Essentially, there is no media, folks. There just isn't any media in the sense that there are reporters out there uncovering things you and I don't know and telling us what they are.
That's what the news is: You turn on the news every night, whatever you watch, and you're expecting to see things that you didn't know happened. And that's not what it is.
That's why we began calling it the daily soap opera, or it's just the place on radio and TV where Democrat Party agenda is advanced. But it isn't media.
The White House press corps isn't there at a press briefing. It's not... They're not news gatherers there. There really isn't any media.
You have people talk about the media as a coequal branch when talking about Republicans. "You know, Republicans have to overcome the media, and then the Democrats." Wait a minute. Why should anybody have to overcome the media?
The media is news gatherers. Why in the world are the media a factor?
Of course [the White House press corps] are a factor, and the reason is they're not media. They happen to pretend or portray people running around finding out things nobody else knows and telling everybody, but that's not what they do.
You don't need 70 people in a White House press conference to tell people what happened there. You need a camera and maybe a couple reporters, and that's it.
With the camera you might even not need the reporters. But, you see, media can't trust you to watch [Barack] Obama without them telling you what you just saw and analyzing it.
Here's the point - and Jonah Goldberg reminds us of this. He wrote a blog post that was titled "The MacGuffinization of American Politics." Do you know what a MacGuffin is? "'In a movie or book, 'The MacGuffin' is the thing the hero wants,' Ace writes." So in the Maltese Falcon, for example, the hero wants the Maltese Falcon, but there's always somebody trying to stop the hero from getting what he wants.
There's always a villain in every book, in every movie. In every story you have the hero and what he wants, and that is the MacGuffin. The whole thing is about who's gonna get the MacGuffin. This piece that this Ace of Spades blog wrote is that's how the media covers [Barack] Obama, and I have observed this in different ways over the years.
Have you ever noticed the Democrats always set the agenda? Whatever the Democrats say they want, that's just what's gonna happen. There's no questioning the policy!
Did the media ever question anything about Obamacare, the intricate do's and don'ts, the policy cogs? No.[Barack] Obama just wanted it.
It's just, "Hey,[Barack] Obama's the hero, and he wants Obamacare," and so the coverage is totally devoted to whether or not Obama's gonna get it. Now, in that scenario, who are the villains?Well, your good old, reliable Republicans are the villains, and they are always portrayed as the people trying to deny our beloved hero what he wants.
Ace of Spades says that this became clear to him in a revelation one night. He was watching Chris Matthews interview [Barack] Obama, and he didn't get one question! He didn't ask Obama one question about how Obamacare works. Every question was one degree or another: How do you feel about [John] Boehner opposing it? How do you feel about it? What will make you happy? Do you think you can get it? [It] was irrelevant!
The details of what [Barack] Obama was going to do to the American health care system didn't matter. All that mattered was whether or not Obama was going to get it.
Going forward, which story will the media find more interesting, [Donald] Trump's or Hillary's [Clinton]? Does Hillary even have a story? Does anyone even care?
Hillary [Clinton] has a resume. What is the story in Hillary's resume? Four dead in Benghazi, illegal emails, trafficking in classified information. The media hasn't gone there on that yet because when covering that aspect of Hillary minus [Donald] Trump, the story is the same.
Will Hillary [Clinton] survive or will the villains...? [James] Comey and the FBI and the Republicans, will they succeed? There isn't any coverage of whether or not Hillary actually broke the law. The media's not interested in whether or not she actually trafficked in classified data.
[People] know what [Donald] Trump wants. They are fascinated with the idea, "Can Trump really get this?" Because Trump, there's nothing professional about him.
[Donald Trump] doesn't have a speechwriter, doesn't have a teleprompter. He doesn't have a pollster, he doesn't have a consultant, he doesn't have campaign staff. He hasn't been fundraising. He hasn't done anything you're supposed to do. Look what he's doing! [People] are fascinated.
Hillary [Clinton] doesn't have a fascinating story to get behind. She doesn't fascinating story to tell. The only thing about Hillary is, you know, "first female president."
"First female president." That's it, and that's nowhere near, by the way, as powerful or penetrating as the first African-American president. I mean, women, yeah, I mean, make the case that they've been victimized. But they can't put themselves in the same shoes as slavery's legacy for example. Now, women might try to make the case. Hillary [Clinton] might try to make the case about not being ought to be able to vote, but it ain't gonna fly.
The whole idea of the first female president is not nearly as momentous or exciting as the first African-American.
Take [the first female] president away from Hillary [Clinton], what's her story? What is fascinating? What's interesting about Hillary? Coughing fits? The lump in her throat that she has to cover with the Mao jacket? What's her story?
