Thoughtful analysis from WSJ's John Fund.
I think however, that the internet has only intensified politics, rather than redefine it.
Here is the closing of the article:
"The moral hazard of the new media is clear," says columnist Jim Pinkerton, an aide to President George H.W. Bush. "They can turn any discussion into a donnybrook, and any nomination into Armageddon." Such a development isn't inevitable--witness the civilized debate over John Roberts's appointment. But President Bush will have to consider that risk in picking a new nominee for the high court, just as Democratic senators will have to weigh how much they respond to Internet sites pressuring them to mount a filibuster against that nominee.
Some folks don't get it. Meirs failed as an appointee precisely because she was a bad nominee, not the type of justice conservatives wanted. And I didn't see a donnybrook: what I saw was debate and a little tiny invective such as the "sexism" thing (whatever the f*ck that is ) and that was it. In the end cooler heads did in fact prevail and a new justice designee is to be announced Monday. Bush has dodged a severe split in the right, and so has his base. |