Center of Attention

balancing_act.jpg

A round up of recent posts by various bloggers who either attempt to strike a balanced note on heated debates and controversial issues, or improve our ability to find our own sense of balance by exposing us to new information and different points-of-view.

————————–

Andrew Sullivan highlights the voice of a pragmatic reader who thinks, for all the hoopla about voters being disgusted with divisive politics, perhaps voters are (after all) not only the source of said politics, but its boosters and sustainers.

Marc Moore revisits the value of riding bikes.

Donald Douglas puts on painful display examples of hateful speech from the Left. I include his post not to suggest that the Left is more hateful than the Right. Far from it: I’ve long held that hate is pervasive on both ends of the political spectrum, that the Extreme Left and Extreme Right are equally guilty of living in glass houses while throwing stones. In fact, had I found this morning a comparable post from the Left featuring the hate of the Right, I would have linked to both. Since I didn’t, I decided to feature Donald’s post anyway, not for its partisanship, but because it hopefully reminds all of us (regardless of our political leanings) just how ugly (and avoidable) such speech can be.

On the debate over the SCHIP legislation, Jim Wallis reminds President Bush that members of his own party are as “irresponsible” as the Democrats.

Jim Satterfield raises a question I, for one, had never considered: “Does the Voting Rights Act cover primaries?”

Scott Paul gives Columbia U’s Bollinger an “A” grade, and for more than just his performance yesterday.

On a concluding (and much lighter) note, Amba links to evidence of the social value of play (and in her post title implies that maybe the Beatles were wrong).

Author: PETE ABEL

4 Comments

  1. Ms. Stillwell actually got the idea for her “hate mail” article from an extreme leftist, Mark Morford, who writes for the same paper (SF Chron) and published his hate mail earlier that week. In the spirit of your comment that “had I found this morning a comparable post from the Left featuring the hate of the Right, I would have linked to both”, I’d like to give you the link.

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....38;sc=1000

  2. “for all the hoopla about voters being disgusted with divisive politics, perhaps voters are (after all) not only the source of said politics, but its boosters and sustainers.”

    Exactly what I’ve been thinking. In fact, I was trying to make that argument on another thread but failed in stating it as succintly and clearly.

  3. Ro – Thanks for the link. I clearly should have looked a little harder and little deeper into that story.

  4. Moore would have done better if he had left the nitwit “fat country” stuff out of his writeup about bikes and just concentrated on the main issue, which is safety on the road. While bicyclists are sometimes to blame for troubles on the road (riding two abreast where there’s not enough width, for example) or on bike paths (racer-child velo-poseurs racing through slower bicycle traffic; different path users refusing to stay in their correct lanes), the risks of the road (and on the bike path) are real, I believe due to a decline in civility and an increase in childishness (and lack of self-control), and in many places driving, as well as riding on the roads, can be quite risky (with inattentive, impatient, ill-tempered motorists).

    It’s the decline in civility over recent years and the change to risks on the road that merit revisitation of bike commuting, something that itself is far from being new — it’s something many of us have done for decades.

Submit a Comment