The subject of "Global Warming"
seems to be quite controversial as of late. With the recent
rumors/discoveries of doctored evidence and conspiracies combined
with differing opinions by supposed experts, it is an enticing and
lively subject for any would be author. Captivated, albeit slightly
confused by the title: Santorum: Global Warming is 'PoliticalScience' I was drawn into reading this even more confusing
article about Rick Santorum's stance on global warming.
Before I could edify the content that somewhat baffled me, as I could not actually understand the author's (simply referred to as David) point of view outright, I had to first understand who the intended audience of this article was. This article was published in a blog called CrooksandLiars.com, written for a mostly liberal audience, attempting to discredit more conservative views. Originally I was drawn to this blog because of its name, hoping it would be more fact based and unbiased towards party lines while attempting to catch politicians in lies and dirty dealings, instead it seems more like hate mail. Though I do not consider myself republican, I do believe there is some merit to the conservative point of view, and that is why I likely had a difficult time with this article.
Ultimately, it was almost as though the author just arrogantly expected the reader to accept his views as common knowledge, but in actuality due to much controversy over the subject and the authors lack of a clear stand, became quite confusing. Most of the article consisted of various ambiguous quotes from a brief speech made by Santorum towards the Oil and Gas Industry, in which he attacked his fellow Republicans for their wavering stances on global warming, going on to say that he never supported this "Political Science." Referencing his stand that global warming was hyped in order to strengthen big government while lining their pockets. Upon reading the article the first time through, I was nearly convinced that the author did not support global warming legislation and that Rick Santorum actually came off looking halfway decent. That was my first clue, as this was a very liberal blog, to reread the article more carefully while attempting to glean off more of the subtext. It wasn't until I studied the authors use of quotations in his sentence: Santorum, however, has said he never believed the global warming "hoax," that I began to understand the his intent.
This article was meant to be a somewhat scathing gotcha, aimed at Santorum's "apparent" ignorance from the point of view of a conservationist, but due to the inability of the author to make his views clear and the lack of more damning evidence, this article just comes out befuddled. Though I, myself am not exactly sure as to whether I believe that CO2 causes global warming, or whether this is just a naturally occurring phenomenon, it is certain that this article did little to help me in my quest for better understanding.
Before I could edify the content that somewhat baffled me, as I could not actually understand the author's (simply referred to as David) point of view outright, I had to first understand who the intended audience of this article was. This article was published in a blog called CrooksandLiars.com, written for a mostly liberal audience, attempting to discredit more conservative views. Originally I was drawn to this blog because of its name, hoping it would be more fact based and unbiased towards party lines while attempting to catch politicians in lies and dirty dealings, instead it seems more like hate mail. Though I do not consider myself republican, I do believe there is some merit to the conservative point of view, and that is why I likely had a difficult time with this article.
Ultimately, it was almost as though the author just arrogantly expected the reader to accept his views as common knowledge, but in actuality due to much controversy over the subject and the authors lack of a clear stand, became quite confusing. Most of the article consisted of various ambiguous quotes from a brief speech made by Santorum towards the Oil and Gas Industry, in which he attacked his fellow Republicans for their wavering stances on global warming, going on to say that he never supported this "Political Science." Referencing his stand that global warming was hyped in order to strengthen big government while lining their pockets. Upon reading the article the first time through, I was nearly convinced that the author did not support global warming legislation and that Rick Santorum actually came off looking halfway decent. That was my first clue, as this was a very liberal blog, to reread the article more carefully while attempting to glean off more of the subtext. It wasn't until I studied the authors use of quotations in his sentence: Santorum, however, has said he never believed the global warming "hoax," that I began to understand the his intent.
This article was meant to be a somewhat scathing gotcha, aimed at Santorum's "apparent" ignorance from the point of view of a conservationist, but due to the inability of the author to make his views clear and the lack of more damning evidence, this article just comes out befuddled. Though I, myself am not exactly sure as to whether I believe that CO2 causes global warming, or whether this is just a naturally occurring phenomenon, it is certain that this article did little to help me in my quest for better understanding.
Original Article:
Additional Information:
No comments:
Post a Comment