Why Recent Books Seem Dated

Let me pre-editorialize by stating that I generally dislike the standard book review. Is it the format, the formality, or the formula? All of the above. 

Here is a recurring theme that I will recycle from time to time: Something happened in Obama's runup to the presidency that marked a change in Western Civilization. The biased news media cranked up the partisan thermostat and memories of a pre-inferno living room are but a memory.

It was as if the hometown refs had tired of their brittle-boned team's anemic efforts, and they took it upon themselves to perform lay-ups in the Visitor's basket. The victorious fourth estate would never abandon their referee jerseys. They would scrub  their silliest, gushiest, most inane Obama praise from YouTube and feigned objectivity would stage a comeback from time to time. But when summoned, the player-refs would sink as many baskets as needed to raise another banner to the ceiling.

The self-adoring press flexed their muscles in 2008 and let the world know that they would decide the outcome of America's presidential election. They would establish the divinity of Barack Obama and identify the organic racism festering in even the gentlest of his critics. The hive media would hammer home the illegitimacy of the 2016 presidential election and the hyper-legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election. They would decide all that was significant about COVID, from its origins, to its dispersal, to its likelihood of infection, to its severity of infection, from the efficacy and safety of the newly-created vaccines to the incompetence, stupidity and criminal recklessness of Pfizer skeptics, from the efficacy of masks to...the rules of the game had changed. The before and after photos prompt the query: Is that the same model?

This brings us to two interesting books that try to make sense of the Obama coronation. I recently gave away my copies of both these books. I can recommend them highly but...they do not age well. 

The first epistle is "A Slobbering Love Affair: The True (And Pathetic) Story of the Torrid Romance Between Barack Obama and the Mainstream Media" by Bernard Goldberg.

The second journal is "Obama Zombies: How the Liberal Machine Brainwashed My Generation" by Jason Mattera.

Both of these works pierce the bullseye. If you want hard-hitting media criticism from a self-professed liberal, Goldberg delivers. If you want vignettes of shamelessly-stupid adoration for Barack Obama, Mattera delivers. The question in hindsight is, are any of these things revelatory?

Both Mattera and Goldberg seem to believe in a return to normalcy. There seems to be the wish, even the expectation, that the subjects will wake up to a Kevorkian-level hangover, take the pulse of the mysterious person in bed next to them, and with a sigh of relief ask aloud, "What was I not thinking?" The Jimmy Olsens would rededicate themselves to truth and objectivity and the Obama Zombies would cultivate the subtle joys of common sense. Hah!

Corrupt media and mindless followers are now fixtures of the American landscape. Not ubiquitous as cell phones but plentiful enough to photobomb every other snapshot. Goldberg and Mattera harken back to an era when shame was possible, and redemption was desirable. For these reasons, the aforementioned books seem hopelessly dated.

Whither The Obot?

Houston, we have a problem. Sixty two thousand Americans worshipping a cult figure would be a news story. Sixty two million Americans worshipping a cult leader is the new normal.

This is not the return of Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter or FDR. Nope. This is more like Jim Jones rising from the grave and snaking his way into the White House.

Whither the Obot? Is his loyalty unending? Is his love unconditional? Is his faith in his messiah unyielding? The answers seem to be yes, yes and yes.

The human race has a long history of leader worship and the leaders always prove themselves to be human and unworthy of adoration. The faithful always look stupid in retrospect. Oh but the bliss they knew at the time!

The American spirit was traditionally skeptical of kings and emperors and wannabe messiahs. Times have changed.

These things do not usually end well. I suspect this mass idolatry will also crash and burn. But don't let me kill your buzz.

WHEN REALITY LAMPOONS PARODY, WE ARE ALL IN TROUBLE

Media Monday: Goldberg and O'Reilly

WHO ARE THESE NAZI TEA-BAGGERS?

Horny Elitist Broads

"THE VIEW" REDUX

I had trouble embedding this vid so I apologize for taking you offsite. Be sure and return just as soon as you watch the vid. Don't dawdle. We are watching you and taking notes.
http://www.clamshare.com/v/249_the_biased_view_-_obama_and_mccain_compared

Bernard Goldberg on C-SPAN 3

I don't see how anyone with even a slightly open mind can watch this and not be deeply disturbed. Maybe if the media stacked the deck for my guy, I would be happy. But I hope not. Yes, I want to win, but I don't want the umpires to fix the outcome. Then again, I don't drink Kool Aid.

BERNARD GOLDBERG SPEAKS THE TRUTH!

Bernard Goldberg on C-SPAN 2

NO ONE REFUTES GOLDBERG. THEY IGNORE HIM.

Bernard Goldberg on C-SPAN 1

This is a great speech. It is edited and I can't speak for the editor but the uncut version has a lot of tangents and that might be why he tightened it up a bit. Goldberg is of the school of public speaking that says you should always open with a humorous anecdote or two. Goldberg's quips are funny but I am offering up the edited version. In an era of humor ubiquity many of us just want to devour the entree.

Ziegler on "The View"

The obstacles faced by anyone who opposes Obama are daunting. It's not just AP-fed newspapers and the alphabet news networks. It is BET, MTV, Comedy Central, late night TV and yes, daytime TV.

