YOULL HAVE TO USE FORCE! Will the press corps reject the Hillary slime? Yes, they will—if you force them: // link // print // previous // next //
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 8, 2005
WHERE DO THEY FIND THEM: There is nothing novel about blathering on, Stacy Schiff writes. And then, the pundit proceeds to prove it. In her first replacement column for Maureen Dowd, Shiff manages to hit invented the Internet, what the meaning of is is, and the troubling length of Bill Clintons book. She also works in a mention of Clintons sex life, and she cant stop herself—she even cites Paris Hilton. Do you know anyone this inane? Where does our foppish press elite go to find these people?
YOULL HAVE TO USE FORCE: A thousand cheers to Media Matters for its quick responses to The Truth About Hillary, Edward Kleins ironically-titled new book. As promised, Klein has published the latest slimy Hillary-trasher, and Matters has started pointing out the books factual and spiritual problems. And the site has asked an obvious question, a central question of our age: What kind of judgment will the press corps use in responding to this trash-can book? In 1996, Larry Sabato criticized the terrible judgment the press corps used in its handling of Gary Aldrichs crackpot Clinton-trashing best-seller. We'll soon see if the U.S. media exercises better judgment with regard to Klein, Media Matters has said.
But liberals, Dems, progressives and centrists cant wait to find out how the press corps responds; they have to demand better judgment. For the mainstream press corps, its time to decide; will they continue their cowardly conduct—the conduct that extended through the treatment of Clinton and Gore right up to the crackpot Swift Boat Vets? Or will they finally get up on their feet and reject the Ed Kleins of the world? Predictably, Klein is now playing the lesbian card, and every mainstream reporter in Washington knows that this is pure garbage. But will these gut-bucket cowards have the courage to stand up and actively challenge this garbage? Will they know find the strength to resist? Theyll only resist if theyre forced.
For the record, on last evenings Special Report, we saw what these gut-bucket cowards are facing. Brit Humes descent to disgrace continued as he hyped a portion of the Klein book. We note that invented anonymous sources are suddenly back in vogue on this program:
HUME (6/7/05): Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the late New York Democrat, who helped—in 2000, helped Hillary Clinton win the Senate seat he was vacating, actually disdained Clinton! That according to a new book by the journalist Edward Klein entitled, The Truth About Hillary Clinton. The book says that Moynihans wife Liz, who managed her husbands campaigns, also felt this way and complained to a friend that Clinton was a quote duplicitous and ruthless woman who would quote do and say anything that would further her ambition. She can look you straight in the eye and lie, unquote. A Clinton spokesman calls the book quote fiction and Moynihans daughter says its quote utterly and completely wrong. Liz Moynihan could not be reached for comment.As anyone can see, Kleins alleged source—that anonymous friend—is amazingly good at channeling stock RNC attack-points. Just like Candidate Gore before her, Hillary is willing to do and say anything. And just like Candidate Gore before her, Hillary Clinton is a liar—and shes ruthless. This, of course, is pure scripted cant, straight from an RNC fantasy shop. These statements came from a Moynihan friend the same way your cable guy wrote War and Peace. This is a script for the mooing talk-show right. And everyone in Washington knows it.
But will the cowards of the mainstream press corps dare to stand up and say so? They very much want to be rich and famous, with fancy homes among the swells of Nantucket. They want to get their mugs on TV, and they very much dont want to be the target of Scaife-style attacks. (Translation: They dont want to get Okrented.) And powerhouses like the slimy Chris Matthews are already out there sliming Clinton. Last night, Matthews was in standard form, saying that Hillary Clinton and Howard Dean have been playing dueling banjos of late. A month ago, he noted how much his press corps has always hated HRC.
Will the gut-bucket cowards of the mainstream press reject the muck and slime this time? Will they reject the Edward Kleins? Almost surely no, they will not—unless theyre actively forced. They know exactly what Edward Klein is, and they understand the gut-bucket slime involved in that thigh-rubbing lesbian stuff. But so what? They care about their bloated, upper middle class salaries—and about their fine dinner parties. If you want them to show better judgment, you will have to actively force them—and youll have to force the young liberal spokesmen who might pressure these people from below. Left on their own, these fiery young liberals wont take on Matthews; they want to get rich and famous on Hardball. Theyve sold you out every step of the way, first with Clinton, then with Gore, then with the idiot Swift Boat attacks. And theyll refuse to speak for you now—unless you force them to act.
You cant sit back and see what occurs. Starting today, you have to insist that they create a new order in Washington. For more than a decade, this mainstream press has shown terrible judgment in the way its treated the Edward Kleins of the world. They know what Klein is—but theyre gut-bucket foppists. Youre going to have to force them to change. Youre going to have to yell at these people, and youre going to have to start yelling now.
Once again, many thanks to Media Matters for taking the lead on this matter. But where are the rest of our fiery liberal heroes? When will we hear them name names?
PART 2—THE ENDLESS SUMMER: Yes, we at THE HOWLER were pleased—and shocked—when the Times David Herszenhorn got it right in his report about New Yorks rising test scores (see THE DAILY HOWLER, 6/7/05). After three or four decades of testing scandals, Herszenhorn reported what skeptics were saying in the wake of the most recent breakthrough in New York Citys public schools. Yes, city test scores had gone up, but Herszenhorn wasnt leaving it there. Skeptics were quick to raise many questions, he wrote, including whether this year's tests were easier and whether the schools spent too much time on exam preparation. He even quoted a Democratic mayoral candidate who asked whether the results might have been raised by excluding low-performing students from taking the test, or through other maneuvers. We dont have the slightest idea whether Manhattans kids are reading better this year, but after four decades of documented cheating through a wide range of such maneuvers, these are obvious questions to ask. We just never thought wed see them in print. Amazingly, Herszenhorn got it right.
