Category: ideological culture

Categories
ideological culture media and media people

Feeding the Narrative

Liberal NPR fired liberal reporter Juan Williams after he admitted on O’Reilly Factor to feeling nervous when sharing a plane with passengers dressed in Muslim garb. Williams also told O’Reilly it’s important to combat prejudice against Muslims, but that sentiment didn’t protect him. Honest man, out!

Some liberals, including Jesse Jackson, have joined conservatives in blasting NPR for the precipitous dismissal.

Various commentators have also been saying, “Hey, I never did like NPR’s smug condescending liberalism, so why are my tax dollars funding it?”

There are many reasons government shouldn’t be funding broadcasting — the unfairness of forcing us to pay people to noxiously condescend to us is surely one of them. 

Some hate to admit that National Public Radio is what it is. For example, Politico​.com scribe James Hohmann, relaying Jackson’s support for Williams, adds: “NPR CEO Vivian Schiller apologized for saying Williams should keep his views about Muslims between himself and ‘his psychiatrist or his publicist,’ but her remarks fed into the narrative that NPR is liberal, smug and condescending.”

Hohmann’s reluctance to state that Schiller’s remarks support that unflattering view of NPR, rather than merely “feed into the narrative” about it, is but a pretense at objectivity. Should another damning bit of evidence come up — for example, another NPR broadcast — would that, too, constitute just another incidental detail to be “fed into the narrative”?

No, Politico, let’s instead accept the obvious conclusion warranted by the abundant evidence.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
ideological culture media and media people

Alaska Misfire

The wrong man was fired.

The campaign of U.S. Senate candidate Joe Miller seems to have been at least twice targeted as November 2 approached. In one case, questionable doings came to light after a reporter with CBS Anchorage affiliate KTVA forgot to turn off his phone after leaving a message with a campaign spokesman. Newsroom reporters then chatted about how to sabotage Miller’s campaign — for example, by finding that “one person” among campaign supporters who is a child molester. The station claims that a recording of the incident gives a “misleading” impression.

Then we have the campaign of Senator Lisa Murkowski, Miller’s opponent, acting to kick conservative talk-​show host Don Fagan off the air. 

After the Alaska Division of Elections aided Murkowski’s write-​in campaign by deciding to distribute lists of write-​in candidates at polling places, a listener said he had now become a registered write-​in candidate himself. Fagan then suggested — on-​air, as part of his regular talk programming — that other listeners might want to do the same. Uh oh. The station fired him after the incumbent’s campaign threatened to sue the station for so-​called “electioneering.”

Compare the two cases. It’s fine for any media outlet to push its political opinions — but not to fabricate smears. It’s fine for candidates to make any complaint they wish to media outlets — but not to coercively curdle speech they happen to abhor.

I say, the wrong man got axed.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


Categories
ideological culture national politics & policies too much government

Issue No. 1

It’s pretty clear that the big issue this election was spending. Not high taxes, or the lowering of taxes. Not war. Not illegal immigration. Not regulation. Not abortion. Above all these issues has emerged one supreme: high spending, over-spending.

According to increasing numbers of Americans, it’s the level of spending by government that must decrease. We must balance budgets. Soon.

One could play sloganeer and say “It’s the spending, stupid”; or, twist that, to say “It’s the stupid spending.” But however you formulate the problem, what the new Republican House must do is find a way to cut spending.

And, as I argued last week, it’s the House that has the constitutional duty to decide money matters.

But talk by the Republican hierarchy, about returning to 2008 levels of spending, will hardly cut it.

Indeed, that idea, of just returning to 2008 spending levels, seems to be a subconscious repudiation of the best thing that Republicans said on Tuesday, that “we’ve been given a second chance.” But to go back to 2008 levels merely takes government back to “before Obama,” and reflects an attempt to let themselves off the hook for the Bush-​era spending extravaganza.

There are reasons why I put so little hope in politicians as such, and more in the direct actions of citizens. Even the best politicians tend to lack real convictions.

