...is that no matter what you do, Rush Limbaugh is going to crow about it, Ken Mehlman is going to do a mass-mailing about it, and the American Family Association will launch a boycott over it.
And even if you choose to do nothing, all of them will still attack you, claiming that you did something you didn't do.
So the choice for Democrats is to sit on their asses and do nothing, while Republicans criticize them unjustly, or to launch an all-out attack on the GOP while the Republicans criticize them unjustly.
This NYT article about the Feingold censure resolution is simply absurd. As an election ploy, the Republicans want to declare all out the-sky-is-falling war against a straw-man, a going-nowhere-fast resolution offered by one single Senator, with barely any other Democratic support. It's all bull, but the GOP want to rally their base, and lying isn't past them, it's their standard operating procedure.
So how does the NYT respond?
Does it say, gosh, there really isn't much of a story here. The Republicans have been using the bogeyman about impeachment to motivate their base for a while now, and Feingold's resolution, well, it was nice but it didn't do much. Oh no. The NYT rises to the occasion and gives the Republicans a big wet kiss, an article talking about how this one highly-unlikely resolution has revived the ailing Republican party from the brink of disaster.
Give me a fracking break.
And the NYT fell for the GOP spin, like they always do, and ran a story validating something based on absolutely nothing.
It really is amazing watching the almost-invisible contest taking place between the NYT and the Washington Post, each trying to produce articles just a bit crappier and more biased than the other, in order to see who can suck up more to the GOP while overseeing the dismantlement of our entire democracy.
Read More......
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
Chris Matthews accepted huge speaking fees in violation of NBC policy
Well, looks like that debate is over.
Just a few days ago, NBC Universal president Rick Kaplan sent the following email to an AMERICAblog reader who was concerned about recent reports that NBC anchor Chris Matthews was accepting huge speaking fees from lobbyists in Washington.
Then there's the National Association of Chain Drug Stores. Here's a description of their lobbying from their own Web site:
And finally, there's the American Hospital Association, which also freely admits that it lobbies:
Now who's refusing to listen?
(More from Open Letter to Chris Matthews.) Read More......
Just a few days ago, NBC Universal president Rick Kaplan sent the following email to an AMERICAblog reader who was concerned about recent reports that NBC anchor Chris Matthews was accepting huge speaking fees from lobbyists in Washington.
From: Kaplan, Rick (NBC Universal, MSNBC)Well, the problem is that ThinkProgress just got the goods on Matthews, and it shows that in fact Matthews has accepted speaking fees as high as $35,000 an appearance from Washington, DC lobbying associations. Now, before Mr. Kaplan starts saying that the groups Matthews spoke to are not "interest groups," let's see how the first group, the National Venture Capital Association describes itself:
To: xxxxx
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 5:26 AM
Subject: Re: Conflict of Interest:Matthews Big Speaking Engagements at Right Wing Organizations
No NBC anchors take money from any interest group...or any group that I can think of...but these folks don't want to hear that and we choose not to engage them. Chris couldn't be more unfairly treated...
Rick Kaplan
President, MSNBC
xxx-xxx-xxxx
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
The venture capital community's leading source for information, networking, advocacy, professional development and industry statistics.Advocacy. They're the lobbyists for the industry. That's what trade associations are. They're lobbyists. Or to use Mr. Kaplan's phrase: interest groups.
Then there's the National Association of Chain Drug Stores. Here's a description of their lobbying from their own Web site:
And finally, there's the American Hospital Association, which also freely admits that it lobbies:
Through our representation and advocacy activities, AHA ensures that members' perspectives and needs are heard and addressed in national health policy development, legislative and regulatory debates, and judicial matters. Our advocacy effortshttp://www.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gif include the legislative and executive branches and include the legislative and regulatory arenas.So, in contrast to what the president of NBC Universal has been saying publicly, Chris Matthews has taken money from interest groups, and it is categorically untrue that NBC anchors do not take such money.
Now who's refusing to listen?
(More from Open Letter to Chris Matthews.) Read More......
Republican talk of "activist judges" is causing death threats against Supreme Court justices
From AP:
- Delay threatens judges
And, let me repost something I wrote in March of last year:
Examples of religious right anti-judge hate speech:
Today, I received this email from the religious right propaganda organ AgapePress:
That then got me wondering what else the religious right has publicly said about judges, and whether a climate of hate against judges is being created in America. Here's what I found doing just a cursory look.
