The press is at war…
…with Romney.
Of course; we expected that. But the nature of the coverage of Romney’s trip abroad—with the press acting, in the words of Powerline’s John Hinderaker, as though Romney had “committed one blunder after another” when in fact the trip has been mostly “triumphant”—underscores the reality that these days the supposedly objective press is out to get any serious Republican candidate, and out to protect any serious Democratic one (read: John Edwards), but most especially Barack Obama.
That’s been true for quite some time. But it’s glaringly obvious in the excessively “gotcha” coverage of Romney’s trip (I would include Newsweek’s “wimp” story, but Newsweek ceased being a serious periodical quite some time ago). There’s no attempt to hide the agenda anymore; it’s full-bore Pravda mode.
If you look at the top headlines at Memeorandum, the story du jour of idiot Romney and his gang of stupidheads abroad makes it look to the casual reader as though they’d insulted the Polish press corps and told them to shove it and to “kiss my ass.” A good example would be this CNN story with the headline, “Romney aide loses cool, curses at press in Poland.”
Many readers just scan the headlines, and the press knows that. But the story was actually that the aide shouted this at the American press, who were hounding Romney (while on a visit to the Polish Tomb of the Unknown Soldier) with questions about the poor perpetually-outraged Palestinians and how offended they were by Romney’s remarks in Israel. You have to read deeply into the story to even realize that it was the American press and not the Polish, and that they were playing the usual “gotcha” game, and that the Romney aide, Rick Gorka, quickly called the reporters to apologize.
As for Romney, he doesn’t appear to be innocent about the press’s agenda toward him (unlike John McCain, who had once been their darling and whom I don’t think ever quite realized that the rules of the game had changed once he became the nominee). I see no indication that Romney expects fairness from them or anything resembling it.
The most important question at this point is how savvy the American people are about the whole business. I’m hoping that the answer is “very.” After all, Iowahawk notes, “”If there’s anything the American public won’t abide, it’s someone who insults screaming reporters and Palestinians.”
Here’s the video:
Show some respect? Dream on.
[NOTE: Speaking of Pravda—it’s not doing all that well, even now. The English-language version appears to be a cross between a poorly-written Guardian and the British tabloids (see this, this, and this, just to take three stories almost at random).]
[ADDENDUM: When I actually watched the video, it struck me that the screechy, shrill questions of the reporters were so gratingly annoying that someone brilliant could even make the clip into an effective ad for the Romney campaign. Ace has a more creative idea:
“>
A rhythm-and-drums techno sort of track, with the questions by the reporter looped in the mix. Like make the found dialogue part of the rhythm. Or the melody. Or whatnot. I don’t do music.
Maybe finish and end with a brief snippet of Romney’ speech, because he, presumably, sounds like an adult, and the contrast would be humorous.]
The media has been in the tank (septic) with the democrats for as long as I can remember. I was in college during the Kennedy Nixon presedential campaign. The media loved Kennedy and loathed Nixon. They would write gushing, adulatory stories about Kennedy but always criticized Nixon. Nothing has changed in half a century. The media is just a bunch of political whores and Obama is their pimp.
Pravda just called to complain that even at their worst, they were never this bad.
“But the nature of the coverage of Romney’s trip abroad … underscores the reality that these days the supposedly objective press is out to get any serious Republican candidate, and out to protect any serious Democratic one…”
With all the talk of defending the American Constitution from depredations like president-appointed czars and anti-gun laws, the media elephant in the room is still hidden in plain sight.
Some may ask what the problem is. Let me explain the nature of the problem, because this merits etching onto one’s brain:
The media benefits from the rights of political parties–angling for the hearts and minds of voters and trying to sway their votes away from their opponents–without being held to the duties of political parties–checks and balances, accountability in general.
The Fourth Estate is a de-facto branch of the Far Left and the Democratic Party. But they do not suffer from any limits to their activities. On the contrary, the slightest suggestion that any kind of checks and balances ought to apply to them is swiftly shouted down as “advocating censorship.”
The Constitution in its current form has absolutely nothing to say of this new political body. In fact, no constitution or set of basic laws of any democratic country has yet developed a response to this recently-emerged threat. The consequences are dire, for this immunity enjoyed by the media wing of the Far Left allows the neo-Communists to exercise political power even when not in hold of government seats.
For the good of the entire free world, constitutions everywhere must be updated to counter this extrademocratic (in the sense of “extraneous to the democratic political system”) threat. Otherwise, as with the Islamic enemy, no final victory over the Marxist Left can ever be achieved, only respites from the worst of its tyranny, such as the Reagan years.
The current Fourth Estate = Fifth Column.
