Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
When the shoe is on the other foot ...
Posted by: McQ on Friday, November 17, 2006

Digby is upset that now that the Dems are in power, journalists are taking shots at their leaders:
Man are these catty little MSNBC snots enjoying their full-on Demo bitch fest. They are partying like it's 1999. Norah O'Donnell, Lawrence O'Donnell, Mary Ann Akers and some other person I don't know have just spent half an hour discussing the fact that Nancy Pelosi ruined her own honeymoon and now it is really quesionable whether she can lead. Meanwhile, the dirty netroots and Howard Dean must have done something wrong because James Carville is hanging out all the Democratic dirty laundry (while his wife cackles with glee, no doubt) and he wouldn't do that unless there was something to it.
Heh ... kind of different when you're no longer the party in the minority, isn't it?
There are no honeymoons for Democrats. Remember that. And "moral authority" is about haircuts and Hollywood, not torture and illegal wars. It is not merely a fight against the Republicans or a fight over politics and policy. It is a non-stop battle with the press to cover events with seriousness and responsiblity. For some reason, when Democrats are in power the press corps immediately goes from being merely shallow to insufferable, sophomoric assholes.
There are no honeymoons for politicians in power, something, if Digby were honest, he could certify. Nor should there be.

So Dems? Get over it.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
I know that it sounds more annoying when the "other" side is whining about how unfairly they are being treated. The Dems will keep complaining just as the Reps will. Even libertarians whine. Jefferson and Adams did it. The high pitched whining of those privleged to be in power may be what turns so many people off to politics.


No one ever "gets over it".
 
Written By: cindyb
URL: http://
I’d much rather have a fierce debate over who my Majority leader should be than a big Kumbayah song over who my Minority leader should be.

Though, accuracy would require that if the Dems leadership race was "unnecessarily divisive," then the Republicans corruption-related post-thumpin’ leadership slate should be titled "they still don’t get it."

 
Written By: Geek, Esq.
URL: http://
Though, accuracy would require that if the Dems leadership race was "unnecessarily divisive," then the Republicans corruption-related post-thumpin’ leadership slate should be titled "they still don’t get it."
I agree and pretty much stated as such in the comment to Jon’s post (and my post on the RedState quote).

But to pretend, as Digby and other are, that this is something unusual as it pertains to criticism of leadership, is silly.

I mean when did ’selected not elected’ start, Geek?
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
Digby, MK, Kos and the rest of the little b*tch brigade are gonna learn that there’s a HUGE difference to things when you’re no longer allowed to just snipe and take potshots from the sidelines like the Dems have done for 6 years.

Just yelling about Bush isn’t gonna cut it anymore, though some (MK) will surely try. You wanted power, have fun!

Now get ready for some (metaphorical) headshots from the sidelines you little b*tches...
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
You guys are so, so wrong about Digby and a lot of blogospheric Dems. They feel — and it is a persuasive case in my view — that the MSM is ruled by an elite class that has always had it in for those who are not considered part of the Beltway club. They regard this as a long-standing phenomenon. Indeed, Jonathan Schwarz says (with reference to statements he heard from Richard Cohen on the matter) the media disliked Gary Hart because they thought he was too weird, not part of the kewl kidz crowd, and so in a ravaging gang they made a huge fuss over the Monkey Business kerfuffle. This isn’t something Digby, Schwarz & etc have only now started saying; they’ve been lamenting it since blogs were born. (Obviously it annoys them most when the target of elite scorn is a Dem.)

The media elite has its own non-partisan interest in being able to craft and dictate political narratives. It is a matter of power. Ideological bias is not the only, or even always the most salient, problem with the media.
 
Written By: Mona
URL: http://inactivist.org/
You guys are so, so wrong about Digby and a lot of blogospheric Dems.
Of course we are, Mona.

However the point here has little to do with media elites. In fact it has nothing to do with them (other than noting those trying to use such criticism as excuse to lambast the media).

There are no honeymoons in politics and if anyone should know this best, it is the "blogospheric Dems".
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
McQ, I’ve been reading Digby regularly for at least a year. Digby and some of the co-bloggers there OFTEN have gone on rants about the media. Months ago I wrote a whole post about "anger on the left" vis-a-vis the MSM. They (Dem-friendly blogs) started a whole web site devoted to pummeling Chris Matthews last year. I won’t be forgetting it, because of one the particular issues they chose to make a hue and cry about was Matthews commentary about Michael Moore; I strongly felt it was beyond preposterous to tie the dignity and honor of MM to complaints about how the media treats Dems the netroots like.

