Commentary Magazine


Contentions

Media Double Standards

Reminders of the mainstream media’s egregious political double standard vis-à-vis liberals and conservatives come on an almost daily basis. The latest is this week’s New York magazine, the cover of which features a head shot of John McCain smack in the middle of a bulls-eye target, accompanied by this charming teaser copy: “Target: Bush-Backing, Surge-Loving, Economically Clueless Geezer.”

Just try to imagine the frenzy of outrage that would ensue if a right-wing journal were to put on its cover Barack Obama’s face in a bulls-eye, along with the words “Target: Jeremiah Wright-Backing, Surrender-Loving, Foreign Policy-Clueless Slickster.”

The liberal blogosphere would suffer a nuclear meltdown and publications like…well, like New York would immediately commission articles on such an incendiary, and potentially tragic, choice of words and imagery and what it says about the scary intolerance–the “bitterness,” if you will–of Red-State America. Meanwhile, the New York Times would torture readers with a numbing slew of front-page news and “news analysis” pieces (think Augusta National Golf Club circa 2002-2003) on American bigotry, Republican sleaziness, and the approaching racial apocalypse.

But what about Obama’s condescending remarks on middle-class, small-town voters and their values? His words are a precise reflection of what liberal elitists have been thinking and saying for decades (with relative impunity in the private sector but at great cost during presidential campaigns). Yet similarly demeaning generalizations about subgroups on liberals’ endangered species list invariably result in orgies of self-righteous denunciation.

There’s something in the liberal mindset that causes otherwise intelligent and rational people to view small towns and their residents with inordinate fear and loathing. It’s why Hollywood, the epicenter of pop-culture liberalism, has long portrayed “townies” in a sinister light and often in need of help provided by their big-city superiors. In his 1979 book The View From Sunset Boulevard, Ben Stein devoted a chapter to “Small Towns on Television.” While a few of the writers and producers Stein interviewed had some positive things to say about small towns, the general attitude was highly negative and derogatory. “There are a lot of dumb, violent people in small towns,” declared the producer Garry Marshall (he of such brainy fare as “Happy Days,” “Laverne & Shirley,” “Mork & Mindy,” and “Joanie Loves Chachi”). One unnamed producer told Stein that small towns are “the kinds of places where the Ku Klux Klan could grow today . . . right now.” Asked whether she saw small towns as “frightening,” the late producer Meta Rosenberg “at first said ‘No,’ and then added, ‘Jesus, they did vote for Nixon.’”

Indeed they did. As, in 1972, did the majority of Americans in 49 of 50 states. Twelve years later, Ronald Reagan, another Republican reviled by the Left, scored another 49-to-1 knockout (with Minnesota taking Massachusetts’s place as the lone entry in the losing column.) But in the eyes of liberal elitists, unless we pull the Democratic lever, we’re all bitter small-town Americans.

Introducing Commentary Complete

13 Responses to “Media Double Standards”

  1. Seth Swirsky says:

    Thomas Friedman wrote today:

    “That is why this voter is hoping Obama will swing for the fences. But he also has to remember to run the bases. George Bush swung for some fences, but he often failed at the most basic element of leadership — competent management and follow-through.

    George Bush took on the Taliban and crushed them in the aftermath of 9/11.
    George Bush took on al Qaeda and crushed them in Iraq.
    George Bush took on the tyrant Saddam Hussein and deposed him.
    George Bush took on better test scores for the nations’ students and succeeded.
    George Bush TRIED to take on reforming Social Security, something no president has tried. The Democrats killed it and openly celebrated that “win” over Bush (at the country’s expense).

    George Bush “swung for the fences” at the big stuff AND “ran the bases”, succeeding at most things he took on. Yet, leftists like Friedman have a deep need to paint Bush as a failure, as they did Sarah Palin, Ronald Reagan etc. They only like Republicans who fail (George H.W. Bush, John McCain).

    Thank God for George W. Bush!

  2. myna says:

    Friedman is DNC propagandist like so many other liberal journalists. They need their bread and butter.

  3. BIG PICTURE says:

    American conservatives, for the most part, are delusional people. Regurgitating Republican and Israeli sound bites. American liberals are slightly better but that’s like comparing a rapist to a sexual deviant.

    I spent years debating these people and I will not spend as much time debating anymore but just lay out the plain truth.

    The surge was a desperate effort to plug up a total failure. That it had an effect in reducing casualties was due mostly to other causes (a big one was the the Iraqi are tire of Al Queda killing them for fun). The reason Bush undertook the surge has little to do with our nation but ,as always, was the selfish reason to boost his legacy. If you still think that Bush is an honorable man, you are, well, delusional.

  4. Alex says:

    Bush wrecked the economy, that’s his legacy. Bush inherited surpluses and leaves behind financial ruin.

  5. Alexander Almasov says:

    Tiny (and few) pixels to amuse the oligonoid and the demented parrot (3,4) that follows it.