I don’t disagree in principle. Newt is a hot news item and a larger-than-life type figure. But even so i think Drudge et al. are going overboard. What Gingrich said about Reagan is fair game, it definitely gets viewer’s attention, yet so too does Romney saying “i’m a progressive.” Maybe Drudge sirened that around the internet and i missed it but in any event he has been going after Gingrich seemingly non-stop the last few days. And that, coupled with his friend Ann Coulter hitting Gingrich hard, makes it look like a tag-team effort by those two.
More than that, there’s just a sense of a massive piling on to help Romney win Florida and that once again the media are doing all they can to make sure that the candidate they want to win will win. They carried Obama across the finish line 4 years and they appear determined to do the same thing with Romney. To me, this election cycle should not only be about defeating the left but also sending a message to the real power behind the left, the media, that they have gone too far manipulating elections with their blatant partisan attacks while at the same time covering up for their media-approved candidates and politicians. If there isn’t a backlash against this type of “reporting” then i fear it may never end.
I agree.
My point, however, is that the only effective backlash is to (1) get a positive message out (refute the media pieces, if necessary), but more than that (2) to win.
I am not saying what the media, including Drudge, is doing is nothing.
I am saying it's a waste of time and ultimately futile, and even counter-productive, to wail about how this **shouldn't** be.
It IS!
And the only way to stop it is to stop it from being effective. Not always easy. But a lot more potentially effective than focusing on how awful it is that someone said something negative about Newt and claiming that everyone else is stupid for even evaluating the information that comes out.