You could not be more wrong in this notion you have that their umbrage is recent, newfound, and tied to winning last weeks’ election. That is the complete opposite of what is true. They identify a problem with the media as being ELITE, and regard the blogosphere as superior in many respects. That’s not a very big difference between them and many on the right.
 
Written By: Mona
URL: http://inactivist.org/
Keep saying it often enough Mona....you may even convince yourself.

How long will it be until we start seeing a spate of "Jon Stewart and the Daily Show aren’t funny anymore" comments, which will happen to coincide with Jon taking a few more (gentle I’m sure) shots at the Dems now that they’re in power?


Besides....what they’re complaining about compared to what was done to Bush and the GOP- no comparison. For the Dems, it’s the princess and the pea syndrome. They’ve had it so cushy for so long that even the gentlest tweak stings like a gunshot wound. Boo fricking hoo for them. When the Dems have CBS try to air a fraud story defaming Nancy Pelosi, then they can talk. Until then.....watch me laugh at their discomfiture. And yours.
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Shark, you don’t get it — it isn’t a matter of what I’m telling others or myself, it is a matter of what is demonstrably true. That is, what left bloggers have been keening about re: the media for A LONG TIME. Indeed, when I wrote this post on 9/05, I linked to and quoted Jon, who had also addressed right here at QandO, liberal unhappiness with the media.

Get a clue — Digby’s post on the MSM is so, so, not a new theme; not for Digby, and not for liberal bloggers all over. It is a freakin’ staple, and has long been so. I’m not addressing the MERITS of their complaints (right here and now), but that they have long existed is indisputable.
 
Written By: Mona
URL: http://inactivist.org/
One can understand Digby’s reaction, however.
Last time the Democrats were in power the press would be caught dead holding them up to the light of day.

 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://
Digby and some of the co-bloggers there OFTEN have gone on rants about the media.
They’ve also OFTEN used the very same media to go on rants about the administration and Republicans. You can’t have it both ways. And that’s precisely what they want.
They (Dem-friendly blogs) started a whole web site devoted to pummeling Chris Matthews last year. I won’t be forgetting it, because of one the particular issues they chose to make a hue and cry about was Matthews commentary about Michael Moore; I strongly felt it was beyond preposterous to tie the dignity and honor of MM to complaints about how the media treats Dems the netroots like.

Yet they love Olberman ... speaking of preposterous.

Nope, this isn’t selling. Chris Matthews isn’t the "elite media." What Digby and his ilk want is no criticism of their side. What they want is a compliant media which views it all as they do and is an enabler and not a critic.

Well that’s not the way an adversarial media works and while it was all wonderful when the target of most of their focus was on Digby, et al’s, political enemies, it’s apparently not as much fun when the focus shifts to their team.

Tough. That’s the price of winning. Now they can attempt to govern with the media tearing into every move and idea they have and see how effective and easy it is to do so. Life’s little lessons, and such.

Me? I have absolutely to sympathy for their complaint nor any desire to see it change. They helped frame the game and now they get to reap the reward of doing so.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
I spoke to a local Democrat operative yesterday and he was still whining about the "stolen" elections of 200 and 2004, I asked him if that means the recent elections were also stolen, He changed the subject.
 
Written By: kyle N
URL: http://impudent.blognation.us/blog
Well McQ, you are arguing against a left blogosphere that exists only in your head. They do not "frame" what the media says about Republicans or the Bush Administration, and they have some legitimate complaints. Brad DeLong is usually a measured and smart fellow, but I’ve repeatedly seen him have meltdowns over journalistic slovenliness that, in his view, simply advances the Bush Administration’s narrative. When I see posts like that, they do not strike me as much different in form than the many from the right you can find lamenting this or that example of supposed bias or media perfidy. As Jon wrote, to some extent this is in the eye of the beholder — but both sides think they are beholding it, and both have long been in that position.

If you don’t ever pay any attention to what the left-of-center blogs write, except to criticize them on occasion, then you are not going to know what their ACTUAL views are. Digby’s post is not a matter of "suddenly" coming to revile the media because now "the shoe is on the other foot." Not even close.
 
Written By: Mona
URL: http://inactivist.org/
they chose to make a hue and cry about was Matthews commentary about Michael Moore; I strongly felt it was beyond preposterous to tie the dignity and honor of MM to complaints about how the media treats Dems the netroots like.
The dignity and honor of MM??? Michale Moore has dignity AND honor? Wow. Wish he would bring those out in public at some point. It would be refreshing.
 
