Thursday, September 10, 2015
Why do they pay?
Via RCR, an article titled The Francis-Trump Populist Nexus.
Author is trying to draw a parallel between Antichrist Francine and Trump based on the strange notion that both are "populists."
Trump fits well enough, certainly better than any other major politician. He emphasizes borders and culture and tariffs, and says rich people should pay taxes. He misses the Populist boat when he advocates war on countries that didn't attack us.
Antichrist Francine is the exact opposite of Populist. She hates borders, loves the rich, and hates morality. Every action she takes is intended to kill the poor and enrich the rich.
How does a concept like this get published? Obviously the author has never bothered to look up the word Populist or understand its implications.
I might try to horn in on the same editorial sloppiness by writing an article about Sport, where my ignorance and stupidity are total. I might write "The Tyson-Tebow Stretchist Nexus", arguing that Tebow and Tyson are both good examples of Seventh Inning Stretchism.
Obviously this article would be raw looniness from start to finish. I didn't bother to look up the Seventh Inning Stretch. I only know it's a phrase that Sport People say sometimes. I don't know how Tyson and Tebow are connected. I've seen news items about these two guys, so I think Tyson is a Boxist who bites ears and Tebow is a Footballist who prays a lot. Both assumptions are probably wrong.
Could I get paid for such a mishmash of word salad? Of course not, and I wouldn't even think of expecting payment.
Why do editors pay for similar mishmash on other subjects? I dunno.
¶ 10:18 AM 
