The conservative entertainment complex

---

We like to be reassured that our beliefs are valid.  We gravitate to the news sources we prefer: the networks, MSNBC, Fox.

 

 

But sometimes we go too far.

 

 

A few weeks before the election, I saw a commercial for Bing Elections 2012, a Microsoft site enabling users to tailor the news to their own political beliefs.

 

 

Do you see anything wrong with this?

 

 

Opinion is opinion, and facts are facts. I belong to my own little group, and I believe what I believe; I groan when I read David Brooks and I giggle when I read Gail Collins.

 

 

But that’s not news. That’s opinion.

 

 

The idea that news – journalism – can be “tailored” to suit one’s political beliefs – well, that’s just repugnant.

 

 

Except that a good chunk of the electorate eats it up like ice cream, which creates all kinds of problems.

 

 

David Frum, late last week, spoke of the “conservative entertainment complex.” I knew immediately what he was talking about: the huge ungainly conglomeration of Fox News and Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin, that feeds on itself and reassures itself that it’s absolutely correct. It's the conservative equivalent of that (imaginary) construct Sarah Palin herself named "the lamestream media."

 

 

It’s not just opinion. It’s “news.” It’s Bristol Palin on “Dancing with the Stars.” It’s radio screamers like Rush and his local followers (Rhode Island and Massachusetts have their share of these, which I’m sure are mild compared to those in other parts of the USA.)  It’s Ann Coulter, the right-wing Lisa Lampanelli.

 

 

They all reassure one another (and themselves) that they’re right, and that they represent America. Not just part of America, mind you, but the whole thing. Anything that isn’t part of their world (the Conservative Entertainment Complex – let’s just call it the CEC from here on) is alien, non-American, un-American.

 

 

This leads to problems.

 

 

Here are a few:

 

 

-          Public polling in October and early November showed clearly that Barack Obama had a significant lead in swing states. No! the CEC shrieked. Impossible! And they created their own “polls,” which showed Romney in the lead. People who should have known better – Karl Rove, even Romney himself – believed those fake polls. And – guess what? – the fake “polls” were utterly wrong.

-          (Side question: why would the GOP want to lie to itself? I know that, as an Obama voter, the mere suggestion that he was behind in any state (not just my own) made me more determined to go vote for him. The GOP really shot itself in the foot with this one.)

-          It’s not just political theory that the CEC simplifies, it’s everything. Do scientists support global climate change? Then let’s vilify and ridicule scientists. Did Obama get Osama Bin Laden? Well, we didn’t want Osama that badly in the first place.

-          Do you see a black man outside a Pennsylvania polling place? According to Fox News, he’s a threat, a menace.

-          Are Hispanics a threat to America, or valuable potential Republican voters? Hmm. Not sure. Let’s talk about Hispanics  as if they’re unwelcome and highly suspicious, and then see how they vote. They’re Catholics, so they’ll vote Republican. Right?

 

 

 

And here’s another thing: studies have actually shown that liberals are more willing to explore other points of view. Conservatives are more likely to ignore opposing beliefs. Ergo: they know less about what’s going on in the world.

 

 

I read the Financial Times almost every day. It’s the British/international version of the Wall Street Journal, except it’s far more free-wheeling. I read conservative and liberal editorials every day. Also I read journalism that’s very unbiased.

 

 

It refreshes me.

 

 

Kids: read everything. Watch everything.

 

 

Don’t let the CEC (or its liberal equivalent) tell you what to think.

 

 

Think for yourselves.

---

 

 

Rush Limbaugh

---

Rush Limbaugh apologized on Saturday for calling Sandra Fluke a “slut” and a “prostitute.”

 

 

Well, you could have knocked me over with a bulldozer, as Dorothy Parker said.

 

 

You know the story: Fluke testified very passionately before a Democratic congressional panel about contraception as an aspect of women’s health care.  Rush intemperately demonized her, making it sound as if Fluke was popping birth-control pills uncontrollably and demanding Federal funding to pay for it.

 

 

The public turned on him. In his traditional style, he doubled down and stuck out his chin and dared the public to come get him.

 

 

And they – correction, we – did.

 

 

Petitions.  Social media. Bad press.  Bill O’Reilly tried to side with Rush the other night, and I think it actually made matters worse; it poured even more fuel on the fire, and made them both look incredible incivil and stupid.

 

 

And then the sponsors began to peel away.  Carbonite.  Sleep Train.  Sleep Number.  LegalZoom.  Citrix.  Quicken Loans.

 

 

See? If you want to punish a Republican, you take away the only thing he understands and respects: money. 

