Bunker Mulligan "Let us endeavor so to live that when we come to die even the undertaker will be sorry." ~Mark Twain

February 4, 2004

Texas Monthly

Filed under: Politics — Bunker @ 1:40 pm

Texas monthly is a very good magazine. I had a subscription, but it lapsed during my move two years ago. I still pick it up on the newsstand when I see it, though.

This month has two articles of real interest to me. One is by Paul Burka, a longtime writer for the magazine. He talks about how the George W. Bush he sees in Washington is different from the one he knew as Governor, and it isn’t complimentary in its comparison. Burka isn’t your basic far-left journalist, either. Well, compared to most Texans, perhaps he is a bit leftish. But nothing in comparison to someone like Molly Ivans.

I have to differ with Burka regarding when the “change” in Bush’s approach took place. Understand, Burka believes Bush has been hijacked by the right-wing Republicans. He sets the time of change during the 2000 campaign when Bush spoke at Bob Jones University. From that point on, he believes Bush has strayed to the right and abandoned the “peacemaker” role he filled here.

I believe Bush has gone the other way. He made a strong effort at unification. He closed down access to all White House records to de facto end inquiries into Clinton decisions. He ignored calls for investigations into allegations Clinton staffers had trashed the White House. He worked with Ted Kennedy–most liberal of liberals–to get an education program both sides could agree to. He got nothing in return from Democrats. If any change in Dubya’s persona occurred, this is when it happened.

The lack of non-partisanship (more accurate than saying bi-partisanship) on his part comes from Democrats angry over the election. In fact, Burka even implies Bush didn’t win, but was selected. The big split came on September 11, 2001. Bush displayed strong leadership. The country rallied around him–until Democrats realized if his support stayed strong, they’d be out of the White House until 2009. Then is when they really began to howl. He didn’t respond, and that made them even madder. Success in Afghanistan and Iraq irked them further.

Burka still admires Bush, but isn’t sure he’ll vote for him again. I think if he looked at things through a little different prism, he might.

The other article of interest is about freedom of the press, and how officials in Washington don’t share info with the press like they should. It hearkens back to the days after Watergate, when every reporter was trying to be the next Bob Woodward. Apparently it was a happy-go-lucky time in reporting, when the mission was to shed light on all the goings-on in DC for the general public. The article bemoans limited access, especially from the White House. The message is pretty clear: “How can we find and report anything bad about you if you don’t tell us what you’ve been doing wrong?”

I think the press has a sincere obligation to do some detective work and expose things that are wrong in our government. The problem is that they are selective. John Stossel found this out when he began investigating government corruption. People at ABC, he said, use the word “conservative” in much the same way as they say “child molestor.” When he attacked Republicans, all was right with the world. But pointing fingers at Democrats or liberal pet issues was forbidden.

Unfortunately, I think most journalists are sincere when they say they have no bias one way or another. There is no way to reach them and make them see quirks in a story which draw shaded judgements because these are truisms in their own minds. They believe they have delivered facts impartially. And, face it: Most journalists begin their education with a liberal frame of mind, and their education does little, if anything, to change it. Only if they are willing to confront contradictions in their experiences will they grow to see the other side clearly. That’s hard to do when you are surrounded by people of like mind. Peer pressure is tough.

Texas Monthly is online. The current month’s articles aren’t available, but past issues are. There are good reasons for reading it, regardless, because they have additional writing which illuminates some of the thoughts that go into putting the publication together.

If you’ve not read this magazine, and have any interest in Texas at all, I recommend you take a look (you must register).

No Comments

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by WordPress