1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Pierce on Obama

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Jones, May 8, 2008.

  1. Jones

    Jones Active Member

    Someone smarter than me will have to provide the link, but at risk of shamelessness (outvoted by my love of beautiful sentences strung in succession), I'd like to direct you to the first story on esquire.com, The Cynic and Senator Obama, written by Charlie Pierce.

    And yea, I say unto thee, Holy fucking fuck.
  2. GuessWho

    GuessWho Active Member

    Here you go:

  3. Jones

    Jones Active Member

    GuessWho, I guess that you are a benevolent and kind soul.
  4. Chi City 81

    Chi City 81 Guest

  5. Chi City 81

    Chi City 81 Guest

    Biased against what or whom?
  6. Double Down

    Double Down Well-Known Member

    It took you five minutes from when you posted to read a four page article that's probably 5,000 words long?

    Really? You expect us to buy that?
  7. OnTheRiver

    OnTheRiver Active Member

    That's well done.
  8. Oggiedoggie

    Oggiedoggie Well-Known Member

    Okay, I'll admit it.

    I started to read it.

    But, he spent so much time just driving around, I stopped caring where he might be going.

    Then, I saw that there were four more pages.

    Too dang long for the Interweb.
  9. Chi City 81

    Chi City 81 Guest

    I read every word. But if it's biased, it's biased against everyone and everything. In fact, the only one Pierce doesn't seem to question is himself. It's wonderfully written, even if I disagree with his conclusions on Obama.
  10. Piotr Rasputin

    Piotr Rasputin New Member

    It's not biased.

    It's boring. A prettily written rehash of ideas I've seen before.

    He spends a lot of time sounding "convinced," then brings back the character of "the cynic" as if he doesn't want to admit he's been seduced by a presidential candidate's words. At the end, he throws out "convince me," but even them, it's unsure whether he's doing that just to cover himself, or because he wants to poke fun at the obvious obtuseness of those who have yet to get on the Obama Train.

    I did enjoy that he got "the f-word" in there. I don't get why so many magazines (take a bow, Rolling Stone) resort to that, an easy use of an expletive to lend . . what? emotion? Hipness? But that's their choice.

    And this:

    "Someone will have to measure the wreckage. Someone will have to walk through the ruins. Someone will have to count the cost."

    Oh, spare me.
  11. Double Down

    Double Down Well-Known Member

    You may want to read it again then. The entire thesis of the article is that Obama believes he can deliver us to an America that does not exist through his own charm and hope, and that Pierce is not convinced. If you think it's a pro Obama piece, one that his aides might hand out on the campaign trial, you should read more carefully.
  12. Piotr Rasputin

    Piotr Rasputin New Member

    Is "the cynic" necessarily Charles P. Pierce?

    Upon first read, I took it as a description of those who refuse to believe. The same piece could be written by an Obama supporter who is ripping on "the cynic."

    I guess I'll get through it . . .errr. . . . .READ IT again.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page