If you have "no place to go," come here!

Another liberal institution jumps the shark

In this case, the Nation, whose non-apology apologies do not convince. What is it about The Big O that causes people to go shark jumping?

No votes yet


Roman Berry's picture
Submitted by Roman Berry on

What I am seeing reminds me of nothing so much as the apologia we saw in the 90's when another Democrat in the White House was doing many decidedly conservative things like passing NAFTA, gutting welfare, deregulating media (especially relaxation of ownership rules) and the banks/Wall Street. A great many putatively liberal organizations fell in line then too. And now, we look back at the best Republican president in modern history (at least prior to Obama) as some sort of icon...all because he raised taxes to a small degree on the upper brackets and happened to come to office during a time when the tech boom and internet were about to launch.

It doesn't have anything to do with the Big O. It has to do with tribalism.

Sixteen years ago the best Republican president in modern history (prior to Obama) had the good sense to reject Bob Dole's version of health care deform. The current Republican president managed to pass what is essentially the Bob Dole health care deform plan...and the tribe hails it as a great progressive achievement. I almost am to the point that I believe if you want to know what the tribe will count as progressive sixteen years hence, all you need do is look at what the far right Republicans are espousing today. From Reagan on, the positions of the Democratic tribe have followed the Republican lead, legitimized it and made it conventional wisdom.

The bottom line is that the tribal chief and council have moved to the right...and the tribe and its scribes have followed. That's why I no longer count myself as part of the tribe.

Valhalla's picture
Submitted by Valhalla on

Smearing "opponents" is just the flip side of unbridled adulation for The One. Wasn't it The Nation which sent that pathetic open letter to Obama during the primaries begging him to be a progressive? (or am I confusing my shark-jumping liberal institutions?) Once you divorce your rhetoric from reality, whether in support for the object of your worship or to demonize your "opponents", it's all over, I think.

The only surprising thing is that The Nation chose to "stand up" on government-sponsored groping and pr0n machines -- rather tone deaf, that.

Submitted by Hugh on

You see this a lot. Katrina vanden Heuvel at the Nation, Joan Walsh at Salon, they're the editors and both are very Democratically oriented, and Obamabotic. It's surprising that we don't see even more of this.

It's just another example of how the left has been neutered and turned into an adjunct of the Democratic party.

Actually I just saw that Walsh stepped down as editor in chief a couple of weeks ago. Salon apparently has a lot of money problems. So there is some talk that Walsh got out while the getting was good. Makes you wonder where Glenn Greenwald will be in a year or two.

Submitted by Hugh on

OT I know but I was just looking at this article on Salon announcing Walsh's departure.

I checked the market quotes. Ten years ago Salon was trading at $23.66. Today it is $0.10. Its market cap is $328,000. Apparently its fiscal year ends on March 31 where it will be after that is anybody's guess. I had not realized how dicey its situation was or how dependent it was on a couple of investors.

If you are interested in looking at the quotes, Salon's symbol is SLNM.OB

par4's picture
Submitted by par4 on

just that article. I followed a link to it yesterday then went over to Alterman where he was writing that Robespierre and the Jacobins were of the far right. Then Chris Hayes filling in for Maddow is bragging up the corporate profits under Obama. I believe he was trying to knock the corporations for being mean to Obama but it was so artlessly done I couldn't figure out who he was trying to defend or why.

Submitted by Hugh on

Well, as long as the corps are doing well, the rest of us can go hang. It used to be a Thomas Friedman trademark to make absurd connections. You know something like the Chinese use chopsticks. Their economy is booming. So if Americans used chopsticks more our economy would be booming too. But I am seeing a lot of this in the media. Just a couple of days ago the NYT had Stanley Fish give his column over to a couple of "economists" who tried to argue that increases in college tuition weren't so bad and that they, in fact, correlated to the increased price of dental treatment. They even had a graph. I mean what could be more idiotic? Or insulting really? That some bullshit numbers should be sufficient to wow the rubes.

But we see this in economic reporting generally. A mistaking of this for that. So if corporate profits are up, if the stock market is up, then the economy is up. If GDP is up, we're in recovery, etc. The problem is that all these things are metrics of the paper economy, and as we have seen for the last 30 years, they have next to nothing to say about the health of the real economy or the lives of real Americans.