Gary Bauer:
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said she and former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor have been the targets of death threats from the "irrational fringe" of society, people apparently spurred by Republican criticism of the high court.More GOP hate that inspires violence:
Ginsburg revealed in a speech in South Africa last month that she and O'Connor were threatened a year ago by someone who called on the Internet for the immediate "patriotic" killing of the justices.
Security concerns among judges have been growing.
Conservative commentator Ann Coulter joked earlier this year that Justice John Paul Stevens should be poisoned. Over the past few months O'Connor has complained that criticism, mainly by Republicans, has threatened judicial independence to deal with difficult issues like gay marriage.
Worry is not limited to the Supreme Court. Three quarters of the nation's 2,200 federal judges have asked for government-paid home security systems, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said this week.
Ginsburg said the Web threat was apparently prompted by legislation in Congress, filed by Republicans, that would bar judges from relying on foreign laws or court decisions.
"It is disquieting that they have attracted sizable support. And one not-so-small concern - they fuel the irrational fringe," she said in a speech posted online by the court earlier this month and first reported Wednesday by LegalTimes.com.
According to Ginsburg, someone in a Web site chat room wrote: "Okay commandoes, here is your first patriotic assignment ... an easy one. Supreme Court Justices Ginsburg and O'Connor have publicly stated that they use (foreign) laws and rulings to decide how to rule on American cases. This is a huge threat to our Republic and Constitutional freedom. ... If you are what you say you are, and NOT armchair patriots, then those two justices will not live another week."
- Delay threatens judges
And, let me repost something I wrote in March of last year:
Examples of religious right anti-judge hate speech:
Today, I received this email from the religious right propaganda organ AgapePress:
Judie Brown of the American Life League says the court-ordered starvation of the brain-injured Terri Schiavo is the latest evidence that liberal judges are trying to take on the role of God. "The problem with the court system is that they are moving closer and closer to condemning severely disabled Americans, as a group, to death," she says, "and that ought to frighten everyone."That got me wondering. I knew the religious right regularly went out of its way to dehumanize gays and lesbians to the point where Katie Couric, our own Dorothy in real life, asked in the days following Matthew Shepard's murder whether the religious right's anti-gay rhetoric didn't add to a climate of hate that overall helps encourge violence against gays.
That then got me wondering what else the religious right has publicly said about judges, and whether a climate of hate against judges is being created in America. Here's what I found doing just a cursory look.
Gary Bauer:
'A radical political agenda is being forced on the American people by un-elected, left-wing judges who are intent on remaking our country,' he says.AgapePress:
"A conservative Christian activist says a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court is proof that many of this nation's judges are on a quest for a religion-free America. Earlier this week, the high court refused to consider the appeal of a judicial ban on cadet-led mealtime prayers at Virginia Military Institute.... Vision America president Rick Scarborough says the effects of the VMI ruling will be far-reaching. For one thing, he fears the nation is in danger of raising up a generation of military officers without religious values. And he believes by such rulings, the United States is pitting itself against God."Family Research Council:
Gay Activists and Liberal Judges are Trashing Democracy to Redefine Marriage.... same-sex marriage would logically lead to marriages based on polygamy, incest, and pedophilia."FRC email 10/22/03:
This is how important the fight for America's judiciary has become: we're now dealing with activist judges who are determining who among us is permitted to live, and who will be left to die.... The time to take back our judiciary has come. Innocent lives are depending on us.Jerry Falwell email, November 20, 2003:
"militant jurists"American Center for Law and Justice email, 3/13/03:
They want to see activist judges appointed - and confirmed - who will re-interpret the law to fit their own political agenda. It's an aggressive campaign ... and it's one of the most outrageous and dangerous I've seen in many years!ACLJ email, 3/3/04:
It is clear that existing state and federal laws may not keep activist judges and local officials from marrying same-sex couples ... even if it means they are committing a CRIME!AgapePress:
The Christian Defense Coalition spokesman points out that the decision by activist judges that the most innocent of all life is not protected has resulted in the ongoing, legalized murder of 3,000 unborn babies in the U.S. each day.Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, R-Colo., chief sponsor of the Federal Marriage Amendment:
"Our nation has a set of activist judges in Massachusetts and a rogue mayor in San Francisco. It is evident that they will openly aid and abet the homosexual lobby. These events over the past week clearly show that gay activists will skirt the law to create a new privilege that has never existed in this country."Republican National Committee:
In an e-mail message, Christine Iverson, a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee, confirmed that the party had sent the mailings. "When the Massachusetts Supreme Court sanctioned same-sex marriage and people in other states realized they could be compelled to recognize those laws, same-sex marriage became an issue,'' Ms. Iverson said. "These same activist judges also want to remove the words 'under God' from the Pledge of Allegiance.Stephen Bennett, "ex"-gay and spokesman for Concerned Women for America, emai:
four tyrannical judges have taken MA -- as well as America -- hostage and their immoral ruling may change the course of history of our great country - forever. The destructive impact that "gay" marriage will have on the entire nation is unimaginable.... The Bible talks of tumultuous times past - and future - when governments directly opposes the law of God. As the apostles said, "We should obey God rather than man." We are at such a time in America.Read More......
