Is 'Team Maverick' Playing the Allegedly Liberal Media Like a Toy Flute?
Firstly, this is not a media bash fest. I leave that sort of witless, anti elitist sludge to the Republicans (even if I slam Fox news for being at best, only barely a legitimate news outlet.) And I confess, I have been spending way too much time listening/watching to MSNBC, never mind my daily Internet news and blog consumption. I am spending way too much time with this stuff. Never the less . . .
It seems to me that there is some sign of intelligence (albeit, the cunningly corrupt, toilet dweller kind) on the part of 'Team Maverick.' And I mean, how they are jacking the news cycles by behaving so badly on the campaign trail.
Let's get real here. How effective are their negative, if not sometimes race-baiting tactics, if only broadcasted to the loyal rank and file at some campaign stump event? No net gain, we would have to say, as whipping up the base only whips up the base.
But when the news channels and blogs and papers pick up the story, they run the risk of actually doing more harm than intended. They risk serving the malicious aim of the negative or race bating tactic, rather than only performing the noble cause of informing the public about the news of the day.
Am I saying that the dirty tricks should be ignored? Hell no. But don't do anything that really serves to advance the malignant message. And it is crucial to do it as our more 'intelligent' journalists and anchors sometimes forget the power of their medium, and as well the effect of the particular manner chosen for republishing the bile.
Case in point; Chris Matthews. He loves to use the 'Devil's Advocate' method of interrogation on guests, but when he does that concerning the dirty tricks he risks legitimizing the tactic, by not condemning it and then asking, now how could you defend that garbage? Or some such.
All I am saying is this; media people need to be more careful, not only in republishing that shit that much, but be careful to NOT at all legitimize that shit.
Now, in his defense, I like the way Matthews describes McCain these days, as "Sticking in the shiv." Ya. Equating McCain's desperate and contempt-driven tactics with prison yard homicide, seems just about right.
And I have not cracked on that Horrid Woman yet. Here is the way I am going to do it today; in the format of a rhetorical question. "Have you ever seen a politician who took such obvious glee in "Swimming in that shit?"
And I will follow that up. Seems to me she is in her natural element, "Swimming in that shit."
Oh. One last point. WTF is it with those people? The obsession with women's accessories and cosmetics? First it was lipstick on a pit bull, then lipstick on a pig, and now it is women's' shoes, between That Horrid Woman herself, and now Cindy McCain, trying to get Sen. Obama to wear her shoes. Is that what she dreams of at night?
(*sick people, yecch*)
I mean really. What sort of sick woman sits around entertaining cross-dressing shoe fetish fantasies?
It seems to me that there is some sign of intelligence (albeit, the cunningly corrupt, toilet dweller kind) on the part of 'Team Maverick.' And I mean, how they are jacking the news cycles by behaving so badly on the campaign trail.
Let's get real here. How effective are their negative, if not sometimes race-baiting tactics, if only broadcasted to the loyal rank and file at some campaign stump event? No net gain, we would have to say, as whipping up the base only whips up the base.
But when the news channels and blogs and papers pick up the story, they run the risk of actually doing more harm than intended. They risk serving the malicious aim of the negative or race bating tactic, rather than only performing the noble cause of informing the public about the news of the day.
Am I saying that the dirty tricks should be ignored? Hell no. But don't do anything that really serves to advance the malignant message. And it is crucial to do it as our more 'intelligent' journalists and anchors sometimes forget the power of their medium, and as well the effect of the particular manner chosen for republishing the bile.
Case in point; Chris Matthews. He loves to use the 'Devil's Advocate' method of interrogation on guests, but when he does that concerning the dirty tricks he risks legitimizing the tactic, by not condemning it and then asking, now how could you defend that garbage? Or some such.
All I am saying is this; media people need to be more careful, not only in republishing that shit that much, but be careful to NOT at all legitimize that shit.
Now, in his defense, I like the way Matthews describes McCain these days, as "Sticking in the shiv." Ya. Equating McCain's desperate and contempt-driven tactics with prison yard homicide, seems just about right.
And I have not cracked on that Horrid Woman yet. Here is the way I am going to do it today; in the format of a rhetorical question. "Have you ever seen a politician who took such obvious glee in "Swimming in that shit?"
And I will follow that up. Seems to me she is in her natural element, "Swimming in that shit."
Oh. One last point. WTF is it with those people? The obsession with women's accessories and cosmetics? First it was lipstick on a pit bull, then lipstick on a pig, and now it is women's' shoes, between That Horrid Woman herself, and now Cindy McCain, trying to get Sen. Obama to wear her shoes. Is that what she dreams of at night?
(*sick people, yecch*)
I mean really. What sort of sick woman sits around entertaining cross-dressing shoe fetish fantasies?
posted by Abstentus at 12:13 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home