Dear Salon:

Part of the structural discourse about U.S. politics involves blaming the notion of "professional politicians" whos "play politics" and "take pork" from the government. We tend to forget that politicians are elected and even the most corrupt politician is some how accountable in the end. Part of this discourse suggests that "term limits" be instituted against elected officials to prevent them from accumulating too much power and to prevent them from becoming too professional.

But the true scorn and contempt should be directed not at the politicians themselves, but rather at the mainstream media which enables the most corrupt of them to survive and prosper by giving them a discourse which is amiacable to the political propaganda of the most corrupt of them. A politics based on image, which treats the entire electoral and election process as if it was merely a game rather than a process which has real implications in the real world. Who elected them? To whom are they accountable? Haven't they been on TV for too many years? Who limits their power?

Sincerely yours,

Arthur C. Hurwitz

I was a media reporter in San Francisco back in 2000 for an online news site that competes with Salon.

I didn't make much money then, but I made nearly as much as I make now -- as a journalist in Washington for one of the nation's "elite media outlets." I am so sick of tired and persistent argument that journalists are nothing but

partisan ideologues or unquestioning scribes for the government -- especially when they come from online,

west coast journalists and bloggers who make heck of a lot more money than most of us do.

and you don't know much about Romenesko? Give me a break. How can you call yourself a media critic?

Great post!

Maybe if Bush could get a hummer in the oval office, somebody would finally become enraged enough to launch an investigation and/or impeach him?

Vapid is such a delightful word because sounds like what it is; nothing disguised as something. And there is no better description of what passes for journalists in Washington. Brilliant point on why they have sold their souls. I have considered stupidity, fear, ideology. incompetence. But your insight into Halperin's drooling over Rove drives home a stunning point. Power corrupts, absolute power, etc. etc. It EVEN corrupts those who view power and hunger for it themselves. To wit Matthews, Borger, Halperin, ad nauseum. They love degenerates like Rove because he has what they want. The problem will not correct itself because the perpetrators are the gatekeepers.

Thank you, Glenn, for such keen insight.

Jeff

Valencia

good stuff -- you hit the nail on the head

it's the media, stupid!

Sorry buddy, I'm not buying your anecdotes. The guy with the hardware store would have had many other options if he really wanted his kid to take it over. It isn't double taxation any more than 99% of the rest of tax policy. You're taxes when you're paid and you're taxed when you buy something from your friend with the hardware store.

If a single woman with children married, she lost her welfare benefits.

Well if she married Newt Gingrich, sure! Again, you're vague and anecdotal, I'm not buying it.

As for familiar leftist rants and talking points based in the politics of resentment,

Now we're back to conservatives assuming everyone is just like them. These aren't rants or resentment. I'm sorry the truth has a liberal bent, but that's the way it is.

Trying being a fiscal conservative and a social liberal rather than a fiscal liberal and expecting wealthy people like me to pay for your goddam poor choices and mistakes. Single mothers are single mothers for a goddam good reason, they chose to be. This is why no man would have you but lots of cats would.

To everybody commenting on Estate Taxes (not that this is on topic or anything...)

Myth 7: The estate tax constitutes "double taxation" because it applies to assets that

already have been taxed once as income.

Reality: Large estates are comprised mostly of "unrealized" capital gains that

have never been taxed; the estate tax is the only means of taxing this income.

Income taxes on the appreciation of assets, such as real estate or artwork, are only paid

when the asset is sold. Therefore, the increase in the value of an asset is never subject

to income tax if the asset is held until a person dies. These "unrealized" capital gains

can make up a significant share of an estate’s total value (http://www.cbpp.org/6-17-

05tax.htm), especially among large estates — the ones likely to owe estate tax.

One reason the estate tax was created was to serve as a backstop to the income tax,

taxing income that was never taxed under the income tax. That is, the taxation of this

income is essentially deferred and ultimately taxed for the first time through the estate

tax.

from: http://www.cbpp.org/estatetaxmyths.pdf

My $.02 Anytime someone is willing to spend a

whale-load of $ to promote something, you have to suspect their motivation.

