Media narrative must never let media or liberalism be discredited [racism update]
By gamecock Posted in Archived — Comments (20) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Media narrative must never let media or liberalism be discredited
By Mike DeVine, Legal Editor for The Minority Report and The HinzSight Report
Now that the Democratic Party has apparently chosen its nominee for President, savvy liberal reporters like, Richard Cohen of The Washington Post are already writing pre-mortems, understanding (like Gamecock has crowed since 2006 re any likely leftist his former party was sure to choose and has crowed since 2007 when we discovered the Obamanation) that Barack Obama cannot and will not be elected President.
Of course the so-called mainstream media is in the tank for Barack Obama of 20-year pew-parked butt in the Trinity (Minister Farrakhan, Reverend Wright and Father Pfleger) United to hate white people and America Church fame, complete with hardball leg tinglings and cries of racism should anyone question, i.e. accurately quote campaign surrogates and advisors.
Speaking of cries of racism, Cohen is out early with the claim that Obama will lose due to the racism of the American (read white Republicans) people, (never mind that the best evidence they can offer is supposed racism in the DEMOCRAT primaries) but he slips up in the process and echoes Gamecock and Hugh Hewitt:
I acknowledge that some people can find nonracial reasons to vote against Obama -- his youth, his inexperience, his uber-liberalism and, of course, his willingness to abide his minister's admiration for a racist demagogue (Louis Farrakhan) until it was way, way too late. But for too many people, Obama is first and foremost a black man and is rejected for that reason alone. This is very sad.
This is, of course, nonsense. Obama has won the nomination by running as a hard left, anti-victory tax raiser with a circle of radical advisors, mentors and friends. He will lose the general because he really is a hard-left, anti-victory tax raiser with a circle of radical advisors, mentors and friends.
[RACISM UPDATE]
Cohen's reference to a vague poll question as to whether race was "a factor" is very weak evidence to support his claims. Respondents could easily have interpreted that question as asking if the racism exhibited by Obama's friends and supporters was a factor.
Moreover, John McWhorter, a prominent black author and Obama supporter refutes claims of significant racism among the American electorate:
A year and a half ago, often I was sweetly dismissed when I said that Barack Obama was possibly on his way to the White House and would certainly trounce Hillary Clinton for the nomination.
"You don't know what they'll do to him," they'd say. As often as not, the idea was that America could not seriously support a black man for its highest office.
I didn't get this. The America I live in today does not seem as deeply stamped by bigotry as these people seemed to think. It seemed as if, on this topic, I was talking to people who had woken up after 25 years and didn't know how the country had changed. Couldn't they see that this man's color was only going to help?
Well, here we are. Are there some bigots? Of course. Did they, or any purported instance of "racism" during the campaign, keep Barack Obama from the nomination?
His victory demonstrates the main platform of my race writing. The guiding question in everything I have ever written on race is: Why do so many people exaggerate about racism?
This exaggeration is a nasty hangover from the sixties, and the place it has taken as a purported badge of intellectual and moral gravitas is a tire-block on coherent, constructive sociopolitical discussion.
Here's a typical case for what passes as enlightenment. On my desk(top) is an article from last year's American Psychologist. The wisdom imparted? To be a person of color these days is to withstand an endless barrage of racist "microaggressions."
Say to someone, "When I look at you, I don't see color" and you "deny their ethnic experiences." You do the same by saying, "As a woman, I know what you go through as a racial minority," as well as with hate speech such as "America is a melting pot." Other "microaggressions" include college buildings being all named after straight, white rich men (I'm not kidding about the straight part).
This sort of thing will not do. Why channel mental energy into performance art of this kind?
Some may mistake me as implying that it would be okay to stop talking about racism. But that interpretation is incorrect: I am stating that it would be okay to stop talking about racism. We need to be talking about serious activism focused on results. Those who suppose that the main meal in the aforementioned is to decry racism are not helping people.
[END RACISM UPDATE]
Besides projections of racism, what else is going on here with Cohen?
Cohen is smarter than the average liberal, more objective and more concerned about his credibility. But make no mistake, the MSM is working off a template they have used since at least 1980 if not 1972.
Ever notice how most all of their between election polls show Democrats ahead until a few weeks or days before elections? Carter in ’80, Mondale in ’84, and Dukakis in ’88 all held large leads over the Republican that vanquished them. Gore and Kerry led as well in 2000 and 2004 respectively.
The MSM uses polls to try and make their wishes come true, but near the end they seek to rehabilitate their reputations with accurate polls.
Moreover, they never admit that Democrats lose because of their liberal policies and what passes for “values.” Oh no. They must never admit that their leftist God is impotent.
Hence, McGovern lost because Eagleton underwent shock therapy, and not because he wanted to lose a war.
Carter lost because Michael Deaver framed good photo ops and Reagan said “there he goes again”, and not because Carter wrecked the economy and lost Iran.
Mondale lost because Reagan joked that he would not hold Mondale’s “youth and inexperience against him”, and not because Mondale promised to raise taxes.
Dukakis lost because George H.W. Bush and Republicans (after Gore) put a black man’s face in a TV ad, and not because Dukakis opposed the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance by grammar school children.
Gore lost because the Supreme Court stole the election (via a lawsuit he filed after breaking America’s tradition of over 200 years of not reneging on a concession), not because he eschewed Clintonism, ran as a populist, had a personality breakdown in three debates and lost his own home state.
Kerry lost because he was “swift-boated” (eye-witness fellow military officers told the truth about Kerry’s publicity tour in ‘Nam), and not because he promised to subject American sovereignty to an “international test” and to give Osama bin Laden an O.J. Simpson-like trial, Judge Ito presiding.
No.
Liberals never lose because of the failure of the liberal policies, both foreign and domestic, for the last forty years.
No, it’s always a debate “moment” on TV, or another event, on TV.
What matters most is that liberalism not be discredited, what happens on TV is deemed significant and dispositive, and that Americans understand that they are racist, bigot, sexist homophobe rubes.
Americans are just too stupid to vote their best interests ya’ know.
Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
The Minority Report and The HinzSight Report
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
GC's comb needs stroking!
Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
It's never "our policies sucked and so did our candidates", but October surprises, Willie Hortons, "selected not elected" (gotta remember that one for 2008!) and Swift Boats.
A slow day in the hen house, perhaps? :>)
feather plucking
Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
I agree that racism is overplayed as a reason people have/will vote against Obama.
And I agree that the left tends to blame the media when they lose.
I don't agree that the media is particularly propping up one side or the other (on the whole; individual outlets clearly have biases). When looking at the media, you have understand that the viewers are not their customers. Advertisers are their customers, and viewers are the product that they have to sell. Truth, fairness, and relevance can sometimes be inputs towards that product (by building a good repution), but often tawdriness, ginned up controversy, or a horserace narrative are cheaper substitutes.
I don't agree that the media is particularly propping up one side or the other (on the whole; individual outlets clearly have biases).
The problem is that just a few of those biased individual outlets determine the coverage (tenor, direction, emphasis, good guys vs bad guys, etc.) of practically every significant political event - the AP, the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN and the three networks (ABC, NBC, CBS) essentially control what you see, hear and read on the political events of the day in over 90% of the nation's newspapers and television stations.
And unfortunately, the ownership, leadership and staffing of all of these flagship institutions of the Fourth Estate are significantly to the Left of the average American.
Rush Limbaugh regularly highlights how reporters and anchors from all over the country strangely use the exact same words to describe and explain the exact same political event to their viewers - which should be something that should raise eyebrows.
The AP provides much of the non-local content for most of the nation's newspapers and television stations, already pre-spun to the Left by the nearly 100% liberal staff.
And then, to make matters even more interesting, New York Times and Washington Post have an arrangement that essentially means their news stories are co-ordinated on a daily basis - and in case you didn't know, what is on the front page of the NYT and WaPo tend to be what you see on the evening news headlines.
In other words, even if you say you don't read the NYT or get your news from the AP, you actually do. The flagship outlets provide content for the rest of the MSM, and most of the time it is delivered to you without a single syllable changed.
The only notable exception is FOXNews; and frankly, it is only one cable station that doesn't reach a third of the audience just CBS on its own gets every night. And since they get a lot of their content from the AP and are often forced to take cues on what stories are important from the other flagship outlets, they're not exactly direct competition to the Left-leaning giants of the MSM.