Bush at 33 and Scotty says they like the team that got them there
Via Atrios, the Prez is at 33% approval in the new Pew poll. That is another new low...the lowest ever new low.
Yet, we learn today, that according to Scott McClellan, Bush is quite pleased with the team he has working for him:
Yet, we learn today, that according to Scott McClellan, Bush is quite pleased with the team he has working for him:
"The president has a smart, capable and experienced team that is fully committed to helping him advance his agenda and get things done for the American people," the spokesman said, noting that Bush was devoting part of his day to talking about health care and prescription drug benefits for seniors.Hey, if Bush is happy with the crew that got him to 33%, who are we to argue? Keep that team intact. Read More......
Washington Post unilaterally declares DailyKos to be "the left wing" of the Democratic party
Yes, another fabrication from that front page Washington Post story today about Senator Feingold and censure. This time the Washington Post decides, based on absolutely nothing, that the DailyKos blog represents the "left wing" of the Democratic party:
We are now at the point where major American newspapers are simply making things up in order belittle Democrats. It is no mistake that DailyKos - which isn't just the most-visited liberal blog, it's the most-visited political blog EVER - is the subject of the Washington Post's subtle and ongoing attempt at marginalization. Take down the big dog, and the rest will follow.
(And make no mistake. That is exactly what this is all about. It is no coincidence that the Washington Post is now parroting GOP talking points that routinely try to trivialize any Democrat who starts to show any backbone. They've been systematically trying to marginalize Bill Clinton, Howard Dean, George Soros, Michael Moore, MoveOn, and more. Any Democrat who takes a stand is instantly painted as fringe by the GOP, then the Washington Post and the New York Times are only too happy to repeat the newly-minted lie as long-established truth.)
And even were the Post to argue that their slight was unintentional, it doesn't really matter. No serious journalist should be quoting "facts" with no attribution whatsoever, especially when those facts are made up out of thin air.
Stop referring to the liberal blogs as being the left wing, the far-left, the base, etc. of the Democratic party. You are making this stuff up, and you will continue to be held accountable for this outright partisan fabrication of the news. Read More......
The left wing of the party has greeted Feingold's censure call ecstatically. He was the front-runner in a Jan. 31 survey of 2008 presidential candidates by the liberal blog Daily Kos.I know Markos, who runs DailyKos. I've been a reader of DailyKos for years. And while DailyKos is certainly a Democratic blog and a liberal blog, I'm having a hard time understanding how the Washington Post decided today, on its front page, AS A FACT that needs no attribution whatsoever, that DailyKos represents the left wing of the Democratic party.
We are now at the point where major American newspapers are simply making things up in order belittle Democrats. It is no mistake that DailyKos - which isn't just the most-visited liberal blog, it's the most-visited political blog EVER - is the subject of the Washington Post's subtle and ongoing attempt at marginalization. Take down the big dog, and the rest will follow.
