The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Declare War on the Establishment Media

Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

Declare War on the Establishment Media

By Quin Hillyer on 3.14.10 @ 2:18PM

Andy McCarthy is right. He writes today to complain about a hit job in the L.A. Times against Ginni Thomas, long a conservative activist in her own right, who just happens to be the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Ginni Thomas is just launching a new organization dedicated to propounding First Principles, educating younger people about our nation's founding and its founding values, and mobilizing on behalf of those values in the public sphere. More power to her. But the L.A. Times treats it as a major conflict for... her husband. Read Andy's whole blog post to see his superb explanation for why the L.A. Times piece is outrageous.

Meanwhile, I'll go farther. I say that the establishment media is, as a collective entity, intellectually and ethically corrupt. Not just liberal, but intellectually dishonest, often knowingly, to a stupendous degree. So many examples could be given, but here's one that is apt right now:

There is no standard too duplicitous on which these media folks will act on behalf of their liberal ideology. If Democrats break 214 years of tradition and all prior understandings of how judges get confirmed (in an up-or-down vote), and filibuster judicial nominees almost willy-nilly, a few brave establishment media souls tut-tut a little bit while STILL expressing sympathy for their aims but not their methods. When Republicans try to kill those judicial filibusters, while preserving all other filibusters, the media goes bat-sh*+ about the Republicans' plans. So it's worse to act to maintain 214 years of tradition and the spirit of the Constitution than it is to trample that tradition and spirit.

But when the Republicans want to USE the filibuster the way it has now been used for decades, on a major piece of legislation, and the Democrats want to overcome the filibuster by trampling all tradition, suddenly there is only the mildest tut-tutting about the Dems' trampling of what the media just five years ago had called a sacred insitution. So its okay to abuse the power of the filibuster, against tradition and the spirit of the Constitution, if you are a liberal, but also okay to undermine the power of the filibuster, again against all tradition, if you are a liberal. So now you can't use the filibuster the way it has always been used, but you can use the filibuster the way it's never been used -- again, only if you are a liberal. And if you fight against those abuses either way, you are a partisan hack.

Okay, back to Ginni Thomas. Here's hoping that her new venture succeeds beyond even her own wildest imaginings. And here's hoping that when it does, one of the results is that it bedevils the establishment media at every turn.

View all comments (68) | Leave a comment

danny| 3.14.10 @ 3:38PM

Here's hoping.

dorothy| 3.15.10 @ 8:09AM

we've had eneough of this hope stuff you dumb liberal .

Missy| 3.15.10 @ 12:23PM

You mean despair, right? The only hope I have left for our country is that ZerObama will be impeached and tried for treason.

Oldefarte| 3.14.10 @ 4:53PM

Connecting the dots.......liberal/socialistic college professors.......their vulnerable journalism students......their employment by newspapers and writing daily articles........subscribers/readers of same being continuously BAINWASHED and voting according to their newspsper-obtained enlightenment. WAKE UP, AMERICA and cancel your newspaper subscriptions [and throw your TV's in the backyard]!!!!!!

glenn| 3.15.10 @ 8:12AM

yes , yes , and let's not forget to throw our books into the bacyard too, except our bibles . nobody should be allowed to read vanything except the bible .

Missy| 3.15.10 @ 12:09PM

Another well educated graduate of our fine union run public school system. Obviously, teaching grammar and spelling are priorities there.

No wonder our country is in such a mess.

Oldefarte| 3.15.10 @ 12:50PM

If your CHOSEN ONE has his way, we'll be throwing our bibles in the backyard [with a 'k'] also, since we will all be forced under punishment of imprisonment to read THE KORAN!!!!

martin j smith| 3.14.10 @ 6:02PM

I think a selective boycott of sponsors of MSM entities should be considered. Note I say selective. because it is impossible to cover everyone and everything. I would say pick out a commonly used product that adverises on MSM TV or news papers. A product or service that many people use where there are alternatives. And, where the station or the paper ect produce
something found most objectionable. Hit that sponsor with a letter stating objections and frankly state an organized boycott. I think on the issue of health care, cap and trade there are enough voters who will upport it.

