The Left - Is It Howard Dean's Fault That He Is Not Getting The Same Air Time As Newt Gingrich?

[TomCADem]

I think the answer is no.

Nonetheless, some folks will argue that like President Obama, it must be Howard Dean's fault that he is not getting featured on Sunday News programs with the same frequency as Newt Gingrich. Afterall, Howard Dean is a former governor, the one time front runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, and former DNC chairperson. You would think that he has at least as much cred among the left, as Gingrich does on the right. Yet, why isn't Dean featured on news programs all the time like Newt?

Should we blame Howard Dean's messaging? Maybe we should argue that like Obama, Dean isn't progressive enough?

My take is that Dean, like Obama, is mainly a victim of our corporate funded news media, and the Koch funded Tea Party apparatus that funnels millions of corporate dollars into "grass roots" campaigns. Plus, with Fox News spreading right wing propaganda 24/7, the fact of the matter is that it is an uneven playing field. This is why Republicans can propose making tax cuts to millionaires permanent, even though this promises trillions more of red ink without suffering any deficit backlash. By contrast, if a Democrat proposes saving the jobs of teachers, not only will Republicans attack him for blowing up the deficit, but liberal groups will attack him for trying to do away with public education.

The news media will only give attention to liberal groups that attack Democratic or progressive leaders. This is why Paul Krugman is only featured when he is attacking the economic policies of the President, but when he is attacking the GOP as being asinine, he is no where to be found.

So, I think that Howard Dean is doing a great job representing the views of progressives, and his relative exclusion just highlights the degree to which media is dominated by corporate money.

[Ozymanithrax]

1. The left wing media abhors liberals...

That is what happens when the left wing media is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Republican Party.

[TomCADem]

2. There Is No Left Wing Media - Who Would Pay For It?

I love KO and Maddow. Still, even they do not necessarily spend most of the time attacking their corporate advertisers. Thus, they mostly attack Republicans (which is great), and Democrats who are not progressive enough, as well right wing media.

However, like most corporate media, they are not going to spend most of their time biting the corporate hands that feed them. For example, look at Thom Hartmann. He is a liberal. Yet, does he call out gold speculators who are pushing inflation in the midst of potential deflation? No.

The media is not free, and unfortunately, even liberal talkers have profit constraints, which means that liberals are fighting a battle with one hand tied behind their backs.

Now, we can get mad and just quit, but I think the answer is to fight even harder, and stop blaming the left and progressives for not having huge rallies like Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin. We simply are not going to have rallies like that, because we don't have that type of financial backing.

[Ozymanithrax]

3. That is why I had a follow up Sentence in the Message box.

And liberalism and wealth are not incompatible. Individual rights are the central tenant of liberalism, and individual rights mean that some people get wealthy.