THE LAND THAT NEEDS HEROES! Why did they tell their childish tales? Early on, David Grann said: // link // print // previous // next //
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2008
DAN BALZ DISAPPEARS: Nothing creates predictable narrative quite like the advent of debate season. Pundits run as fast as they can to recite a familiar, scripted talea story they could type in their sleep. Heres our question, though: Which part of this important issue has Dan Balz disappeared?
Truly, that is pitiful stuff. And yes, this gang can type that familiar script in their sleep. But which part of this important issue did Balz absent-mindedly fail to include? Of course! He absent-mindedly disappeared the role of the press corps itself!
People, lets get serious: Does anyone think that Bushs glance at his watch would have meant a farking thingif the press corps, as a group, hadnt seized upon the gesture as a symbol of his disturbing disinterest? Does anyone think Dukakis answer would have sunk him low, absent the press corps group reaction? We know of no reason to think such things. And yet, heres the way Mark Fabiani just described the Dukes powerful gaffe:
At least Fabiani was willing to hint that Shaw may have played an inappropriate role. But doe anyone think that Dukakis answer, to the evenings very first question, would have ended the Dukakis campaign...right then and there if Shaws colleagues hadnt decided, as a group, to make it their post-debate focus?
Lets get serious: Everyone knows what actually happens in these famous incidents. In these incidents, the gang we still describe as a press corps seizes on some trivial mattera trivial matter which can be used to promote their own view of the race. Everyone knows that this is happens. And journalists know this cant be discussed when they type this familiar old tale.
Yes, its true: Al Gore's audible sighs in his 2000 debate against George W. Bush certainly didn't make him any more likable. But to all intents and purposes, those sighs became audible when the press corps put them on a tape, jacked up the volume, and played them over and over, for days. As weve noted many times, only a handful of those sighs are audible on our tape of that evenings NBC broadcastand only if you struggle and strain, and listen quite carefully, to the full ninety minutes. There is no reason to think that those meager sighs would have helped decide an electionif the press corps hadnt decided to make them a focus of its post-debate tripe. The same is true of Bushs glance at his watch. And of Dukakis deeply disturbing failure to show real passion.
Would voters have cared about those events, absent the press corpss childish group conduct? Sadly, well never get to find out. And yes: The press corps reaction to Gores troubling sighs played a huge role in that campaigns outcome. The press corps changed the shape of world history when they decided to jack up the volume on those insufficiently-audible sighs.
Dan Balzs cohort did that to you. This morning, Balz doesnt tattle.
About JFKs first debate: Is it true? Did Nixon's decision not to shave really hurt him badly? It makes a wonderful story, of coursefar too good a story to drop. And pundits have always repeated the tale about those famous polls. Radio viewers thought Nixon had won! And TV viewers said just the opposite! But readers, how many people listened on radioand just how well could they have been polled? Earlier this year, in U.S. News, David LaGesse kill-joyed thusly:
Does that mean only one radio poll? We cant be sure from what LaGesse wrote. We can be sure of one thing, though. Four years from now, Balz and his colleague will type that old chestnut again.
About Bernie Shaws ugly question: Within days, Dukakis troubling lack of passion had become the official press flavor. But to their credit, a number of journalists criticized Shaw on the morning after. We discussed this when the primary debates began last year; see THE DAILY HOWLER, 4/25/07.
The end of an era: Patrick Kit Healy simpers today aboutwhat else?body language. Apparently, Dowd wasnt quite dumb enough for the Times. So they went out and bought themselves this:
See there? Obamas facial expressions convey a certain distance from the ache that many voters feel. He is sometimes out of sync with their visceral anger. Where does Healy obtain such feathered distinctions? They come to him in silly dreams!
Magnanimously, we might have skipped Healys blather today. Except for his very next graf, which announces the end of an era:
He may be too comfortable in his own skin! Truly, the end of an era!
