Well Steve, I know it's gonna burn yer ass... but I think the poster comin' juuuuust before you (one "make liu") may have stolen your thunder.

You know those "empty-headed, corporate ass-licking, majored-in-speech-communications-learned-the-news-biz-at-a-local-teevee-station-and-wouldn't-know-the-Columbia-Journalism-Review-if-you-smacked-me-upside-the-head-with-a-copy mainstream press-types" you were condemning?

Well, how the hell do you expect to compete with "make liu" of the MSM when they can offer things like this:

"This is a answer someone ask me - by make liu"
"Rohan : Open beta is coming to an end - by make liu"

Clearly, make liu is MSM. Big-time. Rohan PLUS a answer. Sounds like AP to me.

Now. About those chum you were offerin'.....

I share your pain, McSteve, but we're trying to find our voices. Will you join us and seek a way to create the counter message to the inanity, the drivel and the incessant vomitus that is currently offered by the MSM? Would welcome your creative thoughts over at "Our Voice and the Media".

Dudes, I know we're all about gloom and doom here, but you might want to glance at the poll numbers.

I think part of the reason the MSM is latching onto lame-ass Obama stories (about "refining" positions, etc) is that they're desperate to look balanced. And the other half of the story goes like this:

McCain said to have wasted head start.
McCain shakes up staff.
McCain staffers hate each other more than Christy Brinkley hates her ex.
It's widely agreed: McCain is a crappy speaker.
McCain falling behind in OH, MI, VA, MT.
McCain's economic message: nothing really new.
Can McCain use a computer?
Cindy McCain: the trophy wife who got left behind.

If we were Republicans, we'd be tearing our eyebrows out and screaming about press bias.

I'm not saying that Josh should give the AP a free pass. Nor am I saying we should stop contributing -- to all Democratic candidates. But I am saying that we've got a better Presidential nominee, we're running a much better campaign, and it'd be a shame for any of my progressive comrades to pop an artery needlessly.

Great blog and recommended.

While I am sick of sending shit to editorial boards that never receives much more than an automated response, I am committed to blogging for the guy as much as possible.

People discount that as "preaching to the choir" but I disagree. I think TPM would have a difficult time making ends meet if they had to rely on the numbers from just the people we "see" on a regular basis around here. AT&T doesn't pay for ad space on a site catering to the needs a couple thousand political junkies.

We are just the dancing monkeys. The real audience never says a word.

That is why your last point is so vitally important. What other choice do we have now than to treat the Raging Left as if they were in the service of John McCain? They refuse to moderate their criticism to a reasonable tone, so I say they are fair game until November.

I'll do my best to keep it semi-civil, but with the shit they are peddling as "legitimate concerns from a democratic voter still waiting to be sold on the democratic nominee."

Really? You're still making up your mind between Obama and McCain? That's why it is so hard to take them seriously as true progressives. They argue like children (a very neocon trait) and refuse to ever concede a single solitary point no matter how much irrefutable evidence is provided.

At any rate, keep up the fight - You (and others around here) would make Thomas Paine proud! Here is a favorite of mine from Common Sense:

Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infotainment

I have a constructive suggestion. Forget about the MSM--the 24 hour corporately-owned political gossip channels. Focus instead on changing what is communicated in local markets. Local tv stations and newspapers. Local blogging. Elections are won at a local level. Issues are won at a local level. Everyone in politics knows this and develops a communications strategy around it.

Why don't more of us do the same? Think about all the energy spent on the futility of criticizing the MSM, and imagine how much more we could get accomplished by informing on a local basis.

When an issue comes up, there's a certain amount of pressure we put on Senators at the local level-- we speak more directly to the constituents they need to get elected.

These are the pressure points that, if pressed a hundred times more forcefully, would catalyze change far more effectively than perpetually complaining to and about the MSM, over and over again, expecting a different result.

Another great post from you, Steve. And you seem to draw some of the most valuable comments, too. I especially enjoyed reading the to-the-point wisdom of JasonEverettMiller, Alex39, Tena and tpmgary.

I have often thought that the corporate fat cats organized and decided a long time ago [probably within the Reagan years] that it would make good business sense to just 'buy' government decision-makers and place their acquired 'asset politicians' as strategic puppets on the DC stage.

The public can watch the drama on that stage and never realize that 'democratic representation' is often just an orchestrated pretense.

The MSM is itself is also owned by the same power playing interconnected corporate fat cats, which cabal now has a near monopoly on delivering their 'stagecraft' [which they call 'news'] thanks to a lot of 'bought' politicians delivering that monopoly through legislation in the last two decades.

I think that the corporate media would fire the asses of true journalists, and especially would either fire or smear any investigative journalist the moment he/she got close to substantively exposing the 'stagecraft/bought politician nexus.

