Could we have a sadder excuse for a national press?
I just watched the weekly event that's become a sad and painful ritual, that's ordinarily the Brooks-and-Shields segment. Tonight the Big Pundits in the chairs were Ruth Marcus of the Washington Post - who I think was supposed to offer a "liberal" perspective - and National Review editor Rich Lowry. Jim Lehrer moderated.
They discussed three topics. First Marcus and Lowry agreed that the Georgia issue had shown once again what a manly man John McCain is and what a pathetic wimp Obama is. It's Good For The Republicans! What isn't, in the minds of this crew?
Next Marcus and Lowry agreed that both Clintons were pathetic losers and generally very troubling and disturbing as they worried about their appearances at the upcoming Democratic Convention.
Finally, Marcus and Lowry agreed that John Edwards was awful for having had an affair. Not, you understand, because they are judgmental like rural fundis or something. But because it shows he has a faulty character. Which is different from what the fundis say, well, there must be some way...
I find myself wondering, are they actually putting androids in front of the cameras for these little press rituals? Is it all computer-generated? Can there really be some Invasion of the Body Snatchers going on? All three options are beginning to be easier to believe than to accept that literate adults are this clueless and mindlessly conformist to groupthink scripts that would embarrass a drunken frat boy.
Tags: establishment press, mainstream media, mainstream press
No comments:
Post a Comment