(And make no mistake. That is exactly what this is all about. It is no coincidence that the Washington Post is now parroting GOP talking points that routinely try to trivialize any Democrat who starts to show any backbone. They've been systematically trying to marginalize Bill Clinton, Howard Dean, George Soros, Michael Moore, MoveOn, and more. Any Democrat who takes a stand is instantly painted as fringe by the GOP, then the Washington Post and the New York Times are only too happy to repeat the newly-minted lie as long-established truth.)
And even were the Post to argue that their slight was unintentional, it doesn't really matter. No serious journalist should be quoting "facts" with no attribution whatsoever, especially when those facts are made up out of thin air.
Stop referring to the liberal blogs as being the left wing, the far-left, the base, etc. of the Democratic party. You are making this stuff up, and you will continue to be held accountable for this outright partisan fabrication of the news. Read More......
Cincinnati passes civil rights measure protecting gays
From the Human Rights Campaign:
NEWS from the Human Rights CampaignRead More......
Cincinnati's Passage of Non-Discrimination Measure a Triumph for Fairness
"Cincinnati is a symbol of where America itself is when it comes to fairness. In large cities and small towns, on the coasts and in the heartland, Americans want us moving toward equality, not away from it," said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese.
WASHINGTON - Following the November 2004 repeal of a one-of-a-kind anti-gay law, the Cincinnati City Council voted today to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity and expression in employment, housing and public accommodations. Led by Equality Cincinnati and local leaders and supported by the Human Rights Campaign, the move ensures fairness for Cincinnatians.
"Cincinnati is a symbol of where America itself is when it comes to fairness," said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. "Cincinnati is a symbol of where America itself is when it comes to fairness. In large cities and small towns, on the coasts and in the heartland, Americans want us moving toward equality, not away from it."
Solmonese continued, "Equality Cincinnati and local leaders, especially Councilman Crowley, deserve enormous respect for their work. In the face of an anti-gay political obstacle sustained by a few, they gave voice to the many. "
In November 2004, the majority of Cincinnatians repealed the city's discriminatory Article XII, which prohibited the city from passing any laws protecting gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. The city stood alone in the United States as the only place where such laws were prohibited.
The Council voted 8 to 1 to pass the non-discrimination initiative. Some of Ohio's largest private corporations already prohibit this kind of discrimination, including Nationwide, NCR Corp., Owens Corning and Cooper Tire and Rubber.
Cincinnati joins 76 other jurisdictions prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Seventeen states and the District of Columbia prohibit sexual orientation-based discrimination and eight also prohibit gender identity-based discrimination.
Afternoon open thread
So whose crazy idea was it to have BSG come back in October? Grrrr.....
Read More......
Abu Ghraib detainee sodomized with banana
Let's have a little chat about why these new photos - including this one showing a prisoner sodomizing himself with a banana - matter.
The White House will most certainly claim 'been there, done that' with regards to these photos - meaning, we've already had this discussion before.
Well, yes we have. And the last time we had this discussion, key leaders in the Republican party shrugged off the entire incident. The top Republican radio show host, Rush Limbaugh, who his listened to and revered by millions of Republicans, said that what took place at Abu Ghraib was nothing more than a fraternity prank, and commended the work at Abu Ghraib as "brilliant."
And one of the Republicans' top US Senators, Jim Inhofe, trivialized what took place at Abu Ghraib, saying he was "more outraged by the outrage" over Abu Ghraib than by what actually happened there. In other word, what really made him angry was that people got upset that US soldiers were busy torturing people.
When Rush Limbaugh repeatedly goes on the air and belittles the abuse at Abu Ghraib, when Republican US Senators are more upset that people are upset about what took place, then the party that controls the entire US government at this time has not learned the lessons of Abu Ghraib.
If I were an Arab or a Muslim (or an American, for that matter) looking at these new photos and these new videos, I'd want to hear an apology from Rush Limbaugh, Senator Inhofe, and every other Republican leader before I sat back and agreed that this issue has been settled.
We have the nerve to criticize the "crazy" Muslims rioting in the streets around the world, yet we say nothing about the crazy Republicans rioting at the mouth here in the US.
(More photos and videos from Salon.) Read More......
The White House will most certainly claim 'been there, done that' with regards to these photos - meaning, we've already had this discussion before.
