FRISKING HER WARDROBE AND MAKEUP! As your nation slides toward the sea, the Times frisks Bachmann’s makeup: // link // print // previous // next //
THURSDAY, AUGUST 25, 2011
The Washington Post gets it right: We think Trip Gabriel’s “news report” deserves full attention today (see below).
That said, we were struck by the Washington Post’s editorial in support of Warren Buffett’s tax proposals. We recommend that you read the whole thing. But the editors ended with these proposals. Shouldn’t libs bruit this around?
Wow! They even used that “plutocrats” lingo!
As we liberals clowned and played this week (more tomorrow), this editorial got little attention. Our question:
How can progressives establish forums in which such topics are explored by a range of average citizens? Very few people have ever heard a serious discussion of tax fairness. But on all sides of the tribal divide, everyone is being ripped off, in various ways, as the plutocrats extend their agendas.
Everyone hears the disinformation; it gets churned every day by a range of talk hosts. How can progressives establish forums which gain citizens’ trust and extend a fuller discussion?
We know, we know! As good liberals, we shouldn’t even imagine such things! We should be railing against Those People—about how very bad we can imagine they are.
That said, Alert! Tonight’s must-see TV! One of the professors who wrote this Times op-ed piece will be on the Maddow Show tonight. We plan to discuss that column again next week, in conjunction with the fascinating blog post by Kevin Drum which we recommended yesterday. (Read all the comments and links.)
PART 1—FRISKING HER WARDROBE AND MAKEUP (permalink): In large part, it’s the dumbness of our upper-end culture which is bringing our nation down.
As part of the general mega-dumbness, we liberals can only see the dumbness in the other tribe. Often, we imagine this dumbness and bruit it around when it isn’t even there.
But the dumbness of the mainstream press corps has been a monster problem for years. The liberal world has never identified this problem, in part because our intellectual leaders are too dumb (and conflicted) to care.
Just how dumb is the upper-end mainstream press corps? This morning, Trip Gabriel teaches a lesson in The Culture of Dumb in the New York Times.
Gabriel reports today on Michele Bachmann’s makeup and clothes. To read his “news report,” just click this. Just to save a lot of time, let’s explain the obvious background:
The punishment factor: As is obvious from Gabriel’s report, the mainstream press corps is unhappy with the treatment and access they’re getting from Bachmann. When this type of situation develops with a disfavored candidate, low-brow, entitled news orgs like the Times will look for ways to fight back.
Past example: By February 2000, it was obvious that the mainstream press corps had gone to war with Candidate Gore. Obviously, the candidate knew it. Ranking members of the “liberal” “intellectual elite” were sworn to silence, of course.
In reaction, the Gore campaign limited the press corps’ access to the candidate. (In reaction to the swoon for McCain, the Bush campaign was doing the same thing at this juncture.) On March 2, the New York Times fought back against Gore. The punishment was dished by the paper’s always astounding “reporter,” the ludicrous Katharine “Kit” Seelye.
No, we’re not making this up. What follows appeared in a “news report” about the hated candidate:
Gore was punished as Seelye crammed in a reference to those fund-raising matters—and as she transcribed his “uhs.” At a later date, Seelye told writer Michael Erard that the Times had been experimenting with a new way of transcribing spoken speech when she penned this ridiculous passage.
Seelye’s claim may have been true, of course. In much the same way, gargoyles on major American buildings may fly away late tonight.
Gore was punished in Seelye’s “news report” for failing to provide enough access—and for the fact that the press was at war. Rather plainly, the same dynamic is displayed in Gabriel’s “news report.”
The phoniness factor: Gabriel complains in various ways about the lack of access to Bachmann. In this case, the means of punishment is a report about her makeup and wardrobe. Needless to say, the Times must conjure up an excuse for doing such brain-dead, baldly sexist “reporting.” Result? Of course! Gabriel pretends he’s discussing these topics because he’s concerned about the way female candidates are subjected to this type of scrutiny.
Why is the Times reporting on wardrobe and makeup? Of course! Because it’s a problem when so many others report on wardrobe and makeup! Citizens should feel massive contempt for “journalists” reptilian enough to play this game, dumb enough to think that their conduct isn’t transparent. For “journalists” who punish disfavored candidates with low-IQ bullshit like this:
“Like a substitute teacher!” What have Americans ever done to have life-forms like Gabriel, and his editors, arrayed in such high places?
The reinvention of obvious history factor: As fools like Gabriel play these games, they will naturally say and do anything to keep their bullshit alive. In the following passage, we learn that Gabriel is the world’s dumbest man—or perhaps just the least honest:
Exhibiting more of the dogged reporting that makes the Times an utter embarrassment, Gabriel reports that Bachmann may have false eyelashes—and he compares her to Tammy Faye Bakker, but only to show us how wrong it was when the Huffington Post did the same! He also tells us that the campaign “seems determined to play down” Bachmann’s “makeover.” But he doesn’t explain how the campaign is playing the makeover down at all, or why you’d have to “play it down” if the “makeover” is so minor.
Obvious translation: Plainly, that paragraph was devised to let Gabriel use the word “makeover,” a classic term of press corps punishment. But the highlighted passage about Elizabeth Dole is really this article’s highlight. It may be true that Dole “received more news coverage of her personality and clothing” than the men in the Republican race that year; we haven’t seen the study in question. But all through the fall of 1999, a Democratic candidate, Candidate Gore, was savaged for his personality and clothing—for his boots, his suits, his polo shirts, the number of buttons on his suit jackets (three). For the color of the clothing he wore. For the identity of the person who allegedly told him to wear certain clothing. For the psychiatric tendencies displayed in his wardrobe choices.
This garbage was pimped by the New York Times and all across the mainstream press, as the career liberal world’s “intellectual leaders” agreed not to notice. But the attention paid to this candidate’s wardrobe dwarfed the attention paid to Dole’s. In fairness, Gabriel and his editors may be so dumb that they really don’t know this. Much more likely, they are simply being dishonest—again.
The sheer stupidity of Gabriel’s report is a thing to behold. He writes at the very top end of your nation’s post-journalistic “press corps.” But good God! Note the way he reasons in this pitiful passage:
In that passage, Gabriel floats the idea that Bachmann’s press secretary is somehow “prescreening” reporters’ questions. Pitifully, that reported exchange with Herring represents the only “evidence” of this practice.
Today’s report is offensive and deeply dishonest—and it’s amazingly dumb. A few basic points in closing:
First, Gabriel normally serves as an education reporter. Do you begin to see why you learn so little about this topic from this pitiful newspaper?
Second, this pathetic paper kills trees today to report on Bachmann’s makeup. But as best we can tell, it has never reported what would have happened on August 3 if Bachmann’s absurd advice about the debt limit had been taken. Simply put, the Times is too dumb to tackle such questions. It does know how to frisk hair.
Your culture is currently dying from dumbness. The dumbness suffuses your upper-end press corps—and we even thought we spotted The Dumb on Our Own Liberal Channel this week!
Tomorrow: Frisking their oversized houses