It's been a while since one of the exalted Washington Post reporters decided to let fly a broadside at the blogosphere. In fact, one gets the sense they've deliberately toned down their disdain for the last year knowing the kind of shitstorm their half-assed comments often raise.
Ah, but Steven Pearlstein let fly a good one today in his weekly "online discussion". It's highlights just how clueless the Beltway Heathers are about media and news exposure not to mention their continued disdain for DFHs in the blogosphere.
The comment/rant posed to him was:
No, Mr. Pearlstein, it's you who doesn't get it. Nor does Barack Obama who said (as quoted in 9-30-08 WP): "success is unlikely if we start from scratch or reopen negotiations about the core elements of the agreement."
Wrong. We do have to start from scratch because it's the "core element" of this bill that's wrong. We have millions of middle class families who can't pay their mortgage debt vs. a handful of banks who own that debt, but the Bush/Pelosi bill gives 700 billion $'s only to the latter, the very small number of very, very rich people who own these banks, and nothing at all to the former.
The whole approach of this bill is wrong, and that's why the great majority of the American people reject it. We won't bite this apple you and the politicians have handed us because we see that it's rotten to the "core".
Bail out the people who need - and deserve - our help keeping up the payments on their homes. If we do that, Wall Street's bad mortgage debt will take care of itself.
He replied:
The left wing bloggers are out in force on this one -- they see this as a seminal issue, like the Iraq war vote and the vote on warrantless searches. But other than not really understanding the problem and not really having studied the proposal, you guys are doing just great! Thank God there is a mainstream media out there that actually does reporting and has people who understand thing, because if the flow of information and news to the American people were left solely to bloggers, we'd be in a big mess.
No Mr Perlstein, if the vice-grip you and your ilk enjoyed for the last bazillion years continued, we'd be in big trouble. Oh wait, we are in big trouble and your kind have been a fundamental cause of many of the problems of, oh, the last 15 years. Certainly not the sole cause but you and your enabling Villager buddies refuse to own up to your role.
You also refuse to own up to the fact that it's been precisely because of attitudes like the one you stated today that's helped drive your circulation down. What we got to see today was another window into the "soul" (shallow shell that it is) of the Beltway Media Establishment.
Throughout this "crisis", Pearlstein's been a fairly big cheerleader of the bailout. Okay, fine, many people might not agree but then again, many people do. However, he's been fairly snot-nosed in his reaction to anybody who's dared question him, or Paulson or Bernanke always falling back on "these guys know what they're doing and you peons don't understand the gravity and complexity of the situation", or something along those lines.
I guess the 200 economists who've spoken up against the bailout are morans like the rest of us, eh Steven?
Steven, one reason we didn't ram a bill thru Congress was, oh, people getting their news and views from somebody other than your sorry ass.
Sorry to be such a pain but like the vast majority of the American public, we don't trust you.