On 6/23/06, Marvin Gandall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sorry, Gar, I don't think two of the leading columnists for the New York Times and the Washington Post - those pillars of the bipartisan US political-media complex - are out to "finish off the Democratic party once and for all" in order to create a one-party state. So far as I'm aware, neither is a card-carrying Republican.
Not card carrying - because they can do more damage to the Democrats as "even the liberal/even the Democratic " Friedman/Broder says. You have to understand that in the absense of a left to to divert or even the threat of one, much of the power elite who once saw the Democrats of having a useful role now would just as soon have naked one party rule; they don't need the Democratic fig leaf anymore. Note how Eric Alterman and Brad De Long who are Chomsky bashers, but remain loyal to the Democratic party have become media bashers as well - essentially offering the same critique of the media Chomsky made. The difference is that it was fine with them when the media did these things to the left; but from Clinton forward (and I think from Carter forward) the media have become essentially Republican, not merely conservative or capitalist (something they have always been). That is they do to the Democratic party what they only used to do to left. Broder is considered the "Dean" of the pundits (as in a college Dean). Friedman I guess is the Airmiles apparent to the throne. They are not going to depart from the mainstream consensus - which is that Democrats (with a few exceptions like Lieberman) are this bunch of extreme leftists who need to be marginalized. So yeah, while nominally Democrats they are in practice out to advance the Republican agenda whereever possible.
