Just minutes ago on MSNBC, Matt Bai said this about progressive blogs and the folks who read them:
RUSSERT: We have seen the Democratic candidates nurturing the blogosphere and the bloggers. Some would say pandering to them. And yet after one of them wins the nomination and begins to try to turn to the center and run across the country in a general election, will the progressive bloggers be outraged by that potential behavior?
BAI: I don't think so, and I'll tell you why. You mentioned the pandering, and, as you may know, I helped moderate the debate at the blogger convention in Chicago, and there was an awful lot of pandering going on out there. [laugh from both Bai and Russert] But I don't think that will be a problem, and here is why.
This is a very tactical movement. This is a movement based almost entirely around winning or losing, about how you get the blue team to beat the red team. This is not a movement based on any vision of government. And that's really, you know, a large part of what I talk about and sort of reveal...uh... in the book.
And so, uh, I think these folks want to win and whatever they need to do to help a nominee win, they are going to do. And if that means understanding that a...that a nominee has to take certain positions or concentrate on certain areas during a general campaign that may not thrill the folks on the blogs, or the people at Move-On or the donors, I don't think they are gonna have a big issue with that.
Beltway dismissive cynicism aside, there is a vast difference between being a realist and an idealist. And folks who write on blogs and who read them are both realistic about what they are likely to get in a candidate, and idealistic about what they prefer. And they are willing to work their butts off for to get the latter because that is how politics works. It's called life, and we all try to balance these two competing sides as best we can in any given political discussion. Tactics is absolutely an aspect of this, but it is tactics used in the cause of better government: more openness and sunshine, more balance, more accountability.
What Matt Bai sees is his own jaded view of the world through a glossy coating of media veneer. What we see is the potential of what could be, and we are willing to do the work to get something better than what we have now. I'll take my view of the world over his and Russert's any day -- I live in the real world of having to deal with the every day consequences of the political decisions ostensibly made on my behalf as a citizen, and I understand and accept that it is my job, as a citizen, to hold the elected officials to account for their actions. All of them -- this is an American responsibility, red and blue team malarky be damned.
Would that the members of the vaunted media talking head club would hold themselves to the same standards instead of worrying so much about whether they are being supplanted by bloggers and trying to marginalize us. Instead of trying to cling to your jobs, how about you just start doing them?
(Photo via Ben McLeod.)
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
Christy!
0?
Christy!
let’s keep remembering
What Christy Said …….
Bai seems to be a shallow thinker. And brownnosing Russert too.
Russert on the subject of pandering, now that’s funny.
Slothrop @ 6
He was tapping his toes for Timmy.
Americans tend to be an idealist bunch to begin with… otherwise, it just wouldn’t be America… what is the matter with Bai?
Russert? Well, we know what’s a matter with him…
“Balance”. That is a word I have heard for a long time. The word can mean different things to different people. That is perhaps, The problem.
You are on a roll today Christy.
Thanks!
Open yer eyes and see what is as plain as the nose on yer face pundit people,
clutching yer pearls isn’t helping.
They can’t see it’s about accountability and fairness?About winning, yes, but with candidates who actually represent the people that elect them and not the overlords of the corporate world for a change.
What a depressing individual.
AZ Matt @ 7
“Yessuh, Master Cheney, whatever you say, my Master, please let me be near you and speak with you, Master Cheney, you know how it thrills me…”
– Li’l Timmah McPumpkin
Christy:
As a twenty-five year veteran of public administration, ten-year advocate for state and federal funding for the arts and education, a consultant to government, and administrator for public commissions and boards, I have only two words for Matt Bai and Tim Russert, which can best be communicated using one of the five digits of my right hand.
Re: Matt Bai:
I finally finished reading Argument. He dismisses progressive netroots for its intellectual bankrupcy, using Markos as an example, castigating him for not reading Friedrich Hayek even as Markos plans to write a book about libertarianism. He also focuses on dKos for the ranting and anger in the progressive blogosphere.
He limits his discussion of FDL to a controversy. Either he doesn’t read FDL regularly, or if he does, he’s in denial.
