I take your point, but I consider it a self-fulfilling prophecy. If journalists practice journalism -- which means covering things that happen, not covering how things are written about -- you might see a change in that dynamic.

I want to understand you -- please clarify. Do you take as somehow mutually exclusive the roles of media critic and reporter of "things that happen?" That a journalist (or blogger, or what have you) cannot do both, to maximum effect on our society and politics?

This is the type of point-by-point, documented, and unrelenting take-down that keeps me coming to this site.

Nicely done. Way to parlay that killer trial instinct into text.

He's spot on with that post, no? As someone from one these John-Mellencamp-song-inspiring places to which journalists and politicians constantly prostrate themselves, I've never understood the fetishization of all things trucker-cap and flannel-shirt.

Sure, there's something really "Merican" and beautiful about watching 4th of July fireworks in a big field with a keg of bad beer, and the suburbs and country certainly have their advantages, but this fixation on small-town folk as the only Real America always struck me as rank overcompensation. Invariably, who are the ones constantly telling us about "Millie" and "Bob" from Turnipsville? Someone about as far removed from Millie and Bob as one can get. Fred Thompson is a perfect example of this. During his congressional campaign, he rented -- rented -- an old beat-up pickup truck to take around the state and give speeches from the back. Gifted actor indeed.

These paeans to simple small-townism form yet another layer of cliche in our national discourse. Not only that, but I'm with Digby in seeing this behavior as strikingly racist. Let me remember, wasn't it just yesterday that I heard Chris Matthews say something to the effect that "Looking at the Grand Canyon, you could say the hand of God exists. Looking down Flatbush Avenue, not so much."

Hmmm.

Here's another post at HuffPo, by John McQuaid:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-mcquaid/how-the-mainstream-media-_b_48222.html

While I'm on the topic of Huffington, and while the lot of you sleep, I want to comment into the darkness about Bill Maher's show tonight.

Frank Luntz, the svengali wordsmith who notoriously came up with the term "death tax," was on, as was Arianna Huffington. A couple choice exchanges occurred.

First, I want to remark on the amazing similarity of appearance of so many of the Bush movement's intellectuals and strategists. From Karl Rove to Kyle Sampson to Frank Luntz, I am always amazed by their distinct homunculus look, like they've been brewed in the bathtub of a mad alchemist who couldn't quite perfect the formula for hair, normal-sized foreheads, or skin that doesn't permanently glisten with sweat. Anyway, I don't mean to be cruel, but it really is appalling.

To me, the most striking part of the show was when Arianna suddenly turned on Frank after a particularly nauseous remark from him about Democrats needing to "stop hating religion." She said some things that made me quite proud of our little media diva. Arianna essentially called bull---t on the canard, citing the example of Nancy Pelosi's active Catholicism, and saying what needed to be said: people like Luntz have been skating along on empty slogans and unsubstantiated cliches, and because they say it with such conviction, and because such things have been repeated so often for so long, they get away with it and the meme is internalized yet again.

I've seen Luntz on several different "news" shows, and it's always the same old song with him. "Democrats can't win. They will always be incompetent, and no matter how bad the GOP gets, Democrats' inability to wield language and BS like a lasso will forever ensure their defeat." I, for one, am so glad Arianna called this little homunculus out on live TV (not TV, HBO!), in no uncertain terms, and to his self-satisfied face.

Sure, there's something to be said about using language and message effectively, and Democrats (with a few notable exceptions) definitely need to improve those skills. However, if there's one thing that's contributed tremendously to the ruin we are making of this great nation, it is the overemphasis of marketing and packaging over competence, and the fallacious belief that pure competence never sells. Luntz even made the argument himself -- asserting that Carter, a brilliant man, was a terrible leader, while Reagan, not as brilliant, was a great leader. Marketing over product. Campaigns over policy.

I think this mentality really points to a larger sickness at the heart of contemporary American society right now. We place such an immense premium of appearance and bull---t over substance; of talking a big game over having a big game. It's all over our pop culture, rooted deeply in our politics, and even pervasive in professional spheres. Even our economy is based on artifice -- credit cards, national debt, and an erosion of industrial production and innovation.

The grotesque embodiment of this lavish, corrosive, and top-heavy psychology in our political and media discourse -- the Frank Luntz's and Karl Roves, the mad scientist homunculi -- needs to be stamped out like a terrible pestilence. The only way that can happen is not to become more like these illusionists, but to scare them back into the shadows with the blinding light of persistent, steady competence and unapologetic leadership.