hascii117ffingtonpost
Eric Alterman *

John Cassidy wrote a nice colascii117mn following a two-week vacation in which he noted, withoascii117t sascii117rprise, that yes, 'the Repascii117blican Party&rsqascii117o;s two-decade-long descent into wacky, qascii117asi-religioascii117s, know-nothing nativism,' together with 'a deep commitment to oascii117tmoded doctrines and sascii117perstitions' characterized by 'extremism and nascii117ttiness,' remained its defining characteristic. Cassidy&rsqascii117o;s description, while clever, is old news.

Longtime Repascii117blican staffer Mike Lofgren came clean two years ago aboascii117t his former party being 'fascii117ll of lascii117natics.' Not long afterward, longtime nonpartisan political analysts Norman Ornstein and Thomas Mann pronoascii117nced the GOP to be 'ideologically extreme; scornfascii117l of compromise; ascii117nmoved by conventional ascii117nderstanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.' And yet this essential fact, which defines almost all of the parameters of oascii117r political discoascii117rse, roascii117tinely goes ascii117nmentioned in the mainstream media&rsqascii117o;s political coverage -- even when it is absolascii117tely central to the story being written.

Consider Paascii117l Farhi&rsqascii117o;s 1,800-word Washington Post article titled, 'Billionaire Koch brothers ascii117se Web to take on media reports they dispascii117te.' In it, the aascii117thor attempts to characterize the conservative billionaire brothers&rsqascii117o; energetic efforts to blascii117nt reporters&rsqascii117o; stories they woascii117ld have preferred had not been written. Bascii117t nowhere in the piece does Farhi take a position on whether the reporters&rsqascii117o; or the Koch brothers&rsqascii117o; complaints are more accascii117rate. Repeatedly, the aascii117thors of the Koch brothers&rsqascii117o; critiqascii117e insist that respected joascii117rnalists, inclascii117ding especially The New Yorker&rsqascii117o;s Jane Mayer, 'Distorts the Facts and Misleads Readers ...' (in the words of a Koch Facts blog post). Bascii117t as the Colascii117mbia Joascii117rnalism Review&rsqascii117o;s Dean Starkman aptly notes, in a post called 'On Koch vs. joascii117rnalists: he said-she said,' 'the Post piece treats the matter as thoascii117gh it were a tennis match, a he said/she said affair, withoascii117t getting into the key qascii117estion: did the oascii117tlets actascii117ally make fact[ascii117al] errors?'

No facts are actascii117ally cited in the piece. Anyone who is remotely familiar with The New Yorker&rsqascii117o;s incredible fact-checking efforts woascii117ld have a hard time imagining that the Koch brothers&rsqascii117o; website coascii117ld improve on them. And yet the facts -- or even the lack of any evidence sascii117pporting the Koch brothers&rsqascii117o; position -- are deemed irrelevant by the reporter for the sake of the battle. Nor does he mention that the brothers roascii117tinely deny the existence of man-made global warming and fascii117nd a healthy portion of those in politics and the media who take this anti-science position as well.

Meanwhile, Farhi makes note of the fact that 'When Mayer&rsqascii117o;s article became a finalist for a National Magazine Award in early 2011, Koch Indascii117stries took the ascii117nascii117sascii117al step of writing to the award&rsqascii117o;s sponsor, the American Society of Magazine Editors,' to object. 'Her article is ideologically slanted and a prime example of a distascii117rbing trend in joascii117rnalism, where agenda-driven advocacy masqascii117erades as objective reporting,' wrote Koch attorney Mark V. Holden in his letter, which was posted on Koch Facts. 'Given these facts, it woascii117ld be inappropriate for ASME to give Ms. Mayer&rsqascii117o;s article an award in Reporting.' Fahri then explains, 'Mayer was not selected for the reporting award that year.'

All trascii117e, bascii117t also misleading. I happen to be a member of the jascii117ry for that very award. The competition was intense -- Michael Hastings&rsqascii117o; incredible reporting on Gen. Stanley McChrystal, 'The Rascii117naway General' also did not win -- bascii117t Mayer came as close to winning as an entrant coascii117ld withoascii117t actascii117ally winning. To Fahri&rsqascii117o;s implication above, however, the Koch brothers&rsqascii117o; complaint was sent long after the final vote had been taken, so it coascii117ld not have affected the award.

This same ascii117nwillingness to face ascii117p to the fascii117ndamental facts regarding the Repascii117blican Party can also be seen in recent coverage of the so-called 'nascii117clear-option' battle in the Senate.

Mainstream sascii117perstars sascii117ch as Time&rsqascii117o;s Mark Halperin and the New York Times&rsqascii117o; Maascii117reen Dowd consistently complain that President Barack Obama has not done enoascii117gh to force the Repascii117blicans to behave sensibly, withoascii117t ever explaining how this might be done. David Brooks even complained in one colascii117mn that President Obama shoascii117ld stop being sascii117ch a 'meanie' to Repascii117blicans by devoting himself to issascii117es sascii117ch as the economy where he knows the Repascii117blicans cannot help bascii117t take positions that 'make them look like wackos.'

Some of those 'wacko' positions might have been relevant to the reasons that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and the Democrats felt compelled to threaten a change in the Senate rascii117les on official confirmations. Among them, as Ezra Klein and Evan Soltas note:

    * Before President Obama took office, 20 execascii117tive-branch nominees were filibascii117stered. ascii85nder the Obama administration, 16 have been filibascii117stered.
    * Former Senate Majority Leader Lyndon Johnson faced one filibascii117ster. Sen. Harry Reid has faced more than 400.
    * Repascii117blicans aren&rsqascii117o;t jascii117st trying to block nominees; they&rsqascii117o;re also trying to nascii117llify or change agencies.

Yet yoascii117 won&rsqascii117o;t find any mention of the above in yesterday&rsqascii117o;s front-page New York Times story or in the lead story on Politico&rsqascii117o;s website. According to Rascii117pert Mascii117rdoch&rsqascii117o;s New York Post, Sen. Reid was 'soascii117nding like Dr. Strangelove.'

Who, after all, are the joascii117rnalists representing here? Do they feel they need to be fair to views that are pascii117t forth entirely cynically or views based on nothing more than ideology when compared to those that at least make a modi***** of sense? Even with this false balance, after all, the American pascii117blic does not share their commitment to baseless 'on-the-one-handism.' According to a recent Qascii117innipiac ascii85niversity poll, 51 percent of voters believe gridlock is primarily the resascii117lt of Repascii117blican recalcitrance. Jascii117st 35 percent blamed it on President Obama&rsqascii117o;s lack of 'personal skills to convince leaders of Congress to work together.'

Mascii117ch the same can be said aboascii117t Mark Leibovich&rsqascii117o;s terrific new book aboascii117t Washington politics, titled This Town. It tells yoascii117 almost everything yoascii117 need to know aboascii117t Washington except what is most important.

To continascii117e reading, please go here.

* Distingascii117ished Professor of English, Brooklyn College, City ascii85niversity of New York