Dancing on the razor’s edge….progressive blogging can make real change. But it never ends, there is no final win. You fight for a lifetime, then others step in when you fall. Imagine how far into Iran we’d be now if other voices hadn’t spoken up, providing pressure.
Don’t expect big media to “get it”. A guy like Matt Bai is only sawing on the tree limb he stands on when he says the bloggers are the new Democracy - who needs pundits when the voices of millions are shaping the debate?
My position is simple.
I stand with Howard Dean
Matt Bai is close, but no cigar.
He is right that we are pragmatists, but he misses the key point:
We are Principled Pragmatists — we fight for what we believe in, but whe do not make the perfect the enemy of the good.
Which is why we have such disdain for the Naderistas.
We also understand that more often than not, even a bad Democrat (HoJoe excepted) is a 1000 times better than a Good Republican.
Of course, if the GOP wants to trade Chuck Hagel for HoJoe, I’d take that deal in a heartbeat. Better to have an occasional principled Conservative than a backstabbing Quisling.
As for Timmeh?
I really have nothing more to say about the man. I stopped taking him seriously a long time ago.
Who is Matt Bai?
And what the f*ck is Bai talking about when he says big ideas are wholly missing from the left blogosphere?
Christy -
If you hadn’t said he was talking about Dems/progressives, I woulda sworn baa-baa was describing the thug party.
And……..how the h*ll did he get an invite to moderate in Chicago with this kind of attitude?
I’m with Fe @ 9:14.
I am definately a realist. That is I realize the playing field is very not-level. And yes, I cop to being an idealist.
Christy, the more I read your stuff, the more I like it. Good take!
Biodun @ 21
Maybe he means new ideas. You know, the Constitution is old and quaint.
Bai is also a self-annointed netroots “ambassador” to MSM, having been hired as a freelance writer to cover elections ‘04 and ‘06 for the New York Times Magazine.
Biodun @ 15
Bai undercuts his own, possibly very illuminating, argument when he dismisses the blogosphere as “angry” and “intellectually bankrupt.” Once you accept the Right’s villification of the netroots as your conclusion, why even explore further the evolution of ‘roots activism and where it could be heading?
Classic projection, classic conservative move.
This feels really too simplistic - it’s as if ol’ Matt is saying that we really couldn’t care less WHO gets the nomination as long as they can beat the GOP’s candidate. That presupposes that we don’t care about their position on really “big idea” stuff like healthcare, the Constitution, Wireless Wiretapping, Iraq, crimes against humanity…
Bai’s statement is idiotic. To the extent those of us seething with anger at democrats for there spineless servile actions the past 25 years are staying mum, this is a transient condition that recognizes that it is a multi-step process getting rid of the vermin that inhabit US political and news media life.
The first and most important step is putting the cult of republicanism back in Pandora’s box where its sinister destructive effects can be better managed. If that takes temporarily putting up with some “Blue Dogs” then so be it, but Bai and others should not be fooled that a day of reckoning within the democratic party isn’t looming where the Reid’s, Pelosi’s, Hoyer’s Durbin’s, Levin’s and other Vichy democrats are not going to be flushed.
.
Speaking of the press being full of sh*t, Al Gore is now discussing the press coverage of his 2000 campaign: http://www.vanityfair.com/poli.....gore200710
is the “left blogosphere” a monolithic entity?
Would President HRC be preferable to another Republican in the WH? Yes. Is Senator Clinton the best the Democrats have to offer? Hardly.
JF @ 25
Actually he means both: new and big ideas. But my own impression from reading his book is that he wouldn’t know a big idea if he fell over one. He has the intellectual sense of a rock.
I had the interesting experience of sitting next to a Democratic campaign consultant on an Oakland to Dulles JetBlue flight two years ago, shortly after a Matt Bai piece on Howard Dean came out in the Times Magazine. The consultant thought Bai was one of the Democrat’s biggest enemies. Period.
He had some other choice words, but basically, he said Bai is a hatchet man.
pluege @ 30
Exactly. The first step to getting out of the hole you’ve gotten yourself into is to stop digging. Electing Democrats means stopping the digging. Then we work on getting out of the hole that years of Republican government has gotten us into.
