CT Blue

Another post from another liberal about the media’s failure to point out that most of what comes out of Romney’s mouth is a lie. For some reason, while reading this article, my mind flew back to another campaign that took place a long long time ago, in a political galaxy far far away.

The time was the year 2000 and the place was America before everything changed on 9/11. The candidate was Al Gore, who, according to the press, had a problem telling the truth. We were assured, for instance, that he had claimed to invent the internet, though he hadn’t. Hadn’t invented it, and hadn’t made the claim, that is. He was accused of other deviations from the truth, all of which, on close examination, turned out to be no deviations at all, but they had been branded deviations by the right, and that was sufficient for the press to repeat them. What difference did it make, for while there was no truth to the claims, there was a manufactured truthiness about them. You can learn the details of this ancient history at this site, and get more details by searching around on Bob Somersby’s former site, here.

Some might argue that the press learned its lesson from 2000 and now it is just being extra careful before it implies or says that Mitt (or Little Ricky, or Newt, or every other Republican ) is a liar. Perhaps it feels that if one can come up with any construction of the language used- no matter how strained or contrary to sense, grammatical principles, mathematical laws, or scientifically proven facts- that would make a statement arguably true, then the press feels duty bound to let the statement pass, lest it unfairly sully the reputation of an honorable Republican. For after all Mitt is an honorable man; So are they all, all honorable men.

Some might make that argument. Others, far more cynical, might argue that, were Al Gore to run for office again, the liar narrative would be reincarnated in a flash. Such people might point out that there appears to be a rule among members of the press corps that it is impolite to point out that Republicans lie, because that is what they do, that is what they are expected to do, and it is therefore incumbent upon us to look the other way when they do it. Democrats, on the other hand, are expected to play it straight, so not only is it incumbent on the press to point out when they lie, but it is also perfectly fair to pass on Republican talking points that allege that they lie, even when they are not, in fact, lying. In Washington, this is known as fair and balanced reporting, which has not, in lo these many years, been confined to Fox.

There was a time, on this blog, that I actually was capable of writing what passed, at least in my own mind if nowhere else, for satirical or humorously mocking pieces about Republicans, but I admit my powers seem to be fading. I’ve blamed myself, to myself, until today I had a revelation. It is, quite literally, impossible to satirize the self satirizing, or to mock the self mocking. At least it is if you presume your audience has the slightest shred of intelligence, for satire and political humor both involve the exposure of a target’s weakness, whether it be stupidity, hypocrisy, irrationality, paranoia or the toxic mix of all of the above that is the brand of the modern Republican party. But this presupposes the need to expose these things; that they are, at least to some extent, practiced in a nuanced enough fashion that they need exposure. But we are so beyond that point in this post-post modern age. This is the age of out and proud stupidity, full frontal hypocrisy, blatant irrationality, and open and notorious paranoia. What’s to expose? What is there to satirize? These barreled are shooting themselves.

Latest case in point is the right wing’s effort to blame the Obama administration for the Sandra Fluke episode. The specifics of the plot are many and varied, but apparently they are all variants of the theme that the Obama folks set up the Republicans to deny Fluke the opportunity to testify, planning in advance to have her testify before a rump hearing of their own, knowing full well that Rush would engage in a vitriolic disgusting attack on her, thereby forcing Republicans to choose between doing the right thing and defending, Rush, knowing that the Republicans would never offend Rush, and knowing also that they could then make contraception and the right of women to be treated as human beings an issue in the campaign. All this, the Democrats, the party that has never in my lifetime managed to push any talking point in unison, planned in advance, with the hapless and hopeless Republicans falling for it every inch of the way, with Rush dutifully stepping up to spew the expected vitriol.

Rush himself is getting into the act:

By the way, the movie Game Change, the HBO movie that premiered on Saturday night (that’s designed, once again, to castigate and destroy Sarah Palin all over again)? The same public relations firm representing Sandra Fluke represents Game Change. The same PR firm that handled Sandra Fluke’s episode is handling Game Change, and you know who it is? Anita Dunn, formerly of the White House! The Mao Tse-tung admirer, by her own admission. Anita Dunn, Obama’s former adviser, is the PR firm for the movie Game Change and for Sandra Fluke. It’s all part of a plan. It is not accidental. None of this stuff just happened. "Whoa, looky over there what just happened! It’s all orchestrated.

There it all is, a pile of warm and steaming stupidity, hypocrisy, irrationality, and paranoia that defies ridicule. It says to all and sundry: you cannot expose anything I have not already revealed. You cannot satirize me. I am beyond mockery. You might consider pitying me, but I defy even that.