Archive for jonah goldberg

Six words about Jonah Goldberg that will brighten your day


jonah goldberg

Here is a bonus Los Angeles Times letter to the editor about one of my least favorite people, Jonah Goldberg, because our voices matter... especially when they bring sunshine to our politically gloomy days:

Re “Jonah Goldberg,” Opinion, March 25

Six words in the lower right corner of the Opinion section brightened a gloomy morning: “Jonah Goldberg has the day off.”

Tom Turnley
Santa Ana

Here are six more that will brighten your day: I won't speculate about Malaysian airplanes.

"Two of the most wrongheaded statements in the history of column writing"


keep calm we won

Today's Los Angeles Times letter to the editor, because our voices matter:

Re "GOP: Grand old potshots," Opinion, Oct. 22

Jonah Goldberg makes two of the most wrongheaded statements in the history of column writing:

He writes: "We've seen the influence of big business decline in the GOP as new populist PACs have declared war on … K Street." The billionaire Koch brothers, the Heritage Foundation and the Scaife Foundations are populist?

Goldberg writes: "The public has grown more conservative during the Obama presidency." Did he forget who won the last election?

Alan Segal

San Diego


Bob Costas takes on conservative Jonah Goldberg, who "sees liberal boogeymen lurking behind every issue."



Today's Los Angeles Times letters to the editor, because our voices matter:

Re “Redskins: No harm, no foul,” Opinion, Oct. 15

In response to my remarks on NBC about the Washington Redskins team name controversy, Jonah Goldberg writes of his love and respect for words. So why then play so fast and loose with them?

Goldberg twice refers to my comments as a “tirade.” I defy any fair-minded person to view the two-minute piece in its entirety and find anything in its tone or content that remotely resembles a tirade. He later refers to my “crusade.” How does addressing a prominent football-related issue one time on the very night Washington was playing on NBC qualify as a crusade?

Goldberg writes: “It strains credulity to believe the team name was intentionally pejorative, or that fans or ownership see it that way today.” I went out of my way to stipulate that very thing. Or don't the words I actually used matter if they get in the way of whatever point Goldberg is trying to make in this case?

Goldberg is usually cogent, but we all have our blind spots and hot buttons. For Goldberg, it is the tendency to see liberal boogeymen lurking behind every issue. Always. Yet I clearly delineated the difference between the often silly politically correct objections to other team names and the singularly objectionable “Redskins.”

Every dictionary I have consulted has defined “redskins” with words such as “offensive,” “insulting,” “pejorative” and “derogatory.” No such words are part of the definition of Braves, Chiefs, Warriors or any other team name associated with Native Americans. One would think a professed lover of words like Goldberg would appreciate that clear and compelling distinction, and recognize that many of those who have problems with the name Redskins are motivated not by liberalism or political correctness but by common sense and common decency.

Bob Costas
New York


Goldberg misses the point. As a mixed-blood Muscogee and former chairman of the Los Angeles City/County Native American Indian Commission, I can tell you that the term “redskin” is never used by American Indians to describe ourselves. It is a term popularized by whites and almost always used in a pejorative sense.

More than 20 years after the NBA's Baltimore Bullets moved to Washington, it was felt that the name “Bullets” sent the wrong message; the team became the Washington Wizards in 1997. Likewise, “Redskins” sends the wrong message, especially for a team located in the nation's capital.

By the way, Goldberg's assertion that he is offended by the Philadelphia Eagles being the namesake of the National Recovery Administration's Blue Eagle symbol is both historically correct and profoundly silly.

Jack Shakely
Rancho Mirage


Jonah "Goldberg either owns stock in Exxon, lives in a 4th dimension or is waiting for seat confirmation on the mother ship."


Today's L.A. Times letters to the editors, because our voices matter:

Gasoline doesn't come cheap

Re "Gasoline, diesel prices keep rising," March 13, and "Obama's pump debacle," Opinion, March 13

I would like to spirit Jonah Goldberg back to the land of reality, if just for a few minutes.

1. The gasoline we are currently paying high prices for was refined some time ago when cost/prices were less.

2. We cannot drill ourselves back to $2.50-a-gallon gasoline any more than we can find a nickel cup of coffee.

3. The profits realized by the petroleum industry have increased exponentially the last few years.

4. President Obama, along with a majority of climatologists, knows that human activity — such as burning fossil fuels — contributes to global climate change.

5. Oil reserves are finite, therefore we must find alternate fuel sources at the risk of occasional source failures.

6. Goldberg either owns stock in Exxon, lives in a fourth dimension or is waiting for seat confirmation on the mother ship.

Stephen S. Anderson
Hacienda Heights


Goldberg conveniently omits the most important fact: Oil prices are set by a world market. Exxon's price is the same regardless of whether its oil comes from Indonesia or from under Goldberg's feet. Current factors include fears over Iran, rising use in emerging markets and gaming by hedge funds and sovereign wealth funds, and have little to do with Obama's policies.

True, we may be headed for $8-a-gallon gas, simply because of our inability to find, deliver and refine enough of the stuff given inexorably increasing world demand.

In that light, and given the detestable governments that profit from this situation, the president's efforts to develop American energy alternatives seem essential. Conservatives need to get their noses out of their economic reports long enough to try to find a vision of tomorrow as something other than just more of today.

Steven Duff


Quickie: Jonah Goldberg is an idiot


Today's Quickie:

According to Wikipedia, the population of China is 1,341,880,000.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau website, the world population is 6,894,940,672.

According to Jonah Goldberg, China has "700 billion very poor people":

Then there are China's very real problems. China has 700 billion very poor people. By 2050, it will have 400 million very old people.

In today's L.A. Times, there is a correction that says the following in regard to an op-ed written by Jonah Goldberg called "America's China Syndrome" (verbatim):

China: In his Jan. 18 column, Jonah Goldberg wrote that China has 700 billion very poor people. The estimated number of Chinese living in poverty is 300 million.

Jonah Goldberg is an idiot.

That was today's Quickie. Was it good for you?

We’re having our quarterly fundraiser. Without it, and you, The Political Carnival would cease to exist, so if you can, please consider donating.  Details here.


"The GOP is like a spoiled adolescent brat"


Oh how I love the L.A. Times letters to the editor:

Not so sold on the GOP

Re "Look who's popular now," Opinion, July 13

Jonah Goldberg is in La La land again if he truly believes that now is an opportunity for the GOP to offer a real choice on anything. When you believe in smaller government and lower taxes, there are no choices.

Instead, since the Reagan administration Republicans have borrowed and spent money, creating the largest public debt we've ever had, all while paying off their rich constituents. Not a single tax cut was offset by enhanced revenue, nor have we raised a single tax dollar to support two wars. They have brought the economy to its knees.

The GOP is like a spoiled adolescent brat, using the credit cards of the country in violation of its beliefs, and leaving a mess to be cleaned up by the Democrats and debts to be paid by its grandchildren.


Goldberg's view is understandable when all you watch is Fox News and you begin to think the nation no longer supports anything Democratic. But what he does not and cannot account for is the wave of young and first-time voters who aren't conservative, who want innovation, change and progress, and who reject simply saying "no" as a viable political platform.

The GOP will pick up seats in the midterm elections, but if all it has to offer is something anti-Obama, it will not enjoy long-term success.


Oy Vey-O'-The Day: Jonah Goldberg edition


I shan't go any further than the headline (and yes, I just wanted an excuse to say "shan't"). If you want to read the article, please go here... if you have a strong stomach.

Oy Vey-O'-The Day:

Oil-- It's the Real Green Fuel

Please note: The online title is different than the one in my morning L.A. Times. I used the one from the actual newspaper.