Written By: meagain
URL: http://
Well McQ, you are arguing against a left blogosphere that exists only in your head.
Yeah, Mona, I’m incapable of reading and evaluating it for myself.

Thanks for stopping by.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
You could not be more wrong in this notion you have that their umbrage is recent, newfound, and tied to winning last weeks’ election. That is the complete opposite of what is true. They identify a problem with the media as being ELITE, and regard the blogosphere as superior in many respects.

Digby seems to be peeved that the media is reporting/discussing the flak that Pelosi is taking over her attempts to elevate Murtha and Hastings to positions of greater power and responsibility.

Mona, you want to spin this as if it is all of a piece with the Left’s longstanding criticism of media elitism. So, are the criticisms of Pelosi elitist criticisms that would only resonate with elites? Or is Pelosi some sort of plebeian, working-class figure who is a natural lightning rod for media elites?

It seems to me that if the Republicans were trying to push aside an expert on intelligence matters in order to make room for a Republican version of Alcee Hastings as Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, you, Greenwald, and the rest of the Left blogosphere would be screaming bloody murder, not complaining about how the Republicans should be entitled to a honeymoon.

The Pelosi controversies are legitimate political news. The case of Hastings, especially, is a dramatic illustration of the Democrats’ willingness to allow payback, personality and racial politics trump national security considerations, and that is the real problem that Digby and Greenwald have with the exposure it is getting.

 
Written By: Aldo
URL: http://
The Pelosi controversies are legitimate political news. The case of Hastings, especially, is a dramatic illustration of the Democrats’ willingness to allow payback, personality and racial politics trump national security considerations, and that is the real problem that Digby and Greenwald have with the exposure it is getting.
I haven’t said they are not legit news. It is the narrative emerging, however, that this spells disaster for Pelosi, she has already failed & etc. That’s ridiculous, as her problems with Murtha/Hastings are the stuff leadership in both parties have to deal with. Leaders have to appear loyal on the one hand, and to send signals that they will reward loyalty. But they also, on the other, have to live up to promises not to promote corruption.

In any event, you don’t know what "the real problem" Digby or Greenwald have with the coverage, because you have not long been reading their views on the media. I have, and so I knew for a fact that it was utterly false to claim, as McQ did in this post, that Digby became unhappy with the MSM only since 11/7/06. That is the utter opposite of reality.
 
Written By: Mona
URL: http://inactivist.org/
Mona is absolutely right. This is absolutely not new. The lefty blogs has been complaining about MSM coverage of Dems since they came in existence. The oldest is perhaps Bob Somerby’s Daily Howler which goes to 1998. Take a look at any year 1998-2006 in the archives and you will find any number of complaints about media coverage of Dems. Same for pretty much any other American blogger on the left.

Whatever you think of the merits of the left’s complaints about the media, it is simply risible to try to pretend this is a new phenomenon.
 
Written By: Crust
URL: http://
Whatever you think of the merits of the left’s complaints about the media, it is simply risible to try to pretend this is a new phenomenon.
Good grief ... no one is suggesting it "this" is a new phenomenon. What is being pointed out is they now are in a different position vis a vis power and nothing which they’re receiving now, in terms of flak, is any different than the former side in power received. And, in fact, they contributed to the flak by citing the same sources then now decry.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
McQ, when you wrote:
Digby is upset that now that the Dems are in power, journalists are taking shots at their leaders
I (and Mona) took you to be saying that it is a new phenomenon for Digby (et al) to criticize the media for a (perceived) double standard in how they portray portrays Democrats vis a vis Republicans. Apparently, that’s not what you meant. Fine. My apologies.

I agree with you that really the press shouldn’t be giving honeymoons to anyone. (As an aside, I’m glad to see McCain’s—what has it been—7 year honeymoon is finally starting to wear off.) Still, do you think Digby is right or wrong that Gingrich got a honeymoon in 1994 despite slip ups that Pelosi didn’t get in 2006? (I honestly don’t have an opinion either way as I wasn’t following politics closely back in 1994.)
 
Written By: Crust
URL: http://
401 kenwood kmd sale - [url=http://401-kenwood-kmd-sale.owrob.info/401-kenwood-kmd-sale.html ] Array [/url] - http://401-kenwood-kmd-sale.owrob.info/401-kenwood-kmd-sale.html - [link http://401-kenwood-kmd-sale.owrob.info/401-kenwood-kmd-sale.html ] 401 kenwood kmd sale [/link]
 
Written By: Jolie
URL: http://401-kenwood-kmd-sale.owrob.info/401-kenwood-kmd-sale.html

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider