Glenn Greenwald Nukes Versailles On The Potomac

Could this be what Glenn's Upcoming Book will center on?

To David Brooks, lobbyists are nothing more than "experts" who provide important and helpful insight to legislators as they earnestly try to craft laws in the public interest. Not only are lobbyists a positive influence, but they're actually indispensable. The fact that these so-called "experts" are paid by the wealthiest corporate factions to ensure that the laws Congress passes are designed to serve their narrow, insular interests -- and that this is accomplished by pouring money into the coffers of the very people who write the laws so that they're writing the laws that serve these interests -- never makes it into Brooks' understanding of this process. Thus, he is baffled that anyone would find lobbyist-domination of our political process to be at all objectionable.

(...)

Those with rewarding positions inside an imperial court (such as Brooks) naturally view the masses outside of the court with condescension and contempt -- as ignorant, dirty, irritating rubes who need to be pacified with empty, deceitful words ("campaign blather," as Brooks admiringly calls it), in order to keep them placated and believing (at least enough to enable hope) that the imperial court actually cares what they think. But all Serious, savvy, sophisticated royal court members know that none of that is supposed to matter. Not only do political elites have the right to ignore the claims they make to pacify the masses, they have the affirmative obligation to do that. That's how the worst nightmare of the political establishment is avoided: namely, having mass sentiment affect and infect what they do.

(...)

The most significant fact of American political life is that political journalists (of all people) see their role primarily as defenders of, servants to, spokespeople for the Washington establishment. That's how they obtain all of their rewards and remain relevant. The concept of journalists as watchdogs over political power has been turned completely on its head by power-revering servants like David Brooks, who is anything but atypical (indeed, there's a whole new generation of Beltway journalists who have learned and are eagerly replicating this model). Brooks is about as typical and illustrative as it gets. They benefit substantially from the prevailing rules of political power and, thus, their only concern is to preserve and strengthen it and protect it from the growing dissatisfaction and anger of the peasant class. The more they do that, the more they are rewarded.

Read the whole article here. The quotes that Greenwald excerpts from his excellent discussion with Jay Rosen on Bill Moyers Journal are worth a look.

Jonathan Singer also wrote about out of touch media elites today:

Perhaps more than ever, there is a real divide between what the chattering class inside the Beltway is saying and what the people of this country are saying. We saw the beginnings of this during the campaign, when despite the fact that John McCain was deemed to be winning the news cycles -- indeed, his campaign seemed to care more about winning "Hardball" than it did about reaching 270 electoral votes -- Barack Obama nevertheless continued to lead in the polls, both nationwide and in the key states. Now we're seeing it again, as the establishment media focuses on the less meaningful back and forth while at the same time overlooking the larger picture being grasped by the public -- that is that President Obama is succeeding, in terms of both moving forward his policy agenda and bringing two-thirds of the country along with him in his effort.

After every debate the pundits would pontificate about how well McCain did and how he won that debate. They'd harrumph about Obama being out of touch with the "real" America. They'd all agree that he needed to do a lot more if he wanted to attract "heartland" voters.

The the polls would start coming in. Every frickin time they'd show, by a big majority, how badly Obama kicked McCain's butt. The assholes would make excuses until it became clear that these polls really did reflect the opinions of ordinary Americans and Obama had a far better handle on what we all wanted than either McCain or the pundits.

And I'd just sit there and LMAO.

they attempt to 'analyze'. They are as out of touch as those they are supposed to be objective about. It's an echo chamber.