My parents insist, among other things, that the media is not as powerful, nor as liberal biased as I suggest. I think the frantic fumbling over the Tom DeLay mugshot is proof of my view. My mother likes things to take proper essay form, so I will begin by stating my thesis, I will support it, then I will restate it.
Thesis: The media circus surrounding the DeLay indictment shows a clear liberal bias, and is so ridiculous that it requires an incredibly powerful force to prevent every single American from not killing him or herself in embarassment.
On October 17th, the AP reported that Tom DeLay had refused a plea deal that would have allowed him to retain his position as the House Majority Leader. The headline, and subhead are particularly interesting.
DeLay refused plea deal from Texas prosecutor
Ex-House majority leader likely to be fingerprinted, photographed
Pray tell, why is it so noteworthy that he will be fingerprinted and photographed? Here's why. No, wait. I'm sorry, here's why. Because the Democrats need it for t-shirts, mugs, mass mailings, etc. so they can stop photoshopping up fakes. Somehow, the fact that DeLay could have plead down to a misdemeanor, and in doing so kept his position as House Majority Leader, didn't make it into the subheading. What's important here? DeLay refuses plea. That means we'll get a mugshot!
But what then? Well, this:
Smiling DeLay photo no help to Democrats
Police mugshot won’t make for attack ad in future campaigns
That's right, somebody wrote an article about how DeLay's smiling mugshot won't be useful as hoped in a future attack ad. The ever-observant Goulam Hussain Chinoy points out that Earle should loose political partisan points (PPPs) for failing to get DeLay booked someplace where they use one of those boards with the stick on letters that say the perp's name, the date, etc.
Regardless, the tone of the article can be debated all day. Some might fancy it objective. Some might think it seems disappointed that the mugshot wasn't more damaging. I don't think it really matters which is the case, because I've already proven that the media is most definitely fired up about the mugshot, what impact it will have, etc. Lots of talk about the mugshot.
Not so much talk about Bob Perkins, or about MoveOn.org. If I Google for “bob perkins MoveOn.org,” the top two hits are Free Republic, which is sorta like the rense.org of the right. If the top two hits are Free Republic, you just Googled something that only conservatives talk about. NewsMax coming in at number three is good for bonus points. Switch over to the Google news search, and not much changes. MSNBC isn't covering Bob Perkins, certainly not with the fervor that the covered the mugshot.
And why do we need to talk about Bob Perkins? Because Bob Perkins donated to MoveOn.org, an organization which feels that "Tom DeLay is a key part of the culture of corruption in Washington.” Now, to me, the real story here is that a Congressman can get dragged into court, get bumped out of his leadership position, get brought in for a mugshot, all by a DA and a judge that are clearly his political enemies.
Did we get the mugshot? Did we? Did we? Huh? Is it gonna work? Awww, it's not gonna work! What does that mean? Mugshot! What does it mean? Hey. Assholes. Aren't any of you wondering what it means that our legal system has degenerated to the point that it's nothing more than a political club, swung around by partisan thugs? Isn't that somewhat newsworthy?
No. It's not newsworthy. The mugshot is newsworthy. That's embarassing. We, as a nation, should be fatally embarassed that we can be led around by sound bytes and photo ops (or mug shots), like idiot beagles chasing a rawhide. The fact that we're not, the fact that we're instead asking “did they get a useable mugshot,” proves two things:
First, we view things from a liberal perspective. Who is the mugshot useful to? Liberal PR hacks. What are we asking? “Is the mugshot useable?” I don't care what the tone is. The question itself, the focus paid to the mugshot, arises from a liberal thought process. This is, in fact, the very definition of “liberal bias.“ The news is being written from the point of view to a liberal. A liberal will want to know if he's getting his mug shot taken, and will want to know if it looks bad. And that's what the news wants to know.
Second, there is a powerful force at work, here. A force capable of completely distracting from substance, to the point that people don't even know what guilt means, what a mug shot means, what the purpose of our courts is, or what the word “recuse” means. The mug shot. Look at the mug shot. Think about the mug shot. Tom DeLay is guilty... It's only a matter of time... You know he's guilty... There's a mug shot...