Joe Lieberman isn’t camera shy. Why is it so hard for a reporter, any reporter, to simply ask him why he wants to raise the Medicare age when all evidence shows that it would be a disaster? And then don’t let him just say “aww shucks” with his sideways shit-eating grin. Why is that so hard? The facts are right there. Why won’t anyone in the media do it?
Why Is It So Hard
by John Cole| 49 Comments
This post is in: Assholes, Our Failed Media Experiment, Our Failed Political Establishment
les
Generic “anyone in the media:” Ees no my chob, mon.
JPL
I don’t know because we all know it’s a liberal media and Sarah says it’s a gotcha media. Why don’t they ask him what his wife does? HMMMMM!
JPL
Is it possible that he doesn’t have a pen.is and so it’s not news worthy.
quaker in a basement
Why won’t anyone in the media do it?
‘Cause Holy Joe, he’s whatchacall bipartisan! The Village loves ’em some bipartisan.
PurpleGirl
Because senior reporters are overpaid propaganda agents who know what their corporate masters want them to write. Young reporters tend to not do so because they want to become senior overpaid propaganda agents some day and they know what the corporate masters want.
Alan in SF
The corporate media is for making assertions, not proving them. Reporters are never, ever allowed to ask a politician to provide evidence for a claim. That’s just basic
Han's Solo
Dude, what do you think they get paid for? It isn’t that.
This is how it works: They (Lie Berman in this case) say stupid shit and the press passes it on verbatim. The opposition can rebut, but unless the opposition thinks Ronald Reagan pooped rainbows and farted gold the press won’t care.
Pat
Because their jobs depend on them NOT doing it?
Reality Check
You can cut the anger, rage, despair, and general emoness from “progressives” on this blog with a knife. I love it!
Mike Kay (Chief of Staff)
the Village agrees with lieberman. The Village hates medicare and social security.
gene108
People become journalists because THEY HATE NUMBERS! Numbers lead to icky math.
Therefore, when refuting a politician involves getting immersed in numbers, like the total increase in insurance spending from 1969 to 2010 (like economist Paul Krugman points out in the op-ed you linked), I think most journalists brains freeze up, their eyes glaze over – just like 9th grade Algebra, without the benefit of cute girls (or boys, depending on gender) to fantasize about – and they tune out any words coming from the politicians mouth.
All they are thinking is how to move to something not involving numbers.
The mathematic and scientific illiteracy of most journalists has really hurt the information the public receives. There’s either poorly researched sensationalism about impending doom or totally ignoring the facts that support an argument and refute a counter-narrative.
kdaug
@Reality Check:
Pragmatism. (And a general disdain for trolls).
UncertaintyVicePrincipal
@JPL: When I saw the title of this post I thought sigh, must be another one about Anthony’s message exchanges.
By the way the answer is that the only proper form of address for Joe is “your Saintliness” and/or it’s hard to straighten up and ask questions like that when you’re bowing and asking permission to come aboard his Holy Bipartisan Ship.
You’re welcome.
Suffern ACE
Honestly, I think this is the best way to save money. Make as few unhealthy people as possible eligible for the program in as many ways as possible. I think that is the logic here. People who die young, probably were going to cost the program a fortune anyway.
Suffern ACE
Honestly, I think this is the best way to save money. Make as few unhealthy people as possible eligible for the program in as many ways as possible. I think that is the logic here. People who die young, probably were going to cost the program a fortune anyway.
quannlace
I think cause ‘asking questions that most people wth half a brain would” is not part of the job description.
Villago Delenda Est
@Pat:
DING DING DING!
Many good comments, but this was the most succinct.
Spaghetti Lee
Obviously, Lieberman’s animal magnetism distracted them from asking.
MobiusKlein
@Reality Check: Why do you love the despair of others? Isn’t this vale of tears bad enough without needless pain?
Reality Check
Democrat Party= the Party of Losers, and the emo wussy commenters on this blog prove it.
Alex S.
@Reality Check:
May I make love to you on a lazy Sunday afternoon?
Omnes Omnibus
@Reality Check: One really should try harder to keep up the trolling standards. This performance is, shall we say, pathetic.
bemused
Facts are boring. The media sneers at facts.
Mike M
It’s interesting to contrast the treatment of the Weiner scandal with how most journalists approach policy debates. In sex scandals, the entire press corps believe it is their duty to ferret out every last slimy detail, and if possible, to catch the politician in a lie. In policy debates, reporters are very careful to avoid the impression that they are taking sides. In this case, facts are viewed only as a matter of opinion, and reports know that they should not voice their opinion (unless they work on Fox).
Other than that difference, sex scandals and policy debates are treated the same. The media’s top concern is how the scandal or policy position will affect the horse race. They never ask the question: how will this affect the typical American? Rather, is this good or bad for the Replubicans/Democrats? How will it affect Obama’s poll numbers?
cleek
because Lieberman is a Serious Person and to subject him to such indelicate questioning would be to disrespect a Great Man.
jl
Trolls should really take the spare second to glance at the comments before posting the Bait of the Day.
