PresMuffley wrote:As it might be helpful, just to be clear, my position on the ADL before & after this incident has been the same. I feel they are simply a Zionist front organization masquerading as champions of freedom, tolerance & equality.
I think it's pretty clear from his work that Greenwald comes from a similar place. That's partially why it's so hard to take him at face value when he reports a "vicious smear" and then doesn't bother to fully substantiate the charge. Opinion journalism is great when one fully agrees with the opinion of the journalist. But it isn't as useful to those outside of that loop.
PresMuffley wrote:Regarding Greenwald's position on Ellison, I don't get the impression that he considers him to be devoid of baggage, as he is quite obviously a black man, and a Muslim, which is enough baggage for anyone in Washington. Nor does he seem to believe that had Ellison been elected a sharp shift in policy would have occurred. This is my view as well. His point in writing about this was to show just how afraid the Democrats are to allow the left-wing of the party to gain any sort of traction, even in such a minor manner as becoming DNC chair
That's clearly the agenda at work. But he was not forthright about it. Instead he hyperbolized the question about whether Ellison carried too much baggage as a "vicious smear" in order to load the deck. Again...not the way I prefer journalists to handle multidimensional subjects like this.
On the susbstance of the "left wing can't get traction" complaint - I just don't see the argument holding water. Ellison won 200 of 435 votes ALL FROM PARTY INSIDERS. He now has a seat at the table with Perez. How exactly is that no traction? Do you honestly expect the majority of the party to simply walk off of the stage?