“You still haven’t got over the idea that politicians are important because the newspapers tell you so.” – Sir Frederick Hoyle
It’s become critical to our individual and social mental health that we draw a firm distinction between two categories of vermin. The first of these, the politician, runs for elective office. If he achieves it, thereafter he will possess the appearance of power. The second, who was once called a gray eminence, is the actual master of the powers of the State. He may not be known to the public by name or face, but he has greater sway over policy and power than the politicians he “serves.”
The major media “report” on the words and deeds of politicians. Yet in the post-World War era, it is almost never the case that politicians decide on how the State’s powers shall be wielded.
For the past two years it has been brutally apparent that the supposed president of these United States – Joseph R. Biden, a politician – has no significant influence on the use of federal power. The contempt of the gray eminences who manipulate him for Us the Hoi-Polloi has become ever more visible. It’s not unknown for those of high estate to dismiss the sentiments of the common folk. Yet in the pre-World War era, those who wielded power have at least pretended to respect us, reality notwithstanding.
Biden’s most recent “press conference” has made such pretenses impossible:
President Biden is no stranger to detailed cheat sheets when speaking to the press, but the president’s team seems to have taken things up a notch after he revealed a pre-written question from a reporter during Wednesday’s press conference.
As Biden spoke alongside South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol in the White House Rose Garden, a photographer captured a small cheat-sheet in the president’s hand signaling he had advanced knowledge of a question from Los Angeles Times journalist Courtney Subramanian. The small paper also included a picture of the reporter along with the pronunciation breakdown of her last name. “Question #1” was handwritten at the top of the sheet, indicating the president should call on her first at the conclusion of his remarks.
Here’s a rather blatant shot of the cheat sheet’s stage directions for the ersatz president:
And here’s a pretty good look at scripted question page #1:
It couldn’t get much clearer, could it? A large portion of the press has been “tamed” to this farce and goes along with the puppet show uncomplainingly. Even among them must be some individuals who chafe at the disrespect being shown toward their once-honorable trade. Yet there are no indications of a brewing rebellion from that sector.
Quoth John Hinderaker:
One wonders what the editors of the L.A. Times would say about this: enacting a pantomime with the President, in which their reporter plays the part of an independent journalist. Is that their idea of honest journalism?
But they will never have to answer that question, because there is no one to ask it. The other news organizations are playing for the same team. And I think they all agree that this is the kind of thing you have to do when your man is, unfortunately, senile.
“Your man.” The man the press strained all credulity to promote as a worthy aspirant to the Oval Office. The man whose half-century of perfidies and deceits they resolutely refused to mention. The man for whose sake they collaborated in the defamation and de facto silencing of the sitting, wildly popular president.
The gray eminences have the press by the short hairs, and the masters of the press know it full well. Once you’ve lied in service to a public figure, he owns you. He’ll persuade you to lie ever more dramatically and volubly, until you’ve fatally undermined your own credibility. After that he can end your career whenever he pleases, with one public utterance – and in defense of their own careers, your colleagues in the press will help him do it.
The big story these past few days has been the removal of Tucker Carlson from his commentator’s perch at FOX News. Who among our Gentle Readers thinks there might have been an attempt to bring Carlson into the fold? If there was such an attempt, it clearly didn’t have the desired effect. Yet until his firing, Carlson was the most influential commentator in any medium – and his firing is likely to have enhanced his reputation, at least among Americans in the Right. Streisand Effect, anyone?
With this most recent display of contempt for Americans’ intelligence, the stakes have been maximized. Perhaps the Left has a firm grip on the electoral machinery, such that the results of future elections will be predetermined regardless of who votes and how. That will do them no good in the court of popular sentiment. What remains to be seen is whether any great number of us are ready for some “Irish democracy.” I could hardly imagine a greater or more blatant justification.
