Read Time and Understand... the Liberal Mindset

Vivi sends along some Time cover-slugs and such. These guys really seem to be concerned about what's "good" for America. But they do seem to frequently question whether or not anything that smacks of Demon Rum Conservatism* is "good" for America.

Here are some other Time covers, with their complete captions unless noted.

Michelle Malkin has a link to this cover:
Rush Limbaugh: Is he good for America?"

For Ann Coulter, Time left it off the cover but used it as an online poll:
Is Ann Coulter good for America?"

August 27, 2001 cover: Is Homeschooling Good For America?

October 6, 1997 cover: Promise Keepers: A new movement is filling stadiums with men asserting their manhood. This week they rally in Washington. Should they be they cheered-- or feared?

[Ace: I guess that question would turn on whether or not they're "good for America," yes-yes?]

On the other hand....

September 1, 1997 cover: Saint George [Soros] and his unlikely crusades. Billionare George Soros wants to change how we deal with drugs, immigrants
and dying

[Ace: I don't note any question of whether or not Soros' crusades are "good for America." But, having deemed him a "Saint," it would appear that Time figures his crusades are, in fact, "good for America."]

February 22, 1999 cover: How the (Lewinsky/Clinton) scandal was good for America.

[Ace: As John McEnroe would say, you've GOT to be kidding me. Okay-- the suggestion that oral isn't really sex, yeah, I can see that coming in handy at some point (fingers crossed!).

But overall-- I would say that a scandal that paralyzed the government and ripped apart the nation was probably not, in the final analysis, "good for America."]

I have a question:

Time-- America's premeire soft-headed soft-bias liberal pretty-picture book. Is it good for America?

*Show title? Nahhh.

Totally Un-Fact-Checked Preview of the Coulter Article: Well, the guy in question never lied to me before. So what the hell? I'm withholding his name in case revealing it would get him in Dutch with an employer.

Saw TIME's article before it hit newstands.

It's OK. Mostly makes her out to be a semi-flaky wine drinking Nicorette chomping delictate dandilion. So she's not Hitler, but she is "damaged" almost.

But...the BIG mistake in it is a photo that is supposed to be showing a huge protest against Coulter. This is an example of how she is a "polarizing" figure. There is a picture of her with an X on her mouth with some sort of "NEO IMPERIALISTIC BLAH BLAH" on it.

Problem is, it's a picture of a Protest Warrior protest, and it's supposed to be 100% sarcastic.

By the way, I think the pic he's talking about can be seen over at Michelle Malkin's.

posted by Ace at 11:44 AM

| Access Comments