Into The Hornets’ Nest
Wow, that NY Times piece on the Clintons’ marriage really stirred up the lefty side of the blogosphere. Open Thread – excuse me, Atrios – points to the Giuliani marital escapades and wonders why they aren’t front page news (as if they won’t be, should he run). Digby (who, like Open – er Atrios – has never learned how to properly work his blog’s URL settings) seems to detect some sort of Republican bias (!!!) at the Times:
I have no doubt that we are going to be reading many derisive accounts of Al Gore the bearded, earth toned circus freak. It’s quite clear that if the Democrats are are coming into power, the Times is going to pick up right where it left off when it was last obsessed with Clinton’s crotch and Hillary’s cold, cold heart. Or perhaps, more to the point, this piece is just a first notice that they plan to.
Kevin Drum turns up the snarkometer, and Matt Stoller joins the slimefest while pretending to take the high road.
I could go on and on – but you get the picture…
What no one – right or left – seems to understand is that the news media are an industry and their job is to secure the most possible viewers. Scandal does that, and they’ll be more than happy to focus on any scandal involving center-stage players. You’re right that Giuliani’s activities will come up if he runs for president, which is no different from putting this stuff on the front page if Gore runs (and for Clinton, we already know she’s running, so she’s fair game too). This isn’t bias; it’s business.
It also doesn’t help these folks that the left’s presidential candidates – Kerry? Gore? – look a whole hell of a lot more like a sideshow than the right’s. OF COURSE they’re going to catch more flak.
oh geez…now they hate the NYT’s…did they institute a blogswarm?
(sign) Yeah, it gets good ratings, but don’t the people who gobble up this National Enquirer-level crap feel the least bit dirty afterwards? I’m no fan of the Clinton’s but speculation into their sex lives is just plain creepy and not just because (as Ryan notes) the same impulse to put Hillary’s sex life under a microscope will soon elevate Rudy’s philandering to the same level of importance as his record as Governor, his record in bringing down the Gambino crime family, and his courageous leadership during 9/11.
Wow, lots of typos — I meant sigh, not sign, Mayor, not Governor and, well, I’m tired, so off to bed.
This is Kos in the WAPO earlier this month:
“”…Hillary Clinton has a few problems if she wants to secure the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination,” writes Moulitsas. “She is a leader who fails to lead. She does not appear ‘electable.’ But most of all, Hillary has a Bill Clinton problem. (And no, it’s not about that.)…”
So, um memory problems? I guess it is a messanger thing…we can say it…put if you pick up on the theme, then well it’s wrong.
Excellent catch!…
[...] Notice the tone of the piece – this is the same Times accused by many bloggers on the left of anti-Democrat bias in the wake of the Clinton ‘hit piece’ yesterday. [...]
Drat. Does that mean Kos can’t unleash his DLC-Destructo Blogswarm Death Ray on the New York Times now? It’s a shame to see it sitting there dusty and unused, except for a few trial shots at Joe Lieberman.
Secretk: What part of “and no, it’s not about that” don’t you get? Why not link to the article? Perhaps then you would provide the topsecretkontext? What part of the article mentions their maritals troubles?
The whole article is about her policies. Nice try though.
Mark, sorry I thought your original post on this “oh-so proper” comment was not sarcasm, but it clearly is. In any event, I’m not trying to suggest anything about NYT liberal bias, only trying to suggest terrible reporting. Meanwhile, watch how McCain is treated in the coming weeks, especially on page A-1. I don’t think it has anything to do with left/right, only, like others have mentioned, in order to sell papers. You need a villain and a hero in every narrative and I think we all know which side will be which in the coming years. I don’t necessarily disagree that she is a villain either. I’d much rather see Wesley Clark get the nomination. I think Clark vs. McCain would be an excellent series of debates.
The comment about McCain’s marital stuff was in the Atrios post (Atrios more or less says that at one point his wife was stressed out or something and then proceeds to jump on that “sign of weakness” so to speak in the mock story) and was thus the only reason I mentioned his name in that context. It shows that certain people didn’t click on the Atrios link though…
Which is sometimes the fun of linking to something and then dropping things rather than quoting them. Fortunately I don’t have to walk a fine line on the plagiarism issue like Mark.
Mike, the truth is, I actually like Hillary, to a certain extent. She’s been a much better senator, and a reliable national security vote, than I thought she would be. I’d prefer her over almost all of the current list of Democratic hopefuls…
“I think Clark vs. McCain would be an excellent series of debates.”
Oh, Lord, deliver me from that. I would rather have root canal without anesthesia than listen to those two “debate.”
Wait, speaking of sideshow, does the left simply not remember Clark’s candidacy in 2004? It was shameful.
MikeBot
I know the context and my point is the left only accepts critical and/or slightly negative honesty from their own and then even the risk being labeled as a republican if they do so. Further, that Kos even says “not that” implies that “that” exists and therefore is an issue.
That this is silly journalism? Well, yes I consider pictures of and corresponding stories describing the entire contents of Karl Rove’s garage silly journalism but I didn’t here an outcry on the travesty of journalism when this and so many more occur. So pardon me if I happen to think these new offended outcries when ever a Democrat is subject to an ounce of criticism or embarrassment are convenient hypocritical whining.
I disagree once again: To me, Kos is saying it is not an issue as he doesn’t mention it once (besides to say “get your mind out of the GUTTER”).
Well, pointing out bad journalism is what it is, but when it has direct effect on a major candidate, I don’t think hypocritical whining is involved. But, whatever. Life goes on.
On another topic, I am slightly more optimistic about Iran…
Grr, that was page 2, here is page 1.
Clark 08′ – Clark was drafted last minute in 2004 and he still did better than other candidates. Don’t forget when Reagan ran and lost the first time. Clark is the best chance for the Democrats and he could be mccain’s boss with his credentials.