I know I keep doing this, and I suspect that John will have something to say about it, but Time Magazine proves bias once again. And it's the subtle kind, as usual, and probably unconscious (unthinking?) bias by the authors. But for months the Republicans and the Democrats in the Senate have argued over the Miguel Estrada nomination to the Court of Appeals. Central to the argument is the Democrat's complaint that Estrada is a stealth candidate and that he has not come across with enough information about his views. Democrats even demand internal memoranda that Estrada wrote while on staff at the Solicitor's office -- despite a letter from all living Solicitors General (mostly Democrats) saying such information shouldn't be released. For their part, the Republicans argue that Estrada has provided as much information as necessary and what has been provided, from written answers to hearings, is on par with what is obtained from other nominess. Now, Time Magazine has determined that the Democrats are right and establishes the following as fact:
. . .Miguel Estrada, who has given Senators too little information about how or what he thinks.Even a different formulation, such as, "Miguel Estrada, who, Democrats claim, has given Senators too little information about how or what he thinks" doesn't quite work because it would give no account of the Republican argument, but it would establish the opinion rather than the fact as the others would like it to be, and would lessen the sting of bias. Where do these people learn journalism these days?
Thanks to Jonah Goldberg's Corner entry for pointing the language out.
Labels: Supreme Court
