Is it a Liberal Media Spin or Simply Reporting?

The Fix — Chris Cillizza’s Politics Blog on washingtonpost.com

As chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Schumer has watched the playing field for 2008 go from good – 22 Republicans up for re-election compared to just 12 Democrats – to great as four Republicans have decided against seeking re-election next fall.

Those developments have led some Democratic strategists to begin talking seriously — albeit privately — about the possibility of controlling 60 or more seats after next November — a filibuster-proof majority that would constitute real legislative control in the chamber. (The last time either party had a 60-seat majority was in the 95th Congress — 1977-1979 — when Democrats controlled 61 seats.)

The expected retirement announcement of Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N.M,) later today will only add fuel to that fire. Domenici joins Republican Sens. Wayne Allard (Colo.), Chuck Hagel (Neb.) and John Warner (Va.) on the sidelines in 2008 and each of the seats are likely to play host to competitive contests between the parties. Democrats are also heavily targeting incumbents in New Hampshire, Maine, Oregon, Minnesota and making noise about challenges in North Carolina, Tennessee, Alaska and others.

Schumer, for one, insists it is far too early to speculate about 60 seats. “Picking up nine seats you would have to have the miracle of miracles,” he said. “To pick up nine seats even under the best of circumstances is very, very difficult.” (For those Schumerologists out there — of which The Fix is one — this kind of rhetoric is similar to what the New York Senator was saying about retaking the majority at this point in the 2006 cycle.)

Liberal Media? Yeah, right.

I’m so tired of conservatives endlessly invoking “the liberal media.” I wish I could just roll my eyes, but I need to address conservatives directly about this intentional self-delusion.

By “liberal media,” do you mean Rupert Murdoch, the billionaire media tyrant? Do you mean Fox News, founded by ultra-conservative Roger Ailes? Do you mean Lush Limbaugh, who has more listeners and sponsors than any other drug-addict in AmeriCo? Do you mean billboard-owning, record-smashing Clear Channel? (Can conservatives name a liberal counterpart that truly matches each of the previous examples in influence?) Do you mean the self-reverend Sun Myung Moon’s Washington Times, home of the aptly named blowhard Tony Blankley? Do you mean the Wall Street Journal?

I could add a list of conservative columnists who appear every day in more newspapers than any liberal columnist. Columnists who directly influence the current administration, like Krauthammer and Thomas. And I can cite a study to that effect, knowing there is a study proving anything and we all pick and choose. (Liberals admit we are all flawed human beings. Today’s conservatives divide the world between good — themselves — and evil — everyone else.)

Are conservatives who truly believe there is a dominant “liberal media” (as opposed to those who simply espouse that cynically to rouse the rabble) willing to think more deeply about this? Who pays for “the liberal media”? Most is driven by advertising. Who pays for ads? Mostly, businesses, especially big, national corporations. What political policies do corporations favor? Minimal regulation and minimal taxes. Aren’t those the primary planks of the Republican Party?

So, if the dominant media is liberal, why is it funded by corporations? Perhaps, they are simply stupid. Or, perhaps, it is in the interest of corporations to spend money on liberal media. Though cynical, that would be true if liberals partake of more media or are more responsive to advertising or spend money more loosely than conservatives. So, there might be more liberal media-consumers or a liberal minority might be the majority of customers of conservative corporations.

Conservatives believe America is a genuinely conservative nation and has always been so. They often speak of the liberal media, liberal politicians and the liberal judiciary as if liberals were a minority occupying the Silent and Moral Majority, bedrock conservatives. (An unfortunate consequence of this salt-the-earth war tactic is that conservatives steadily undermine confidence in all aspects of government.) How did this liberal minority come to dominate the conservative majority? Well, albeit by circular logic, the liberal media is a big part of keeping conservatives down. (Re-read second paragraph above.)

OK, leave aside how a natively conservative majority came to be dominated by a liberal minority. (I’m sure it involves the Civil War and forced integration; I imagine others blame Mexicans, gays, and Jews.) Three times in my life, I have seen the rise of the conservative tide. Conservatives believe it started with Goldwater. In fact, it started with Nixon and the odious criminal, Spiro T. Agnew. Today’s conservatives would not elect anyone as liberal as Nixon (choke-sputter-gag), who would be labeled a tree-hugger, communist sympathizer and dove/quitter. They would, however, gladly nominate Agnew for president; much of the “liberal media” nonsense originates with Agnew. It is also in those days that the power-hungry recognized the value of playing up the notion of native conservatives occupied by liberal outsiders. As vile as Nixon/Agnew, et al., were, they can’t hold a candle to Tricky Dick Cheney and Duhbya, though in the current case, it’s the veep who is dangerously powerful. As you may know from Wikipedia, conservatives over-reached and trusted the wrong guy, who was dethroned. (The liberal media — especially, the Washington Post and the New York Times — did play a key role, which inspires much of today’s enmity. And conservative columnists like James Jay Kilpatrick defended the Crook until he boarded the helicopter for the last time. Could Fox News have saved Nixon? Certainly, unlike today, Democrats weren’t stopped by “let’s just wait until his term is over.”)

The revenge of the conservatives was Morning In America, starring Ronnie Raygun, who might as well have been Jesus. Although there were no free speech zones then, it was a tough time for liberals. But, on a national level, we were merely drowned out and ignored for a decade. Things would get much worse.

The third wave of conservatism starts with Newty Gingrinch and collapses with King George. And yet, with all the power — an enflamed citizenry, both houses of Congress, the Presidency, an increasing percentage of the judiciary, Fox News, Rupert Murdock, more money than god, ad nauseum — with all this power and the smug certainty that they would hold that power for a generation, what happened?

Do conservatives blame Iraq on “the liberal media”? No, just the fact that all the Good News (gospel) out of Iraq is being filtered out by the same. While I’m stunned by those who believe we are “doing the right and honorable thing” in Iraq (and, next year, Iran), I’m outraged by the wimps who simply say, “Duhbya deceived us — he’s not really a conservative.” I know, he’s just an over-privileged party boy who has lead a pampered and sheltered life in which — inexplicably — people have helped him overcome his incompetence and ignorance every step of the way. (At least a few of those people have profited mightily by doing so. And what better way to prove government is bad than elect incompetents?) Now, the “true” conservatives pull a Peter on Jesus H. Duhbya — I don’t know him. Know him? You crowned him! Anyone half-awake in 2000 could see Duhbya’s unworthiness. Blame the liberal media? Blame conservatives!

Pulling back from my historical screed: How did the liberal media weather 40 years of mostly conservative rule and a purportedly conservative majority populace? Could it be that the media isn’t liberal or that the majority of media-responders are?

Why do conservatives continue to rail mindlessly against “the liberal media.” What do you blame the liberal media for? And would you rather have a conservative Pravda and Isvestia? Should media be a tool of those in power? In fact, isn’t it.

I would be interested in a coherent response from Deep Thinkers. (1) What is your evidence of a dominant liberal media? (Please cite someone other than Lush Limbaugh.) (2) What sustains that alleged dominance? mjh

PS: I believe the world is not black and white nor even shades of gray. It is brilliantly colored. The colorblind may not get that. I admit I’m flawed in reasoning and other respects. I admit I’m in the minority in almost everything I do. I admit there are some great conservatives and some shitty liberals. I admit we are all human. More unites us than divides us, but we’re obsessed with the divisions.

This Week’s WTF?!

ABQjournal Opinion: Letters to the Editor

Free Speech Should Be Respectful

Keeping protesters away from partisan group gatherings was not invented by the current administration. Others including the Clinton administration did the same thing. One difference was that conservatives did not try to disrupt gatherings or usurp someone else’s forum. Selective indignation may be convenient for espousing partisan positions, but it is hardly objective journalism or commentary.
    RONALD G. TOYA
    Albuquerque

Ronald forgets (or ignores) the gangs officially sent to Kerry rallys armed with flip-flops in organized disruptions designed to brand Kerry in the most simplistic fashion for the benefit of dimwits. Yes, that was a respectful use of free speech.

Let’s all admit we are all selectively indignant. We minimize our own flaws and those of people we like and maximize the flaws of those we dislike or of strangers. That’s human nature for you.

But in contemplation of freedoms, I would appreciate evidence of Clinton herding conservatives into free-speech zones or Clinton supporters on horseback and in body armor chasing conservatives down the block. Ronald?

peace,
mjh

You’re Free to Speak Until A Cop Says You’re Not

Jim Scarantino writes a moving account of his personal experience with the heavy-handed, repressive assault of APD on free-speaking citizens opposed to a senseless, unnecessary war. A war which at least a few of those same cops must agree now was a mistake. The spirit of the nation — thirsty for blood and brooking no dissent — was alive and on horseback just a few weeks ago. If we’re fighting ourselves on the streets of America, what exactly did fighting “them over there” accomplish? mjh

Note: Photos are from 2003 issues of the Alibi.

alibi . september 27 – october 3, 2007

The Real Side: Déjà Vu Not All Over Again City Hall tackles police misconduct against peace protesters By Jim Scarantino

I’d come from work, still dressed in a business suit. I didn’t know then that undercover police officers had slipped in among us. But I did sense trouble coming when suddenly the cars disappeared. To prevent motorists from reading our signs, police blocked traffic on Central. Down the street I saw troops of police assembling and what looked like a SWAT van. I decided it was time to go. I headed for my car with sign in hand.

I didn’t get very far before a young police officer stepped across my path and pointed a shotgun in my face. He was terrified and shaking. I’ve always wondered what had been planted in his brain to make him view a man in a suit displaying a plea for peace sign as a threat justifying leveling his gun at my head.

After what seemed a very long time, the officer let me go. When I got home, television news was showing children inside the Frontier washing tear gas from their eyes. Out in the street police in riot gear waded into the group of people who didn’t want Americans dying in Iraq. It didn’t look like my Albuquerque. It didn’t look like America out there on Central that night.

When I learned how this month Albuquerque police harassed and intimidated peace protestors outside Kirtland Air Force Base, I thought, “Here we go again.” Mounted officers in battle gear forced their way through fragile women leaning on walkers, mothers with strollers, even people in wheelchairs. An officer ticketed only cars with pro-peace bumper stickers. Another officer drove down Gibson shouting over his speaker “Go Bush!” Police hurled insults at the group. A protester was handcuffed and locked in a patrol car, windows closed, in full sun, for more than an hour. His offense, committed only after he had been seized, seems to be kicking out a window so he could breathe.

Jeanne Pahls of Stop the War Machine, a sponsor of the event, says the organization has conducted more than 30 other protests since 2002 without a single act of violence or criminal conduct by protesters. So why the show of force by APD against grandmothers, children and the disabled?

Once again, it didn’t look like America on the streets of Albuquerque.

– – – – –

mjh’s Weblog Entry – 03/25/2003: “Operation Slackened-jaw”
Regarding the encounter between police and demonstrators that turned violent on Thursday, 3/20/03, city councilor Sally Mayer said, “I think we need to thank the police for behaving as well as they did.”

See also mjh’s Weblog Entry – 03/29/2003: “alibi on APD” for more links on this topic.

Hear! Hear!

ABQjournal Opinion: Letters to the Editor

Look Back to 2002 For Vile Advertising

    EXCUSE ME all you politicians objecting to the Gen. David Petraeus ad. Did any of you object to one of the most vile ads of all time— Georgia Sen. Max Cleland, a triple amputee Vietnam veteran, whose opponent in a 2002 campaign ad placed his photo between images of Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein?

    PEG BRINEY
    Roswell
   
It’s Not Unpatriotic To Oppose the War

    WHILE I personally don’t agree with the “betray us” ad, I find it laughable that the Republicans are so outraged and injured by it. This is the exact same tactic that was used to smear one of their own in 2000, Sen. John McCain— a Vietnam POW— and also Sen. John Kerry in 2004— both decorated veterans!

    Calling into question the patriotism of good, decent, patriotic Americans simply because they want to end the slaughter of our young men and women is reprehensible. Yet the Republicans continue to self-righteously accuse anyone who does not blindly and mindlessly agree with this president’s hysteria of being unpatriotic. I think their outrage comes more from the fact that this extreme left organization has taken a page straight from the Republican National Committee’s play book of dirty politics and used it brilliantly. Getting a taste of their own bitter medicine has left Republicans reeling. They don’t like it, but since they perfected the art, perhaps they should get used to it. …

    But with organizations like MoveOn.org now willing to mix-it-up with them, this election cycle promises to leave no mud pie left unthrown.

    YVONNE HAWPE
    Albuquerque

This Week’s WTF?!

ABQjournal Business: Letters to Outlook

Of course, we’re not taxed enough

    Further proof that people in government have lost their minds is the unapologetic call for a plastics tax by a Santa Fe city councilor.

    Yeah, like we’re not being taxed enough as it is.

    I don’t when it happened, but there’s been a complete takeover of government in this state by a bunch of bossy, busybody, (and to use the old Saturday Night Live term) anal-retentive environmentalists who worry over what we eat, what we wear, what we drive, what we smoke, and what we think.

    Using the phony crisis of environmental warming and the new green idiocy, we’re being forced to jump through every conceivable hoop these fools dream up. Couldn’t they get together and buy a life so they could get out of ours?

    About the only solution I see is a state law that demands that for every tax anybody raises, an equal amount be cut from government spending and from taxes to curtail this continually growing socialist monster that’s eating its way into our lives.

    Either that or the people in New Mexico are so stupid they deserve to have every dollar and every freedom they have taken away from them.

    Clyde J. Aragon
    Albuquerque

Speechless [updated]

Faculty works toward preserving languages by Jeremy Hunt, Daily Lobo [update]

Every two weeks, one of the world’s 7,000 languages becomes extinct.

UNM faculty is working to keep American Indian languages alive in New Mexico and trying to establish a center to help preserve them.

“The issue of language maintenance is not just some academic exercise,” said Christine Sims, a professor in the language literacy and sociocultural department. “These indigenous languages are spoken nowhere else in the world.” …

Sims said there are about 20 indigenous languages still spoken in New Mexico, and they are in danger of extinction.

Of those languages, there are three spoken only by older adults in the communities, including the Mescalero and Jicarilla pueblos, Sims said.

When a language dies, so does the culture and identity of the people who speak it, she said.

“The challenge, for the rest of us, is how do we make sure that doesn’t
happen?” she said. “These languages can’t be revitalized from any one
other source except within their community.”

The only way to
keep the languages alive is to have older generations encourage and
teach the youth to speak it, said Melissa Axelrod, a linguistics
professor who works with the Nambé tribe.

“A lot of people think
all pueblo languages are the same, but they’re completely different,”
she said. “We have this incredible, exciting diversity in New Mexico.”
– – – – –

AP: Saving endangered languages – News by Randolph E. Schmid

While there are an estimated 7,000 languages spoken around the world
today, one of them dies out about every two weeks, according to
linguistic experts struggling to save at least some of them.

Five
hotspots where languages are most endangered were listed Tuesday in a
briefing by the Living Tongues Institute for Endangered Languages and
the National Geographic Society.

In addition to northern
Australia, eastern Siberia and Oklahoma and the U.S. Southwest, many
native languages are endangered in South America – Ecuador, Colombia,
Peru, Brazil and Bolivia – as well as the area including British
Columbia, and the states of Washington and Oregon.

Losing languages means losing knowledge, says K. David Harrison, an assistant professor of linguistics at Swarthmore College.

“When
we lose a language, we lose centuries of human thinking about time,
seasons, sea creatures, reindeer, edible flowers, mathematics,
landscapes, myths, music, the unknown and the everyday.”

As many as half of the current languages have never been written down, he estimated.

That
means, if the last speaker of many of these vanished tomorrow, the
language would be lost because there is no dictionary, no literature,
no text of any kind, he said. …

Harrison said that the 83 most widely spoken languages account for
about 80 percent of the world’s population while the 3,500 smallest
languages account for just 0.2 percent of the world’s people. Languages
are more endangered than plant and animal species, he said.

Vanishing Languages Identified – washingtonpost.com By Rick Weiss, Washington Post Staff Writer

While previous analyses have focused on individual languages that have just one or a few surviving speakers, Harrison and his colleagues took a geographic approach, identifying where in the world languages are disappearing fastest. Oklahoma
and nearby areas of the American Southwest, it turns out, have an
extremely rich linguistic fabric because of the many Native American
tribes that were corralled there in the 1800s.

Today those
languages are disappearing by the month, and with them a treasure trove
of ecological insights, culinary and medicinal secrets and complex
cultural histories, including mythologies that can teach a lot about
universal human fears and aspirations, Harrison said.

“It may
seem frivolous, but mythological traditions are attempts to make sense
of the universe, and the different ways that the human mind has tried
to grapple with the unknown and the unknowable are of scientific
interest,” he said. …

Language can reveal a lot about how a culture organizes information.
In the Paraguayan Lengua language, for example, the word “11” means
literally “arrived at the foot, one,” meaning “counted 10 fingers plus
one toe.” The word for “20” means “finished the feet.”

In Siberia’s Nivkh language, each number can be said 26 ways, depending on what is being counted.