Thank You, Sir! May I Have Another?!

So it was, a typical Sunday again for yours truly; catching up on laundry, stuff around the house, tending to the young one, and picking up the Inquirer and reading about how those nasty, swearing, unkempt little lefty bloggers are ruining our country (now I know why Atrios frequently refers to much of the Inquirer editorial board as “the stupids”).

I suppose that’s being a bit tough, but I get tired of reading from people getting paid in the news business about what awful cretins we supposedly are in the blogging community. Chris Satullo and Dick Polman of The Philadelphia Inquirer are accomplished news professionals; I have to acknowledge that even though I frequently disagree with them. That’s why it is actually beneath them to heap scorn upon us without even really bothering to look at the merits of what we’re trying to say.

Let’s start with Satullo (from yesterday’s Editorial section...oh, sorry – I keep forgetting that that section has been given the bland, vague moniker of “Currents”):

Now to the port side of the blogosphere, where folly also reigns. Lefty blogs were incensed that news accounts of the dinner focused not on Colbert, but on Bush's byplay with an impersonator. This, combined with the room's tepid response to Colbert, spawned endless tirades on media cowardice and bias.

Fact check. The folks at the event weren't all journalists, not by a long shot. Media outlets scramble to fill their tables with celebrities and power brokers. Awfully chummy, I agree. Point is, this wasn't simply a silence of the journalistic lambs.

I should note that this was preceded by Satullo’s quite proper castigation of conservatives in “the blogosphere” (still hate that term…).

Can I ask what difference it makes who attended the press club dinner regarding the question of whether or not Colbert’s performance was covered on CNN, MSNBC and the network news? Digby pointed out last week that was Don Imus said in 1996, with the Clintons sitting right next to him, was far worse than anything Colbert said, and I distinctly recall that that was mentioned all over the place. Despite what I acknowledge to be occasional whining on whether or not Colbert was covered by non-bloggers, the fact of the matter is that the whiners have a point. I saw NOTHING on Colbert’s appearance at the news sites, but I could find “stories” on the Bush impersonator everywhere.

Again, to me this is a case of killing the messenger (“how dare you little non-professionals try to hold us accountable!”). And Satullo's gratuituous dig at Noam Chomsky without citing any evidence was a stellar moment also.

Now, onto Dick Polman; this is an excerpt from his column yesterday describing the current fate of Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut:

Lieberman now faces real competition for the first time since 1988 - from Ned Lamont, an affluent cable-TV entrepreneur and staunch war critic who is poised to challenge Lieberman in an August Democratic primary, with financial backing from the liberal bloggers who routinely assail the senator in language unfit for a family newspaper.

Before I say anything else, I should point out that Polman updated his column at his blog today with some more background on Lieberman’s – how might you put it? – “contentious” relationship with the lefty bloggers (who have all pointed out by now what a shill Lieberman is for the Republicans).

There is about one paragraph in Polman’s original piece where he discusses Lieberman’s votes on domestic issues (against Arctic drilling, against Bush’s tax cuts, and the Social Security privatization scheme). However, Lieberman also supported federal intervention in the Terri Schiavo circus, the energy bill giveaway, the fraud bankruptcy bill, and the confirmation of “Strip Search Sammy” Alito.

Wouldn’t it have been nice if Polman has mentioned THOSE VOTES also in his original column? Instead of spending the vast majority of the column on Lieberman's out-of-reality support for the Iraq War, I would have liked to have read a more thorough analysis of why he has fallen from favor (silly me).

Oh, and by the way, somehow I missed this true gem of a hit piece, “drive by” journalism at its worst as far as I’m concerned, by Richard Cohen of The Washington Post that he assaulted us with last week (though my lefty “betters” were all over him, and rightly so). I was probably paying too much attention to the 8th district congressional race (by the way, there was more Guest Opinion nonsense in the Courier Times today from Warren's people - at this point, I won't even dignify it with a response).

See, Richard had a problem with Stephen Colbert’s performance that I referred to above (actually, to say Cohen had a problem with it is an understatement…in his prissy whining, Cohen reminded me of Bruno Kirby’s character of 2nd Lieutenant Steven Hauk in “Good Morning, Vietnam”).

Gee, it’s nice to see Richard have such a keen sense of perspective on this. I guess that’s part of his vast well of knowledge that he brings to bear when writing such insightful columns, such as the one where he had no idea of the accomplishments of Eleanor Roosevelt a month or so ago.

OK, now that I’ve dispensed with trying to deflate some of the journalistic high pomposity out there, I’m going to cast a reflection inward for a moment, if you will, and say this (and please pardon my impudence in daring to address the “big hit” lefty bloggers, seeing as how I’m just a tiny creature in this vast sea by comparison).

In the process of trying to learn about what is going on so I can add some meaningful (I hope) content to this site, I’ve read a lot of other blogs and have come to familiarize myself (a bit) with as many of the big issues out there that I can. I’m not looking for “props”; I’m supposed to do that. My point is that there are some TRULY AMAZING and TALENTED people out there with GREAT THINGS TO SAY who are great about saying them. But when these people indulge in gratuitous profanity, it demeans from their terrific content, turns off potential new readers, and makes us an easy target for our dear corporate media cousins who can demean us at will and pay not a whit of attention to what we’re saying, thus further validating this stupid narrative of “those filthy, swearing little liberal bloggers are at it again.” If we can somehow take that copout away from them, it will only make us stronger.

I know I have some work to do on that score myself. You may come across some swearing from time to time here, but I promise to do much better at that. And with acknowledging the appropriate level of respect, I should also mention that it does our cause no good when the best lefty blogger of them all has the “F” bomb in the title of a post, as was the case yesterday.

Make no mistake, though; our message is being heard to one degree or another. And if this keeps up, the mode of expression will take less of a priority with readers (though, as I said, we should work on crafting our words in anticipation of new readers at all times) as opposed to the importance and urgency of our content.

Update 5/9: georgia10 does it again... (and likewise Peter Daou).