[Newspoetry] second opinion

[Sam Markewich 2]

Yo William,
	I read the piece.  Here's what I think:  Much of what the author writes
is compelling and may well be true, even probably is true.  Certainly,
what he states about the impending oil crisis is accurate to my
knowledge.  Yet, his style argues against the validity of his theses, so
it's hard for me to find credence in what he writes.  What I mean is
this: He first legitimizes himself by telling us that he's a former
special forces person.  He then tells us that the evidence against Bin
Laden is shabby, yet he tells us little substantive evidence to counter
it.  The rest of the piece is mostly his opinion, which seems to be
formed out of a combination of his knowledge and his uncritical
adherence to traditional socialist/leftist language (the use of the word
fascist, blanket references to capitalism, dumbed-down critical language
against the character of politicians, etc.).  This is highly
problematical stylistically, as he writes his admixture of opinion and
dogmatic language as if it were fact.  And, because his claims are so
very plausable it's easy for me to feel and think they are indeed fact,
expecially since he's told us he's an expert.  However, his recounting
of the play-by-play of the hijackings and crashes demonstrates a lack of
any real expertise on his part, as he doesn't manage at all to convince
me that any of G.W.'s responses were wrong or dubious.  After all, he
seems to think that anyone who is president should have some instant and
proficient way to respond to such a series of events.  Yet, he doesn't
tell us why that would be so.  Then, when he ends with a quotation by
Luxemburg juxtaposing socialism with barbarism I know something isn't
right here.  Not that I disagree with the quotation, but it really has
no tight formal relationship to the particular writing offered here and
in fact could be an ending for almost any piece of leftist writing that
is stylistically sloppy in the way his is.  So, while I wouldn't be
surprised if everything the author claims is in fact the case, I also
wouldn't take action in response to the piece as if it were true or even
compelling enough to inform my action beyond the fact that it does state
the obvious: that we can't at all trust that the government is telling
us the truth, and that the mass media manufacture consent.  But, I
already knew that, and, in fact, the stylistic limitations of any
leftist argument written as this piece is written make little more than
this possible to credibly assert.  I hope this second opinion helps you, dude.

- Sammy