Wednesday, June 28, 2006

Jim Wooten's "Folderol"

I had to look "folderol" up but it means "nonsense". That "The Tool" knows this word surprises me not. Jim let me down yesterday with his "Liberals find living in past to their liking" in that he's a constant source of material. While I guess some of what Mr. Wooten is writing in the above might make sense to some people, I'm simply lost.

About halfway through he writes,
The intent here is not so much to argue for the much-needed modernization of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, but to note the difference in the way liberals and conservatives approach government.

I've actually blogged on the difference in that approach just yeserday. I can understand the scholar's work I'm building off even if a can't do the same for this "journalist". Wooten then goes on to write,
Liberals associate behaviors and conditions with geography.

We do? Of course there is often an association I'd accept plus we liberals do like to try to grasp as much information as we can in seeking solutions. So what's the problem Jim? The Tool adds,

Instead — and this is, again, where liberals and conservatives differ — the smart solution is to forget playing “economic justice” power games (which is what the Voting Rights Act preclearance provisions also engender) and design market-needs transportation systems.

The notion, though, that conditions, behaviors, values and real estate are inextricably linked gets us a lot of misdirected government effort and spending.

Huh? I have read this column over and over but I'm still struggling with what point(s) he makes. He got a plug in for his beloved "markets" and slammed government and spending, with special scorn for education spending, yet beyond that I'm confused. Shifting the VRA issues to disputes on transportation planning facing The ATL seems like a poor way to make any point yet we know "Wooten's World" allows for some special "thinking". Citing Lynn Westmoreland is understandable for The Tool but I'm used to skewed statistics and/or pseudo-research and/or shilling of GOP talking points when I read his "thinking right". Perhaps Jim just tried to cobble together too much conservative "logic". It's not like he's getting paid for this is it?

If anybody can translate The Tool for me I'd appreciate the help. The VRA might need polishing up but the legislation is still relevant. Beyond that, I'm not sure how to engage Jim just yet. Peace ... or War!