Joe Conason: If D.C. Pundits Say 'Stop,' Go (Americans sick of unchecked & unaccountable Presidency)

http://www.observer.com/20070402/20070402_Joe_Conason_opinions_conason.asp

If D.C. Pundits Say ‘Stop,’ Go
By Joe Conason

Someday the Democrats may learn an important lesson about the collective wisdom of the media in the nation’s capital: On important questions of policy and politics, the Washington press corps is almost always wrong. They are always full of opinions about everything from clothing, haircuts and marital problems to political tactics, but the safest course is always to ignore their advice.

At the moment, the most popular line among the certified pundits is that the Congressional Democrats are in danger of displaying excessive zeal in probing Bush administration corruption—and specifically the apparent politicization of the federal law-enforcement system by the White House and the Justice Department.

- snip -

But the Washington punditry has been reliably wrong about everything of consequence for many years, from Whitewater to weapons of mass destruction. For any sane politician, the “biggest risk” is listening to these people.

- snip -

Every poll shows that American voters want Congress to fulfill its constitutional mandate to oversee the executive branch, which ran amok under the flaccid reign of former Speaker Dennis Hastert. Most Americans are sick of this unchecked and unaccountable Presidency, and they show no signs of impatience with Democratic efforts to rein in the White House.

MORE

editing and updating of it, as their life's work.

The day they stop their over-reaching and their lies and distortions lapse into history, will be the day they are reined in by the legislature. And by "over-reaching", I obviously mean "massive over-reaching"; they'll always be a tool of Western geopolitical propaganda, to some extent, as well as in terms of domestic affairs. But very, very much less.

the robber barons. Why would anyone listen to them.

nd informed the readers of The New York Times that “the biggest question is, how far can Democrats go in opposing this president? The biggest risk is going so far that they feel the sting of a backlash—of being transformed from the fresh new face of change to the latest cast of Washington players enmeshed in partisan wrangling.”

This is why:

1. No one should listen to anything Nagoureny has to say ans

2. Why his columns belong on the editorial page- and should NOT be masquerading as "news" in the NY Times.

just by reading the headline and the first paragraph or two. His copy is so predictably slanted that you don't even have to click on the link to know!

(The same is true with Brownstein at the LA Times, who recently got taken to task for major conflicts of interest).

It's insulting when they don't even bother to be subtle.

taken to task? Please tell.

What is amazing is that no matter how wrong they are they are still considered "experts" and worthy of airtime. People who were "right" on these issues are considered "fringe".

In Washington up is down and down is up provided that there is a mainstream media consensus on the matter.

The guy has been totally wrong about every single thing he has said for the last six years. But there he sits, soiling a Sunday morning news show as an unctuous host asks him for his prognosis on Iraq. Insane!

Like it or not what Cheney says is news. He is also a known quantity.

It's guys like Perle and Feith and Wolfowitz who were so terribly wrong yet somehow are still considered experts, also all of the mainstream media types who bought into their lies and the prevailing wisdom of the time and were wrong, absolutely, phenomenally wrong yet for reasons I don't understand have not been transferred to writing obituaries.

As for those who were right about the war from the getgo I get the impression that many of these media and political types have a certain resentment toward them. Like Carville said about Howard Dean (and I'm paraphrasing pretty losely) you can't be right too often in Washington and expect people to take you seriously.

all of these hacks' quotes that were wrong over the years.

posted on DU a couple of days ago. It was from the spring of 2003 ("Mission Accomplished!") and it contained the deathless quotes of various high-profile print and television pundits. I'll see if I can track it down again and post a link.

This simple column outlines perhaps the most deeply disturbing truth of the Bush Occupation of America.

That the media, by and large, are working almost directly for the Loyal Bushies.

The Loyal Bushies dare not try Soviet-style KGB thuggery openly (yet) but as we have seen, Operation Mackingbird lucre and plain old Orwellian linguistic assaults, not to mention the death of the Fairness Docrtine as well as other persuasive methods, have reduced our media to a shattered rubble.

Even NOW, with the sewer stink of corruption and contempt finally boiling up, they cannot bring themselves to represent the side of Loyal Americans, choosing the side of Loyal Bushies over their own country and countrymen almost every time.

They continue to repeat memes which originated in the basement of the RNC. They are instrumental in "catapulting the propaganda" and I think it is safe to say that Chimpoleon could not have gotten away with half as much as he did if the American Press didn't so thoroughly resemble a watery version of Soviet Pravda (again, they dare not come out ham-fisted but must be so much more subtle..."Crisis? What crisis?").

thanks for posting

They are now pretty much hanging out there naked.

Memo to Democratic candidates and leaders: Ignore the pseudo-pundits and follow your hearts!

"By now, the Democrats should know that when these soothsayers warn against your present course, it is best to keep going straight ahead. And when they complain that you’re barking up the wrong tree, it is time to bark louder."

Thanks Hissy!

On my bad days I believe this is deliberate. However, there are a few out there that don't accept the fallacious framing and they're either considered too fringe or not backed up by the party leaders. Kucinich and Murtha come to mind although there are others.

The saddest and most sickening fact in all this is that the punditry appear again to be trying not just to defend this abominable and scandle-ridden administration, but are actively seeking to stand in the way of the Democrats doing the Will of the People and getting to the truth about them.

I thought the so-called "4th Estate" was supposed to be the last bastion of hope for discovering truth about those in power... rather it seems they are out in the 4th dimension with no connect to real-world issues whatsoever.

Shameful punditry! (and so "librul"... NOT!) :puke:

Want to back the PResident - that is their only perspective on any issue.

"Congress today came out against the President"

"This morning, Senator Feinstein took the lead against the President's appointed AG when she..."

And of course about 30% of the people only do want to back the President. (Any other course is seen as TREASON) They see doing anything else as paramount to kicking the Sun God in the crotch and no good populace would ever have an inclination to do that

Re >>MSM takes the stance that the majority of the American people
Want to back the PResident - that is their only perspective on any issue.<<

Then the opposite is true: The MSM takes the position that the majority of the American people want to see "the President" impeached and removed from office--even if they don't.

With someone other than his wife - and no Rebublican has ever done that, have they?

Conason is pointing out this rich, unmined piece of advice!

:kick: