Ok, so maybe guest bloggers aren't all bad. Atrios is gone (again, without permission I'm sure), and he's got a few others to fill the void. And I surely would never have clicked on his others' blog, and thus would have missed this post from guesty Attaturk regarding allegations that Bush's latest terror victory is a complete sham based on misunderstanding and similar sounding names. And it's pretty bad.
And it reminded me of what is truly wrong with our media. First off, they're not trying to be such complete boobs. I can assure you of that. Were they trying to be so biased, they'd surely fail. And it's not that they're in the bag (not most of them, anyway).
The problem with our media is that they think like liberals, but they haven't got the brains to process information properly and believe so deeply in a subjective, relative world that they're constantly adrift and have no idea if the foundation they're using as their vantage point is solid or not. And more often than not, it is not a solid vantage point; but rather one of Rove's creations. But without a solid foundation for your ideas, you can't possibly know anything, and are helpless to those around you. And thus, our media.
The Liberal Media
And yes, you heard me right. I said they think like liberals. And they do. They don't necessarily push any liberal agenda. And they certainly like to smear Democrats more than Republicans, but that's not because they're Republicans but because they think like liberals.
And what I mean by that is that they're trying to be fair. They're trying to see both sides. Think of it like an affirmative action program to help idiotic conservatives sound less idiotic. They've been told that they've been biased against conservatives for a long time, so they're going out of their way to appear unbiased. But it's a hopeless and thankless task that can never be fulfilled because most conservatives see bias as anything that isn't coming from Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity.
And part of the problem is that journalists DO consider themselves to be liberals. And that's why they rarely attack liberal ideas, but love to attack liberal or Democrat politicians and policies. Because policies are flawed and politicians are fallible; and neither can hold up to the imagined ideals of our liberal media (epitomized by the adulterous JFK).
In their minds, if they attack Clinton, Gore, and Kerry, it will satisfy the idealism they cherished when they were younger. And as such, it helps rationalize their otherwise Republican attitudes desiring tax cuts, war, and the revamping of Social Security. Thus, if they stay more ideologically pure than Dem politicians, it justifies their own ideologically impure thoughts.
And they actually feel guilty about being liberal, which is why they're trying to over-compensate in Bush's direction.
Desperately Seeking Success
And in this case, what we see is that the press wants to prove its fairness towards Bush. To prove that they're not so biased that they won't praise him. So they actively seek out ways to praise him. But the problem is that Bush is just such a complete fuck-up that he can't do anything right. He's got a galaxy-sized chip on his shoulder regarding his own inferiority, and so everything he touches becomes crap. Kind of like a reverse Midas.
And so the media keeps wanting to find ways of proving their nonpartisan status (an impossible feat by itself), and the Bush Admin keeps denying them any valid reasons to do so. But until they can finally satisfy that itch of Bush support, they'll never give up their hopeless quest to praise Bush.
Hell, it's almost as if Bush doesn't want to do anything right, out of fear that he'll satisfy their quest and will start telling the truth about him. Or is that just too much speculation?
And so here we are again. Rather than doing the tiniest amount of research which could have easily uncovered the fact that this "number three Al-Queda" guy wasn't even on the FBI Most Wanted list; we have the media rushing out to repeat a story solely based upon what the Whitehouse told them.
And they now think that's their role: to take dictation and give Bush's side of the story. And if we wanted any research done on Bush's claim, we needed to do that ourselves; though they'd certainly attribute such work to "Bush's critics". Otherwise, they'll use this as just another opportunity to prove that they're not Bush-haters who reflexively hate Bush. And to prove to themselves that they're fair-minded liberals who are willing to listen to both sides...even if both sides are coming from the right.
And all because of our liberal media and their desire to make the idiotic and improbable sound fair-minded and sane. I believe Hitler used such tactics to his advantage too, though if you want to make any Bush-Hitler connections, you're on your own. Happy Mother's Day.