![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
McTosh
Anyone who thinks they know anything about US politics based on the coverage given by the US mainstream media should urgently read this article. Jamison Foser is always excellent in his media analysis, and nowhere more so than here.
One campaign is talking bilgewater (e.g., and from a long long list, Iran is accused of aiding Sunnis), and much of the mainstream media is basically stenographing this crap. The other campaign is trying to make this a proper debate about the future the US -- and the world -- should have. The first campaign is whingeing about unfair media treatment, despite the facts on the ground. The second is saying little on the subject.
See? I'm not biased. I'm not saying which campaign is which.
no subject
"Because, of course, McCain had. Absolutely. Nothing. Whatsoever. To Do. With. It."
It was stupefying that most of the mainstream newsoid media fell for this nonsense. Would they have blamed McCain had there been a terrorist outrage while he was there? No, of course not: they'd have been idiots to do so. Yet letting him bask in the glory of the hostage release was an exactly similar non sequitur -- rather like, for that matter, crediting Raygun with the fall of the Berlin Wall.