The MSM have now describe us as radical left-wing extremists, incapable of compromising our extreme views — and totally pragmatic opportunists who only want ill-defined “blue team” to win, no matter what.
I’m having such an identity crises today. Someone hold my hand. No, the other hand.
I liked it better when I could just do my needlepoint in private.
EPUed:
OldCoastie @ 22
anyone else get the feeling that Larry Craig is starting his campaign to stay in the Senate?
———–
My suspicion as to what’s going on behind the scenes: There was a big push when the Foley scandal broke to purge all of the gay Republicans from Capitol Hill. I think a lot of those gay Republicans (I mean the staffers here, not so much the elected officials.) lost their jobs after the 2006 election swept many of their bosses from office, so the furor died down quite a bit. Now you’ve got the Craig scandal. Bob Novak is running around telling people that no one on the Republican side of the Senate was terribly surprised by this scandal, which seems to me to be egging on the purge-faction. I think there was–and is–a significant amount of disgust among the true believers about the number of powerful gay Republicans on Capitol Hill. The fact that Craig lost his scalp so quickly has got to make all of those gay Republicans wonder if they’re next. Those folks–and their sympathizers–want Craig to stay on and fight it out.
The beauty of this fight is that you’ve got two truly despicable groups (virulent homophobes on the one hand, hypocritical Uncle Tom’s on the other) who are thrashing it out. Pass the popcorn.
Oh yeah, that’s gonna happen any day now.
These guys get me off. Who the hell are they to define people like myself and the rest of us, who’ve been around the block longer than they’ve been alive, much less kicking? What they have that we don’t have is lots of money, and that’s about the start and finish of it. Lots-of-money has a vision of the world that is not my vision. Most of us made a conscious decision back in the day not to make lots-of-money because we thought doing good in some small way was what makes a life worth living.
They can diss and dismiss all they want. Most of us have more to our cv than a talking empty head in a frame. It pisses me off that anyone should take these bozo’s seriously.
End of rant. Back to writing up course for students.
Biodun @ 21
Big ideas = Big money. They are synonymous in the world of the main stream media. It would be impossible for Matty to conceive of an idea that wasn’t backed by money and visa versa. You can feel sorry for him, but he’ll never get it. He is more useful as an example of someone who believes his own reality. I like the analogy of sawing on the limb upon which he is standing. That a journalist would call into question anyone else’s motives for broadcasting the written word is one thing; to be guilty of the fault he is attributing to the blogosphere is quite another. All that matters to Matty and the MSM at large is wining. And, in their world, wining means someone keeps publishing their crap, regardless of what the combinations of words actually mean.
Christy is bringing this issue up at an important time. Matt Bai seems to be pandering more than a little bit in his successful effort to get Russert and his kind to sni**er at our efforts. But, when it comes to our effect on the presidential contest, there’s more than a little bit of truth to what he said.
I’ve pointed out earlier here that our effects in 2008 will be most powerful and cost efficient in U.S. House races. I still believe that is where our main efforts should go. But one thing I’m beginning to see is that if Sen. Clinton continues to surge ahead of her rivals, our efforts and influence can delay her “race to the middle” and keep the discussion of real progressive issues on the presidential race table longer.
BTW, when does the U.S. Congress re-convene?
~~~ModNote: Edited for content to clear filters.~~~
let Bai be Bai-gone
oddmommy @ 32
You’d think so, wouldn’t you? Anytime one of these twits starts talking about the “left blogosphere”, somebody needs to ask, “Um, have you read the damn blog?”
punaise @ 42
groan… .
Biodun @ 15
I doubt Matt Bai or Russert read blogs. They are both too full of themselves to get off their perch.
Amen, Christy.
Shorter Matt Bai: “
Pretending to beFriends is what we do best. Now who wants another sucker?”Who is Matt Bai, and why should anyone care?
thank you christy, i can’t tell you how inspiring that is.
i confess i was starting to freak out a bit this year over congress’s multiple failures - irresponsible iran actions, funding the iraq “surge”, the secret trade deal with bush and then watching the fisa debacle put me on outrage overload… but you have really stepped it up (along with glenn, jane and some others). i love your “they work for us” posts.
when the blogs are shining that light of accountability on our side as well as the Rs, i have hope.
thank you, thank you, thank you.