Former Polish President Lech Walesa Endorses Mitt Romney
You’d never know it from the news coverage – but it is there, http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/07/mitts-travelogue-meeting-lech-walesa-and-greetings-from-polich-ron-paul-supporters/
The left must be crying in their beer – they’ve always signed all their missives “In Solidarity”
I just got the yahoo.de headlines when I checked my mail. Guess what made the news: Romney aide curses reporters. And of course the “gaffe” in London made their heads too. One would think that in a country totally enamored of Nobel winners there might have been some interest in Lech Walesa’s comments, but no. Romney has already been typecast on this side of the Atlantic, which is not hard to do if reporters simply paraphrase the NYT.
“The press should be not only a collective propagandist and a collective agitator, but also a collective organizer of the masses.”
– Vladimir Lenin
Pattern recognition anyone?
Someone in the vanguard?
Over on the Left… anyone?
It’s not enough, but they are paying a price–losing audience and circulation (trophy goes to NEWSWEAK).
As I like to say, Pravda reporters told lies and spread propaganda for fear of being sent to the gulag. The American media does it willingly.
ziontruth,
It’s already there: 1st Amendment. The problem is that until just recently, the MSM also took some pleasure (and profit) by digging dirt on everyone. Maybe they were a little more lenient towards the Dems, but if it would sell a newspaper, they were ready to report a scandal, etc. Now, as neo says, they don’t even try to disguise it anymore.
Every since 9/11, it seems to me that the MSM has gone totally over to the Dems/far left. Probably no coincidence that this time also is when the Baby Boomers took most of the control of the MSM in the upper management. The sooner ‘My Generation’ dies off, the better for the US; if it can survive our remaining years.
They’re trying to make him Gerald Ford?
The sooner ‘My Generation’ dies off, the better for the US; if it can survive our remaining years.
Our parents were The Greatest Generation.
We are The Worst Generation. The sooner we’re gone, the better.
Thats funny…
but thats because you dont know who writes for it.
what’s your assumption? party hacks? etc?
you will find that most of the articles are written by westerners in england and the US. 🙂
Peter Baofu wrote the first article..
He is quite the fantabulous author..
http://www.mellenpress.com/mellenpress.cfm?aid=795&pc=10
he has some interesting titles, which explains writing for pravda
Beyond Capitalism to Post-Capitalism: Conceiving a Better Model of Wealth Acquisition to Supersede Capitalism
http://www.mellenpress.com/mellenpress.cfm?bookid=6275&pc=9
the other two are inserts… mostly though you will find that a good amount of stuff there, makes its way into leftest press here..
just as China chastising romney, most westeners dont understand what the point is. that is, most dont realize that its a difference in whether to recognize the results of the war as valid.
now, what WE dont get is how the ideology gives them their positions… in this case, an oppressor state has no right to self defense, and so, certainly no right to expansion, whether or not there is a war as such a war, would be a form of justice of the oppressed over the oppressors. (same rules that apply to man hate, race hate, etc. its a process to apply and those experiencing miss the repetition)
so china and others (Obama?) don’t feel that it was valid they took the land after being attacked… and Romney and others do.
in order to build the big lie your people have to work based on a set of rules and process, and that process is to pick up on the party line, and repeat it.
the article on sex has a reasearcher pravda interviews and so injects interesting things.
Chamakhe Maurieni..
AIDS: 21st century’s biggest fraud
http://english.pravda.ru/health/16-05-2012/121133-aids_fraud-0/
now… remember that Gorbachev admitted that the soviets had an active measure on this creating false information as to where it was created and so on (as a response to the escape of some weaponized anthrax).
well, here is a researcher from Tunis and he is going to tell you that AIDs is a fraud and its to manipulate 300 billion.
and he spins the classical leftist line you hear at OWS and so on…
its even more interesting if you are a semiregular reader and compare and notice how things appear in one place then other places are running it.
so when you wonder where some wacko gets their ideas as to how the world is, want to guess what places he may have read and not filtered what he reads or checks?
and its a mish mosh of facts you can look up, a repetitive world view and conclusions to go with it, and more – like a video
you can find similar articles in places like this
http://www.naturalnews.com/028707_AIDS_epidemic.html
in fact, HIV=AIDS: Fact or Fraud? repeats over and over and over… do a search in quotes and get About 89,400 results
its how you appear to legitimize divisive things like this.. a person looking for proof that its not crazy can find tons of sights around the health vitamin industry, and leftist holistic areas, and can find confirmations in Pravda… which IS a national press paper… no?
Occam, i beg to differ…
the 2nd generation after the worst are worse…
It might work, but then again, remember that the press has an approval rating of 21%.
Artfldgr:
I wonder why you sometimes assume without evidence that people don’t have even elementary powers of observation. For example, my statement about Pravda made no comment on whether Russians or people of other nationalities were writing for what was obviously the English-language version of Pravda. In fact, I skimmed quite a few articles there (more than the three I linked) in the course of writing the post, and noticed that a fair number seemed to be written by non-Russians, including Brits and Americans.
