Positioning himself left of what, again?
So when Russ Feingold indicates support for gay marriage, he's "positioning himself to the left of possible 2008 rivals." When right-wingers say wacky shit, it doesn't seem like they're portrayed as positioning themselves to the right of anything.
(link via atrios)
(link via atrios)
posted by $!# at 4/05/2006 01:07:00 PM
3 Comments:
I'm not sure that's right; all the press I read about McCain's visit to Liberty U., for example, discusses how he's trying to curry favor with the Right, or with the Christian Right, in preparation for 2008. I've also read press on Sam Brownback and how he's positioning himself to the right of his 2008 rivals. Of course, they usually fail to mention that Brownback is looking to position himself to the right of Cardinal Richelieu....
The "currying favor" thing I see a lot. But that's different from being right of something.
I haven't seen any coverage of Brownback yet (though this makes him seem like quite a reactionary).
So I might just be missing it. Also I'm unquestionably more sensitive towards an anti-progressive bias.
Either way, I'll be keeping an eye out and angrily shaking my fist at the screen...
I think this is as much an issue of sloppy journalism as it is of the traditional right-wing media bias. This is sort of an inverse of Bush getting up and saying "My critics say X," where X is some straw man no one actually said, but the press repeats it unchallenged. Goes together with the whole "Crazy bloggers say Y," without saying who they are, or the "White House officials, who wished to remain unnamed, say Hillary's a lesbian" type bullshit. It's all just sloppy journalism serving the purposes of those in power.
If reporters wanted to differentiate themselves from the blogosphere, of course, they'd say "Feingold may be attempting to court the support of the netroots and civil rights advocates within the Democratic party, such as [fill in the blank], who were dismayed by earlier Presidential nominees -- Bill Clinton in 1996 and John Kerry in 2004 -- endorsing discriminatory national marriage policies." Personally, I think it's pretty unlikely we'll see that happen soon.
Post a Comment
<< Home