 |
 |
   Twenty years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, Gnter Grass still thinks reunification was a bad idea.
 Forty years of writing from Taylor Branch, James Fallows, Katherine Boo, Marjorie Williams, Joshua Micah Marshall, and more.
 With help from Washington, the for-profit college industry is loading up millions of low-income students with debt they'll never pay off.
 The best recent memoir from republican Washington is a hoax. That should tell you something.
|
   |
|
|
November 7, 2009
IT'S ALWAYS SUNNY IN WEEKLY STANDARD LAND.... Jonathan Chait had a great item the other day on the defining characteristic of one of the key Republican news outlets: the Weekly Standard.
It is a curious phenomenon. I understand the purpose of National Review, even though I find it offensive. Its writers and editors believe their ideas are the right ones, and are committed to presenting their case (a case I find deceptive, incoherent, and misguided). I can also understand the purpose of Fox News, even though I think it makes a mockery of American journalism. There's an audience for a network that will present current events through a Republican lens, and FNC caters to the niche. But the Weekly Standard is just a cheerleader in print. Chait and Noah Kristula-Green pulled together some classic examples from recent years. Last year, for example, the magazine assured readers that John McCain was likely to win the presidency and the "new and improved" Republican brand -- which "President Bush has helped" -- would help stem congressional losses. In 2007, the Standard said Republicans should be optimistic about the 2008 elections. In August 2006, it said the same about the midterms (you know, the cycle when Democrats re-claimed the majority in both chambers). In July 2006, the Standard assured readers that George W. Bush may be "on his way to renewed popularity." Indeed, this morning, I swung by the Stardard's site, and the lead story was from Fred Barnes, arguing that all recent current events are "good news for Republicans -- extremely good news." Giving Republicans a copy of the Weekly Standard is a bit like giving them a doll that says, "Everything is going to be all right" every time you squeeze it. —Steve Benen 10:30 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (10)Comments
Corporate culture has been refining that genre for years to keep "human resources" compliant and "happy." It is the glorious wonderful "way of life" we have here in our company -- it is the bestest. Posted by: neill on November 7, 2009 at 10:32 AM | PERMALINKEvery Repiglicans reality is defined by absolute delusions that they need to 'believe' in order to have any chance to function. They are dependent on creating scapegoats to target in order to sustain these delusions. And when these delusions get exposed they manage to create yet more delusions in order to justify the delusion that was exposed. FOR THESE REASONS EVERY REPIGLCIAN WHEN SPEAKING SHOULD BE FORCE TO SQUEEZE A SQUEAKY TOY UNTIL THEY ARE DONE SPEAKING. Posted by: storsmkies on November 7, 2009 at 10:44 AM | PERMALINKThe Weakly Standard is just speaking to it's readership's tendency toward fundamentalist/authoritarian thinking. It soothes them and helps them avoid all that messy ctitical analysis and questioning stuff. Posted by: bikelib on November 7, 2009 at 10:49 AM | PERMALINKI'd like to squeeze the WS a lot harder around the ...um...neck. Posted by: E L on November 7, 2009 at 10:50 AM | PERMALINKThe WS has a few other functions: Constantly screaming about the MSM being the "liberal press". That way, anytime anything is printed that doesn't favor Republicans - they can scream "SEE - liberal press! Don't listen to them, WE have the correct version." Or, revising history in real time to make GW look good or Reagan look like the saint of the planet. And, promoting the idea that the more money the top 0.1% of the country has, the better off everyone will be - tax cuts cure everything! Etc. Posted by: Mark-NC on November 7, 2009 at 10:58 AM | PERMALINKany magazine that publishes fred barnes can't be taken seriously... Posted by: mudwall jackson on November 7, 2009 at 1:47 PM | PERMALINK"It's unclear to me why the subscribers of that magazine pay money to be the subjects of a disinformation campaign" That's a good question to ask Jonathan Chait (at TNR) of his own magazine's readers. People like having their instincts, biases and racism acknowledged and legitimized with smarmy chin-scratching pseudo-intellectual justifications. Top articles by Marty Peretz right now are "This was an act of Jihad" (about the Ft. Hood shootings), one asking, "Mr. President, "which side are you really on?", i.e., either with the democracy protesters or with the Iranian government, and "A Huge Majority of Americans Would Support Military Action Against Iran", which speaks for itself. Posted by: flubber on November 7, 2009 at 2:51 PM | PERMALINKThe Russians will be pushed back from Berlin in a glorious victory, and our wonder weapons will allow us to go on and conquer the world! Posted by: Der Fuhrer on November 7, 2009 at 3:08 PM | PERMALINKjust wondering: when the doll says "everything is going to be all right," does it sound like bob marley? Posted by: dj spellchecka on November 7, 2009 at 3:50 PM | PERMALINKYrs ago the repub conservatives invested heavily in think tanks, propaganda PACs, news organizations and media cheerleaders. For awhile this repub propaganda bombardment seemed to work but after years of lying, misinformation and just being dead wrong on all their projections speculations and predictions their influence is waning. You just can't depend on anything they say. The only way to not know how un-credible these groups have become (including Fox news) is to not want to know. Same with the entire repub party...the tactics of choice just aren't working any more due to the results of multiple exposures. Posted by: bjobotts on November 7, 2009 at 4:24 PM | PERMALINKPost a comment
November 2009
October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 |
|
|
    |
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
