Check this out, note especially the first sentence of O'Leilly's spewage.
Harrogate warned of this the night he took the lead in correctly calling Lamont's victory. Between then and now, unfortunately, Harrogate has been proven right: the Conneticut primary has been solidly framed in the media as a victory for extremism.
4 comments:
Harrogate, your foresight never ceases to amaze me.
It's a burden, this gift. One shares when and where one can. Other than that, what can one say?
An interesting take on this at MSNBC at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3449870/
Of course O'Luffa is against Lamont; O' Luffa supports the war. The interesting aspec would be to see how O'Luffa maintains his "Populism" as support for the war dwindles. He has done it before, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,204360,00.html, but he must watch what he says closely before he alienates his audience too much. In this article, notice his harsh criticism for the Left (At the top) and then the general remarks against "consumers" at the end, the "I Don't Want to hear about it camp."
solon, if it was only the punditocracy, there wouldn't be as many teeth to the thing. But it's the hard news.
Mark it. Just as in the run up to the 2004 Primary, every newscaster and writer asked "is Dean electable" (and this was before almost anybody knew anything about what the guy actually was about), so too is Lamont already being painted nationally, and will continue to be painted, as a fringe phenom.
So that there is in effect no way to oppose the government's endless war without being represented as fringe, period.
Post a Comment