During Campaign 2000, the question of who was more comfortable in his own skin became a press corps obsession. Fairly clearly, this language began with the Bush campaign (as authenticity came from Bill Bradley); within weeks of Bushs debut on the stump, every pundit knew to say how wonderfully comfortable he was. Indeed, a few week after Bush debuted, Gloria Borger wrote a tongue-in-cheek piece for U.S. News. She summarized what everyone in the press corps had been saying:
Everyone knew it: George Bush was comfortable in his own skin! But on that very same day, in Newsweek, Howard Finemana flat-out shill for Saint Bradleystole the phrase for his main man:
That September, Fineman even called Bradley Whitmanesque, meaning Walt. One other person had called Bradley Whitmanesque that year. That person was Bill Bradleys wife.
At any rate, comfortable in his own skin came to dominate the press corps evaluations. Everyone knew that Bradley and Bush were comfortable in their own skinsand that Vile Gore wasnt. At the end of the year, Walter Shapiro even chose comfortable with himself and authenticity as two of the years top buzzwords. (The others: alpha male and compassionate conservative. One was a mocking term aimed at Gore, the other a term of praise for Bush.) By now, though, these terms were mainly being applied to the press corps anointed, twin favorites. The phrases are so cliche-ridden and inauthentic it's difficult to figure out who first applied them to the dynamic duo of Bradley and McCain, Shapiro wrote.
Today, though, Barack Obama may be too comfortable in his own skin! Truly, an era has come to an end. But lets be fairthats what happens when a candidates tone and volume convey a certain distance from the ache that many voters feel.
BE SURE TO READ EACH THRILLING INSTALLMENT: Your press corps staged a long, damaging love affair. For previous installments in this tale, see THE DAILY HOWLER, 9/25/08.
Today, in part 4, we ask ourselves why these childish children needed a hero so much:
PART 4THE LAND THAT NEEDS HEROES: The press corps avoided a great many things about The Man They Loved. They had met the most wonderful manand they had invented a set of childish tales about his exceptional character. To maintain their childish tales, they had to avoid many things:
They pretended they didnt notice his misstatements about Bushs budget plan. They looked away when he said he planned to beat Gore like a drum (while complaining about the campaigns negativity). They didnt notice when he lied in their faces about those phone calls up in Michigan. They didnt notice the race men who were running his Carolina campaignand they didnt notice the salaries The Man They Loved paid them. They looked away from his ludicrous statements about those fliers he kept distributing (while avoiding the negativity, of course). In their minds, his many flip-flops seemed like an intellectual odyssey. They ignored his endless bungles on policy matters, praising him for the way he was willing to take their advice. When he kept attacking a tax bill for which he had voted, they said it was just a quirka sign that even The Man They Loved sometimes avoided candor.
And of course, they avoided something else; as Jonathan Alter (and others) explained, they avoided discussing his record. As the love affair began gathering steam in the fall of 1999, Alter wrote a short piece in Newsweek explaining why (to quote from the headline) the press corps loves John McCain. In part, Alter said this, apparently speaking for everyone:
What we all like about McCain is that he might actually govern on principle, Alter said. (They ignored the way he softened his stands on issues when it suited him.) This was a slightly odd statement, of course, since it was made at a time when Alters colleagues were walking away from all basic principles of journalism, their own profession. In a rational world, it would be odd to see a major reporter explaining what we [reporters] all like about some candidate they were all covering. But these love-sick children had become a vast pack. They invented their demon tales about Gore in a pack, and they fawned about Bradley and McCain the same way. And oh yes: As Alter impliesas others saidthey knew they pretty much had to avoid thinking too much about McCains record. It would probably appall them if they looked too closely, Alter said. So they rarely did.