 

 

I’m sure Clear Channel was very quick to go to Rush and give him the bad news: Apologize, babe.  The jig is up.  Glenn Beck got canned by Fox, and when was the last time you saw or heard anything from him?  (He’s still around, and I know he still has a Tea Party / lunatic following, but he has nowhere near the audience he did once.)

 

 

Rush’s Saturday apology was thin and whiny and unsatisfying, but it was remarkable in that it’s really the first time he’s apologized for anything he’s said.

 

 

On Saturday morning, Mary Matalin said coolly that the liberals were silly to expect him to apologize; he’d never apologized for anything.

 

 

Surprise, surprise, Ms. Matalin!

 

 

I think this is really a by-product of the recent dust-up between the Susan Komen Foundation and Planned Parenthood.  Komen tried to tighten the political screws on Planned Parenthood; people went nuts on the Internet about it; and overnight, Komen went from Everyone’s Favorite Pink Charity to the John Birch Society.  They pulled back, they retreated.  And now people have learned the power of the Internet and social media in mobilizing on these issues.

 

 

(By the way: I wonder how Komen’s fundraising is doing?  I bet a whole bunch of people have realized that, instead of wearing pink and doing 2K runs, they could actually be giving money to other worthwhile organizations.)

 

 

And, even after Rush’s “apology,” another of his advertisers, ProFlowers, pulled out on Sunday.  It’s almost as if they want nothing to do with him.

 

 

Buckle up, Rush. This may be only the beginning.

---

 

 

Tim Thomas, Barack Obama, and free speech

---

 I was checking my BlackBerry yesterday when I was brought up with an “Urk!” by the following Providence Journal newsbrief:

 

 

 Bruins goalie Tim Thomas, the biggest hero of the team's Stanley Cup championship run of last year, declined to join his teammates during today's visit to the White House. Team officials indicated that the decision had to do with political differences.

 

 

Partner is a big hockey fan.  I have a hard time watching the game with him: too fast, too violent, and I can’t even see the damned puck most of the time.  But I rejoiced with him when the Bruins won the Stanley Cup last year, and enjoyed watching the local victory celebrations.

 

 

Thomas was certainly the team hero: he’s widely considered to be the main reason they won the Cup.

 

 

But he cannot meet the President, or be seen at the White House, because he does not agree with him.

 

 

 

I could not stop thinking about this.  I investigated a bit further, and found that he is not only a far-right true believer, but a follower of Glenn Beck. 

 

 

Yikes!

 

 

I would have gladly forgiven him his beliefs, however, given that he’s such an excellent player.

 

 

But then he had to go thumb his nose at the White House.

 

 

Some questions:

• What if it had been me and a president I detested – like, let’s say, George W. Bush?  It would have been tempting to snub him.  But, then again, it would have depended largely upon the reason for the invitation.  If it were for a personal achievement, like winning the Nobel Prize, I’d have told him to go stuff himself.  If it were this kind of honor – a team being celebrated as a group – I might well have swallowed my pride and gone, for the sake of my teammates.  Because – really – what would I have to lose by standing alongside someone with whom I disagreed?
• Does Tim Thomas agree politically with all of his teammates?  I certainly hope so.  If he should ever learn that they don’t agree with him, he might not agree to appear on the same ice with them.
• Does Tim Thomas think that President Obama is trying to make political points by appearing with a popular sports team?  Really, think about that one. If you stand alongside the President, which one of you will people notice first?  And (last I looked), New England / Boston athletes are generally detested by the rest of the country.  Obama’s doing the Bruins a favor, not vice versa.

 

 

 

 

Greg Wyshynski, a hockey blogger for Yahoo!, wrote a comment about this on Monday.  He makes the point that the team general manager and team president both tried to talk Thomas into going – in fact, they could have compelled his attendance - but in the end they gave up and respected his wishes.  He’s an American; he can do any damn fool thing he likes.

 

 

(Wyshynski makes a false comparison of Thomas’s no-show at the White House to Rangers player Sean Avery’s public support for gay marriage, and says that both are governed by free speech.  This is not an excellent comparison.  Thomas can say what he likes, and hold whatever beliefs he likes; that’s free speech.  Snubbing a White House invitation because you don’t like the current occupant is bad manners.)

 

 

And Wyshynski ends by pointing out that free speech has consequences.  This is his very well-written conclusion: “This is the moment when Tim Thomas, the most valuable player to his team last June, did something that detracted from his teammates' celebration. This is the moment when, for better or worse, he becomes something more than the blue-collar hockey player from Flint with the great backstory and the sterling save percentage. And as long as he's willing to accept that his absence from an event that even Tomas Kaberle attended has overshadowed this day and changed his profile as an athlete, then like Cam Neely I'll respect the decision.”

 

 

Same here.

 

 

Thomas may be a great hockey player, but he ain’t no hero around these parts no more.

 

 

---