Reminder: GAO report assessment on CSPAN 3 @ 2PM ET
Whoa! How can Bai sit there and say that with a straight face?
Knut Wicksell @ 40
Considering all the face time he gets on TV, Tweety’s ratings are horrid. It’s sad that the only show he can beat on weekdays is Tucker. It doesn’t say much for TV or Tweety.
Amen Christy! F*k Bai.
Bloggers and blog readers are an increasingly large group of people, who don’t all think, vote, or behave in the same way, even when they share the same general philosophical perspective. The MSM loves to make sweeping generalizations, however doing so is no more fair or accurate in this case than it would be if they were judging people solely by race or gender.
The whole thing sounds an awful lot like projection, somehow.
LS @ 50
And the sound of MSM reporting on same?
*crickets*
Biodun @ 51
B0t0x?
Biodun @ 51
Well, if you can’t point to “Atlas Shrugged” and claim that as your goal, then you just must not have a purpose, damnit.
Biodun @ 51
As Charlie Daniels said, “because the devil was looking for a few souls to steal”. And Bai made the Faustian bargain.
earlier version of this still stuck in moderation:
Christy is bringing this issue up at an important time. Matt Bai seems to be pandering more than a little bit in his successful effort to get Russert and his kind to chuckle at our efforts. But, when it comes to our effect on the presidential contest, there’s more than a little bit of truth to what he said.
I’ve pointed out earlier here that our effects in 2008 will be most powerful and cost efficient in U.S. House races. I still believe that is where our main efforts should go. But one thing I’m beginning to see is that if Sen. Clinton continues to surge ahead of her rivals, our efforts and influence can delay her “race to the middle” and keep the discussion of real progressive issues on the presidential race table longer.
BTW, when does the U.S. Congress re-convene?
OT but of interest: LINK
I don’t think Hillary is going to forgive or forget.
If the blogs of the left didn’t care about ideas, why would they care so much about winning elections?
scarecrow @ 48
See my 26 above. As you well know, the Kool-Aid drinkers who follow MSM don’t know any better. So they’ll take him at his word and they’ll continue to live in benighted darkness (to force a tautology).
When Bai says such a huge, blatant lie as “liberal bloggers have no vision of government,” he knows it’s a lie, but he still says it because he knows it’s what Timmy and the other kewl kidz wants to hear, it’s the inside-the-beltway CW, and it will keep him on the invitation lists for Georgetown cocktail parties.
Oh My, Christy.
Just got back from errands & dropped by the Lake, to this?!
Bai’s an absolute idgit altogether! And paired with Timmeh? Nice graphic there. *snerk*
Good catch! Now, can we throw em out with the trash? Yuck!
OT: McClatchy has this awful “fear the aliens, they are filling our jails” piece up now. How disappointing. Let them hear from us.
scarecrow @ 37
LOL, that’s great.
i think the trouble they’re having is in trying to paint everyone with the same brush - as though every blogger and reader is part of some monolith. that’s just a big mistake.
i can see why bai might think blogs are totally about pragmatism if he spends all his time talking with markos. but, he’d get a very different picture from talking with glenn… and something completely different from arthur silber.
that’s the thing he misses. blogs aren’t about idealism or pragmatism or any one thing. blogs are a tool for democracy: for a national conversation about our country - where we’re at, where we want to go, how to get there. and there are going to be as many views as they’re are participants.
Bai is clearly a mindless prat jousting with strawmen.
The question I have is : Don’t these people vote?
They’re on the ‘inside’, allegedly with their fingers on the pulse of what’s really happening, but rather than talk about issues and bring the Truth to bear, they’d rather talk about bloggers? What, do they just vote for whichever party’s in the majority in a given election year?
I understand the ‘uninvolved’ stance they’re supposed to take as ‘journalists’, but geez… It’s like they don’t understand the Government’s actions have real consequences.
I remember coverage of Matt Bai I read here during the first yearlykos. He came across then as someone who was suffering from “young punk” syndrome. He was very full of himself and not really keyed into what the blogosphere was all about. So I was very surprised when I heard that he had been chosen to moderate a debate at the second yearlykos. I wondered at the time what are they thinking. But then I thought well this is yearlykos and kos is much more of a traditional Democrat.
