What ‘cheap­ens and de­means’

The Washington Post Sunday - - SUNDAY OPINION -

Re­gard­ing Dana Milbank’s Jan. 23 Out­look com­men­tary, “I pledge to stop ob­sess­ing over Sarah Palin. Join me”:

I sub­mit that Mr. Milbank’s ap­par­ent in­abil­ity to con­trol his in­ex­pli­ca­bly long-un­di­ag­nosed ob­ses­sion with Sarah Palin is not what “cheap­ens and de­means” him but that he brought those el­e­ments to the ta­ble him­self as he chose the an­gle from which he would cover the sub­ject. Mr. Milbank es­sen­tially ad­mits as much later in his own op-ed. In try­ing to ra­tio­nal­ize his be­hav­ior, he ex­plained that the me­dia cover Ms. Palin to gen­er­ate Web traf­fic in lieu, pre­sum­ably, of el­e­vat­ing the na­tional po­lit­i­cal dis­course.

Like many Amer­i­cans, I hope that the me­dia can re­turn to their nat­u­ral and in­no­cent pre-Palin state of po­lit­i­cal cov­er­age, but I re­main doubt­ful that is pos­si­ble if this is the tone in which the mora­to­rium is to be­gin. Un­til then, I’ll look for­ward to Mr. Milbank’s ex­e­ge­sis on Medi­care re­im­burse­ment rates as they per­tain to the fed­eral bud­get.

Noel Fritsch, Washington

Please tell us, Dana Milbank, why you’ll go only 28 days with­out writ­ing about Sarah Palin. Have you sur­veyed your read­er­ship and found out how long we wish you wouldn’t write about Ms. Palin? Some days there are three or four long ar­ti­cles about her. We would ap­pre­ci­ate a mora­to­rium of at least a year.

There has been much overkill on the sub­ject, and we could do with­out fur­ther ar­ti­cles for a long time.

F.G. Lang­ford, Lan­ham

Only a week ago, Dana Milbank swore off writ­ing any­thing about Sarah Palin for a month. But on Wed­nes­day, he de­voted a full op-ed to GOP Rep. Michele Bach­mann’s “unau­tho­rized” re­sponse to the State of the Union mes­sage. Does he have a rogue fetish?

Nancy Serpa, Ar­ling­ton

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.