Well, yes we have. And the last time we had this discussion, key leaders in the Republican party shrugged off the entire incident. The top Republican radio show host, Rush Limbaugh, who his listened to and revered by millions of Republicans, said that what took place at Abu Ghraib was nothing more than a fraternity prank, and commended the work at Abu Ghraib as "brilliant."
And one of the Republicans' top US Senators, Jim Inhofe, trivialized what took place at Abu Ghraib, saying he was "more outraged by the outrage" over Abu Ghraib than by what actually happened there. In other word, what really made him angry was that people got upset that US soldiers were busy torturing people.
When Rush Limbaugh repeatedly goes on the air and belittles the abuse at Abu Ghraib, when Republican US Senators are more upset that people are upset about what took place, then the party that controls the entire US government at this time has not learned the lessons of Abu Ghraib.
If I were an Arab or a Muslim (or an American, for that matter) looking at these new photos and these new videos, I'd want to hear an apology from Rush Limbaugh, Senator Inhofe, and every other Republican leader before I sat back and agreed that this issue has been settled.
We have the nerve to criticize the "crazy" Muslims rioting in the streets around the world, yet we say nothing about the crazy Republicans rioting at the mouth here in the US.
(More photos and videos from Salon.) Read More......
Now HERE is a quote for the ages
"Senator, when you took your oath of office, you placed your hand on the Bible and swore to uphold the Constitution. You didn't place your hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible."
- Jamie Raskin, testifying Wednesday, March 1, 2006 before the Maryland Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee in response to a question from Republican Senator Nancy Jacobs about whether marriage discrimination against gay people is required by "God's Law." Read More......
- Jamie Raskin, testifying Wednesday, March 1, 2006 before the Maryland Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee in response to a question from Republican Senator Nancy Jacobs about whether marriage discrimination against gay people is required by "God's Law." Read More......
"Law & Order Criminal Intent" to take on the Abramoff scandal this Sunday
I'm happy to give a free promo to that! More here.
Read More......
Washington State considering letting pharmacists play God and judge you - if you're not worthy, they don't have to serve you
Hey, sounds good to me, so long as it works the other way around too. Can we turn religious right pharmacists away from our emergency rooms because they offend our sense of morality?
Read More......
Bush and the GOP are Washington
This is so weak. The President is dissing Washington to explain why the Medicare drug bill is such a disaster:
"Any time Washington passes a new law, sometimes the transition period can be interesting," the president said.But, Bush and his party control Washington. They are the government. This is their failure. Read More......
Bush changes security clearance language to make it harder for gays to get clearances
Because bashing gays, and pandering to America's Taliban, is more important to George Bush than focusing on the real problems America is facing.
Can America survive 3 more years of a failed presidency? Read More......
Can America survive 3 more years of a failed presidency? Read More......
Washington Post. Sloppy Journalism. Stop it. Now.
Sometimes I know what it's like to have kids.
You get tired of always having to be the parent. Always having to be the bad guy. Never getting any respect. But someone has to do it. And if not you, then who?
That's why liberal blogs are constantly berating the traditional media. Because the traditional media is made up of a growing number of increasingly sloppy children. And their sloppiness is now jeopardizing our democracy. It's gotten us into a war that's a disaster, and it's helped re-elect a president who isn't capable of managing our country. All because the traditional media let themselves be emasculated and lobotomized rather than simply doing their job.
To wit, this lead sentence from tomorrow's front-page Washington Post story on Senator Feingold's censure resolution:
Actual real-life surveys show that most Democrats, and most Independents, have had it with Bush. Not just liberal Democrats, but all Democrats, and even most Independents.
So, seriously, where did the Washington Post get the facts to justify the very first line of its front page story about Senator Feingold? Nowhere, that's where.
They just made it up.
Because that's what journalism has become. A place where you hide the truth, lest you scoop your own book (Woodward) or invite the ire of the Bush administration (New York Times). It's a place for sloppy people to make a good amount of money telling the rest of us what to think, even though they themselves stopped thinking long ago.
I really don't mean to knock all traditional journalists. I've worked as one myself. But I find myself at an increasing loss for words every time I read one of these bizarre right-wing slanted stories coming from the Washington Post and the New York Times. Stories that simply aren't based in fact, but appeal to your sense of what you'd think was true. As Stephen Colbert says, they're stories with "truthiness" - meaning, they're not true, but they sound true, and that's what really matters.