Matt Bai is just another one of those journalists (and I use the term loosely) who are dismissive of blogs but who pretend to understand them. From those of us in the blogosphere his perspective is at once irritating and laughable. I think the original mistake was that the people at the dailykos chose to give him any blog credibility. He really has none.
Ed*ard Teller @ 60
today…and here’s this week’s list of congressional hearings.
Biodun @ 51
Well, that is comparison to Bush and Cheney who have a very clear vision of government as a Presidential dictatorship. Support for the Constitution is so vague and general, don’t you know?
Congress is in session now.
Ed*ard Teller @ 60
I agree. That’s where the lefty blogs should be directing the effort.
Biodun @ 74
woooohoooooo. Let’s see what they took in during their breaks.
your last line was priceless. most of us wouldnt be compelled to be so active and online and blogging and posting so often if the MSM would just do their damn jobs.
selise @ 72
{{{selise!}}}
What a great link! thank you.
Why, Matt Bai might ask himself, would so many accomplished, busy, intelligent people focus on the tactical goals of winning elections?
Could it be because they recognize that winning elections is how our country is governed?
Maybe because they have a vision of government that precludes the Unitary Executive? Because they have a vision of government that precludes preventive wars? Because they have a vision of government that responds with good policy in the face of systemic health care failure?
Or is because they “just want to win something”? Sure. Must be that.
Pundits and conservative journalists have tried to marginalize progressive Americans for decades. This is nothing new. By ignoring the inherent ACTIVISM of participating in a national and international debate about important issues of the day, marshalling together, and then implementing change by petitioning, making contibutions, and pointing out contadictions and hypocrisy, Bai is attempting to undermine the First Amendment and create something quite different than Americans, all ‘created equal’, might envision when they think of the promise of America.
And gee whiz, the corporate media gives him TV time…go figure.
What Bai fails to realize is that, by the time the political discussion is distilled to the lesser of two evils (the general election), we will, of course, pick the lesser of two evils. That doesn’t mean we have shifted our ideals, it means we are not freaking stupid.
AZ Matt @ 5
Remember all the complaints about Bai moderating in Chicago?
Just sayin’ . . .
johnSwifty @ 41
So, essentially, you’re saying that to Matty, Jesus Christ had no potential for success, since his ideas were not based on the pursuit of money, and were therefore not “big” ideas. Perhaps someone should point that out to him.
Well of course this is completely preposterous, it’s on the corporate media isn’t it.
I don’t give a damn about party loyalty, I care about the issues.
If there was a Republican candidate (here me out) who believed in curbing corporate power, setting up a single-payer health care system, promoting peace over war, restoring the primacy of the Constitution, and serving We The People rather than the oligarchy, I would support him/her in a heartbeat.
Sadly it’s hard enough to come up with a candidate like that in the Democratic Party, and impossible from the Republican Party (as it currently exists).
So in order to get closer to those goals, I may settle for a less-than-perfect candidate because it would be better than a Republican who would continue our descent into tyranny at a much faster pace.
Unlike one poster here, I have no disdain for the “Naderistas” I share most of their values, but I’m a little more willing to compromise.
Has anyone protested to MSNBC about this yet? One of the ways the right began to be so successful in controlling the message was by getting hordes of the faithful to raise holy hell every time there was a story in the media they didn’t like.
wigwam @ 31
Unfortunately some journalists think this type of reporting in their job.
Infuriating, as usual.
I guess it just bugs me when the so-called pundits deign to talk about “us,” as if they had a freaking clue.
I watched O’Reilly last night. He changed his description of us. Must be the ‘leftwingNazihatesites’ wasn’t working out. Now we’re ‘blackmailers’. If the candidates don’t do what we say, we won’t donate to their campaigns. “Blackmailers”, O’Reilly declared. And, he doesn’t like blackmailers.
Honest. That’s what he said.
Professor Foland @ 79
And let us not forget SCOTUS.
JPL @ 85
If they don’t do that type of reporting, how will they ever get jobs with News Corp?
