Letters to the Editor
CarolynC
Published Letters: 191 Editor's Choice: 6
-
On the current debasement of our public discourse
[Read the article: The most revealing three-minute YouTube clip ever]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Many of the media elite, but not all, are profound nihilists. There is something so utterly decadent about their whole approach to life, there is nothing of value, apparently, beyond their own self-aggrandizement. Chris Matthews' career was on life-support when he got a job offer from the Moonie Times. He owes his current success to his decision to join a corrupt, extreme, authoritarian business organization and lend it credibility by his presence. This speaks volumes about him and the kind of person he ultimately is. He can only understand those like himself, who have sold out in order to achieve so-called success.
Maybe these people see themselves as decent human beings who have simply compartmentalized their work, made it a values-free zone; I've heard interviews with journalists who say things similar to this. But they are tragically fooling themselves. Their behavior reveals that they have truly lost touch with what it means to be a citizen of a democracy. Has Chris Matthews or Nora O'Donnell ever given any deep thought to what being a good citizen means? Have they asked themselves what their duty as human beings is today, when we live in a country where our leaders routinely lie, cheat and break the law? Only they know the answers to these questions. Meanwhile, our public discourse is cheapened and debased by their actions.
-
Another Republican president on 2008?
[Read the article: Your modern-day Republican Party]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Giuliani and Romney are depicted as the "moderates" in the Republican party, yet their views on presidential power are extreme, as this post illustrates. Regardless of who the Democratic nominee turns out to be, it will be a challenge to beat any of the Republican front-runners judging from the results of recent polls. The latest Time Magazine poll has McCain and Giuliani beating Clinton by 6 points and 9 points respectively if the election were held today. Obama, interestingly, does better. He loses to McCain and Giuliani by 2 points and 1 point respectively, presumably within the margin of error.
Mark Shulman, a Time Magazine poll analyst states. "Most voters have made up their minds about her (Clinton), pro and con. She may have limited upward potential against Republicans."
It's time for Democrats and progressives to take a hard look at Clinton and the so-called inevitability of her nomination and ask why she does poorly and what to do about it.
The results of the 2006 election, where Democrats who presumably rejected consultants' advice and spoke honestly and fearlessly about their positions, did far better than Democrats who were cautious and timid. "House winners like Jerry McNerney from California, Ed Perlmutter from Colorado, Bruce Braley from Iowa, John Sarbanes from Maryland, Keith Ellison from Minnesota, Carol Shear-Porter and Paul Hodes from New Hampshire, John Hall from New York, stood for election on platforms that echoed the commitment ... to bring the troops home from Iraq, promote economic fairness, make elections more honest and government more ethical, and promote energy independence. (John Nichols, The Nation)
Clinton is the epitome of the cautious centrist, who comes across as standing for nothing other than getting elected. Americans sense that most politicians offer no real hope for change. The candidate who can cut through this cynicism and connect and inspire others will win. Democrats need to wise up and chose new leadership. The challenges we face in these times are immense, and business as usual won't work. The American people know this; do the Democrats?
-
We're told only what's "appropriate."
[Read the article: Do national journalists agree with Gary Kamiya?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]No one likes to acknowledge guilt. It is common for human beings to deny self-obvious facts in order to avoid the discomfort that results from the awareness of their own incompetence or wrongdoing. But the denial that media figures have engaged in concerning the war in Iraq may have deeper causes.
Kamiya talks about the web of assumptions and beliefs that both shape and limit what the public is told by the media. Certain facts or interpretations cannot be communicated because they are "inappropriate," as he put it. There is a range, or zone, outside which lie interpretations and conclusions that are unacceptable, and therefore cannot be communicated, cannot even be recognized as plausible, because they contradict the narrative that has already been decided upon.
Frank Rich's book, "The Greatest Story Ever Sold" talks about the way the Iraq War was rolled out in a slick marketing campaign by the Adminstration. That the press accepted the Rove-inspired spin and fixed on the one acceptable narrative can be explained in terms of their need to cooperate in conveying the approved point of view. The corollary involved actively excluding voices that expressed rational doubts and questions about the "facts" being related.
How else to explain how the press marched in lock-step to the drumbeat for war, becoming zombies during the run-up and well into the Iraq debacle? And part of the American public, forced to choose between believing the press or "their own lying eyes," chose to drink the kool-aid and meekly go along because they had always been taught to believe what they were told by their government, their newspapers and the folks on tv.
Reality eventually destroyed the carefully constructed illusion, however, and most of the public has now woken up and realized they've been lied to and betrayed. Yet the media still doesn't get it. They just don't see what has happened or their role in all of it. They remain encased in their beltway bubble, out of touch with the experience of those of us who live in "the real world." No wonder they are mystified and become resentful when they are criticized. They just reported the facts, didn't they?