Time Magazine, CNN, and the New York Times treat politics as if it’s the high school cafeteria and deserve the ridicule and opprobrium they get.

Left by Preston on January 10th, 2008 at 11:09 pm

What’s funny to me is, the person that wrote the blurb at Time is a woman with a hyphenated last name. That the foul-mouthed sluts at shakespearessisters would find umbrage with a fellow traveler is entertainment enough for me.

Left by no2liberals on January 10th, 2008 at 11:40 pm

Umm… what’s the standard spelling for that catfight noise that insensitive people like me like to make at times like these?

Left by Martin on January 11th, 2008 at 4:04 am

What’s funny to me is, the person that wrote the blurb at Time is a woman with a hyphenated last name. That the foul-mouthed sluts at shakespearessisters would find umbrage with a fellow traveler is entertainment enough for me.

You’ve got some strange notions about women.

Left by Preston on January 11th, 2008 at 10:02 am

“Time Magazine, CNN, and the New York Times treat politics as if it’s the high school cafeteria and deserve the ridicule and opprobrium they get.”
most on this blog have been telling you this for as long as i’ve been reading it. it appears to be a sort of “dumbing down” of real news so that the left leaning audience doesn’t loose interest in the most important popularity contest of all time.

Left by adam on January 11th, 2008 at 11:54 am

Not really, Adam.

In fact I have long railed on this website against the preferred media narratives particularly stories on the inner psychology of politicians and other unknowables at the expense of actual reporting on issues. The media fixation on finding a president who “you’d like to have a beer with” has been an unmitigated disaster.

In contrast, the media criticism typically found on the right is just that they want journalists to be more conservative. There is very little criticism of the actual process of journalism, just whining over the end result of the political slant: you might notice there are a number of posts on the front page right now that echo the same types of psychologizin’ specialized by Maureen Dowd and Chris Matthews.

The conservative case for a liberal bias is pretty flimsy when you actually look at the reporting procedures used by the media as described in this mea culpa from Politico as he describes the conservative news sources that campaign journalists all keep referring to:

Check out the nicer restaurants in Manchester, N.H., or Des Moines, Iowa, in the political season and you will see the same group of journalists and pols dining together almost every night. We go to events together, make travel plans together and read each other’s work compulsively. We go to the same websites — the Drudge Report, Real Clear Politics, Time’s “The Page” — to see what each other is writing, and it’s only human nature to respond to it.

Catty speculation from journalists such as: is there room in Washington for both a Speaker Pelosi and a President Hillary? is only par for the course.

Left by Preston on January 11th, 2008 at 12:50 pm

“not really” what?
urbangrounds readers/commentors haven’t been telling you about liberal tendancies within the msm?…or
the amature dr. phil hour (vehemently opposed by you) that these left leaning pretenda news organizations provide,isn’t a dumbed down version for their popculture-obsessed audience?

“…the media criticism typically found on the right is just that they want journalists to be more conservative. ”
you’ve again obviously failed to correctly interprit conservative opinions. the ideal journalist does not slant either way, just objectively reports.

Left by adam on January 11th, 2008 at 1:27 pm

You’ve got some strange notions about women.

You have some strange notions.
I was slamming the LLL bloggers that were slamming a LLL blogger at Time.

Left by no2liberals on January 11th, 2008 at 6:08 pm

I don’t know what LLL means but I find it strange that you judge a woman’s ideological sympathies by looking at her last name rather than simply reading what she writes. Newton-Small (you, of course have no way of knowing if she was born with this name) reduced Speaker Pelosi’s decision about who to support for President into a childish catfight. Newton-Small deserves the ridicule she gets for her bad journalism- even if it comes from a woman.

(In any case, wouldn’t it be a little more educational and interesting for her readers to contemplate the fact that her House rival and ex-Clintonista Rahm Emmanuel would be empowered by a Clinton White House? Or just about any other post-junior-high explanation for the Miller endorsement?)

Left by Preston on January 11th, 2008 at 11:09 pm

LLL=Looney Left Liberal.
Some assumptions are easier than others. If she was given that name at birth, she comes from a LLL lineage, but I’m comfortable with the idea that she is one of those that wears the self-adoring moniker of progressive. That she works as a writer for Time is another clue.
Her claims about Piglosi’s position seems reasonable, considering her gargantuan ego, and Mrs. Clintons. That the foul-mouthed blogger took her to task speaks of the insecurity of the LLL bloggers, and possibly an attempt to whip another dissenting liberal voice back in line.

Left by no2liberals on January 11th, 2008 at 11:39 pm