The Examiner gets its own Georgetown column


The Examiner, the right-tilting daily known for its dogged free delivery, has recently started running a “Georgetown University Examiner” column on its website.

Penned by Georgetown philosophy major and American Enterprise Institute intern Peter Grace (COL ’10), the first seven installments of the GU Examiner have mostly stuck to covering some already over-exposed Georgetown institutions (the Tombs! Dumbarton Oaks!) or critiquing campus culture (the verdict: too many sweatpants, not enough Catholicism).

In one post, though, Grace uses Georgetown as a springboard for discussing some lofty political ideals, highlighting the potential arrest of a former Bush administration official who is also a “professor of government at Georgetown University” by the Spanish court for violating international law in providing the legal framework for our Guantanamo torture policy and argues that such an arrest would undermine national sovereignty.

Disagreements with his political position aside, the post gets one fairly crucial fact wrong: the “Georgetown professor” in question is Douglas Feith… who left Georgetown over a year ago.

According to an email from Grace, the column was born when he responded to an ad on the Examiner‘s website soliciting writers with a draft of The sweatpants scrouge.” Covering a college campus over the summer is tough, he wrote (Vox can certainly say amen to that!), so for now he’s just hoping to draw in whatever audience he can. Come the fall, though, his columns will be directed principally at Georgetown students.

In his email, Grace wrote:

For the most part, I try to restrict the column’s ambit to matters directly related to Georgetown University. (If you’ve read any of the articles, then you’re well aware how I rarely succeed.) There’s no shortage of news related to GU, so when I come across something interesting or relevant, I often use it as a launching pad to deploy one of my lunatic dithyrambs, of which there is also no shortage. In the minority of instances, I write about an observation I made at GU and what kind of an impression it left on me.

When I’ve finished reviewing the preliminary draft to an article inspired in such a fashion, I often think I’m positively non compos mentis (see “The sweatpants scourge”), but the articles often strike me as a little funny, so I polish and post them anyways.

6 Comments on “The Examiner gets its own Georgetown column

  1. Lunatic dithyrambs? Sign me. up. But seriously, “Professor Feith depends on our vigilance. “

  2. Seriously. Anyone who can use “dithyrambs” in a coherent sentence deserves my respect and admiration. I also appreciate “ambit” and “non compis mentis”.

    We’ve got a true William F. Buckley ahead of us.

  3. Yeah, reading the part where he diagnoses writers was funny to me because for the rest of the article, I couldn’t stop thinking that this guy couldn’t write to save his life. “I am unaccountably impressed?” No you aren’t; you spend the rest of that paragraph detailing why/how you are impressed. “For three anachronistic decades and one plausible decade?” “…articulates daily the opinions and beliefs of the popular majority under its esoteric masthead?” He’s parodying either himself or the Philodemic — I hope.

  4. The hook-up piece is a good example; would be 500 times better if you deleted the words: “indisputably,” “what qualifies as,” “nevertheless,” [the entire sentence that accompanies the “nevertheless”], “seems to lack the ability to suffocate,” “plausibly justified”…I’m only two paragraphs in. This is too much.

  5. Charity, I had the exact same reaction regarding “unaccountably impressed”. It’s direct evidence of this kid’s writing for the sake of prestige rather than substance. But even more laughable is the fact that he’s actually impressed his fellow students at this blog. Is this what passes as high standards at Georgetown?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>