Closure on Cloture

To the Editor:

I had to laugh out loud when I read Steve Kornacki’s article on the Senate maneuverings over the Iraq War debate [“Republican Senators Deepen a Hole for 2008,” Wise Guys, Feb. 12]. It’s hard to imagine that someone would think to criticize another, when they themselves are completely misinformed about what happened.

Unfortunately for Mr. Kornacki, it appears that he actually believed Harry Reid’s bald-faced lie to reporters Monday afternoon. The Democrats tried to cut off debate on the Iraqi resolution with a cloture motion. The G.O.P. rebuffed that attempt to end the debate.

Only the ignorant or hopelessly naïve swallowed the mainstream media spin that the Republicans blocked the debate. But at least the majority didn’t write insipid articles using the lie as a premise for criticizing the G.O.P.

The next time Mr. Kornacki decides to write an article, he would be well advised to know what he is talking about. In that way, people like myself won’t consider him a fool.

Brian Goettl

Nicholasville, Ky.

MoMA, Dearest?

To the Editor:

Nicholas Boston, as is typical for cultural writers, describes MoMA in glowing terms [“MoMA Gets Biesenbached in Euro-Curator Stampede,” Feb. 12]. Not everyone shares these warm fuzzies.

He doesn’t touch upon Klaus Biesenbach’s use of YouTube as an advertising gimmick. Gimmicks are supposed to be below any curator’s status.

YouTube derives its viability from the concept of reciprocity and sharing. MoMA shares nothing. It speaks down to people on YouTube and exploits them. The Museum of Modern Art, in the final analysis, isn’t so lofty, in spite of its media curator’s rock-star status.

A reporter should always at least try to look behind the curtain at the man who operates the controls of Oz.

Tim Barrus