OBAMA UBER ALLES!

A Modest Proposal

I propose that all Republican Party officials, office holders and candidates boycott the mainstream media at least through the 2012 elections. That is, they refrain from speaking with all members of the news media and they no longer advertise in the mainstream media. There was a time just a few years ago when adopting such a strategy would be political suicide. Now, failure to adopt such a strategy is political suicide.

Anyone who has read Bernard Goldberg's “A Slobbering Love Affair” or has viewed “Media Malpractice” or has just paid attention knows that media are stacking the deck for Obama. Even now, roughly 100 days into the Obama Administration, we know more about Joe the Plumber than we do Barack Hussein Obama.

We don't know what Obama wrote as an undergrad. We don't know the identity of hundreds of his donors. We don't know why a Chicago hospital would pay Mrs. Obama over $300k to fulfill the duties of a Diversity Director. We don't know much about Obama's relationship with Ayers and Dohrn and Rezko and Khalidi. We don't know much about ACORN but what we do know is pretty disturbing if you oppose voter fraud. We hear a lot about the collapse of this company or that but we don't hear much about Obama's close associates who played a significant role in the collapse of Fannie Mae.

Can anyone say with a straight face that Sarah Plain and Barack Obama were treated identically by the media? Even after the election they are trying to dig up dirt on Palin's family. Meanwhile, Obama's life is one long puff piece. His titanic budget is barely scrutinized.

To paraphrase Bernard Goldberg, if the referees of the Michigan-Ohio State football game decided that it would make for a better story if Michigan won and they called the game in such a way as to determine the outcome, there would be public outrage. But it would not just be the Ohio State fans who would be angry. The Michigan fans would be furious as well. People know full well that if referees determine the outcome of a football game, you no longer have football. If the referees of democracy determine elections, you no longer democracy.

So how would candidates receive exposure without appearing on “Larry King Live” or “Meet the Press?” Answer: Republicans need to form their own channels of communication on the Internet. Republicans need to move underground. Let the Democrats have the Associated Press fed newspapers. Let them have the alphabet networks, including Fox. If a member of the media elite wishes to speak to you, Mr. GOP candidate, about this or that, refer them to your website.

As an extension to the “no press” policy, GOP voters should boycott, banish or vote against any candidate who purchases newspaper ads or TV spots. Those candidates are cuddling up to the enemy. Worse, they are funding the enemy. Let the seal clubbers buy their own bats.

Of course the websites will have to sparkle. They have to look professional. They will have to be compelling. The mainstream media will not simply close up shop. They will dredge the websites in search of the smallest inaccuracy, the tiniest gaffe, the silliest blunder. They will need to contrast the ways of mere mortals with the ways or their messiah. When the mainstreamers lose their editing powers, they will work more diligently to find damaging material. They will still show images of Republicans on CNN so long as the image is a flattering portrait of a RINO—or an unflattering portrayal of a principled candidate.

To continue on the current course is to throw in the towel. Let us be reminded that the mainstream media did not just fix the presidential election, they fixed both presidential primaries as well. The biggest obstacle to change (Shhh. Obama has that word copyrighted but I want to use it just one time. Don't tell the White House.) would be the Idiot McCains who still think they can charm the news media. Note to all future Idiot McCains: These people are your enemies. They love John McCain now because he lost and lost graciously. He played by their rules even as they stacked the deck against him. They see a beautiful loser. We see a loser.

What would be the impact of a GOP media boycott? The first benefit would be a media event in and of itself. It might, maybe, possibly, force the media to confront their unfettered bias. It might open a dialog about the media coverage in the 2008 election. Maybe the sycophants would suspend their smooching long enough to participate in the dialog. We can dream, can't we?

Ultimately the impact would be financial. This would not be felt right away but by the November, 2010 it would get the accountants' attention. Even the suggestion of a media boycott would elicit tremors at newspapers and TV network affiliates. Station managers will not be heartened to learn that their favorite dupes have now invested in websites, dvd's and old fashioned mass mailings. Network affiliates count on GOP airtime purchases. If that money disappears they will spin excuses about the flat economy and Bush era economics that still hobble the industry. Newspapers are even more vulnerable. As well as the economic fallout from an advertisement boycott, the accompanying publicity will do nothing to upgrade newspaper credibility and might even hasten their timely demise.

The empire will strike back. They will conduct a divide and conquer strategy. “We like you, you Idiot McCain wannabe. Sit with us and we'll make sure you dust off your primary rivals. You are a regular guy and they are unwashed tea baggers. We love you.” But it will be a Faustian deal and Mephistopheles will take payment in November. Mephistopheles might be evil but he is not stupid.

Yes, there will be pitfalls in a media boycott but it must happen if the GOP is to regain any credibility. While the Republicans were farming players, the Democrats were farming referees. 2008 might be the high water mark of the elitist media but it is also the advent of a new style, form and structure of politics. The game will still be played, but it will be played without referees. We will be returning to the sandlots.

In the sandlot game everyone can play. Everyone except the referees.

Goldberg Redux

Stating the obvious: Someone has to do it.

Media Turncoat Tells All!

Bernard Golberg Promoting "A Slobbering Love Affair"