Date:  Mon, 28 Mar 1994 21:28:30 -0700

From:  Rudy Troike <RTROIKE[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]ARIZVMS.BITNET>

Subject: Re: Clinton's speech



The more I think about Ellen's AP reporter, the more annoyed I get that

journalists should lay the work on others so they can come up with a "quickie"

piece like this. As Mike Picone complained about Cokie Roberts, are we in

for another subtle round of regional bias? Will reporters comment on how

much of Clinton's language lacks regional identifiability? The press certainly

tried to use Lyndon Johnson's language as a subtle way to undermine him.

If Clinton is really a Southern hick, we can discount his Georgetown and Oxford

educational experiences, which make us uncomfortable in a President anyhow,

and thus ignore and contain his intellectual abilities by making a buffoon of

him. Should we be co-opted into reinforcing this? And supporting a reporter's

laziness to boot? Safire discussed "the devil is in the details" at some

length last year. Can't reporters read?

    --Rudy Troike (rtroike[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]ccit.arizona.edu)