Solai @ 87
Maybe he would prefer publicly financed elections so that will eliminate the power of us blackmailers…
…I mean that would seem to be the logical extension of his argument. Ooops, there I go using “logic” again.
Re: Bai and the lack of “big” ideas:
Sounds like he’s read Francis Fukuyama, which I doubt. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, Fukuyama wrote an article and book of the same title (The End of History) that argued (relying mostly on Hegel) that history has now ended, that “liberal democracy” (whatever he meant by that) was now the final state form because by defeating communism, the West had won in the realm of ideas. History had ended because there were no more new ideas to debate about, and that we (in the West) will now live out our lives as bored consumers. He said all this even when at the time the world was replete history. Of course Fukuyama has since retreated from those assertions.
Now this isn’t what Bai is saying is it? That because there are now new and big ideas, this is the end of History? *g*
By the way, I also wanted to say Amen to Christy. Really appreciate this post.
Also, I have a question: whatever has happened to Evil Parallel Universe? Haven’t seen him/her around here in quite a while.
Sure sounds like Republicans to me. I mean, projecting much? What is it with people who, falsely even, accuse others of having the very flaws they themselves are exhibiting?
A lot of us are dedicated to precisely the vision of government held by the Founders of our country, which they termed republicanism. A vision in which, among other things, authority is not concentrated in a single omnipotent executive (otherwise known as a despot), but dispersed among a variety of branches and institutions of government, so that each one can be constrained by the others to stay within reasonable bounds. That vision also includes fundamental constraints on the power of government to take actions against citizens, by recognizing that citizens have rights that government cannot legitimately take away.
It is precisely this republican “vision of government” that the modern Republican party (despite the misnomer of its name) so opposes, and is so dedicated to subverting.
Not surprisingly, those of who want to preserve for ourselves and our posterity the institutions of republican government created by the Founders don’t take kindly to the Republican’s anti-American agenda.
Hence, the anger.
Ed*ard Teller @ 77
ET - ack! i started making the list for firepups around april or may (since we like watching the hearings so much)…. so sorry you didn’t know about it - probably ‘cuz i post the info in the comments on the first morning thread of the week. my apologies.
The one aspect of this is that, as Christy pointed out, Bai was speaking on MSNBC. And as I have many, mnay times, cable news is not news. It is infotainment masquerading as news.
If I turn to a cable news channel, it takes me on average from the time someone opens their mouth about 5 seconds to register the first misstatement, distortion, spin, WH talking point, or lie.
Cable news is not news. It should never be taken seriously. Yes, they may one or two real newspeople but that’s just to give them cover. They are not news.
selise @ 72
And am I missing it or is there nothing on the agenda this week to deal with the many contempt of Congress issues floating around. Have they all gone away?
Ann in AZ @ 83
Well, you have to admit that in the story of Jesus, the person of Jesus didn’t have a very successful ending. And, I’d hate to argue that there hasn’t been monetary value attributable to the ideas of the Christ story; the Vatican has been making a killing in that venue since Constantine.
But smartassedness aside, you are entirely correct in pointing out that there isn’t any big money in loving one’s neighbor as one’s self; but it isn’t a really big idea either, just a really good one.
Solai @ 87
Law’s a mercy! That’s a strong stomach you got there. ;-)
I trust that can all shuffle over to the MSNBC site and share our thoughts with them?
The problem with MSNBC is that they’re tied to Newsweek [which will then regurgitate their crap] and the WaPo [ditto]. So this gets broadcast far and wide.
realworld at 96 — There will be some info on te contempt of Congress issue in the House soon. Am awaiting a call back on it…but we’re certainly keeping an eye on that issue.
Solai @ 87
Wow! Punishing someone by refusing to give them money is blackmail? Then let’s continue our campaign to get advertisers to blackmail Fox! *g*
The answer to people like Matt Bai, whose ego interferes with his ability to perceive reality, is to have clearer-minded people on the air instead. This seems like an obvious take to me. Politicians may be persuaded because they must stand for re-election; journalists answer to their employers only and are mostly impervious to public pressure. There must arise a class of progressive journalists, and I sense that is starting to happen. These things are cyclical, and our time is beginning. Again.
Waccamaw @ 97