I think John McCain let himself be bought pretty thoroughly, and the MSM will not expose him precisely because he's been bought by their cabal, not because they are enamored of his history as a pow or maverick.
I also think that Obama realized a long time ago what he would be up against with the interlocking web of background powers controlling the government and the media. The only change possible to this existing power arrangement is a grassroots movement large enough to be able to countervail in this climate. So tpmgary's suggestion about doing a whole lot of local focusing is spot on.

Highly recommended. Thank you, former NC Steve. Very much.

As I've posted elsewhere, I work with a large number of moderate Republicans. They are not opposed to voting for Obama but they are very, very skittish. And nothing anyone can do (or would want to do!) is going to make him totally reassuring:
-- he is black,
-- he does have a very different background,
-- he is comparatively new on the national scene,
-- he does talk about things in a different way,
-- he does come across as 'cerebral,'
-- he has acquired a bit of a rock-star aura.
When it comes to elections, those things are handicaps. Yes, he managed to win the primaries against the strongest field in decades -- but it's important, I think, that he won the primaries with his supporters unified, enthusiastic and working hard.

Some or all of these things are going to lose him some of the more conserviative Democratic vote. Period. It's gone. And these things also make moderate Republicans/independents/some Democrats very skittish. And the air of discord and anger is going to turn off the youth vote -- which is what's happened every election cycle.

So despite the fact that McCain is stumbling and, Lord knows, the Supreme Court factor alone should keep people from voting for Obama, I don't think this election is anywhere near 'won.'

Even if Obama doesn't make some gaffe or put on a Dukakis helmet, he's simply more unknown and different than McCain. Therefore, the steadiness, certainty and willingness to work of his volunteers is going to make all the difference in helping individual voters get to know him. When you don't know the man at all and you hear his own supporters screaming betrayal, etc. .... then it's simply easier not to try to sort it all out. If folks are feeling upset and betrayed this quickly, then it raises concern that you might vote for him in Nov. and (as someone above said) you'll wake up four months or a year from now feeling like a fool.

(And since the moderate Republicans HAVE had that experience, fairly recently, they are particularly concerned about that.)

For those who do have that concern, I would suggest that you do yourself and your country a favor and listen and ask questions and learn. Remember, it is a two-option (only) decision:
Obama or McCain.
I think the best place to start is reading both of their autobiographies: "Dreams From My Father" (Obama) and "Faith of Our Fathers" (McCain). That's one way to cut out the MSM.

Please remember, it really *isn't* a matter of whether you approve of/trust/like/adamire Obama. The question right now - the only question - is which of two men you approve of/trust/like/admire more? Barack Obama or John McCain? ---------- And if you can't decide between them, then it's which party do you want in the White House (and appointing Cabinet members, representing us abroad, etc.) for the next 4 years? Democrats or Republicans?

So, please, let's take a lesson from the civil rights movement (which is one of the legacies very much involved here) and keep our "eyes on the prize"

One thought --- maybe there is so much disruption lately because a lot of people who post on these blogs simply aren't sure of precisely what they *can* do. tpmgary has a good idea, and maybe we should exchange ideas about the best ways to approach local media. And where are some 'independent' or 'moderate' blogs where providing some calm, reasoned and informative posts might ease some uncertainty and win a few more votes?

There really is plenty of time to discuss - critique - bemoan - and pressure afterwards. Four whole years. So maybe the question to answer is which of the candidates do you think will listen best? But for the next four months (a really very short time), I hope that we would work - hard! - for the candidate we are comfortable backing and if there isn't one, to work - hard! - to figure out which candidate you want to support or at least vote for.

I know they always say "this is the most important election ever" I've heard that said for 12 presidential elections (since 1960 - I think I counted right). This time, for the first time, I believe it's true. America is so low right now, both internally and in its standing in the world, that the next president has to be a leader who will start building us up in solid but dramatic ways .... or we are simply going to remain stuck here in the mire, for far more than four years, with people saying "America's time in the sun is over."

PS: Even in this very post you put forth the idea that Obama lied somehow. My comprehension of his book and his many interviews and speeches and written positions is immaterial to your underlying misunderstanding of who the man is based on your written comments at TPM.

He has never misrepresented who he is and this NEW bill isn't the same one he was against last year nor is different from his stated position on these sorts of things in the past. Same with Iraq. It is foolish to think that presidential candidate Obama could outline a plan that wouldn't be modified once he is President Obama and has access to new information. That's just common sense to me.

Did you read the book? It doesn't sound like it based on your read of his positions on national security and a host of other items.

To NC Steve:

A big hearty FUCK YOU!

You sick, petless fascists.

Oh, My Dear Sweet Mother of God its Going to be a Long Stupid Summer

Steve, having spent 3 weeks swimming across Lake Superior, fears that he may soon get wet.