Proceeds from the ads below will be donated to the
Bob Wuesthoff scholarship fund.
Monday, November 14, 2005 |
OT: Scheer Madness
Most of the ravings in this forum against the Times' content comes in the guise of outrage and the mocking sneer aimed at the likes of Bill Plaschke, and occaisionally, T.J. Simers, but today something a little different. Today, we learn from LA Observed that Boomer-era gasbag Robert Scheer is about to get the axe from his long-time redoubt. Scheer's unrepentent redness has long been an eyesore for more thorough Times readers; his exit can't come a moment too soon. But that's not to say he doesn't have a few pointed bites for the hands that until December continue to sign his paychecks, declaring the move to fire his graying ass "a bad marketing decision". I defy anyone to pick a group of randomly selected Times readers and find a majority who answer in the affirmative to the question, "Do you subscribe to read Robert Scheer?"
Oh, but there's more:
The publisher is a wise guy accountant, a bean counter from Chicago. These guys come in from Chicago. They don't know the community, and buying the LA Times may be illegal. The Chicago Tribune already owns a TV station in same market and they're going to need a waiver request which comes up next year. The publisher/bean counter's Pasadena golf buddies probably warned him about me -- that flaming leftie. Now, (Times founder) Otis Chandler was no liberal but he understood his community. The paper is in decline. They have 300,000 fewer readers now than when I went to work there nearly thirty years ago.... The Times needed me more than I need it.Not only was he on an ego trip, his had an expense account!
...I always have two or three balls in the air at same time... That's why I teach full-time at USC's Journalism school, do my radio show, write books. It's the only way to live. I've been preparing for this moment for 30 years. I wrote this column for 13 years and never missed a deadline.... as though punctuality were proof against actually being engaging and having something to say besides forty-year-old retreaded Marxist rhetoric from the former editor of Ramparts, that haven of lefty lunacy. I'm sure there's others who will mourn his exit, but none of them hold a political opinion more sophisticated than a five-year-old's belief that the other five-year-old with the better Tonka truck should surrender it on demand. Nonetheless, I must make some room for Scheer's late discovery of President Bush as a kind of endless gift; the maxim about blind squirrels may apply, but he still earns credit for having found the nut.
As for the Times, they've had nothing but ill-disguised contempt for Orange County and its residents, dating back at least to the days of the 1994 bankruptcy; I keep my subscription mainly so they don't pester me during the dinner hour with inducements to subscribe. If firing Robert Scheer is a harbinger of better things to come -- say, replacing T.J. Simers and Bill Plaschke with J.A. Adande and/or Bill Shaikin -- why, bring on the axe.
Comments:
I subscribed for the weekend edition and get two calls a week to expand my subscription to 7 days.
# posted by 
: 11/14/2005 11:28:00 PM
: 11/14/2005 11:28:00 PM
I'm sure there's others who will cheer his exit, but none of them hold a political opinion more sophisticated than "Fuck you, I got mine."
# posted by : 11/15/2005 12:44:00 AM
: 11/15/2005 12:44:00 AM
I've read the Times for 20 years, including the editorials, and never knew the guy existed. No loss. Now how about ditching the chick with the flowery hat, Patt Morrison?
# posted by : 11/15/2005 05:41:00 AM
: 11/15/2005 05:41:00 AM
Mr. Habib: communism and its watered down pal named socialism are based purely on one motivation, that of Jones to steal from Smith. If, in the free world, Jones wants what Smith has, he can earn it, according to what someone else wants to pay.
Further: if you intend on swearing at me, I will be pleased to yank your childish prattle from the comments.
Further: if you intend on swearing at me, I will be pleased to yank your childish prattle from the comments.
Rob: I value your insights on baseball, and you provide good information. I recommend that politics be relegated to other sites, one you create if you want to. The level of Mr. Habib's comment and your response demonstrate where this site could go if you don't accept this friendly advice.
# posted by : 11/15/2005 07:36:00 AM
: 11/15/2005 07:36:00 AM
Don -- normally I keep my political opinions off this site. Sometimes a target so fat appears off my bow that I just can't resist.
well, nobody reads a newspaper for its columnists, except perhaps the NY Times or the Wall Street Journal (who hide their columnists behind online subscription services). I'm sorry to see you can't muster up a more sophisticated criticism of socialism but nobody's perfect...ever read "Nickel and Dimed"?
