The case of the disappearing campaign issues

You don't have to be Sherlock Holmes to figure out why certain perennial concerns hyped by the mainstream media have disappeared from the 2018 campaign cycle.  The disappearance illustrates the degeneration of the principal American mass media into mere propaganda outlets for the Democrats.  When the topics seemed to work against Republicans, they were almost constantly drummed into the public's consciousness.  They were a threat to our very democracy, and all good citizens were horrified, according to the instructions from our media betters.  But now, because they reflect badly on Democrats, they have mysteriously vanished.


Image credit: Pixabay

Issue Number One is "Russia Collusion."

Just three months ago, Russia's alleged handing of the election to Trump through nefarious means, or else Putin's use of blackmail to control Trump, or even third-party candidacies, was being used as a call to voters to throw the traitorous Republicans out of office:

 

 

But with the Mueller investigation producing nothing but dry holes on Russia, Ms. Milano and the rest of the true believers moved on (in the actress's case, to an even more costly dry hole: the attempt to portray Brett Kavanaugh as a rapist).

A couple of honest lefty sources noticed.

Glenn Greenwald:

 

The Nation:

... after months of fearmongering about a sweeping Russian interference effort and a compromised, complicit president, perhaps we are also seeing the penny start to drop: Russiagate, for all its hype, has not gone as advertised.

Take the supposed Russian threat to the midterms.  For months, intelligence officials and prominent media outlets have bombarded us with warnings about "a pervasive messaging campaign by Russia to try to weaken and divide the United States" (Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats), a threat so dire that we might as well dub the vote the "The Moscow Midterms" (FiveThirtyEight) and acknowledge that "we're defenseless against Russian sabotage in the midterm elections," (Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin).  The New York Times informed readers in July that Coats had likened "the persistent danger of Russian cyberattacks today ... to the warnings the United States had of stepped-up terror threats ahead of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks."  "The warning lights are blinking red again," he said.

While it is always possible that new evidence of interference will emerge, so far, the Russian danger has had an underwhelming denouement.

Joining Russia! Russia! Russia! in the media memory hole is the previously baneful effect of "big money politics" and "dark money."  They don't matter anymore.

In election cycles where Republicans had a fundraising advantage, media denunciations of the idea that rich people could fund campaigns were virtually a daily occurrence.  Watch Harry Reid on the subject:

But now that Democrats have a huge advantage in campaign fundraising, who cares?  Especially who cares about billionaires Tom Steyer and Michael Bloomberg throwing scores of millions of dollars into Democrat campaign coffers or into their own ads?  Has Robert Francis O'Rourke (trade name: Beto) been vilified for hugely outspending Ted Cruz?  If you can find anything in the mainstream media worrying about the influence of money in the Texas senatorial race, please send it to me.

If the media aren't honest or consistent in their approach to political issues, doesn't the label "enemy of the people" apply?  If not, why not?

 

 

 

You don't have to be Sherlock Holmes to figure out why certain perennial concerns hyped by the mainstream media have disappeared from the 2018 campaign cycle.  The disappearance illustrates the degeneration of the principal American mass media into mere propaganda outlets for the Democrats.  When the topics seemed to work against Republicans, they were almost constantly drummed into the public's consciousness.  They were a threat to our very democracy, and all good citizens were horrified, according to the instructions from our media betters.  But now, because they reflect badly on Democrats, they have mysteriously vanished.


Image credit: Pixabay

Issue Number One is "Russia Collusion."

Just three months ago, Russia's alleged handing of the election to Trump through nefarious means, or else Putin's use of blackmail to control Trump, or even third-party candidacies, was being used as a call to voters to throw the traitorous Republicans out of office:

 

 

But with the Mueller investigation producing nothing but dry holes on Russia, Ms. Milano and the rest of the true believers moved on (in the actress's case, to an even more costly dry hole: the attempt to portray Brett Kavanaugh as a rapist).

A couple of honest lefty sources noticed.

Glenn Greenwald:

 

The Nation:

... after months of fearmongering about a sweeping Russian interference effort and a compromised, complicit president, perhaps we are also seeing the penny start to drop: Russiagate, for all its hype, has not gone as advertised.

Take the supposed Russian threat to the midterms.  For months, intelligence officials and prominent media outlets have bombarded us with warnings about "a pervasive messaging campaign by Russia to try to weaken and divide the United States" (Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats), a threat so dire that we might as well dub the vote the "The Moscow Midterms" (FiveThirtyEight) and acknowledge that "we're defenseless against Russian sabotage in the midterm elections," (Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin).  The New York Times informed readers in July that Coats had likened "the persistent danger of Russian cyberattacks today ... to the warnings the United States had of stepped-up terror threats ahead of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks."  "The warning lights are blinking red again," he said.

While it is always possible that new evidence of interference will emerge, so far, the Russian danger has had an underwhelming denouement.

Joining Russia! Russia! Russia! in the media memory hole is the previously baneful effect of "big money politics" and "dark money."  They don't matter anymore.

In election cycles where Republicans had a fundraising advantage, media denunciations of the idea that rich people could fund campaigns were virtually a daily occurrence.  Watch Harry Reid on the subject:

But now that Democrats have a huge advantage in campaign fundraising, who cares?  Especially who cares about billionaires Tom Steyer and Michael Bloomberg throwing scores of millions of dollars into Democrat campaign coffers or into their own ads?  Has Robert Francis O'Rourke (trade name: Beto) been vilified for hugely outspending Ted Cruz?  If you can find anything in the mainstream media worrying about the influence of money in the Texas senatorial race, please send it to me.

If the media aren't honest or consistent in their approach to political issues, doesn't the label "enemy of the people" apply?  If not, why not?