There is a lot of whining on Balloon Juice. Maybe a lazy troll would figure that it’s a sure thing to just copy/paste in from the talking wingnut talking points collection into a random thread. But that troll would be wrong.
Mike Kay (Chief of Staff)
@Mike M:
Not true. The usually give the republican a break on sex scandals. I mean, they didn’t raise a keystroke to ferret out Ensign’s cover-up/payoffs.
Frankensteinbeck
I’m still sidin’ with the ‘Cult of Savvy’ theory. To imply that any change to Medicare would affect real people Is anathema. Politics is only a horse race and those of us who think it matters are juvenile and unSerious.
SRW1
@Reality Check:
Life is all about pissing off them liberals, init buddy?
JasonF
I’ve only read the title of this post, but I’m not going to read any further because I am sick of blog posts about Rep. Weiner.
(Why yes, I do have a twelve-year-old boy’s sense of humor. Thank you for asking).
Maude
The media doesn’t know enough about Medicare to ask smart questions. They seem to know a lot about sexting and can talk about that for long periods of time.
shortstop
@Alex S.: This cracked me up.
DonkeyKong
The medicare trustees need to start sexting. Duh!
General Stuck
It’s showbiz. providing endless pre fight interviews of Ali and Frazier, with Howard Cosell as the 4th estate, separating the bullshit from the dung beetles.
FlipYrWhig
He wouldn’t say “aw shucks.” He would say, “The hard truth is, we have to do something to get Medicare under control, or it’s not going to be there. We need to strengthen the program, which is why I have proposed…” And then the reporter would move on to the next question. No substance in the question, no substance in the answer, but it’s a simulacrum of journalism, and that’s all we ever get.
When was the last time you saw a reporter actually listen to the answer a politician just provided? It’s really fucking rare.
fasteddie9318
Cole, I give you eventheliberal Margaret Carlson, on the coverage of the 2000 election:
Why don’t they ask Lieberman about this? Because they don’t want to. It’s not enjoyable for them and would do nothing to advance their own upper crust interests.
Judas Escargot
If they ask, they get tagged as “difficult” and lose access (and thus the job).
Money may or may not be the root of all evil. But money certainly does seem to favor the purely banal.
dollared
The man with a tag “David Brooks giving a seminar at the Aspen Institute” has to ask this question….
Have you had a glass of $250 Bordeaux at 8,000 feet? I did, once. Aspen is a good gig, and no fool would pass that up.
Xecky Gilchrist
@Reality Check: Democrat Party= the Party of Losers
The Democratic party, OTOH, = the party of WINNARZ
James E. Powell
It is useless to hope that the courtiers in the corporate press/media will ever ask a penetrating question on policy. We could make a list of Great Questions That No One Will Ask quite easily, no? We could start with one on cutting government spending during a recession, but none of the big shot stenographers will go near it.
The people who really ought to be asking these questions are Democratic elected officials. Democrats consistently lose the public debate on issues because they do not take their case to the public, they do not (with the exception of a few like Nancy Pelosi) challenge the Beltway shibboleths on Medicare, Social Security, taxes, or anything really.
The Raven
Well for one thing, they know they won’t get the chance to ask a hard question twice.
Access. It’s a wonderful thing.
The Republic of Stupidity
Because they’ve all been farkin’ neutered…
That’s why…
Steph
They’re afraid they’ll lose access to cocktail weenies?
Ruckus
@Pat:
One day there will be a place that shows the best answer to any question. And yours will be the one and only answer to the question asked.
brendancalling
@Reality Check:
get cancer and die slowly, troll.
El Cid
Remember, the default establishmentarian opinion is that social programs like Medicare or SS are always bloated and the political class needs to get tough enough to show the people receiving such benefits that the gravy train can’t go on forever.
They like anyone saying ‘we have to raise the Medicare eligibility / SS retirement age’.
Just watch them. Or read them.
Is this somehow special to Lieberman? No. And of course Lieberman knows it, just like any politician going on TV knows you won’t get the harsh treatment or tough questions if you’re saying that we’ve got to reign in this and that social program and people have to learn that we can’t go on like this and so forth.
Bobby Thomson
@gene108:
This. Facts and analysis are to most political reporters as silver and sunlight are to vampires.
Kathy in St. Louis
Why is it so hard? You would think that people who have attended decent journalism schools around the country would be able to handle asking those types of questions. The problem that I note over and over is that they would have to well-read enough on the subjects that they are quizzing our lawmakers about to actually ask a cogent question. That’s merely the more obvious problem. Less obvious, but probably more to the point, their bosses don’t want them asking such questions because the guest might not agree to return again if he or she is asked a lot of tough questions.
These networks have a lot of time to fill and need the cooperation of all the windbags they can find.
The sad third part of this problem is that the American people really don’t want to know a whole lot more than they already do. It’s all pretty scary when the world and your future is changing so rapidly…and not always for the better. So, viewers cooperate in this charade of news by not demanding better. That’s the reason that Fox News is so popular. They give you a minimum of actual facts plus villains to blame everything mishap on, the Dems and Obama.
LanceThruster
Lieberman’s championing of Israeli Zionist policies gives him a near impenetrable invisible force shield, no matter what other foolishness he spouts.