Trump saying he’ll “no longer read” Christianity Today is like saying he’ll no longer cheat on his wife(ves).
Christianity Today basically said Trump’s soul is rotten from wallowing in sin.
Hard to disagree.
The Army and Naval academies made a bad decision. But at least we’ll know where to find white nationalists: they’ll wear uniforms.
Is Steve Bannon running these academies?
Officers with bad reputations were “fragged” in the Vietnam era.
Every Marx-inspired crisis theory since 1848 is basically a re-write of The Eighteenth-Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte. See the latest New Republic.
There’s no virtue in a small donation. That’s the bizarre populist dogma that has infected the campaign.
Warren is polling at 17% nationally with women and 14% with African Americans. She needs to beef up those numbers or, like Bern, she’ll die in the southern primaries.
Banging on Buttigieg won’t help in this area.
Michael Tracey is famous for knowing the right way to be anti-Trump (e.g., Tulsi Gabbard) as oppose to the wrong way to be anti-Trump (e.g., Nancy Pelosi).
As opposed to Tracey, the revolutionary left are as unhappy with the impeachment as the hardcore MAGAts. Both sides realize it was a massive victory for the Democratic Party Establishment.
Thus the effort to downplay the impeachment or to suggest it was conducted on the wrong basis.
Concerning the demise of The New Republic (which reads like a script from the “The Newsroom”), Ross Douthat accurately captures the difference between the old and the new(est) journalism.
The New Republic as-it-was, the magazine I and others grew up reading, was emphatically not just a “policy magazine.” It was, instead, a publication that deliberately integrated its policy writing with often-extraordinary coverage of literature, philosophy, history, religion, music, fine art.
It wasn’t just a liberal magazine, in other words; it was a liberal-arts magazine, which unlike many of today’s online ventures never left its readers with the delusion that literary style or intellectual ambition were of secondary importance, or that today’s fashions represented permanent truths.
Unlike our era’s ascendant data journalism, it also never implied that technocracy was somehow a self-sustaining proposition, or that a utilitarianism of policy inputs and social outcomes suffices to understand every area of life. (And unlike many liberal outlets, in its finest years it published, employed and even occasionally was edited by people on the right of center — something some of us particularly appreciated.)
So when we talk about what’s being lost in the transition from old to new, print to digital, it’s this larger, humanistic realm that needs attention. It isn’t just policy writing that’s thriving online; it’s anything that’s immediate, analytical, data-driven — from election coverage to pop culture obsessiveness to rigorous analysis of baseball’s trade market.