Pete2| 3.14.10 @ 6:47PM

The MSM is failing and losing power bigtime. Sure you can hit the sponsors but most of them are hurting in this econmy so you can be sure they will be putting their advertising money where it'll do the most good and that is not with the MSM. In other words, don't worry about a boycott...just deliver a better product than what they have and the problem will take care of itself.

dorothy| 3.15.10 @ 8:07AM

thank god we have fox news to give us the kind of news we want to hear . those msnbc types are always complaining about something and are never fair and unbalanced like our boy becky . gosh I hate hearing news stories that don't fit into my mind . and then those liberals go on about poor bill o'reilly trying to get his producer to let him shower with her , like he didn't have the right already , since he's her boss . stupid liberals .

Missy| 3.15.10 @ 12:20PM

Ugly conjecture doesn't become you, nasty little troll. Go back under your slimy HuffPo rock where dirt like you belongs.

wbfrank9| 3.15.10 @ 12:16PM

Has anyone noticed the losing, L, cable TV station that is advertising on Fox?!

S.L. Toddard| 3.14.10 @ 7:35PM

If Sonia Sotomayor was married and her husband started a MoveOn.Org franchise group that organized mass rallies in opposition to the Republican Party (or in favor of illegal immigrant amnesty), I would find that troubling.

Apparently, Quin Hillyer and Andy McCarthy wouldn't, and would instead valiantly defend such a scenario as both appropriate and void of any conflict of interest.

SoCon| 3.14.10 @ 8:32PM

MoveOn.Org is funded by George Soros, an anti-Semitic Communist. Who is funding Ginni Thomas' new venture? A racist Nazi?
Do you know something we don't know?

I find it troubling that you object to Ginni Thomas' 1st Amendment right to freedom of speech. Why is that, predictable troll?

Margie| 3.14.10 @ 11:33PM

Ha! And why would the predictable troll, defender of terrorists, be against "mass rallies" against the Republican party when his very existence is one of bashing them?
As usual his premise is full of deceit and manipulation. Mrs. Thomas' endeavors outside the home have nothing to do with her husband, and not only that but it isn't a "franchise against a party" but is PRO-LIBERTY and ANTI-TYRANNY~ .."an organization dedicated to propounding First Principles, educating younger people about our nation's founding and its founding values, and mobilizing on behalf of those values in the public sphere."
Of course only the Leftist creeps would object to that!

SoCon| 3.14.10 @ 11:57PM

Of course, you're right, Margie--only a LEFTIST CREEP would object to Mrs. Thomas' right to free speech!

S.L. Toddard| 3.15.10 @ 12:31PM

Right - just as only a "leftist creep" would object to Sonia Sotomayor's husband starting a MoveOn.Org franchise group that organized mass rallies in opposition to the Republican Party, right? You and AmSpec resident intellectual "Marge" would be perfectly fine with that, I'm sure, and would defend the hypothetical Mr. Sotomayor's "right to free speech".

SoCon| 3.15.10 @ 1:26PM

Forget the mass rallies (who is pushing 'mass rallies' besides you?).
You SHOULD object to the Communist Soros backed MoveOn.Org in principle, moron--unless, of course, you're a Communist yourself, Toddard.

Are you?

S.L. Toddard| 3.15.10 @ 2:38PM

I do object to MoveOn.Org in principle, and in principle agree with most stated Tea Party objectives. That is not the issue. The issue is whether it is proper for the spouse of a Supreme Court Justice to organize political opposition to a particular party. Note - I do not allege that it is *illegal* or *unconstitutional*.

If Sonia Sotomayor was married and her husband started far-left "progressive" group that organized mass rallies in opposition to the Republican Party, you would NOT believe that was improper? You would vociferously defend her "right to free speech"?

SoCon| 3.15.10 @ 3:25PM

Convenient. Suddenly, you object to Communist funded MoveOn.Org in principle--yeah, sure.

Too bad you didn't say that in your FIRST post. It's too late now.

victor| 3.15.10 @ 8:29PM

Something Lettuce Tomato:
"I do object to MoveOn.Org in principle,"

Really? Alert the Newsmedia!

"and in principle agree with most stated Tea Party objectives."

From the Tea Party Nation Mission Statement:

"Tea Party Nation (or TPN) is a user-driven group of like-minded people who desire our God given Individual Freedoms which were written out by the Founding Fathers. We believe in Limited Government, Free Speech, the 2nd Amendment, our Military, Secure Borders and our Country!"

Which of these do you not agree with, eh?

To equate Virginia Thomas with Latina Sotomayor is ludicrous, maybe even absurd.

If Latina Sotomayor was "married" and her "husband", remember, she's a lesbian, would be a "fellow" member of LaRaza, MeCHA or Maldef or some such Anti-American group of malcontents.

Virginia Thomas is promoting the First Amendment, the Founders and the Constitution.
Who is she organizing political opposition against?

Margie| 3.15.10 @ 5:40PM

Hey Hot Toddy~ Wrong again O slithering Lizard. The title "AmSpec Intellectual" is reserved for you! Isn't it?
After all, I'm just a lowly high school drop out, self taught, who you enjoy picking on because I bother to point out your utter hypocrisy and slick lies. I don't pretend to be something that I'm not. I just know snakes when I see them. Anyhow~ why are you wasting time here? Don't you have a Gitmo detainee waiting to be represented?

SoCon| 3.15.10 @ 7:10PM

That's not intelligence, Margie--that's snark.

SLT is full of hot air and snark; what a bore.

victor| 3.15.10 @ 8:32PM

SLT?
As in Something Lettuce Tomato?
Since a BLT is quite tasty,
SLT would be downright unappetizing.

SoCon| 3.15.10 @ 10:26PM

What is the 'something' you have in mind, Victor?

I have my own ideas but I shall keep them to myself--for now.

Margie| 3.15.10 @ 10:36PM

Exactly. He was mocking me, and I returned the favor. He can have the title, in the same manner he meant it to me.

SoCon| 3.15.10 @ 11:46PM

Who was mocking you? Victor? Brave man to mock you, Margie--especially, considering the fact that he's in such close proximity and all. lol

Margie| 3.16.10 @ 12:18AM

No, My comment was to yours about Toddard's snarkiness, not intellect.
Boring subject, indeed.

SoCon| 3.16.10 @ 12:56AM

SLDullard's a boor and a bore.

Oldefarte| 3.15.10 @ 12:48PM

'If Sonia Sotomayor was married' we'd all be COMIN' TO JOIN YA, LIZBETH [have you ever seen what that woman looks like----in the words of Bo Diddley, SHE'D HAVE TO SNEAK UP ON A GLASS OF WATER TO GET A DRINK!]

victor| 3.15.10 @ 8:41PM

SL Troglodyte:
"conflict of interest."

???? Define "conflict of interest."

The purpose for conflict of interest laws is to prohibit public employees from personally benefiting at the expense of the public interest.

Clarence Thomas, as an officer of the court, would have to be a part of a law firm that represents or he himself represents, an enemy of the United States. To normal folks, that would be Al-Qaeda or the ACLU. To folks such as Comrade Toddarovich, that would of course, be Israel.

What would a conflict of interest for Virginia and Clarence Thomas be?
He is a Supreme Court Justice, possibly Chief Justice, and holds the responsibility of upholding the Constitution of the United States.
Virginia is furthering the cause of the Founders, which must include the Constitution, and passing that along to the youth of America.

In other words, Virginia and Clarence are both furthering and upholding the same document, the Constitution, and ideals of the Founders.

Conflict? What conflict?

Franklin| 3.14.10 @ 8:32PM

Thank all of you for your tireless efforts to promote the conservative message.