Because no, you never see these questions raised when some city or state has a testing breakthrough. And let's face it, theres no dearth of such pleasing breakthroughs; they seem to go on all the time. Indeed, New York has been having such breakthroughs for decades. As part of Herszenhorns report, he provided a slightly jumbled but intriguing review of the past several decades:
HERSZENHORN (6/2/05): History indicates that [New York] city test results are something of a roller-coaster ride. In 1981, citywide reading scores exceeded the national average for the first time since testing began in 1969.Theres a bit of apples-and-oranges in that account, and Herszenhorn falls prey to a typical problem in Times education reporting—the treatment of minor year-to-year changes as if they were major events. But did you realize that New York Citys kids were actually beating the nation all the way back in 1981? Sure enough, that years good news was trumpeted in the Times. Gene Maeroff did the honors:
MAEROFF (5/29/81): The reading scores of public-school pupils in New York City have exceeded the national average for the first time in the 12 years that the citywide test has been given.Above grade level isnt quite the right phrase, but you get the general picture. And one year later, Maeroff was back, reporting even better news about New Yorks junior Einsteins:
MAEROFF (6/16/82): For the first time in at least a decade, students in the New York City public schools exceeded the national averages in both reading and mathematics scores, according to preliminary figures released yesterday by the city's Board of Education.In 1983, the progress continued, with Joyce Purnick doing the reporting. Children in New York City's public schools are continuing to perform above national norms on reading and mathematics tests, she bugled. The preliminary results of the examinations, given last month, showed that 55.5 percent of the students tested in reading and 58.1 percent of those tested in mathematics had scored at or above grade level. It would have been more accurate if Purnick had said at or above the national norm, but again, you get the Big Picture.
But readers, might we ask an obvious question about these reports from the early 1980s? Dont you find it surprising to learn that New Yorks kids were above the national norm more than twenty years ago? With all the despair about urban schools, arent you surprised to learn that this large urban system was actually out there ahead of the curve, as early as 1981? Indeed, because we worked for more than a decade in Baltimores elementary schools (1969 through 1982), we find this notion quite surprising. After all, what has all the wailing been about if urban kids were beating the nation all the way back in 1981? And by the way: Why wasnt this amazing achievement treated as the Manhattan Miracle? Why werent researchers crawling all over Gotham, trying to see what the city was doing? Why werent foundations trying to bottle the magic, then trying to spread it all over the land?
Could it be that everyone knew this was a hoax—and everyone just agreed not to say so?
After all, what was happening around the nation by the early- to mid-1980s? Uh-oh! Increasingly, tremendous pressure was being brought to bear on public school systems testing programs. These programs were now a part of public accountability, and the nations educators knew how to respond; in a wide range of documented cases, they responded by cheating their keisters off, driving up public school test scores and making local newspapers proud. How absurd was the situation becoming when New York was reporting those pleasing test scores? Go back to 1987-88, when Dr. John Cannell, a West Virginia pediatrician and education activist, issued several remarkable reports about the nations testing programs. Cannell had discovered an amusing factas of 1987, all fifty states were officially reporting that their students were above the national norm! Cannell called the phenomenon "The Lake Wobegon Effect," after Garrison Keillors mythical village where "the children are all above average." And he suggested an unpleasant explanation for this implausible state of affairsteachers and principals were cheating on tests, driving up everyones test scores. Cannell ran an ad in an education journal, soliciting first-hand accounts from teachers. According to Cannell, over 300 teachers wrote to tell him about outright cheating in their schools.
We first discussed this four years ago (see THE DAILY HOWLER, 4/19/01); in that report, we also reviewed the twin waves of cheating scandal stories that swept through the national press, first in the late 1980s (post-Cannell), then again in the year 2000. But understand—when New York was reporting those pleasing scores all the way back in the early 1980s, a bewildering wave of high test scores was sweeping all over the land. Was New York City above the national norm? So was every state in the union! And yet, your educational press corps slumbered and snored, persistently failingto raise many questions about this peculiar situation. For ourselves, we would be completely amazed if New Yorks kids were above the national norm in the year 1982. But it made a pleasing story, and the New York Times typed it up. Mayor Koch took a couple of bows—and the selling-out of urban kids continued, just as it had gone on before.
And thats why we were so surprised to read David Herszenhorns startling report. We never thought wed see the day when a major reporter did what he did—when a major reporter noted that skeptics were quick to raise many questions about the latest pleasing test scores. Those questions should have been raised long ago. But the national press snored and slumbered.
Amazing, isnt it? New Yorks test scores have been going up ever since they exceeded the national norm, all the way back in 1981! Why arent researchers studying this? Could it be that no one believes it?
TOMORROW: Sorry, Matthew! Liberals walked away from urban kids roughly three decades ago.
ALL PRAISE TO PURNICK: Uh-oh! We just noticed this brief passage in Purnicks 1983 report:
PURNICK (5/27/83): Many educators are skeptical about what these standardized tests really measure, in part because top school officials and elected officials have so emphasized their importance in recent years. As a result, students are prepared through classroom exercises.In our view, Purnicks skeptic wasnt skeptical enough. In many schools, kids dont get test-wise during those practice sessions; they get to memorize the actual test questions! We first learned about this, in great local detail, all the way back in 1971. Twelve years later, Purnicks skeptic still didnt seem to have heard.