So apparently Barack Obama is going to spend a week at the end of this month in Martha’s Vineyard. This choice isn’t much of a shock; the island south of Cape Cod has long been a popular vacation destination for those who can afford it.
But nevertheless, a New York Times blog ran a piece yesterday in which the talking heads weighed in on Why Democrats Love Martha’s Vineyard.
The Vineyard article ran in the “Room for Debate” blog, devoted to commentary about issues in the news. Let’s take a look at the debate:
Julia Wells, editor of the Vineyard Gazette, says “The island is a place where you can be yourself.”
Jill Nelson, the author of Finding Martha’s Vineyard: African Americans at Home on an Island, explains that “we don’t overtly fawn over actors, singers or presidents, even though, like cars, at times there are a lot of them here.”
Todd Purdum, the national editor of Vanity Fair, said “I spent one pleasant weekend there years ago and thought it was just fine.”
Oh, the mudslinging! My understanding of debate is that the word applies to some sort of argument or disagreement. But apparently there isn’t really much room for debate on this one. Um, Democrats love Martha’s Vineyard because it’s nice.
About the only critical opinion offered in this piece comes from Politico editor-in-chief John Harris, who grumbles that Martha’s Vineyard is so expensive. Because journalists have to cover the president wherever he goes, Harris would prefer that the Obamas vacation somewhere more affordable.
Daniel Luzer is web editor of the Washington Monthly.