Think;
How come the so-called Plame scandal got such intense coverage while Sandy Berger's far more serious destruction of classified intelligence material was no more than a flash in the pan?
How is it that George W. Bush's service in the TXANG became such a huge issue despite their being no evidence of wrongdoing on his part, while the story of John Kerry's swiftboat squadron mates being completely opposed to his candidacy was being quashed until they sponsored ads on TV?
How come 60% of the American people believe the nation is in recession without a single quarter of negative growth?
I could go on, but you get the point.
"First you win the argument, then you win the vote." - MARGARET THATCHER.
So let's start winning the argument.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
that they believe trump every all others. I disagree, I think and hope America is tiring of this game.
_________________
Thou art the Great Cat, the avenger of the Gods, and the judge of words...-Inscription on the Royal Tombs at Thebes
The King Makers. They hold themselves to be impartial repeaters of truth and reality, but instead push and pull for their anointed prince until he is either in power or vanquished by those they decry after the fact as evil and low cheaters.
"Government of the people, by the people, for the people."
A. Lincoln
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121270934203350365.html?mod=rss_opinion_...
It is completely framed, not in how this reflects on BHO's character, but how to fool more people into thinking that the Obammassiah's being an active part of racist politics in Chicago does not really matter.
many times in the past, once he and I got written up about in the NYT.
If you want links, let me know and I will get them this evening.
Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
but I fear McCain will not attack BHO on the issues because of his fear of being labeled a racist.
Jindal in 2012!
about Obama without McCain's help.
Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
The Left thought it could browbeat voters into support of their candidate, and prevent criticism of him, by threatening to cry racism if anyone dared admit they supported McCain and/or said something negative about Obama. It didn't even work with Cinton supporters since Americans don't like to be threatened. Hence we get the pre-mortems, because the intimidation that was supposed to propel Obama into the White House didn't even work in the latters stages of the Democratic primary. To be fair, I am certain Hillary supporters would have tried to play the sexism card in the same manner if she had prevailed.
As for Cohen himself, he was revealed as a logic-challenged cretin by, of all people, Pat Buchanan who asked him why it mattered if Hillary got two-thirds of white votes while Obama garned more than 90 percent of black votes. The columnist conceded people could oppose Obama for "other reasons" (big of you, Dick). Cohen never answered the question. Apparently that exchange spawned the pre-mortem.
If the Clinton campaign did anything, it forced the Far Left to play the faux race card early and to become a parody of itself because it did.
Advantage McCain here.
Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
you must have more faith in the intellegience of the average voter than I do.
Jindal in 2012!
I really liked this one. You picked a topic that is almost never mentioned--the media's intentional ignorance of Liberalism's failures, both in life and in elections.
The good side of that is that Liberals themselves seem to be forgetting it, too. They learned the wrong lessons from Clinton's successes, just as some of our Fearless Leadership have forgotten the true lessons of Ronald Reagan.
One quibble: I have heard several times that the Willie Horton ad was only shown on TV a few times (probably more times on the news, however), and that there was in fact no mention at all of Willie Horton's race, nor any picture of him. Does anybody know if this is all true?
But that is just a quibble.
Pluto, the Ninth Planet - Forever!
learned is that liberals find big black men with big lips and big unruly Ben Wallace like afros to be grotesque. They show their racism by being offended by the picture of a black man.
Me, I find them to be men made in the image of God, and as long as they don't rape and kill before or after prison furloughs....
Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
Liberals never lose because of the failure of the liberal policies, both foreign and domestic, for the last forty years... No, it’s always a debate “moment” on TV, or another event, on TV.
At least they're consistent: they expect to win the same way. When it became clear that Obama was not appealing to blue collar Democrats in the rust belt, several of the liberal talking heads seriously thought he could fix that by giving a couple of speeches in which he honked some Bubba Buzzwords... perhaps HighPaidManufacturingJobs™, or maybe FairTrade™. Obama's problem was that his stump speech lacked the proper buzzwords to appeal to this particular identity-politics segment. As soon as he grafted those buzzwords onto his speech, along with the buzzwords he already honked for other identity-politics segments, all would be well.
Drink Good Coffee. You can sleep when you're dead.