Jay's right, although I have a small problem with classifying Mr. Taibbi as "underappreciated" as he now enjoys a regular gig at "The Rolling Stone" and "The
"I have a serious question for David Brooks, who is hailing Romney's Bain record http://nyti.ms/NyEzQ4 . Do you know how private equity works?"-- which, within 24 hours, had been retweeted (by my count) 155 times and "favorited" 53 times.
That's recognition.
On the other hand, Mr. Taibbi is pretty clearly on what appears to be permanent, double-secret Beltway probation after making David Gergen go Number Two in his pantaloons when he suggested on live teevee that teabaggers are many, many possums short of a stew (From "Rolling Stone"):
...
Taibbi: To me, the main thing about the Tea Party is that they're just crazy. If somebody is able to bridge the gap with those voters, it seems to me they will have to be a little bit crazy too. That's part of the Tea Party's litmus test: "How far will you go?"
Gergen: I flatly reject the idea that Tea Partiers are crazy. They had some eccentric candidates, there's no question about that. But I think they represent a broad swath of the American electorate that elites dismiss to their peril.
Hart: I agree with David. When two out of five people who voted last night say they consider themselves supporters of the Tea Party, we make a huge mistake to suggest that they are some sort of small fringe group and do not represent anybody else.
Taibbi: I'm not saying that they're small or a fringe group.
Gergen: You just think they're all crazy.
Taibbi: I do.
Gergen: So you're arguing, Matt, that 40 percent of those who voted last night are crazy?
Taibbi: I interview these people. They're not basing their positions on the facts — they're completely uninterested in the facts. They're voting completely on what they see and hear on Fox News and afternoon talk radio, and that's enough for them.
Gergen: The great unwashed are uneducated, so therefore their views are really beneath serious conversation?
Taibbi: I'm not saying they're beneath serious conversation. I'm saying that these people vote without acting on the evidence.
Gergen: I find it stunning that the conversation has taken this turn. I disagree with the Tea Party on a number of issues, but it misreads who they are to dismiss them as some kind of uneducated know-nothings who have somehow seized power in the American electorate. It is elitist to its core. We would all be better off if we spent more time listening to each other rather than simply writing them off.
...
But such an embargo suggests nothing more than run-of-the-mill Villager cowardice and fear, not a lack of appreciation.
6 comments:
Taibbi wasn't totally right. The rank and file Teabaggers are without question crazy to the last one. Those who are using the Teabaggers, the Kochs, Dick Armey, etc. are far, far from crazy. Devious, ambitious and totally ruthless is a much better description.
Sideboob Journal...Ah yes, Arianna's Trench. Gergen evidently had a Big Gulp full of bathwater and grain alcohol to finish, and thus couldn't close off his thought bubble properly: "...dismiss them as some kind of uneducated know-nothings operated by people who know how to aim them.
Fixed.
;>)
David Gergen calling someone an elitist is like Boris Yeltsin calling someone a drunk, or GW Bush calling someone stupid. He badly needs to go sit on a rusty chainsaw.
The DC Corporate Media Villagers have deemed the Tealiban a Serious Subject since they push policies the Villagers find useful, as opposed to the dirty hippies of Occupy who they wish would jsut go away.
Evidence-based voting is just so elitist.
Excuse me, David Gergen is every bit as populist as all the other attendants of Davos & the Bohemian Grove.
Matt Taibbi's got nothing on you, Drifty. With the greatest possible respect, though, your work would benefit from the services of an editor who really gets your vibe. IMHO.
Love you man...
Post a Comment