If the GOP offers any hope, it depends entirely on continued pressure applied to them by the people.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
ideological culture

Hitler, Ha-​Ha

Monday night on E! network’s late-​night chat show, Chelsea Lately, British comedian Eddie Izzard got laughs with partisan hyperbole:

  1. Izzard identified the Tea Party as “extreme right wing”;
  2. He said, oh-​so-​amusingly, that Sarah Palin and Tea Party folks want to take things back to “1773 when slavery was legal”;
  3. He thanked America for helping Britain out when “we had a problem, in the Second World War, with extreme right-​wingers in Europe”;
  4. He identified the Democrats with the people who’ve pushed progress and “caring about other people” since the beginning of civilization.

He went on. But you get the idea, you see how partisans treat their opponents — in this example, somebody vaguely on the left attacking Tea Party folks as right-​wingers of Hitlerian proportions.

Now, Izzard is a funny guy, and not just because of his funny name. But politics is allegedly serious, and you’d think he would know that Hitler was not a right-​winger. Hitler was a “national socialist” whose policies don’t resemble Tea Party policies at all. He knows that the number of American activists who look back before 1776 and think fondly of slavery is pretty close to zero. 

He may not know, however, that “caring” as such, without follow-​through and principles and a rule of law — and balanced budgets, just to avoid mass insolvency — does the opposite of good.

Except in short-​run politics. And on Chelsea Lately.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
ideological culture local leaders too much government

Profiles in Non-Courage

What has to happen before government officials reduce the loot they’re lobbing to special interests at the expense of the wallets and future of everybody else?

Armageddon?

The city council of Kansas City, Missouri, won’t permit even an inquiry into how the burg might save bucks.

At Show-​Me Daily, David Stokes notes that a council committee has tabled (killed) a proposal “that called for SIMPLY STUDYING the idea of contracting out the management of certain city assets,” an idea proposed by Mayor Mark Funkhouser. But city unions predictably went to DEFCON 1. The resolution would have authorized the city manager to request information from firms interested in handling things like parking garages and sewer plants.

The mayor says he thought that they might have creative ideas about how to handle things more efficiently. C‑r-​a-​a-​a-​zy, eh? Well, this mild, er, radical notion is off the table, at least for now.

Stokes hopes the council reconsiders while they are in a position of relative strength. If they wait until really pushed to act by “economic realities . . they won’t be [able] to get the best agreement for taxpayers.”

But aren’t the economic realities already here, for Kansas City and every other town in post-​2007 America? 

Single-​issue voters are always going to shout louder than the general public about reforms that affect their short-​term interests. Political “leaders” should do the right thing, not follow the path of least political resistance.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
ideological culture national politics & policies too much government

The Upcoming Game of Chicken

In Europe, populist response to government policy looks a lot different than in America. The French are rioting in the streets … because President Nicolas Sarkozy proposed to raise the retirement age by a mere two years. But, as The Economist notes, America’s Tea Partiers “are the opposite: they exhale fiscal probity through every pore.” The French, on the other hand, “appear to believe that public money is printed in heaven and will rain down for ever like manna.”

This appraisal, “The good, the bad, and the tea parties,” recognizes that the Tea Party is not violent, doesn’t even litter much. In sum, the Tea Party is “[n]ot French, not fabricated and not as flaky as their detractors aver: these are the positives. Another one: in how many other countries would a powerful populist movement demand less of government, rather than endlessly and expensively more?”

Interestingly, The Economist pushes the practical point, arguing that if Tea Party “Republicans capture the House, they need to move past ideology into the realm of practical policy.”

This echoes what I argued this weekend on Townhall: “[I]f Republicans in Congress are serious about restoring fiscal sanity to Washington, they will hold all the cards necessary to do so. The Obama Administration simply cannot spend money the U.S. House refuses to raise or appropriate.”

This will lead to a game of chicken with the Obama administration, threats of a government shutdown.

So, who will blink first?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.