Lies, and damn lies could have worked just as well. Or it could just be the way one reads it. Not many ways to interpret a three word sentence in terms of cadence and structure. Is it LIES,DAMN LIES or is Lies & Damn Lies. I was actually going for the latter.
Likewise, Arnie, Arnie, Arnie could either be a cheer or scolding.
True neutrality cannot be acheived when writing or reflecting on op-ed pieces about someone's speech from the GOP convention. Just reporting what transpired would be irresponsible parroting. How is it that when someone challenges the facts of what someone says it somehow denegrates the value of what is written.
To me it doesn't. If Arnie said there were tanks where he grew up and there wasn't, I call that responsible journalism. Just reprinting falsehoods that way (poor Arnie, he had all those Nazi's around him) makes them fact. Especially if you are a reporter - pandering can only get you so far. One of the tenets of journalism is to get to the facts behind an issue, not to report things without investigation.
|