Another scribe had described this conduct roughly six months earlier. Coverage of McCains campaign had barely started in May 1999, when David Grann profiled the press corps love for The Man They Loved in The New Republic. Apostasy was still allowed, back before the free bus rides started. In a superlative piece called The Hero Myth, Grann focused on the press corps problem swith McCains voting record. Grann cited many parts of that record. We will highlight two:
For a conservative, of course, there is nothing particularly striking about any of these stands, Grann continued. What is striking is how few reporters and liberals who support him even know or care. Grann then quoted a couple of people who didnt seem to understand the shape of McCains record:
In that passage, Grann quoted an unnamed reporter making a fairly silly remark about McCains record on gay issues. But in November, when McCains bus was rocking with laughter, the Posts Richard Cohen made a prophet of Grann:
Cohen could tell that McCain wasnt a thousand percent anti-gay because he didnt act like he was! But in that actual profile by Bernstein, Frank had listed McCains specific votesvotes Cohen never mentioned. But then, the votes Grann listed were rarely discussed as the love affair grew. For example, McCain often associated himself with Teddy Roosevelts environmentalism, despite the rock-bottom rating Grann described. As Alter said, too much focus on McCains actual record would probably appall the children who loved him. And so, the children rode around on his bus without looking too closely at that.
Why did these love-sick pseudo-journalists care so little about McCains record? Four months before the free bus rides began, Grann explained the love affair in terms of insider reaction to the very bad President Clinton:
This was clearly on-target. Plainly, a desperate search for character was under way, although Grann never explained why these children were so desperatewhy they had reacted so childishly to Clintons misconduct. But by the fall, it was quite clear; nothing mattered to many scribes except their desperate search for character. As if they were a gang of pre-schoolers, they invented silly demon tales about Gorea man who now holds the Nobel Peace Prize. And they invented silly hero tales about McCain, whom they now despise. Children like Alter now lived for these tales. Four months before the free bus rides started, Grann limned the problem further:
For this reason, it is after no digging at all that I discover what almost no one ever mentions about McCain: his voting record, Grann wrote. But as Grann noted, no one really cared about that. They only cared about the tales they could tell about his vast character.
Grann was writing back in May, before the free bus rides started. Once they began, the bus roared and rocked; reporters tended to glance away when The Man They Loved descended its stairs and misled voters about that obscene tax billthe tax bill he had supported. In that sense, the problem turned out to be worse than even Grann had said; they were so in love with their character tales that they were willing to pimp these tales in the face of contradictory evidence. They invented misstatements, then pretended Gore said them. At the same time, they ignored real misstatements from McCainalong with his voting record. Again, well offer a small suggestion on motive; these childish children were too well-paid to worry about ideology and the programs that evolve from it. Did McCain make a horrible mess of his health plan? They themselves had very good health careand they didnt seem to give a fat fig if you and your neighbors did.
They were Villagers, after all; these people lived around the Palace. And they behaved much as such overpaid fops have behaved all through the annals of time. They were living the lives of fops and foolsand yes, they felt a bit queasy about it. But so what? The Man They Loved had let them sign up for his Vietnam Fantasy Camp. By their own admission, some of the children who loved The Man felt less than manly about the way theyd avoided Nam. It made them feel whole when The Man They Loved welcomed them into the fold.
Sometimes they felt very empty inside, as people living such empty lives would. How would you feel if you sat around while all those fake tales about Gore were peddled? Among many others, Alter knew those tales were bunk. And he knew he should keep very quiet.
But then, good boys were keeping quiet all around this press corps, as they rode around laughing on a bus, breaking every professional stricture. They needed someone to tell them how good they wereand then, along came The Man They Loved. He played them, saying he thought they were smart. Desperately, they believed him.
As he ended, Grann said this about their desperate desire for heroes:
Our land has been very unhappy since this group rode around on that bus, inventing hero tales about McCain and demon tales about Gore. Their misconduct gave Bush eight years in the White House. And uh-oh! The narratives they built on behalf of McCain may yet give him eight years more.
Today, Alter cries about the bad man The Man They Loved has now become. Sorry. Its just the latest fake, desperate tale these grisly children all love.