I may be wrong, but I seem to recall that Howard Fineman of Newsweek used to be journalist. Now I think the only question is whether he is primarily a flack or a shill for the Democratic Party. [flack: A press agent or publicist; shill: One who poses as a satisfied customer or an enthusiastic gambler to dupe bystanders into participating in a swindle.]
Consider, for example, this current article, “Piñata Strategy: Behold the Republican playbook: Frightening voters and demonizing Dem leader Nancy Pelosi.”
Sept. 13, 2006 – The Republican message for this fall’s election season turns Franklin Roosevelt’s famous statement on its head: fear is good, or at least it’s a strategy. They want the electorate to be afraid, very afraid—of the terrorists, of course, but also of an elegantly dressed woman from San Francisco.
Democratic operatives have been warning Rep. Nancy Pelosi for months that she needs to prepare for what Karl Rove and the GOP have in store: an all out, coast-to-coast assault
Warning voters that electing more Democrats to Congress would result in Nancy Pelosi becoming Speaker is, to Fineman, for some reason dirty politics, the politics of fear. Such a campaign, he writes, is nothing more than an effort “to scare [voters] silly about what the Democrats would do with control of Congress.”
Fineman never comes out and says what exactly is wrong with such a strategy. Indeed, he even acknowledges that
it is incontrovertibly true that she represents one of the most liberal congressional districts in the country. “That’s who she is,” said a top Democratic operative. “The problem with refuting that attack is that it’s true.”
The only problem I can see that Fineman has with Republicans pointing out how liberal Democrats are is that, since it’s true, it often works.
It’s a page from an old GOP playbook. In 1984, the Democrats held their convention in San Francisco; Republicans renominated Ronald Reagan in Dallas. It was the dawn of the Red State-Blue State, cultural/political divide we see today. Democrats made history, nominating the first woman—Geraldine Ferraro—for vice president. “Independent” GOP groups swarmed into San Francisco, and onto the airwaves, to denounce the Democrats for their liberal stands on abortion, gay rights, taxes and so on. Reagan won 49 states.
Imagine that! In 1984 the Democrats “made history” and those uncouth and churlish Republicans refused to genuflect! They even insisted on (can you believe it!) attacking the Democrats over a host of pesky issues instead of joining in the media celebration. How rude.
No flacking/shilling article would be complete without a double standard or two, and Fineman doesn’t disappoint. Thus, some “Democratic insiders,” he writes, “worry about gay-rights: the notion that the Democrats are too responsive to gay demands for equal treatment.”
Note the clear implication here that the Democrats’ problem is that they are too good for their own good — “too responsive to gay demands for equal treatment.” Never mind that when opponents of racial preferences demand “equal treatment” for everyone the Democrats are quick to call them racists for opposing “affirmative action.”
Or take Nancy Pelosi’s clothes (no, you take them).
The GOP has “tested” her image in focus groups and polls. She has become a favorite villain of conservative talk radio, which sometimes dwell [sic] on her attire and looks. Female Democratic strategists I know fret about this, even as they are outraged at what they see as the sexism of it. They admire her sense of style, but they do worry that she looks too sophisticated, too Nob Hill. “She dresses too ‘rich’,” one said to me. No one would accuse Denny Hastert of that.
Perhaps Fineman is too subtle for me here. Perhaps he is actually chiding the “Female Democratic strategists” for being “outraged” at the “sexism” of making an issue of Pelosi’s expensive style while they themselves “worry” about the same thing.
Perhaps, but it sounds more like he’s sympathizing with them.
Fineman says that the Republicans “want the electorate to be afraid, very afraid—of the terrorists, …”, presumably without good reason. But Harry Reid says that “Under the Bush administration and this Republican Congress, America is less safe …”.
The message from the Democrats is clear: Bush is grossly exaggerating the threat of terrorism, from which we are all in mortal danger because of Bush.
Well, I can’t say as I’ve heard anyone criticizing Pelosi’s wardrobe. Her politics and some of the(ok, MUCH of the) stuff that comes out of her mouth, yes, but not her clothes.
In Rhode Island there is a continuing campaign against Lincoln Chafee, a nominally Republican senator, pointing out that a vote for Chafee is a vote for a Repub controlled senate. I’m not sure that this is different from a national campaign with Pelosi as the target.
Damn those tactics that work! Especially if they involve nothing more than telling the truth. The noive.
It is amazing how telling the truth about someone who would be third in line for the presidency becomes a feindish plot at the hands of a propagandist like Fineman.
I may be wrong, but I seem to recall that Howard Fineman of Newsweek used to be journalist. Now I think the only question is whether he is primarily a flack or a shill for the Democratic Party.
A guy who cross-blogs (blogged?) on “Oh, That Liberal Media,” feels the need to ask this question?