Did the New York Times just give up the game? A report on Mayor de Blasio’s apparent hesitancy to endorse Hillary Clinton speaks volumes about the dysfunctional political culture that is inspiring the Sanders movement and the paper that refuses to report, or even acknowledge it. Everything is illuminated under the squiggle.
Link: http://www.nytimes.com/...
The article, by Michael M. Grynbaum, is ostensibly about an upcoming endorsement of Hillary Clinton by Mayor de Blasio. (Sad to hear, I know, as was the news of yesterday’s unlikely endorsement by Sherrod Brown.)
The story reads like breathless commentary:
“What, close allies wondered, was Mr. de Blasio waiting for”?
complete with numerous unattributed quotes, set off with Mr. Grynbaum’s version of Fox New’s s patented “Some people say”.
In keeping with the Times’s policy of mentioning Bernie Sanders as infrequently as possible,
and, and never without a reminder that he is “socialist Bernie Sanders,” there is only one reference to the candidacy who makes the subject endorsement so critically important.
What is covered in depth, to the point of being repetitious, are the reactions of those around the mayor and/or involved in the campaign. There is a universal sense that he is unnecessarily and unjustifiably depriving Mrs. Clinton of his endorsement. The endorsement which is, implicitly, her due.
As such, Mr. de Blasio is portrayed as a recalcitrant rebel, foolishly postponing the inevitable:
"Such a move was widely viewed as inevitable, in part because Mr. de Blasio’s will-he-or-won’t-he dance had appeared increasingly untenable."
Along with petty insults,
“Peter Hamby, an executive at Snapchat, a social media network, wrote on Twitter: ‘You know that they say: When de Blasio speaks — actually, never mind no one says that.’”
there are also naked expressions of resentment for de Blasio’s status as a national figure, and not incidentally, his role in democratizing the primary:
“Instead of focusing attention on income inequality, Mr. de Blasio was drawing public mockery. Some Democratic officials complained that the mayor was overly focused on being a liberal kingmaker, particularly after his team announced plans for a forum for presidential candidates in Iowa this fall. “
The article also includes an implicit threat to primary de Blasio, presumably for the sin of disloyalty, not to principle, or to his constituents, but to the Clinton campaign. On what rare meat do those little Caesars feed? If the Times were interested in reporting rather than in manufacturing consensus (i.e. that the primary is over) that would be the real story.
As it is, the story paints a picture of a campaign apparatus that is entitled, snide, and conformist. The proverbial “junior high school for ugly people” that is Washington at its worst. The concerns of the citizenry, and political and economic ideology seem to take a back seat not only to corporate interests, but also to the vanity of our so-called representatives. How else to explain the fact that the story treats the substantial ideological differences between de Blasio and Clinton as lame excuses for him to refrain from enthusiastically endorsing her. In fact, the pols who are quoted seem to believe that the lip service that she paid to progressive ideals was more than de Blasio should reasonably have expected.
But more than that, this snarky, tone-deaf piece seems to take as an article of faith the fact that the Clintons rule the Democratic party with an iron fist. I was taken aback by the reporter’s catty and nonchalant recounting of the story of a political machine strong-arming an endorsement out of a prominent elected official. Neither the reporter, nor the people who were quoted seem to understand how outrageously undemocratic all of this looks from outside the bubble. All of which led me to question whether the endorsements that the Clintons are so fond of touting are worth the paper they are written on.
The Times chose not to include a comment section with the article, so I am anxious to hear if others read it as I did. Meanwhile I am bracing myself for the sight of the hostage video-style de Blasio endorsement. This is one of the reasons why we need a revolution.