Why would you assume I don’t notice these things? Why would you assume I didn’t see the names of the people who wrote the articles I cited, both Russians and non-Russians, and the names of the authors of other articles as well? Why would you assume that I assumed all the articles were written by party hacks, or even by Russians? My comment was simply that Pravda still isn’t much of a paper. But in that respect it doesn’t much differ from much of our press, does it?
How the mighty have fallen—at least, in terms of circulation:
Congress voted today to eliminate the requirement for Senate confirmation for 169 Presidentially-appointed positions.
According to Mark Levin, a source inside Congress said that Romney approved of it and urged McConnell and Boehner to support it. It passed.
So Congress has ceded yet more power to the Executive branch.
House passes bill eliminating Senate confirmation for presidential appointees
Flat out unconstitutional.
In an April 2011 blog post, David S. Addington, a senior vice president and deputy chief operating officer of The Heritage Foundation, cited the “slow and detailed background investigations and mounds of duplicative paperwork.” He wrote that the bill sponsors have “identified a valid problem, but proposed the wrong solution.”
I hope Romney was just misinformed. However, just as an organizational problem, I can see a point that the federal positons are so numerous and that the period of transition so long, that government becomes unteneable. The answer, to me, is less federal government. There might be a compromise to this one, however, which is that we install a theocratic law similar to sharia which would provide a stability and order heretofor lacking.
Kidding. Just kidding.
Just shows you, how desperate the Obama’s campain gets. It’s not as David Axelrod lost his touch, it’s just difficult to sell damaged goods.
Pingback:Can we stop calling the Washington Post a "newspaper" now? » Datechguy's Blog
The time has come for the nation to pass some sensible press control laws.
Art said,
“Occam, i beg to differ…
the 2nd generation after the worst are worse…”
Actually I beg to differ with Art. As someone who has daily contact with 18-22 year olds, I can state that there is change on the way. True, the Gen X’ers leave something to desire. However, the Milleniums (born starting circa 1990) are showing some real grit and common sense, at least to me.
The kids I have been teaching for the last 4-5 years, show a sense of personal responsibility, willingness to work through tough problems without whining, and a dollop of common sense. True, they ARE young, but I wish I could be around when they come into their own. My hope for the future took a turn for the better in the last few years.
physicsguy,
“It’s already there: 1st Amendment.”
How does the 1st Amendment address the issue? The 1st Amendment is what the Marxist-owned media invokes whenever the slightest suggestion of curtailing its power is made.
I see no provision in law, anywhere, for prohibiting the MSM’s partisanship. As with the United Nations, the assumption was made that rogue elements would be held in check by the majority of the good; the scenario of domination by rogues, by evil bodies with a nefarious agenda, was never taken into consideration. Once again the overestimation of humanity has failed good people everywhere.
Ziontruth,
You seem to miss the whole point of the 1st Amendment. A publication can be as biased as it wants and is protected by the 1st adm. The idea is that someone else publishing a completely opposite point of view is also protected. Freedom of the press/speech means exactly that: freedom to be as opinonated as you wish. The real problem is that many people are too lazy to look beyond the MSM… you can’t fix stupid by legislation.
As soon as there are limits on the speech in terms of partisanship, it opens up the whole notion of censorship by the government. Do you REALLY want that??? The sort of law you propose in limiting the MSM bias, can equally be used to attack more conservative publications, blogs, etc. Be careful what you wish for.
I agree with physicsguy.
The press shouldn’t be censored. It’s up to the American people to do their homework. If they can’t, then we’re in big, big trouble.
The only limits on the press I can envision involves the publishing of classified information. See this, especially the part about the National Secrets Act in Britain.
My idea of curtailing media power abuse isn’t one of censorship but of breaking monopolies. The trouble isn’t that the Far Left are allowed to have a voice but the fact that they are the dominant voice, at least as far as the MSM goes. Although the new media (the blogosphere &c) is not monopolized by the Left in this way, the importance of the non-Internet media is still too high for the Leftist dominance of the MSM not to have dire consequences.
Far too many people get their news only from the non-Internet MSM. Until this changes, it means their chance of getting the non-Marxist point of view is at least 80% (I’m being very reserved here). On the Internet-based media you have a 50-50 chance, which is information choice in a democracy as it should be. What I’m saying is this situation needs to be forced upon the MSM. That’s a true fairness doctrine, not the sham one that the Left has attempted to drive to cement their already existing MSM monopoly.
There’s just one plausibly conservative news network in the U.S. of A., and in my country the situation is little better; as for Western Europe, the land of “easy-listening tyranny” as Mark Steyn put it, the less said, the better. This monopoly the Left has isn’t just unfair, it’s dangerous, and that’s why it needs to be broken up.
The MSM are expert in the rapid deployment of Weapons of Mass Deception.
Pingback:Media War on Decency | Blue Crab Boulevard