Most government scandals involve the manipulation of the system in obscure ways by people no one has ever heard of. That is why George Washington Bridgegate is nearly a perfect scandal — because it is comprehensible and (as they say in Hollywood) “relatable” to everyone who has ever been in a car. This is the reason this one is not going to go away so easily, even if one accepts the contention that Gov. Chris Christie had nothing whatsoever to do with it.
Government officials and political operatives working for Christie, for weird and petty reasons, chose to make traffic worse. That’s the takeaway. When they are reminded of the fact that people working on Christie’s behalf thought it was a good political game to mire tens of thousands of their fellow Americans in the nightmarish gridlock that is a daily dreaded prospect for tens of millions, they will be discomfited by that and by the politician in whose name it was done.
And yet, you know what is also something everybody would find “relatable”? Politicians who sic the tax man on others for political gain. Everybody has to deal with the IRS and fears it. Last year, we learned from the Internal Revenue Service itself that it had targeted ideological opponents of the president for special scrutiny and investigation — because they were ideological opponents.
That’s juicy, just as Bridgegate is juicy. It’s something we can all understand, it speaks to our greatest fears, and it’s the sort of thing TV newspeople could gab about for days on end without needing a fresh piece of news to keep it going.
And yet, according to Scott Whitlock of the Media Research Center, “In less than 24 hours, the three networks have devoted 17 times more coverage to a traffic scandal involving Chris Christie than they’ve allowed in the last six months to Barack Obama’s Internal Revenue Service controversy.”
Why? Oh, come on, you know why. Christie belongs to one political party. Obama belongs to the other. You know which ones they belong to. And you know which ones the people at the three networks belong to, too: In surveys going back decades, anywhere from 80% to 90% of Washington’s journalists say they vote Democratic.
More at the NY Post
Your argument follows the well familiar pattern of ranging from specious to dishonest to ignorance.
Mr. Whitlock’s MRC’s 1/10/14 report starts out in error as the IRS story broke 8 months ago, not 6. That report focuses on the last 6 months rather than the 1st and 2nd. In the 1st month, major news outlets were all over it
The IRS ordeal lost public interest mainly when after the 1st month when it came to light that the IRS wasn’t focusing strictly on conservative groups.
As journalist Alex Seitz-Wald detailed:
Another area that you seem to contradict yourself is by implying Chritie’s innocence. “Even if one accepts the contention that Gov. Chris Christie had nothing whatsoever to do with it”‘ “Government officials and political operatives working for Christie, for weird and petty reasons, chose to make traffic worse” , ” people working on Christie’s behalf “.
Former IRS director Lois Lerner, admitted to, apologized for, and excepted responsibility. President Obama referred to it as “outrageous” and “inexcusable” and fired Lerner.
Yet you are using the MRC’s report in which Whitlock refers to this as “Barack Obama’s Internal Revenue Scandal”.
Another area that your argument seems distant from is the reality that CC is considered a major player in the 2016 elections. This is big news. And if he is directly guilty, it would likely mean impeachment or criminal charges. Obama is not running for reelection in 2016.
Journalist, or paid hack?
Mr. Seitz-Wald has an interesting resume. Assistant Editor at ThinkProgress.com; staff writer for Salon.com; contributing writer to The National Journal, The Atlantic and The Nation.
Perhaps RJW would like to tell us which one of those publications would even fall in the “centrist” category?
And yeah, RJW, I’m aiming at the messenger. He’s a left wing socialist hack. But no surprise you would quote him.
@retire05: @retire05: Ah the hypocrisy of this site is so profoundly deep.
Dr. John bases his argument on the likes of Scott Whitlock, senior news analyst for Media Research Center who proudly says their stated mission is to “prove—through sound scientific research—that liberal bias in the media does exist and undermines traditional American values”. And as pointed out, Whitlock falsely compares the coverage of the IRS ordeal and Bridgegate by omitting the first 2 months of the IRS coverage.
Yet, I’m supposed to provide sources of a ““centrist” category?
Wiping the floor with the half baked arguments presented by this blog is akin to shooting fish in a barrel. There isn’t even a sport to it anymore.
It’s as if Dr John and the other (assumed) writers don’t even try.
@Ronald J. Ward:
What a hypocrite you are, RJW. You complain about Dr. John’s source, then present us with a far leftist source of your own. You whine about MRC, yet have no trouble with the George Soros funded Media Matters.
Now, I understand that leftists, like all slugs, can’t stand the light of day. MRC is a counter to the lies and falsehoods perpetrated by Media Matters and all the leftist outlets that are more than happy to present Mr. Seitz-Wards material.
Also, there were over 90 conservative groups that were harassed by the IRS, but I can only find 3 ( THREE) leftist groups that were denied their 501(c) requests and two of them were tied to Texas Dems. The problem with your theory is that the IRS didn’t just investigate those conservative groups, the back benched their applications, some of them giving up and some waiting four years for a decision. That way the IRS could claim
They were not denied”. No, they were just ignored while Obama’s half brothers questionable charity was fast tracked in six weeks.
You don’t wipe the floor, RJW, you slither across it. And if you are so disappointed that your leftist hyperbole is not accepted here, why do you stay? You are free to push your views to others, say, like DailyKos and Huffington Post, where they will be welcomed. Hell, man, even the leftists here don’t rush to your aid.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Please show us where Obama fired Lerner. Lerner took the fifth.
@DrJohn:
You select a rather minute segment of the argument to acquire a “gotcha” moment.
I’m not sure how many cabinet members, staff, aides, etc. have gone down in the history books as being fired when in fact they resigned or retired. But in an effort to debate in good faith, I’ll concede. Can we both agree that Lerner “abruptly retired” after accepting responsibility of the IRS scandal and then placed on paid leave after pleading the 5th?
But again, I digress and retract my claim of being fired.
Regardless, that seems to be more of a distraction than a rebuttal to your actual argument.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Seems one of us is misinformed.
@DrJohn: Regarding?
Two out of three Americans polled either don’t care about ”Bridgegate,” or view Christie MORE favorably since their last poll!
Some in the press might obsess with it, but not the people of this country.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/danieldoherty/2014/01/14/poll-60-percent-say-opinion-of-christie-hasnt-changed-n1778401?utm_source=TopBreakingNewsCarousel&utm_medium=story&utm_campaign=BreakingNewsCarousel
If that’s really so, I suppose republicans should be celebrating. I’m surprised at their indifference, however. It has been my impression that they have enormous appreciation for investigations.
Speaking of which… Has Darrell Issa been paying any attention to Dawn Zimmer’s allegation? You’d think ol’ Mr. Investigation would be right in there on this one. The mayor’s allegation is that a state governor made access to millions of dollars in federal disaster relief money contingent upon cooperation with a private real estate development project, which in the long run is worth billions. The news just broke that the FBI has interviewed her.