Letters to the Editor
-
Follow the Money
Once again I ask.....who provided start-up funding for the Politico?
-
Jebbie
Once again I ask.....who provided start-up funding for the Politico?
I wrote about that awhile ago -
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/05/04/politico_funding/index.html
-
Blame the Victim
Yes, something is quite wrong here. But the establishment media will never change its behavior. Why not? Because they do not think there is a problem at all.
I'm afraid that one of the reasons the establishment media won't change their behavior is because this stuff sells. Keeping track of who holds what position on troop withdrawals or interrogation techniques is hard work and involves thinking about depressing reality. Comparing notes on who feels a greater need to primp before going on TeeVee is MUCH more entertaining and requires no soul searching or moral doubt.
It's easy to blame the networks who serve up this crap but the viewing public bears a significant portion of the responsiblity and improving the market for hard news is going to take a lot of effort and more than one election cycle to accomplish.
Needless to say.....in the meantime, keep up the good work.
-
Olbermann's blog covers it
Check it out at http://thenewshole.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/07/17/273031.aspx:
Politico reports on another exceedingly high bill from a beauty salon that will surely derail a 2008 hopeful's White House bid. Mitt Romney is the victim this time...he used $300 in campaign funds to pay a place called Hidden Beauty to slap some make-up on him before a televised debate. The campaign (in an attempt to obfuscate the absurd payout???) disclosed the payment as "communications consulting" on their campaign finance report...because the payment came from the communications budget.
Ultimately it's really not a big deal...and it shouldn't and probably won't impact Romney;s campaign. That said, it sure is a good thing Romney never took a swipe at John Edwards for his haircut faux pas. Oh, he did? Oops.
-
I think there actually is a good reason this story won't be a big deal...
As everyone knows, the threshold for a beauty-political story going national is $350. The media won't pick up on this story because they know that Edwards's haircut crossed this threshold and Romney's makeup didn't. Good for them for sticking by their principles!
-
edwards haircut/romney's makeup
the reason edward's story has legs is the hypocrisy, which is precisely why the vitter story also has legs. but i'm with you about lazy journalism and the issues that get the most noise. I don't want to be dragged down to the level of generating as much noise about romney's makeup as about edward's haircut--I want real reporting of real issues.
-
If the Shoe were on the Other Foot
I'm constantly fascinated by 'other shoe' phenomenon, as in, “My guy has a hangnail and you treat it like murder. Your guy is a murderer and you treat it like a hangnail.”
For instance, the Right Wing Media Circus treated Bill Clinton’s getting a $200 haircut at LAX like it was a world-shattering event:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/anecdotes/2.html
http://nitpicker.blogspot.com/2005/09/goddammit.html
http://mediamatters.org/items/200702090015
They treat outing a CIA agent working specifically on weapons of mass destruction in Iran and then lying repeatedly to the FBI and a grand jury as if almost nothing happened.
So, I always like to think about what would happen if GWB got an expensive haircut, maybe even on Air Force One, and some people in Bill Clinton’s administration had outed the agent and then lied under oath repeatedly about it.
The question, as always is: would the media treat the events the same way if the shoe were on the other foot?
I think not.
-
Follow the Money (to the Politico)
Thanks, Glenn. I (obviously) missed that one.
Reagan Library - Riggs Bank - The Bush Clan - Pinochet - and (I presume)the Saudi Royal Family.
-
Amazing
And just what is the price tag for Bush or Condi to hop on Air Force One and fly to Iraq in the middle of the night for a photo op with the troops any time the admin. is about to have a bad news day? I could grasp that number, but I'll never hear it from my MSM. They think I'm too stupid to understand it. So, I'll get the puff piece which seems to be required now as part of the nightly news. I'll bet anything the Hair/Makeup story makes it onto all three network newscasts tonight. Makes me wanna HURL!
I think a theme for several columns now, has been calling out the lazy typists who offend with this lightwieght crap. NPR got a letter from me the other day, and Politico will get one today. Gotta start somewhere.
BTW Glenn, I have wanted to say for some time what a pleasure it is to read your writing. I wish I could make my points as cogently as you when debating my Republican friends.
-
Huh?
> the reason edward's story has legs is the hypocrisy
You care to explain that in a bit more detail? Like tell me when John Edwards ever said that people shouldn't spend more than $20 on haircuts? Or that paying extra money to get a stylist to drive out to an airport at a ridiculous hour to give a quick trim is wrong or ought to be forbidden? Both Vitter and Romney have done exactly that, true, by willfully engaging in the exact behavior they gleefully railed against. But what exactly was Edwards' crime here?
For cryin out loud, I'm a straight guy and even I've dropped $100 in one sitting (shampoo, trim, highlights, eyebrow waxing, tip) at the stylist. A travelling public figure who gets a lot of television face time spending more than the average on his image? Oh my god, the horror!
As usual, the ones engaging in rampant hypocrisy here are the Republicans.
-
Closer to home
I took to calling California's Governor Arnold Schwartzenegger "The Orange Waxy Man", because his appearance in public became more and more cartoonish as he was sprayed down with airbrushed "tan" before being turned loose on the adoring star-struck hordes.
The way it's done:
http://www.sunsplashtans.com/tanning/sunless.shtml
There was even testimony from the aide charged with the duty of fixing him up. But it got no traction. Primarily because, well, he's a movee stah and a Republican, and it's just what they do. Even the numerous accounts of him sexually assaulting women were accepted as just what these people do.
It's who they are: they get sprayed down with Sunsplash, they assault women, they pay for hookers, they lie, cheat, and steal. It's who they are.
And it's celebrated when they do it. Shows how macho they are, how brassy and clanking their balls, how hairy their chests, how iron-clad their stomachs.
It's just the opposite with Dems, who must be, at all times, purer than Caesar's wife, which in some sense is what a Dem really is in our current Imperial climate. Nobody can live up to it. Of course not. And because the Dems can't be what the Narrative says they are supposed to be, better than perfect in every way, modest, retiring, and real to boot, they are pilloried.
The Narrative long since declared Republicans to be testosterone-soaked phonies. And celebrated them for it. So no matter how bad they are, or maybe even the worse they are, it's all good.
And no Dem on earth can be as Perfect as the Narrative says they are supposed to be.
Of course it's not "fair." Pffft.