Newspaper Article

Going to Extremes

Reviewed by Steve Weinberg

2003

Overview

Much of the evidence [Joe Conason] provides is derivative, as his endnotes make clear. Many times evidence bearing on a target's stated point of view ought to go beyond a reference to a newspaper or magazine story. To put it another way, Conason should have actually sat down with [Dick Cheney], [Ann Coulter], [Dennis Hastert] et al. to probe their actions and words as reported elsewhere -- if his targets would have been willing to risk serving as sitting ducks. For the most part, however, Conason mounts a persuasive case from the sources he does use. When Conason says that his targets are hypocrites or downright liars, he is often right. When he writes about the \"family values\" crowd who turn out to be adulterers or the military hawks who avoided life-threatening military service, the evidence appears to be irrefutable. Granted, the book's credibility would be heightened if Conason spent more space examining the alleged hypocrisy and lies of, say, Bill Clinton. But polemicists can be excused for a relatively narrow focus; that is, after all, part of a polemic's definition. Conason deserves praise for placing his polemic in an admirable context: \"If only one political perspective is heard clearly, there can be no robust debate and no meaningful democratic choice. At a time when highly partisan and extremely reactionary Republicans control every branch of government, our country needs full, fair and uninhibited debate that encourages participation -- not a loud, monotonous drone that breeds apathetic surrender.\"

• Publisher: WP Company LLC d/b/a The Washington Post
• Subject: Big Lies: The Right-Wing Propaganda Machine and How It Distorts the Truth / Books-titles / Conason, Joe / Conservatism / Nonfiction