I was listening to a 1993 Alan Parsons Project song and it hit me how appropriate it is for today:

Turn It Up
Alan Parsons Project

It's no good believing in somebody else
If you can't believe in yourself
You give them the reason to take all the power and wealth
It's no good you trying to sit on the fence
And hope that the trouble will pass
'Cause sitting on fenses can make you a pain in the ass

If there's something you find to believe in
Then the message must get through
So don't just sit in silence
When you know what to do

Turn it up. Turn it up, make it louder
Turn it up. Turn it up, make it louder

There's no conversation if nobody speaks
And nothing gets done in the end
There's no confrontation when fantasy makes you its friend
So much injustice, too many lies
We don't have to look very far
But nothing will change if we leave things the way that they are

If there's something you find to believe in
Then the message must get through
So don't just sit in silence
When you know what to do

Turn it up. Turn it up, make it louder
Turn it up. Turn it up, make it louder

Indiana Alex| 3.14.10 @ 9:57PM

I sometimes wonder how the mainstram media would have handled an attempt by GW Bush and the Republican congress to pass Social Security privatization through reconcilliation.

My guess is that the reporting would have been a bit different, even though both that and the healthcare boondogle are similar in their popularity.

wbfrank9| 3.15.10 @ 12:20PM

I expect that Social in-Security would have been better off years ago with privatization.
Neither party wants that: it would mean a lot less money to play with!

Margie| 3.14.10 @ 11:39PM

FYI~ The article at the L.A. Times won't post your positive comment and best wishes for Mrs. Thomas' endeavors. We kept trying to post repeatedly. So far they've let one negative post by someone go through, of course. Imbeciles!

SoCon| 3.14.10 @ 11:59PM

Just more LEFTIST CREEPS, Margie!

Margie| 3.15.10 @ 10:42PM

Went back there tonight, and they put the comments back up. They scrubbed them last night, then put them back up. Anyone who wants to put in a good word to Mrs. Thomas:
http://www.latimes.com/news/na.....5384.story

dorothy| 3.15.10 @ 8:00AM

I agree but I just don't know if I can trust a white woman who married a black man and watches pornography with him and god knows who else .

Dai Alanye| 3.15.10 @ 11:44AM

We all deeply appreciate your thoughtful comments, Dorothy, but you must stop peeping in the Thomas' bedroom windows. Such habits will get you into trouble some day.

Missy| 3.15.10 @ 12:14PM

Dorothy is just your average, run of the mill liberal racist.

If liberals can't keep black folks down on the democrat run inner city plantations they go ballistic.

victor| 3.15.10 @ 8:47PM

Were you peeking in the window of the Barack Obama Sr's house?

I've been reading that they were quite the libertines in their day.
Frank Marshall Davis was one of their close friends.

daveinboca| 3.15.10 @ 2:13AM

Thankfully, the LAT will go belly up before the sociopaths in the White House can rescue them with an AIDS buyout.

dorothy| 3.15.10 @ 7:57AM

we were just lucky that we were able to have the supreme court appoint bush in 2000. can't we have the court do something here ? I am sick of these liberals winning elections and running the government . it's not fair .

Nick| 3.15.10 @ 8:17AM

Dorothy,

You are a great example of a bleeding heart liberal.

You don't have the brains or common sense to know that you just responded to a spam ad!

Keep it up, Einstein!

Ken (Old Texican)| 3.15.10 @ 8:49AM

Nick,
You gave me a good laugh!
I was still doing a "huh? what? do what???" to Dorothy's post. Thank you for clearing that up for us. (grin)

I do hope each of you will take the time to read McCarthy's article in the link above.

Missy| 3.15.10 @ 12:17PM

Liberals like 'Dorothy' have spam for brains--I'm surprised she couldn't recognize it.

victor| 3.15.10 @ 8:50PM

Well, she probably did what you're supposed to do with Spam:
Fry it up real good and put ketchup on it.

SoCon| 3.15.10 @ 11:51PM

Spam makes me want to urp! Double that if you put ketchup on it.

