Rubio vs Maddow: Who’s more mainstream?

All you need to know about Mad Cow is that she was born on April Fool’s Day. Fitting, doncha think?

Of course, she has absolutely no formal journalistic training, and in fact got her first job in “media’ by entering and then winning a contest.

Only in America!

Del Dolemonte on July 17, 2010 at 4:06 PM

considering the a**hats that do have formal journalistic training I’m unconvinced as to it’s overall value.

chemman on July 17, 2010 at 4:37 PM

Saw a great article by Steve McCann at American Thinker about this very issue this morning. Excerpt:

The other major enabler of President Obama is the mainstream media. When will they collectively come to their senses and begin to realize that this new and transformed America as envisioned by this President and his radical cohorts will be one that they too will have to live in? That they and their progeny will not be exempt from confiscatory taxes, onerous regulations, stagnant job creation, and a dramatically eroded and rationed health care system.

This march to the media’s present role of being in league with the Obama administration is the culmination of the good versus evil bias of modern journalism. The contemporary process of determining who were the righteous and who the villains were began over 45 years ago.

In the 1960′s a social revolution took place against historical and societal norms. An era of peace and prosperity unprecedented in the history of mankind was underway in the United States, allowing a new generation, who had never experienced hardship on a massive scale, to focus on hedonistic pursuits, self-aggrandizement and a search for meaning in their lives.

This movement was promptly seized by the true-believers of the Left as a recruiting tool; Leftists proclaimed to the gullible that the United States was an unjust, repressive tool of capitalism. The siren song of a classless society wherein all are treated fairly and there are no absolutes found eager ears. The protests against the Vietnam War and then the very necessary civil rights movement, which achieved so much, were hijacked by many of the post-depression generation into a call to overthrow all of society’s foundational standards.

The protests surrounding the Vietnam War and then Watergate, that most infamous of scandals, not only gave rise to the resignation of a President but accelerated the virulent polarization of politics and the beginning of the end of the impartial mainstream media.

As a consequence of the media’s perception of their role in ending the Vietnam War and Watergate, the press began to look upon themselves not as neutral reporters of the news but rather as a crusaders out to right the wrongs, as they perceived them, of the United States. Journalism, as taught in university and promoted by those who had been active in the 1960′s, came to be viewed not as an independent watchdog of government regardless of who was in charge but rather as a vehicle for social and economic change.

As further incentive, the journalists who successfully assumed the role of “societal avenger” were feted by their fellow scribes, became celebrities and coincidently achieved great wealth. This, in addition to any so-called noble calling to transform the United States, became a vital part of the metamorphoses of journalism from news gathering to news manipulation and the naïve promotion of a radical leftist ideology.

Over the intervening years and into the present, the far-Left effectively promoted: 1) the false and unfounded libel of a desire by conservatives to turn the United States into a theocracy and, 2) guilt for the nation’s past and one’s success. These tactics became the basis for many of the gullible in the media to promote the policies of the Progressives without understanding what in fact the end game was.

It became more important and fashionable for a majority in the media to protect their lifestyles against the “right-wing horde” descending upon them and to assuage their guilt rather than comprehend what was happening around them, or the controlling agenda they unwittingly supported.

Thus the coverage of news stories concerning conservative issues or politicians became notable for vitriol and deliberate slanting or omission of facts. Polls, commissioned by the media and easily manipulated, were substituted for news and real reporting. Every personal failure of a Republican politician was amplified into a national outcry. All civility and traditional objectivity was rejected when discussing the (predeterminedly) evil conservatives.

By comparison those politicians who said the right things relative to morals and lifestyles and used the magic phrase of “social justice” were treated in an opposite fashion — except when a story, thanks to the alternate media, became too big to ignore.

This 45 year evolution of the mainstream media culminated in the election of Barack Obama, who on the surface fulfilled all the requirements of an ideal presidential candidate for the chattering class. He was one of them — Ivy League educated, well spoken, attractive, and capable of saying all the right things designed to appeal to the myopic worldview of the New York-Washington media axis. But above all he was African-American, an opportunity to wash away the collective guilt so embedded in the psyche of the press.

Barack Obama also knew that he had those tangible and intangible factors and he used them to manipulate the press. The mainstream media willingly became, in phrase often attributed to Lenin, useful idiots. Obama’s background and radicalism were ignored and all effort was exerted to tamp down negative stories to make certain he was elected.

Yet after a year and a half of the Obama administration, the very members of the media that so prostituted themselves are being treated with outright disdain by their Idol, and they will be among those to suffer the most under his policies.

Del Dolemonte on July 17, 2010 at 4:54 PM