Saturday, November 25, 2006

The Media Is Flunking Pelosi Before Classes Start, We Have To Support Her

Posted by olvlzl.

Here is a good analysis by Matt Stoller of how the insider media, including the latest, aspiring, internet insiders, are doing their best to sandbag Nancy Pelosi before she even assumes leadership of the House. Stoller points out the most reasonable and clear explaination of why Nancy Pelosi might not want Jane Harman to head the Intelligence Committee, she clearly doesn’t think Harman is the best person to do it.

Left out of the whole nasty and myopic rant is any possibility that Nancy Pelosi might want someone who can chair the Intelligence Committee who can do a good job running the Intelligence Committee. Is it so unbelievable that Pelosi might think that Jane Harman is unfit to serve as a check on this President's misuse of intelligence? Harman did after all vaguely support prosecution of the New York Times for revealing the existence of the eavesdropping program. And that Pelosi is 'waiting' so long couldn't have anything to do with the fact that she has to organize the entire House of Representatives, could it? Pelosi has given every indication that she wants the House to function; she's calling the House into session and keeping it in session throughout January so members can get to work.

Having great faith in Nancy Pelosi’s intelligence, judgement and experience, I don’t think she would choose to have an important and public fight for nothing more than revenge. She clearly has her eyes on more important things than personal vendettas. I use that word to show where the corporate media is headed with this. They are going to turn every problem that naturally comes up for a new House Speaker into a badly made movie version of a stereotyped Italian woman grasping at power. They are laying the groundwork to make Nancy Pelosi into a nightmare version of a latter day Lucrezia Borgia . It’s just a matter of time before the TV preachers and the right-wing blogosphere start finding murders to pin on her. It’s going to be Hillary Clinton with ethnic heritage thrown in.

Experience has shown that the corporate media have that ability, to turn the best politician into a cartoon. They do it constantly. The left can’t let them get away with it again. We have to call them on it, it is up to us to support the politicians who represent our side. That is something that the left is really bad at, guarding the backs of politicians when they need it. We do a lot better at complaining that we aren’t getting everything we want and threatening to pull out of coalitions. But you don’t get anywhere doing that. The threats and self-defeating withdrawal of support have gotten us nothing but failure. The example of what works better is how Nancy Pelosi spent some of her political capital to reward John Murtha for his loyalty to her, even though she certainly knew that Steny Hoyer was bound to win the job of Majority Leader. When someone has given as much campaign support as Hoyer did, they get something for it. We have some money but, more importantly, we have our support. If the left gives that it will be noticed.

The media has it’s ability to blanket the country with lies and to insist on having its candidates installed. But that is a big mistake for us to assume that they don't have influence. Politicians have to get their support from somewhere and in a vaccuum of that they turn to the wrong place. . See Clinton’s disastrous choice of Louis Freeh for the FBI with the fullest support of the media and insider establishment if you have any doubts. Democrats should beware of when the insiders support a candidate. They are the enemies of real Democrats, certainly of the left. They will always promote those who will work against our best interest and who will stop any progress on our agendas.

While I’m not saying that Jane Harman is necessarily in the same category as Freeh, this gets my guard up. Jane Harman, the friend of the enemy isn’t trustworthy. Look at the DC press corps if you want examples.