Read: Perfectly Legal (David Cay Johnston) about taxes in general, talk about making your blood boil.

Torque

I concur with LBS. Your post is important. Important to connect rumblings of partial investigations with a case that is happening. I can only hope your local media smartens up, the people perpetrating these investigations did so hoping locals couldn't.

these people, if they were living during the west westward expansion period would still be living in rhode island they need to see the wizard

The politicization of the Justice Department under Gonzales has unsavory implications, to say the least. I've included a clip from one blog, and a report from a few sources that are disturbing.

1. The Justice Department linked to voter fraud, particularly the disenfranchisement of minorities.

Campaign Legal Center Blog

J. Gerald Herbert.

“It was an email from Monica Goodling at the Department of Justice to Scott Jenkins at the White House and to DOJ’s Kyle Sampson (Gonzales’ chief of staff until he resigned earlier this week). The subject of the email exchange involved Tim Griffin, a person working at the White House for Karl Rove, and how to move him into a position as U.S. Attorney in Arkansas. There are two parts to the email exchange that jumped out at me. The email says Griffin would likely face political opposition to the nomination because he played a role ‘in massive Republican projects in Florida and elsewhere by which Republicans challenged tens of thousands of absentee votes.’ According to the 8/24/06 email, ‘[c]oincidentally, many of those challenged votes were in black precincts.’”

*********************************

2. The Justice Department linked to the choice not to pursue a rather horrifying case of sexual abuse against youths at Texas Youth Commission facilities.

Pam’s House Blend quotes a letter by Bill Baumann, assistant U.S. attorney, to Texas Ranger Burzynski (the Texas Rangers investigated the case); the federal government, according to the NYT, stated it could not step in because the assaults were only ‘misdemeanors.” Note: the assaults involved repeated sexual intercourse with youths by government officials. Baumann wrote:

“The offense of aggravated sexual abuse is proven with evidence that the perpetrator knowingly caused his victim to engage in a sexual act (which can include contact between the mouth and penis) by using force against the victim or by threatening or placing the victim in fear that the victim (or any other person) will be subjected to death, serious bodily injury or kidnapping. I do not believe that sufficient evidence exists to support a charge that either Brookins or Hernandez used force to cause victims to engage in a sexual act."

...As you know, consent is frequently an issue in sexual assault cases. Although none of the victims admit that they consented to the sexual contact, none resisted or voiced any objection to the conduct. Several of the victims suggested that they were simply 'getting off' on the school administrator."

Baumann’s statement belies the evidence. Ralph Blumenthal of the NYT reported on March 24, that the youth facilities could extend inmate sentences. Those inmates who tended to complain, would be given lengthier sentences.

At a Texas State Senate hearing in February, Democratic Texas State Senator Juan Hinojosa said, “We found out a lot of youths are kept seven, eight months longer than required, and we want to know why.” He then stated, “If a young person refuses to have sex with a supervisor, they deduct a point, and they’re required to stay longer.”

Longer sentences seem to constitute a threat of 'bodily injury,' particularly as they would probably mean that the victim would be put under the same circumstances again. Moreover, the statement leaves out the inmates actual reports of abuse.

The scandal developed during a gubernatorial election in which the Republican governor was facing some challenge from an independent candidate.

I do not know if the Justice Department under the Democrats would or would not have pursued these charges. I also do not know how to judge Baumman's superior in the JD, Sutton, who is currently under fire in conservative circles for pursuing cases against border patrol agents.

However, the case is chilling. I left out the actual description of the abuses; they did not seem necessary to recount.

Mr. Greenwald and Salon's readers were rightly disturbed that pundits would laugh at the current Justice Department scandal. I find it even more disturbing as I begin to realize what they are laughing at. In part, they are laughing at the disenfranchisement of minority voters and the sexual assault of minors.