So you hate liberals - yawn. Please don't ruin a perfectly good baseball site with you neanderthal politics. Most of us really don't want to hear it (probably even those that agree with you).
# posted by : 11/15/2005 09:57:00 AM
: 11/15/2005 09:57:00 AM
I'm all for varied opinion commentary at a newspaper. Although I rarely agree with him, Scheer is usually an entertaining read. What bothers me about the LA Times (besides their insipid sports section) is that the leftist bent bleeds into their supposedly objective reporting.
Wow, Rob, thanks for the company you put me in! My dream is to some day host a back-and-forth between an unrepentant liberal and equally unrepentant conservative, that gets beyond the usual easy (but aren't they cathartic?) insults.
# posted by : 11/15/2005 11:54:00 AM
: 11/15/2005 11:54:00 AM
Perhaps the motivation for Scheer and others left of center is to structure society so that Jones starts on a level playing field with Smith rather than having Jones trying to succeed in a gang infested neighborhood with inadequate public services, at a school with underqualified, underpaid teachers without adequate supplies, and parents who work two jobs without health insurance. A simplistic and naive analysis, but no less simplistic and naive than yours.
# posted by : 11/15/2005 12:07:00 PM
: 11/15/2005 12:07:00 PM
Conservative? Amazing.
As for addressing inequalities in income, public services, etc., I would say: well, they haven't done a very good job of it, and never will... trying to legislate away such stuff only leads to more and more incomprehensible bureaucracy, none of which really ever cares about the poor.
As for addressing inequalities in income, public services, etc., I would say: well, they haven't done a very good job of it, and never will... trying to legislate away such stuff only leads to more and more incomprehensible bureaucracy, none of which really ever cares about the poor.
OK. Libertarian then. I haven't read more of your site yet, but I plan to. You know the old line about libertarians being Republicans who like porn. Do you really think libertarianism would actually work in the world as it is and has been since we came out of the caves? Just as hairy-armpitted socialism has no chance in the real world, either. The golden center is where it's at, influenced by fruitful argument amongst the extremes.
# posted by : 11/15/2005 03:55:00 PM
: 11/15/2005 03:55:00 PM
Can.
Open.
Worms everywhere.
My two cents: I'm a liberal, been a liberal for many a moon and I have many liberal friends, many of whom will have to take a backseat to Rob when it comes to me choosing who to bring to the ballpark.
First beer's on me.
Open.
Worms everywhere.
My two cents: I'm a liberal, been a liberal for many a moon and I have many liberal friends, many of whom will have to take a backseat to Rob when it comes to me choosing who to bring to the ballpark.
First beer's on me.
I agree with suffering bruin.
What you folks have to know about Rob is, whatever political opinions you have, Rob will disagree with half of them. Quite vociferously sometimes.
But that doesn't matter. He's the most agreeable disagreer I've ever met. No better person to take to the ballpark, or anywhere.
Folks who take it as an affront that Rob disgrees with you and takes a cheap shot at a politico, well they need to broaden their opinion of Rob. And of the idea of discourse.
For what it's worth, Rob is neither a republican, nor to my knowledge does he particularly like porn.
If there's one thing he's anti-, it's government incompence. And that cuts across party lines and ideology.
What you folks have to know about Rob is, whatever political opinions you have, Rob will disagree with half of them. Quite vociferously sometimes.
But that doesn't matter. He's the most agreeable disagreer I've ever met. No better person to take to the ballpark, or anywhere.
Folks who take it as an affront that Rob disgrees with you and takes a cheap shot at a politico, well they need to broaden their opinion of Rob. And of the idea of discourse.
For what it's worth, Rob is neither a republican, nor to my knowledge does he particularly like porn.
If there's one thing he's anti-, it's government incompence. And that cuts across party lines and ideology.
# posted by : 11/17/2005 03:31:00 PM
: 11/17/2005 03:31:00 PMNewer› ‹Older
 |
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.