The Washington Post and the New York Times, and the rest of the traditional media that emulates them, need to stop thinking like GOP clones and start thinking like the independent journalists they once were and still can be.
If you're going to label bloggers, and our readers, and the growing numbers of Americans increasingly angry at the direction our country is heading "the liberal base" of the Democratic party, then that would mean our liberal base comprises around 66% of the country right about now.
It simply no longer passes the laugh test to label all opposition to George Bush as liberal, or fringe, or base, or being in the minority. The man is at 34% in the polls. Even his own base has had it with him. So spare us your sloppy bs about the Democratic base being the moving force behind public ire at the president.
This is part of a larger problem. Not just a larger problem of conservative bias in the mainstream media, a media that is simply terrified of doing its job in the shadow of George Bush. No, the larger problem we face is the attempt by the traditional media to marginalize its liberal critics.
We are not just angry with the direction our country is heading, and with the failed president who is leading us over the cliff, we're also angry with traditional journalists whose writings once helped further American democracy and who have now sold out to sloth and influence. And that's why those traditional journalists feel the need to marginalize us in return.
They tell us that bloggers are all angry, immature, children who type in their pajamas. Forget that most of the top bloggers are in their 30s and 40s, many are professional journalists, lawyers, and have PhDs, backgrounds in government, and beyond.
I'd bet most of us have better resumes than most of our critics.
They also tell us that blog readers are all angry, far-left, party activists who are unreasonable and will only accept the most extreme of political views.
I communicate with a lot of my readers, and I (and a number of bloggers) even hold coffees with them when I travel. And they come from all stripes. Liberal, conservative, Democrat, Republican. What identifies them, and unifies them, isn't that they're all particularly lefty or righty or centrist - it's that they're mad as hell about the direction in which our country is heading, and about the lack of courage and conviction in today's politicians.
The problem with today's media is the same problem with today's Democratic party. They confuse anger with policy. They do not understand that we are united in and motivated by our anger, regardless of our politics. And it is sloppy journalism, and sloppy politics, to assume that what is motivating the blogosphere today is its liberalism rather than its frustration.
We are not fed up with a particular policy, we're fed up with politics.
I am not the liberal base of the Democratic party, sorry to disillusion anyone. My views are more nuanced, and diverse, and can't be put in a convenient little partisan box just to make the Washington Post happy. And I'm hardly unique in the blogosphere, nor are my readers.
There is nothing wrong with being the base of the Democratic party. But the blogs represent far more than that base, and that base does not rule the blogs. No wing of the party rules the blogs - or rather, no political wing. If anything, we represent, we are, the reform wing of the Democratic party. We are motivated, and united, by our utter horror at what we see happening to our country, and by the fact that, for whatever reason, we, unlike our political leaders, are not afraid to fight back and take back our country.
Does that make us activists? Sure. Angry? Absolutely. But this has nothing to do with our politics nor whether we are the base, the center, or the far-right of the Democratic party. And I'd suggest that there are a growing number of non-far-right Republicans in the same boat. They are fed up with the direction our country is heading, and the inability of conventional politics to address the growing disaster. It just isn't about right or left anymore, and you're all just too lazy or stupid or old to see it.
Sloppy journalists and cowardly politicians need to wake up and learn that fact, or they will never understand who we really are until it's too late. Read More......
You get tired of always having to be the parent. Always having to be the bad guy. Never getting any respect. But someone has to do it. And if not you, then who?
That's why liberal blogs are constantly berating the traditional media. Because the traditional media is made up of a growing number of increasingly sloppy children. And their sloppiness is now jeopardizing our democracy. It's gotten us into a war that's a disaster, and it's helped re-elect a president who isn't capable of managing our country. All because the traditional media let themselves be emasculated and lobotomized rather than simply doing their job.
To wit, this lead sentence from tomorrow's front-page Washington Post story on Senator Feingold's censure resolution:
For months the Democrats have resisted calls from their liberal base to more aggressively challenge President Bush.Calls from their "liberal base?" Really? Where did you get that from? Seriously. I want facts. How did the Washington Post determine that it was the "liberal base" of the Democratic party that has been the driving force calling for Dems to challenge President Bush?
