Letters to the Editor
-
How did this come about?
I've noticed the same thing that Glenn has written about in this post and wondered when and how it all began. I've never been impressed with the level of political discourse in this country but it's gotten so awful in the past couple of decades that I just decided to start ignoring it all. Is this recent development just a coincidence or has there been some conscious effort to get the entire media establishment to conduct itself this way? I'd love for Glenn or some comment posters to direct those of us who want to know toward some resources for understanding this current phenomenon. It's not only sick, it's extremely debilitating for the health of our political system.
-
That is the question, isn't it?
The real question is whether Obama, as he did this week, will be able to render these attacks impotent, even cause them to backfire, because they and their propagators will appear to be so ugly and small and irrelevant in light of the type of candidate he is, the rhetoric he produces, the vision to which he aspires.
I think that the lesson of John Kerry should be front and center as this question is pondered. Many are quick to attack Kerry for his slow and weak response to the swift boat attack, but it is worthwhile thinking for a minute about just how "ugly and small and irrelevant" attacks do get rendered "impotent".
As Glenn points out in the heart of the post, many such attacks on Obama already have started. So far, they have proved ineffective and none have gained real "legs". I think they mostly have fallen of their own accord because of the image which Obama has been able to maintain. There probably was some reason for Kerry to feel that the same fate would befall the swift boat attacks. They were so blatantly false that no rational person could fall for them, and to take them on would lend them more credibility than they deserve while sullying Kerry through his willingness to fight on this level.
I'm not saying Kerry's response was appropriate; clearly, the attacks had a huge, negative impact on the campaign and likely played a large role in his loss. What I'm trying to get at is that Obama now must walk the same gauntlet in choosing when and how to respond to attacks.
The blogs could well play a central role here. Look for many of the worst attacks to be incubated in the blogs of the troglodytes, but it will be very helpful for our side to maintain vigilance and to provide the point-by-point refutations that dismantle the attacks. These refutations should be made available to the press very quickly each time a new attack comes out. With any luck, the reality-based blogosphere can help to lighten the load for the Obama campaign and to take the lead in refuting the attacks, allowing him to remain above the fray.
-
Horde: a moving pack or swarm of animals
There are obviously hordes of people, regardless of ideology, yearning for an end to the Limbaugh/Drudge/ Chris-Matthews/Karl-Rove/Time Magazine petty, vapid dirt-mongering that infects and shapes our politics.
Do you really believe that? Hordes? I think we get the media (and the government) we deserve.
Glenn, there are 3 kinds of people in the world (contrary to all those lame jokes you've been told): People who live to be told how to live; people who live to tell others how to live; and people who just want to be left the hell alone to live in peace. Unfortunately, only the first group occurs in sufficient numbers to form hordes. Don't expect any "yearning" from them. That would require a proactive, inquisitive mindset.
-
Wake me when it's over.
We've already got Larry Sinclair on YouTube saying that he gave Obama a blow job (or maybe it was the other way around) and they did cocaine. Now, courtesy of National Review, completely fact-free musings on Obama's "communist" upbringing. (I didn't know that we were still supposed to be afraid of communists.)
The next 8-9 months are going to be so excruciating, I honestly don't know if I can stand it.
-
Great sentence.
After all, two of the most establishment journalists,
Please don't edit that one. :D
-
-- Barb
"......It appears I'm already referring to HRC in the past tense. Like I said, it was her's to lose."
Are you sure you're in the correct thread? With all due respect, I really don't see any connection whatsoever to what you wrote and what Glenn wrote.
-
It's only going to get uglier
I heard on NPR this morning that Mccain was considering taking the matching funds for the general election - while hypocritical, is a brillant move. If Obama doesn't follow suit, he can now be painted as the "special interest" candidate. If he does take it, his spending cap will limit his defense of these attacks.
-
Slackie Onassis
I don't know, Mr. Greenwald; you pointed out that a week's worth of virulent attacks by anti-Obama people produced nothing, and then you puff up the reactionary attack press into Godzilla dimensions.
There's a big, big difference between a week's worth of diffuse chatter and months of a sustained, multi-armed, multi-million-dollar slime campaign. The fact that someone can withstand the former isn't proof they can't withstanding the latter.
Having said that, I made clear in my post that I think it's an open question whether Obama can. I see and understand and, to some extent, accept the arguments as to why he can. But I don't see how anyone can look at the way our political process has worked for the last 30 years and be so blithely confident that it's just all going to magically change and fade away without much of a struggle.
Certainly, their dismal industry has deep pockets, and they'll eagerly hop into bed with McCain versus the threat of a non-Republican being in the White House again. They are masters of propaganda, but like all propagandists, there are limits to their power.
Of course there are limits to their power. I'm a big believer in the fact that they can be beaten. I think any man-made system can be. But that doesn't mean it's easy.
So, I think it's going to backfire, and badly, for the right-wing and gliberal media, given that the Press isn't held in much higher esteem than any of the other institutions in this country.
Has it ever happened before? What past events would you point to as empirical evidence that this can happen and of how it will work?