Maybe it wouldn't be too bad with a chilled bottle of Moet. ;)

JP| 3.15.10 @ 9:05AM

Funny how today's liberals find nothing wrong with the appointment of Hugo Black to SCOTUS by FDR. Black, a bonofide KKK member, helped to grease FDR's New Deal through the Senate. He was rewarded with a SCOTUS seat. If you look at the many bios of Black, you will see liberals even today giving him many kudos -only mentioning his KKK membership in passing. How the very people who find nothing wrong with Hugo Black, but wax indignantly about Ginny Thomas can rationalize thier beliefs is a mystery.

The Constitution protects Free Speech -even for wives of conservative jurists. Today's Left has a huge problem with Democracy and the Constitution. They have an autocratic streak a mile deep.

Ken (Old Texican)| 3.15.10 @ 9:08AM

Quin, Hi!
I was breathlessly waiting for you to give us a brilliant strategy for "Our War On The Establishment Media".

Uh!

It didn't happen.

One strategy might simply be calling local TV advertisers on the Network news shows and pointing out to them TEVO commercial jumps after delaying news for about ten minutes and taping.
Other ideas, folks?

Nick| 3.15.10 @ 10:59AM

Ken,

Glad I could give you a laugh.

I think consevatives have been doing a decent job in the media wars in the last 15+ years.

The 3 network news shows have gone from 70 million viewers a night down to 20 million. I stopped watching around '93, thanks to Rush. I grew up actually thinking they were non-partisan.

Drudge can drive stories as well as the NYT and WaPost.

And Rush, Ingraham, Levin, Beck, et al, inform, entertain, and, one could argue, planted the seeds of the Tea Party movement. Along with conservative blogs, of course.

The war isn't over, to be sure. But, we have advanced on many fronts.

gearjammer| 3.15.10 @ 9:43AM

If 10 million canceled their cable , if just for the summer, it would be a stunning blow against the criminal media conglomerates. These are the greediest people on earth, they worship money, and yet criticize everyone else for being overpaid. And, do not give your children for movie tickets and video games. Tell them the money is used to support bad people who hate America.

wbfrank9| 3.15.10 @ 12:29PM

Well, maybe the reason that the Leftist anti-Freedom Socialists (Dems of course) don't like this is BECAUSE she is 'white' and he is black AND because they are conservatives. I think that, as usual, the Democrats are the racist race-baiters that they always have been!
It bears repeating: that after the 'Civil War' during Reconstruction the white slave owners, better know as Democrats, brought forth a terrorist organization: Klu Klux Klan. This organization was in the business of terror acts again blacks AND Republicans. And it was the Republicans who actually had a lot of influence in getting The Voting Rights Act of 1965 passed.
wbf

Tim| 3.15.10 @ 12:39PM

•"And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed—if all records told the same tale—then the lie passed into history and became truth. 'Who controls the past' ran the Party slogan, 'controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.'"
- George Orwell, 1984,

victor| 3.15.10 @ 8:51PM

That's why the libs don't want anyone else but them to write the history books.

SoCon| 3.15.10 @ 10:29PM

Agreed. Those who control language control the people. Dirtbags.

Pingback| 3.15.10 @ 12:45PM

War on the Establishment Media « The Republican Heretic links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…the State of Kansas Home > Media > War on the Establishment Media War on the Establishment Media Mon 15 Mar 2010 The Republican Heretic Leave a comment Go to comments Quinn Hillyer at the American Spectator calls for an all-out war on the mainstream media. The main point of contention here is an LA Times article attacking Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, for her…

The Republican Heretic| 3.15.10 @ 12:46PM

Trackback: http://republicanheretic.wordp.....ent-media/

Dein| 3.15.10 @ 1:24PM

I nominate GM ,GE,Chrysler for boycott

Trackback| 4.11.10 @ 6:27AM

Erotic games, books and toys for adults, on Erotic games, books and toys for adults, links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

And am not talking about your over- sexed neighbours, who you always wonder how they do it or if they swings…., No, am talking about other species of the animal Kingdom who we share this planet with. We can learn alot….. and am not asking you to go out & purchase DvD’ s of Animal porn (do they exist?)….

The American Spectator