Comments on: The salacious mainstream affection for Huckabee

by: MikeEss

Fri, 07 Dec 2007 08:20:58 +0000

“You know the New York Times pundits keep attacking Hillary Clinton, right?”

Doesn’t mean they don’t want her to be in the race. She’s got brand recognition, already has whole groups of avid, drooling, “fans” ready to escalate their hate, etc.

As Amanda said: “The New York media is probably rooting for a Giuliani/Clinton race the most, since they’ve been covering these candidates in detail for a long time, meaning less research and more sales.”

They probably still want the matchup, even if they dislike both Giuliani and Clinton…

by: Samantha Vimes

Fri, 07 Dec 2007 05:52:46 +0000

A professional writer has a responsibility to know the meaning of the words they use.

by: hf

Fri, 07 Dec 2007 01:02:48 +0000

You know the New York Times pundits keep attacking Hillary Clinton, right?

by: Kyso K

Thu, 06 Dec 2007 22:26:51 +0000

According to Christopher Bird, a.k.a. Mightygodking, Huckabee also “…actually manages to seem occasionally human and warm-blooded, and exudes ‘I would love to have a beer with him’-ness. (Which, incidentally, is not something any other country ever thinks about.

Can I just rant about how much this drives me insane? I think about all the people I enjoy having beers with, and it strikes me that though they are lovable, fun people, a significant minority of them are barely capable of managing a pizza shop, much less a whole country. Why this became a serious litmus test among certain, vocal subcultures in this country is beyond me, but I know a couple of people who actually think like that and it drives me insane.

by: Amanda Marcotte

Thu, 06 Dec 2007 22:20:14 +0000

Sorry, Keith, but salacious is a more common word than gunsel. You used average person for your metric, because you figured that was an easier sell and were either too slow to realize that no average person of average vocabulary becomes a writer for the Times, or you were hoping no one would catch it. The entire fucking article is water-carrying; the word is a particularly egregious example of the entire dismissive tone of the article. You know it; so why are you so quick to be dismissive? Do you just enjoy playing the wise man shaking his finger at the hysterics or do you have a pro-Huckabee slant to your thinking?

by: zuzu

Thu, 06 Dec 2007 20:00:13 +0000

The New York media is probably rooting for a Giuliani/Clinton race the most, since they’ve been covering these candidates in detail for a long time, meaning less research and more sales.

The local media (as opposed to the New York-based national media) hasn’t even *begun* to make what it knows about Giuliani known to the rest of the country. And they have a grudge against him now.

With any luck, this will all find its way into the race if he’s the nominee. But the national media tends to disdain the tabs, who have all the really juicy stuff. So who knows how much will actually get out.

by: libhomo

Thu, 06 Dec 2007 19:46:52 +0000

Of course the corporate media are propagandizing for Huckabee. Militant fundamentalists keep fundies distracted and easier to rip off by corporate interests.

by: pablo

Thu, 06 Dec 2007 18:50:27 +0000

The NYT considers this salacious only because Clinton is involved. If Huckabee had bought into a wacky Bush conspiracy theory and released a rapist/killer the Times would’ve used a different word if they covered the story at all.

by: KeithM

Thu, 06 Dec 2007 18:50:02 +0000

Actually, in Alberta, this more or less carried Ralph Klein’s regime for it’s entire duration through scandal after scandal. Stories of him frequenting Calgary’s most famous sleazy taverns were circulated during every election, and when the St Louis finally closed down the local media called it the “end of an era”.

The main reason Klein lasted so long is that the opposition parties are, to be frank, sort of useless in Alberta. This is handily shown by the example of Stockwell Day. The fact he’s an idiot was quickly shown at the national level with a minimal amount of effort on the part of the Liberals. There’s nothing that couldn’t have been pointed out by opposition parties in Alberta.

As for Ralph himself, everyone knew he was an alcoholic but given the total incompetence of the opposition, it’s not like people had a lot of choice.

by: Sheena

Thu, 06 Dec 2007 17:52:25 +0000

Rob, (verb)er of (noun)s
December 6, 2007 at 11:10 am

exudes ‘I would love to have a beer with him’-ness. (Which, incidentally, is not something any other country ever thinks about.

Those of us in the deepest south (i.e. Australia) beg to differ.