Another emerging theme on the Right is that Obama's efforts to bail out the economy are somehow an assault on the U.S. Constitution, an odd argument coming from right-wing commentators who fiercely defended Bush's claim to near-monarchical powers, including ignoring habeas corpus and fair trial rights and claiming the power to wiretap Americans without warrants.
Suddenly, however, the right-wing media is appealing to supposed "patriots"- to defend the Constitution against the actions of the first African-American President, whose rightful status as an American and whose belief in Christianity are endlessly questioned and impugned.
It is also the vehemence of these right-wing claims that gives the demagoguery force. After all, loud and angry white guys in suits must know best.
Amid the nation's economic distress, the screamers on the Right can have a disproportionate impact on Americans seeking scapegoats to explain why their jobs are disappearing and their personal incomes are declining.
Appeals to extremism and even violence--whether overt or implicit--may reach a receptive audience. And the Right has a powerful megaphone to spread those resentments.
In a normal world, one might expect mainstream media voices to speak out against irrational arguments and to condemn the false innuendos about Obama, but there are few such voices left in mainstream journalism. After several decades of sustained right-wing assaults on honest journalists, those who might have spoken up have been mostly marginalized or silenced.
Does anyone believe that TV careerists like Wolf Blitzer, John King, David Gregory, Katie Couric, George Stephanopoulos and many others would put their huge salaries at risk in the spirit of Edward R. Murrow and take on the modern-day Joe McCarthys? Is there even a Dan Rather left who would pose tough questions to today's Richard Nixons?
On the print side, the major news organizations--like the New York Times and the Washington Post--have long since surrendered any moral high ground through their clumsy efforts to ingratiate themselves with the Right.
That has progressed from the pandering to Ronald Reagan in the 1980s; through the proving-we're-not-liberal phase of piling on against Bill Clinton and Al Gore in the 1990s; to the fawning coverage of George W. Bush during much of his eight-year reign of catastrophes.
There are some honorable exceptions--for instance, see Frank Rich's "The Obama Haters' Silent Enablers"---but the larger reality is that we are now more than a generation into the decline of the American press corps.
The Washington Post is still living on its Watergate reputation earned 37 years ago, much like the New York Times still basks in its role in the Vietnam-era Pentagon Papers. The truth is that neither newspaper would be likely to take on those kinds of risks today against right-wing pressures.
The American Left also deserves a share of the blame, having ignored the urgent need to build honest news outlets when the Right was constructing a multi-billion-dollar vertically integrated media apparatus and was pummeling the remaining truth-tellers in mainstream journalism.
Instead the Left sat back, lamenting the surging influence of the Limbaughs, Savages, Hannitys and O'Reillys--and condemning the cowardice of the corporate media. But when brave journalists did take risks for the truth--the likes of Gary Webb of the San Jose Mercury News or Mary Mapes of CBS's "60 Minutes II"---the journalists found themselves pretty much on their own when the attacks came.
More often than not, the chief role of the U.S. news media in recent years has been to tamp down flashes of public worry about threats from the Right. Mainstream journalists understand that to do otherwise would put their careers and livelihoods in jeopardy.
That was the case eight years ago when the news organizations acted as if no one should be upset that George W. Bush was stealing a U.S. presidential election. It was the case again when Bush took the nation into an aggressive war against Iraq.
Now, we are witnessing the mainstream U.S. news media once more putting on blinders so it's easier to ignore today's escalating--and dangerous--demagoguery on the Right.
Suddenly, however, the right-wing media is appealing to supposed "patriots"- to defend the Constitution against the actions of the first African-American President, whose rightful status as an American and whose belief in Christianity are endlessly questioned and impugned.
It is also the vehemence of these right-wing claims that gives the demagoguery force. After all, loud and angry white guys in suits must know best.
Amid the nation's economic distress, the screamers on the Right can have a disproportionate impact on Americans seeking scapegoats to explain why their jobs are disappearing and their personal incomes are declining.
In a normal world, one might expect mainstream media voices to speak out against irrational arguments and to condemn the false innuendos about Obama, but there are few such voices left in mainstream journalism. After several decades of sustained right-wing assaults on honest journalists, those who might have spoken up have been mostly marginalized or silenced.
Does anyone believe that TV careerists like Wolf Blitzer, John King, David Gregory, Katie Couric, George Stephanopoulos and many others would put their huge salaries at risk in the spirit of Edward R. Murrow and take on the modern-day Joe McCarthys? Is there even a Dan Rather left who would pose tough questions to today's Richard Nixons?
On the print side, the major news organizations--like the New York Times and the Washington Post--have long since surrendered any moral high ground through their clumsy efforts to ingratiate themselves with the Right.
That has progressed from the pandering to Ronald Reagan in the 1980s; through the proving-we're-not-liberal phase of piling on against Bill Clinton and Al Gore in the 1990s; to the fawning coverage of George W. Bush during much of his eight-year reign of catastrophes.
There are some honorable exceptions--for instance, see Frank Rich's "The Obama Haters' Silent Enablers"---but the larger reality is that we are now more than a generation into the decline of the American press corps.
The Washington Post is still living on its Watergate reputation earned 37 years ago, much like the New York Times still basks in its role in the Vietnam-era Pentagon Papers. The truth is that neither newspaper would be likely to take on those kinds of risks today against right-wing pressures.
The American Left also deserves a share of the blame, having ignored the urgent need to build honest news outlets when the Right was constructing a multi-billion-dollar vertically integrated media apparatus and was pummeling the remaining truth-tellers in mainstream journalism.
Instead the Left sat back, lamenting the surging influence of the Limbaughs, Savages, Hannitys and O'Reillys--and condemning the cowardice of the corporate media. But when brave journalists did take risks for the truth--the likes of Gary Webb of the San Jose Mercury News or Mary Mapes of CBS's "60 Minutes II"---the journalists found themselves pretty much on their own when the attacks came.
More often than not, the chief role of the U.S. news media in recent years has been to tamp down flashes of public worry about threats from the Right. Mainstream journalists understand that to do otherwise would put their careers and livelihoods in jeopardy.
That was the case eight years ago when the news organizations acted as if no one should be upset that George W. Bush was stealing a U.S. presidential election. It was the case again when Bush took the nation into an aggressive war against Iraq.
Now, we are witnessing the mainstream U.S. news media once more putting on blinders so it's easier to ignore today's escalating--and dangerous--demagoguery on the Right.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
