4 ms·
I'm sorry but this is bull. The man dislikes both sides but he disagrees with the right and thinks the left didn't go far enough. That's not the same thing.
by SamAtt 17y ago
I'm sorry but this is bull. The man dislikes both sides but he disagrees with the right and thinks the left didn't go far enough. That's not the same thing.
In a slate profile (http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/04/16/cassandras/index.html http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/04/16/cassandras/inde...) he's listed as disliking the stimulus because it wasn't big enough and wanting the banking system nationalized. Without passing judgment on the merits of his philosophy the man is clearly a leftist.
- tortilla 17y agoAnd here he's calling Obama a sellout or close to it: http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/12/did-obama-sellout-to-wall-street/ http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/12/did-obama-sellout-to-wa...
- SamAtt 17y agoThat just makes my point. Follow me here... The original comment was saying "this guy is partisan and that's why he doesn't like the article". You tried to refute that by saying "He dislikes both sides" I'm saying he doesn't really dislike both sides. He dislikes one side and agrees with but is disappointed in the other. Those are vastly different things.
- tortilla 17y agoYeah, I see your point. I probably shouldn't have said, "He dislikes both sides" when I should have said, "He attacks/criticizes both sides." My intent was to show he's not some blind partisan hack. I'm not sure if he's a leftist either. Some people accused him of being a libertarian in the past.