Experts Weigh In

In an otherwise rather dry article by Marc Sandalow, Washington Bureau Chief, in today’s San Francisco Chronicle (the topic is the administration’s Iraq “policy”), one encounters this astonishing sentence, delivered apparently without a hint of irony:

“Yet, some experts say it would be foolhardy to assume, just because Bush said it, that the statement is true.”

Well, damn! Who would have guessed? Thank heavens for the experts! Without the experts I would probably just have gone on assuming it was all gospel. But now my eyes have been opened.

So, thank you, experts.

← Previous post

Next post →


  1. Thank you for posting this important piece of information—although I am a bit worried, as only “some” experts are saying it. Does that mean that other experts say we ought to go on assuming everything Bush says is true? Which experts should I listen to? Are there experts who can help me decide?

  2. Splodinvark, you make an excellent point. The reference to “some experts” troubled me too. Why has author Marc Sandalow not elaborated on the possibility of a seething — is that the right word? — disagreement among Bush experts? Why has he only cited those who subscribe to the Bush Fallibility Theorem and not given equal time to the Absolutists?

    I can only assume that, as a prudent and fair-minded journalist, he is merely leaving open the possibility that such experts exist, so that if such an expert is found his reporting will stand unchallenged. Perhaps, in the whirlwind rush to make his deadline, he did not have time to find and interview such experts but wishes to imply that he would have liked to have done so, to give equal time to both sides of the issue of Presidential Infallibility.

    According to “When Experts Disagree,” “The fact that experts disagree … can … create some real discomfort for people who hope someone can tell them the one right way to think about issues.” Of course, that’s just one expert’s opinion.