Instapundit – the Blogfather – Politics and Current Events
Instapundit is one of the most popular blogs on politics, the war and current events. Glenn Reynolds writes that:
“I try to help provide a fuller picture than the TV folks.”
Our comment there would be, “that should not be too difficult”, but … it is easier said than done. Glenn has many imitators, but he has remained “the original”.
Jeffrey Knight in the American Lawyer called Reynolds the King of the Bloggers.
See About.com for a blog profile.
Instapundit was not only a blogging pioneer who inspired many other blogs but he seems to have a knack for knowing what people are interested in reading.
Technorati shows that Instapundit is the benefactor of 10236 Links from 7011 Sources. Google gives Instapundit 603,000 hits. It is estimated that 100,000 people read Instapundit daily.
One link at Instapundit – can lead to an Instalanche at the Instapunditted blog. We would call that “Instapolitical clout”.
It is interesting to view the archived postings from earlier periods, e.g., here, and compare them with recent ones here.
Increasingly, Instapundit does not handle topics in depth, but covers the entire spectrum of current events with many outside links, copious blog and website quotations and poignant short commentaries. Instapundit is fully connected to the news mainstream, without really being a mainstreamer. That is quite an achievement.
[The fact that he is a law mainstreamer as a Professor of Law at the U of Tennessee is in this regard irrelevant. As a blogger commenting on the world political scene, he initially donned an outsider’s garb.]
One can pretty much keep up on the major issues of the day just by glancing at Instapundit’s daily postings.
As Kevin Drum of the former CalPundit – now at the Washington Monthly – previously wrote: “People only want to read about what they’re interested in, and that’s it.”
And that’s what Glenn seems to give them, for the Oxblog writes about Instapundit:
“Making even the dumbest sh** interesting!”
Under the title, “The Blogfather’s Hit List”, see Wired.com for blogs other than Instapundit which Glenn Reynolds himself finds useful.
The Law Pundit does want to take exception to a recent posting by Instapundit about the Bush/Kerry presidential debates.
Glenn Reynolds thinks it was a major blunder for Kerry to mention Dick Cheney’s lesbian daughter. As political centrists, we disagree.
What Kerry touched upon indirectly was the fact that many right-wingers are hardliners on subjects such as abortion or gays and lesbians, until it affects them directly in their own family. Then things suddenly look a bit different.
The left-wingers are guilty of similar thinking about diversity (this used to be called “integration”), which almost all support, but – in many cases – look out if one of their own white kids brings home a girlfriend or boyfriend who is black and who looks like they might want to become one of the family.
One of the most prevalent standards in use in politics is the double standard and this card should be called if it is being played.
As a matter of policy, Kerry is saying that a politics of sensible tolerance and “live and let live” is advisable in all these matters and that people should pay more attention to their own backyard and not always be trying to get the neighbor to do what they want them to do in a backyard where the grass – and the rules to be applied – are greener. Here, the message was directed to Bush and Cheney who are trying to outlaw gay and lesbian marriage.
Whether Kerry should have brought Cheney’s daughter into the campaign discussion at all is a sore point with some, but Kerry is not the one who first brought Cheney’s daughter into the eye of the public. As experience shows, what the children of politicians do is relevant to the question of their parents’ general strengths and weaknesses and is a legitimate point to make in election campaigning. Cheney likes to present himself as someone who knows the answers, but maybe he doesn’t.
Indeed, we ourselves look to see if politicians do not preach one morality for others while entertaining a different morality in their own lives and families. The use of such double standards is prevalent everywhere. Surely Cheney has not disowned his daughter for being a lesbian. The liberals argue we should not disown those members of our society who have like sexual preferences.
The Law Pundit says the above as a heterosexual who is not particularly sympathetic to gays or lesbians.
Nevertheless, a government is not like business, where you can throw people out to make a profit. A government must include ALL the people, or it can not survive.
Glenn Reynolds says that he is with the “polled” majority on the impropriety of Kerry mentioning Cheney’s daughter in the Presidential debate, even though it was father Cheney who first brought the topic into politics earlier himself. We think on election day that the topic will prove negative for Bush and Cheney, even if people do not admit it. There is a cloud over the image being projected to voters by Cheney.
The deciding paragraph of the ABC news story which erroneously uses the word “condemned” to describe voter’s views (far too strong) and is linked to by Instapundit, is this paragraph in Kerry’s favor:
“… on the question of whether homosexuality is a trait or a choice, more people take Kerry’s position. (In response to this question at the debate, Kerry said, “I think if you talk to anybody, it’s not choice.” Bush said, “I just don’t know.”) A third of likely voters call homosexuality a choice; 10 percent have no opinion; and, as noted, 57 percent say it’s the way people are.”
The voter for whom this is an important issue will think of Cheney and his daughter and vote – in the majority – FOR Kerry, because the Bush/Cheney position on this issue is contrary to the majority.