Blogging the Federalist

It is practically a truism to note that Georgetown students are busy people. In fact, between the time spent on classes, jobs, internships, pre-gaming, post-gaming, gaming, and facebook, we run the risk of missing out on the important things in life.

Of course, I’m talking about reading the Federalist. Some of you may not have even noticed that their 1 year anniversary edition is out on newstands (actually, the ground) this week. But have no fear! To help counteract the fact that “reality has a well-known liberal bias”, I’ve decided to offer some highlights from this month’s issue, to ensure that you don’t miss out on your recommended dose of Grade-A conservative bullshit:

Page 4
Lest you mistakenly think that Take Back Georgetown Day was a failure this year:
“The TBGD board decided to shift the focus of the event a bit, away from the big name speakers and toward a smaller, more personal, event ...Hopefully, this smaller event will provide a more comfortable setting to allow students and outsiders the opportunity to express their views and collaborate together.” That makes perfect sense, and in no way sounds like an excuse for the failure to attract big name speakers, respectable attendance levels, or at least rename a bench in honor of Ronald Reagan.

Page 5
Muslims are taking over Europe!

“We must channel the unity, charity, and strength the American people showed in the aftermath [of 9/11], rather than the virulent partisan hackery that has become the norm.” They certainly have a point here: I, too, long for that halcyon age after 9/11 when President Bush brought the nation together, overcoming partisan divisions by working in a conciliatory manner and engaging in a civilized discourse that respected all points of view. But then the Democrats got elected....

Page 6
On this page (entitled ‘Opinion’ in order to differentiate it from the fine objective journalism displayed in the rest of the issue) they argue that it is hypocritical of liberals to call for humanitarian intervention to stop the genocide in Darfur while at the same time criticizing Bush for sending troops into Iraq. Apparently the situations are indistinguishable...if you ignore the fact that Iraq was not a humanitarian crisis expected to claim from 200,000 to 500,000 lives, and that Saddam Hussein’s genocidal actions, such as the chemicals weapons attack that killed 5,000 Kurds, were performed in the 80s, when his regime had the support of the Reagan and Bush administrations. I for one, find no inconsistency in the conviction that our soldiers lives are valuable, and should only be put in harms way to preserve human life and address grave threats to national security, and even then only after carefully planning the operation and examining the situation to avoid carelessly wasting human life based on false intelligence. But thats why I’m a liberal hypocrite.

Stayed tuned for part 2, when the Federalist will try to exploit the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr.