The Media's Kindred Spirits
By Vincent Fiore (04/20/05)
On April 10, 2005, Congressman Chris Shays (R-CT) stated to the Associated Press that embattled House majority leader Tom DeLay should step down from leadership. Shays, who feels that “Tom's conduct is hurting the Republican Party, is hurting this Republican majority and it is hurting any Republican who is up for re-election,” remains the only elected Republican to federal office to ask for Tom DeLay to step aside. (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050410/D89CP0K80.html)
That same day, the Associated Press blasted this headline across the news wires: “DeLay Needs to Answer Questions.” If one were only to read the headlines, one might think the inspiration for that quote, Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), was condemning Delay for his supposed “unethical conduct.” (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050410/D89CLA881.html)
But, scanning headlines and foregoing the read is exactly what the media expects of readers. . The media count on the hustle and bustle of life and a shallow span of attention given over to the mundane. One only has to read a bit further to find Senator Santorum unequivocally stating that “from everything I've heard, again, from the comments and responding to those, is everything he's done was according to the law” and that Tom DeLay “has not been compromised.” Truth, anyone?
Predictably, the Washington Post then ran a story by Dana Milbank on April 14,2005 titled “The Loneliest Republican,” which essentially portrays Shays as the type of Republican the media loves best: a soft-spoken scold of the party and trend-bucking maverick. ( www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A51336-2005Apr13.html?nav=rss_politics)
Later that same day, Senator John McCain (R) sat with MSNBC’s Chris Matthews in RFK Stadium in Washington and declared his intention to vote against his party with regard to changing senate rules in the use of the filibuster. Matthews, who has probably seen more of McCain in the last six years than the senator’s wife has, did his best to appear thunderstruck upon hearing McCain say “No, I will vote against the nuclear option.” (www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7505537/)
Imagine Dana Milbank and Chris Matthews cooing with delight over the “party disunity” of the GOP and the “turmoil” this must be causing for President Bush’s agenda? Certainly, this is a problem of some importance for the President and the Republican rank and file on Capitol Hill. But, it is not the great chasm of doom for the party that the mainstream media purports it to be.
When one considers the source for the media’s somewhat evangelical hunt of Tom DeLay and its indignant pooh-poohing over the very thought of Senator Bill Frist pulling the trigger on the “nuclear option,” one may remember that the world according to Shays and McCain is not one of principle, but one of populism.
For the mainstream media, that is business-as-usual. Never mind the actual proof (as in Tom DeLay’s case) of documented and egregious law breaking. It is the seriousness of the charge that counts, and how many page-one stories the media can throw out to a public that loves the blood-sport spectacle of scandal.
In the case of Congressman Chris Shays, here is a classic example of a northeastern liberal Republican. Because he and others like him are cowed into compliance by the editorial pages of the New York Times and the like, it is far easier to lie on his sword than to present it for battle. No real Republican, or even fair-minded Independent, would throw his majority leader to the wolves over unproven accusations and alleged wrongdoing.
For Senator John McCain, this is just a continuation of campaign 2000, and his love affair with the Washington media elite, and theirs with him. Though McCain and his loyalists among the chattering classes believe that he could have been president, if not for that dumb-as-a-fencepost Bush, the sheer ego of the man is enough to sustain him until 2008, and then who knows?
But, it seems that we never hear about those “courageous,” “principled,” and “insightful” “mavericks” of the Democratic party. Unlike Republicans, who legislatively flirt with the opposite party, Democrats who do likewise are seldom heard from, or reported on.
A case in point: Senator Ben Nelson, (D-NE), is trying to work out a deal with Senator Trent Lott, (R-MI) to allow President Bush’s stalled judicial nominees to receive a floor vote after a predetermined amount of time, once they are voted out of committee. (www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/041305/nelson.html)
Senator Nelson is plainly going against the grain of his Democratic party. Other Democratic Senators share Nelson’s angst over Senate minority leader Harry Reid’s scorched earth position regarding the presidents’ nominees. Senators Bill Nelson and Ken Salazar are looking for a way out of Reid’s own “nuclear option” of shutting down Senate business, as are Senators Mark Pryor and Blanche Lincoln.
All Senators mentioned above are sufficiently Democratic, are in positively “Red” states, and are virtually ignored by a mainstream media that will continually trumpet the actions of one GOP congressman from Connecticut and one GOP senator from Arizona. Pertaining to today’s journalism and what passes for it, this is not just expected, but a media right-of-passage.
In the end, two things happen here: Tom DeLay survives the attempted decapitation by the media, and Bill Frist enacts new rules regarding filibusters. So, when Senate minority leader Harry Reid shuts down the Senate as he said he would, will the media protect these “maverick” Republicans to whom they devote so much glowing ink, or will they condemn the Republican party as a whole, and blame it for the government shutdown?
Why not? After all, if all these maverick and courageous Republicans lost power, what principled and insightful politicians would be left for the media to laud accolades over? Everyone knows, no “maverick” Democrats exist in Washington.
(Printer friendly version) Email: Vincent Fiore
