Do Giuliani and Thompson Have a Mental-Health Issue?

Slate, the 11-year-old online magazine that can lean pretty hard to the left, has just launched a video channel called Slate V. By the current standards of web video, these things are genius. It is interesting to note that the two leading GOP presidential candidates, Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson, seem to be abnormally enthusiastic about prescribing mental-health treatment. Click on “Rudy’s Ferret Face-Off” and “Damned Spot: Fred and Mike” to see what I’m talking about.


egretman

Yes.

egretman

...oh...I thought you were asking if they were deranged.

Sorry.

711buddha

Return of Dean - "YYYEEEAAHHHHH!!!"

egretman

Ron Paul is our only hope.

RichP

Interesting,
I thought this entire freakonomics concept was about avoiding inappropriate conclusions based on limited data.

bkreit

I'm not quite sure how Slate "can lean pretty hard to the left" unless we're to take that literally (i.e. it can also lean pretty hard to the right) rather than logically, as a statement saying Slate is a leftwing publication... Slate runs, among others, neocon Christopher Hitchens, and just yesterday, a Slate writer, Emily Yoffe, wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post denying the existence of global warming. She also argued that even if global warming is happening, the far greater danger is posed by people like Al Gore who are scaring everyone else over the prospect of global warming. Seriously.

So leans pretty hard to the left? I'd say that slate is contrarian for the sake of being contrarian, almost, at times, to the point of being silly. It may be slightly left-of-center, but it is by no means a hard left publication.

manny

Not to disparage bkreit's argument or anything, but Christopher Hitchens is not a neocon.

There are other elements to neoconservatism than supporting the Iraq war, or so they tell me.

dkrueger

Well, bkreit also said "a Slate writer, Emily Yoffe, wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post denying the existence of global warming."

Ms. Yoffe's op-ed actually says: "All this is not to say that it's not getting warmer and that curbing our profligate environmental ways is not a commendable and necessary goal."

There is no need to feel guilty about disparaging bkreit's arguments. Dishonest arguments are always worthy of disparagement.

egretman

Yes.

egretman

...oh...I thought you were asking if they were deranged.

Sorry.

711buddha

Return of Dean - "YYYEEEAAHHHHH!!!"

egretman

Ron Paul is our only hope.

RichP

Interesting,
I thought this entire freakonomics concept was about avoiding inappropriate conclusions based on limited data.

bkreit

I'm not quite sure how Slate "can lean pretty hard to the left" unless we're to take that literally (i.e. it can also lean pretty hard to the right) rather than logically, as a statement saying Slate is a leftwing publication... Slate runs, among others, neocon Christopher Hitchens, and just yesterday, a Slate writer, Emily Yoffe, wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post denying the existence of global warming. She also argued that even if global warming is happening, the far greater danger is posed by people like Al Gore who are scaring everyone else over the prospect of global warming. Seriously.

So leans pretty hard to the left? I'd say that slate is contrarian for the sake of being contrarian, almost, at times, to the point of being silly. It may be slightly left-of-center, but it is by no means a hard left publication.

manny

Not to disparage bkreit's argument or anything, but Christopher Hitchens is not a neocon.

There are other elements to neoconservatism than supporting the Iraq war, or so they tell me.

dkrueger

Well, bkreit also said "a Slate writer, Emily Yoffe, wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post denying the existence of global warming."

Ms. Yoffe's op-ed actually says: "All this is not to say that it's not getting warmer and that curbing our profligate environmental ways is not a commendable and necessary goal."

There is no need to feel guilty about disparaging bkreit's arguments. Dishonest arguments are always worthy of disparagement.