‘Chatsworth Farnsworth’ Strikes Again
by
Jack Kenny
by Jack Kenny
DIGG THIS
In her 2004
book Bushworld:
Enter at Your Own Risk, stubbornly irreverent New York
Times columnist Maureen Dowd recalled in her introduction that
"Poppy" Bush, (Bush ’41) was rather uncomfortable with
Ms. Dowd in her role during the first Bush administration as the
Times’ White House correspondent.
"Poppy
Bush had been expecting a traditional pin-striped Times correspondent,
one with a name like Chatsworth Farnsworth III, who would scribble
about ’41 leading the Atlantic alliance," Dowd observed. Not
only the New York Times, but the whole media establishment has too
many aspiring Chatsworth Farnsworths, with or without Roman numerals,
who are all too eager to discover the next world leader of grand
ambition and global "vision." We would be better served
if they would just stand back and report and comment on how the
American people choose the president of the United States. Where
have you gone, Theodore H. White?
The Anything
But Candid (ABC) television network and cable channel Fox News this
week announced plans to limit the number of candidates participating
in this weekend’s televised debates – ABC’s on Saturday night and
the Fox News event on Sunday night. This is, for the benefit of
that portion of the rest of the civilized world that may not have
been paying attention, the weekend immediately preceding next Tuesday’s
New Hampshire primary elections. ABC had a number of criteria for
winnowing the field based on standing in the polls, money raised
and how they fared in the Iowa caucuses. Fox had already made its
decision for its Republican debate and U.S. Reps. Ron Paul of Texas
and Duncan Hunter of California didn’t make the cut.
That means
the Fox debate will include the Big Three – Romney, McCain, Giuliani
– whom former candidate Tommy Thompson called by one name: "Rudy
McRomney." And Gov. Huckabee will be both seen and heard by
the national TV audience, unless he has lost another 100 pounds
by then and has become invisible. And former Tennessee Senator and
Law and Order star Fred Thomson will be included and will no doubt
lead a nationwide TV audience to the dramatic discovery of the missing
smoking gun, or "mushroom-shaped cloud" that justified
the war in Iraq.
Duncan Hunter
won’t get to talk about his fence to keep the illegal immigrants
out. And without Ron Paul, there won’t be single voice in the Republican
debate raised against our continued participation in the great neo-nuthouse
Bush War II in Iraq that Paul has always opposed, still opposes
and would end soon after he enters the White House. At that time,
Fox News may fall on its propagandistic sword and stop covering
the White House, though there may be occasional mention of rumors
of an alleged White House somewhere in Washington, DC. Perhaps there
will even be rumors of a Washington, D.C. Who needs a real president,
White House or capital, anyway? Who needs a real debate? Fox News
creates its own reality.
Indeed, that
is what many, if not most, of the columnists, commentators and alleged
reporters in Chatsworth Nation wish to do. They like to create our
reality for us. They will tell us who the candidates and what the
issues are, thank you. A caller on a talk show here in New Hampshire
made the point that it was not so much an issue of who gets
left out of the debates, but what is being left out. Neither
Paul’s argument against the war in Iraq nor his call for abolition
of the Federal Reserve will be heard by the Fox News audience. Nor
will Dennis Kucinich’s plan for universal health care be heard on
ABC. The marketplace of ideas that should be part of a presidential
debate has been shrunk by the imperial edict of the Chatsworth Caesars
of the Fourth Estate.
Listening to
that very insightful argument, I didn’t think it had much impact
on the two professors who were guests on the program, one from the
University of New Hampshire, the other from Harvard. Both offered
tepid defenses of the ABC’s and Fox’s fiats. Neither, I suspect,
gives a cat’s keyster or a rat’s rear end about "the marketplace
of ideas." Neither, I am certain, do the two major political
parties. And neither does the "mainstream media" which
is so much and so often in bed with the political establishment
that they are no doubt breaking laws against incest and fornication
in every state in the union.
Is it a coincidence
that the establishment, kennel-fed media want to keep out pretty
much the same people that the political establishment wants to keep
out – the Pauls and the Kuciniches and the Hunters, the bulls in
a political china shop, who aren’t afraid of breaking a few political
icons? That gives the "mainstream media" or Nuthouse News,
Inc., more time to dote on the stars and amplify their messages
for them. We hear, for example, that voters in New Hampshire or
Iowa, are being asked to compare Hillary Clinton’s "experience"
versus Barack Obama’s promise of change. What we don’t hear much
of is the substance, or lack of it, in the change Obama promises.
And we seldom hear the journalistic gatekeepers of the political
conversation challenge Clinton’s claim of experience. The cartoonists
do a better job – especially the one who depicted Sen. Clinton in
an operating room advising a patient not to worry: "I’m not
a surgeon, but I was married to one for eight years."
I recently
heard one of the talking heads on the radio refer offhandedly to
Sen. Clinton’s "sensible foreign policy." Really? On what,
I wonder, is that glib assumption based? Her cop-out, pass the buck
vote in October of 2002 to authorize the Great Decider to unilaterally
decide whether or not he would take this nation to war in Iraq –
when it was all too obvious he would? Someone should have brought
Senator Clinton and each of her colleagues who voted as she did
a bowl of water so each could ritually wash his or her hands in
the tradition of Pontius Pilate.
That is what
the "mudstream" media is inclined to call a "sensible
foreign policy." Go along to get along. Follow the conventional
wisdom, defined so well by Joe Sobran as, "what everybody thinks
everybody else thinks." People like Paul or Kucinich, who opposed
our war of aggression in Iraq from the beginning and have consistently
opposed the funding of it, are usually labeled, "controversial"
at best and "extremist" and "isolationist" at
worst.
Last year,
PBS correspondent Bill Moyers produced a documentary called Buying
the War, showing how the major news media swallowed the lies,
half-truths and deceptions that somehow convinced most of the nation
(if the polls were to be believed) that Iraq was a serious threat
to the United States. Did the establishment media "buy"
the war? Or was the media "bought" by the war’s proponents?
At the end
of last week, Fergus Cullen, chairman of New Hampshire’s Republican
State Committee, was still trying to convince Fox News, with whom
the state GOP is co-sponsor of the debate, to relent and let the
banned candidates participate. My suggestion to Mr. Cullen was that
he announce the New Hampshire Republican Party has withdrawn its
sponsorship, leaving Fox to either go it alone or find another sponsor.
For the sake of candor, I recommend that Fox sponsor this debate
as a joint venture with the American Kennel Club. That, or something
like that, is where I would assume the political establishment finds
the accommodating Chatsworth Farnsworths of the Fourth Estate.
January
5, 2008
Manchester, NH, resident Jack Kenny [send
him mail] is a freelance writer.
Copyright
© 2008 LewRockwell.com
Jack
Kenny Archives
|