Actual real-life surveys show that most Democrats, and most Independents, have had it with Bush. Not just liberal Democrats, but all Democrats, and even most Independents.
So, seriously, where did the Washington Post get the facts to justify the very first line of its front page story about Senator Feingold? Nowhere, that's where.
They just made it up.
Because that's what journalism has become. A place where you hide the truth, lest you scoop your own book (Woodward) or invite the ire of the Bush administration (New York Times). It's a place for sloppy people to make a good amount of money telling the rest of us what to think, even though they themselves stopped thinking long ago.
I really don't mean to knock all traditional journalists. I've worked as one myself. But I find myself at an increasing loss for words every time I read one of these bizarre right-wing slanted stories coming from the Washington Post and the New York Times. Stories that simply aren't based in fact, but appeal to your sense of what you'd think was true. As Stephen Colbert says, they're stories with "truthiness" - meaning, they're not true, but they sound true, and that's what really matters.
The Washington Post and the New York Times, and the rest of the traditional media that emulates them, need to stop thinking like GOP clones and start thinking like the independent journalists they once were and still can be.
If you're going to label bloggers, and our readers, and the growing numbers of Americans increasingly angry at the direction our country is heading "the liberal base" of the Democratic party, then that would mean our liberal base comprises around 66% of the country right about now.
It simply no longer passes the laugh test to label all opposition to George Bush as liberal, or fringe, or base, or being in the minority. The man is at 34% in the polls. Even his own base has had it with him. So spare us your sloppy bs about the Democratic base being the moving force behind public ire at the president.
This is part of a larger problem. Not just a larger problem of conservative bias in the mainstream media, a media that is simply terrified of doing its job in the shadow of George Bush. No, the larger problem we face is the attempt by the traditional media to marginalize its liberal critics.
We are not just angry with the direction our country is heading, and with the failed president who is leading us over the cliff, we're also angry with traditional journalists whose writings once helped further American democracy and who have now sold out to sloth and influence. And that's why those traditional journalists feel the need to marginalize us in return.
They tell us that bloggers are all angry, immature, children who type in their pajamas. Forget that most of the top bloggers are in their 30s and 40s, many are professional journalists, lawyers, and have PhDs, backgrounds in government, and beyond.
I'd bet most of us have better resumes than most of our critics.
They also tell us that blog readers are all angry, far-left, party activists who are unreasonable and will only accept the most extreme of political views.
I communicate with a lot of my readers, and I (and a number of bloggers) even hold coffees with them when I travel. And they come from all stripes. Liberal, conservative, Democrat, Republican. What identifies them, and unifies them, isn't that they're all particularly lefty or righty or centrist - it's that they're mad as hell about the direction in which our country is heading, and about the lack of courage and conviction in today's politicians.
The problem with today's media is the same problem with today's Democratic party. They confuse anger with policy. They do not understand that we are united in and motivated by our anger, regardless of our politics. And it is sloppy journalism, and sloppy politics, to assume that what is motivating the blogosphere today is its liberalism rather than its frustration.
We are not fed up with a particular policy, we're fed up with politics.
I am not the liberal base of the Democratic party, sorry to disillusion anyone. My views are more nuanced, and diverse, and can't be put in a convenient little partisan box just to make the Washington Post happy. And I'm hardly unique in the blogosphere, nor are my readers.
There is nothing wrong with being the base of the Democratic party. But the blogs represent far more than that base, and that base does not rule the blogs. No wing of the party rules the blogs - or rather, no political wing. If anything, we represent, we are, the reform wing of the Democratic party. We are motivated, and united, by our utter horror at what we see happening to our country, and by the fact that, for whatever reason, we, unlike our political leaders, are not afraid to fight back and take back our country.
Does that make us activists? Sure. Angry? Absolutely. But this has nothing to do with our politics nor whether we are the base, the center, or the far-right of the Democratic party. And I'd suggest that there are a growing number of non-far-right Republicans in the same boat. They are fed up with the direction our country is heading, and the inability of conventional politics to address the growing disaster. It just isn't about right or left anymore, and you're all just too lazy or stupid or old to see it.
Sloppy journalists and cowardly politicians need to wake up and learn that fact, or they will never understand who we really are until it's too late. Read More......
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
