Joel Stein, the LA Times and Hugh Hewitt

Phew, I just read the Hewitt interview with columnist Joel Stein of the LA Times. I missed the last segment of the interview last night on the drive home, and am awfully glad Radioblogger transcribes the interviews.

I've got to agree with many out there that were outraged with his article. The only thing that bugs me about the interview and it doesn't really bug me so much, but the Left will be bitching up a storm (if they choose to tread here), are the questions.

Huh? The questions? Yeah, the questions. In order to get to the bottom of this guy and where his editor may or may not stand it was necessary for Hugh to step down to the level of lowest common denominator. Even then, Stein has no clue.

The Left might say, "wow, those questions are so stupid, redundant, and picky; couldn't you have at least asked him something substantial?"

They wouldn't understand or would choose not to understand that in order for an interview to go anywhere the interviewee must have a clue. No of the questions were difficult in any way, shape or form, but they were for Stein. The interview drove home the fact that this guy had given absolutely no regard for what he was saying and what it meant.

Stein took what he considered a contradiction and wasted 700 plus words on it, without even considering what it is he is truly not supporting. The Hewitt interview revealed the shallowness of Stein's understanding.

You would think an opinion writer would be slightly more thoughtful and understand the subject more; just an iota would have been the difference between night and day. Or as Joel Stein sees it, black and white.