This isn't a long entry, and will likely be an unnoticed entry. However, it is important to acknowledge some facts and patterns relating to the conflict of ideologies and myths in the media. Most important of these facts is that you can not argue with fools. To attempt such a feat is to slander yourself. Before Obama gets up and launches a rhetorical volley into the American consciousness, we can expect these facts and patterns to remain constant.
Me, personally, I'm a cultural historian. Today is alway intriguing because it gives yesterday a new meaning. So lets talk about the kooks of yesterday, and the internet. A lot of people had this strange notion that the Paulites of 2007-8 and their money bombs were an isolated phenomenon. Where did they come from? Having spent far too long in academia, I can posit a guess: they are newly incarnated LaRouchites. The libertarian ideals that are founded on historical and political ignorance sound a familiar tune, and indeed, have rang before in less noticeable circles, like university campuses. Ron Paul however, introduced these useful idiots to the Republican party, made them feel somewhat validated and identified each other in opposition to Democrats and specifically Obama as time went on.
Another thread in this children's Home Ec project is that of the independent Hillary splinter groups that realized they hated Obama more than they liked Hillary (if they ever truly did). Another useful idiot, eager to be exploited by the Republican party. Over the summer of 2008 the birth certificate rumors started here, and perhaps some remember the "Whitey Tape" that NoQuarter never saw but obsessively reported on. There was direct or intentional communication here between the party and the bloggers. Of course they were hung out to dry when the whitey tape never appeared, but that doesn't matter to a severely gaslit population.
During the time that these groups formed, however uncoordinated they may have been, they were rarely acknowledged. How much time did Obama give to question of his natural origins or his statements that never happened? Very little, with less fanfare. Another important fact that must be acknowledged is that 2008 was ripe with news. The horse race was obsessive and exciting, and I wondered, "what will they do when it's over?"
Intentionally or not, what they did was panic as print journalism failed left and right. Part of the panic process is emulating better models related to your business, and they looked to bloggers. They kept their obsession with spectacle, which will never fade from popular news, but this marriage was only destined to be toxic. Bloggers pick out the needles in haystacks on their own, and swell in editorial together. But when print, television, and broadcast news make story placement and priority decisions based on what "a bunch of people online talk about", it rarely elevates debate and becomes a story about what "a bunch of people online talk about." If we talk about the lunacy of splinter Republican groups like the former Paulites and Haters for Hillary, we elevate them and do ourselves a disservice; when the sensationalism of the debate gets legs and travels different media, we lose a rhetorical advantage of truth because truth does not compete, it is always true.
So when we talk about the crazy people we see, hear, have met, know of, or despise, we are still setting the rules of engagement for political and popular discourse. It's a sad or sarcastic joke to us, but news in other mediums. This is not good. Television, print, and broadcast news have allowed us to set the agenda. Is this the best liberal blogs can do? It is spectacle, it is sensationalism, it is the life blood of the modern news cycle, and it is inherently damaging to refute lies as though they may have truth. To refute something is to allow a battle between two truths where one must be the victor. Leave the trash you find in the garbage, if you find trash outside of the bin, place it in the bin; it is not treasure, it doesn't make us smarter to point out the stupidity/insanity of others just as it doesn't make us any more clean to surround ourselves with garbage.
Since Obama will speak in roughly two hours time from now, I can only hope he won't resuscitate lame arguments from the sprained minds of his opposition. In any case, I can speak for myself that it is something I will not do.