Wapo the ‘Ron Burgundy’ of newspapers & how the media misses the boat

http://bettinainclan.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/marco-rubio-flag-background-e1319754104163.jpg?w=500&h=260

For whatever reason, the liberal media continues trying to smear Senator Marco Rubio even after their first attack resulted in most of the country mocking their transparently malicious assault.  Nevertheless, liberals in the media are nothing if not persistent, and they will continue beating that dead horse until another bright and shiny object captures their attention.

Seth Mandel at Commentary Magazine views the Washington Post’s incessant and fruitless attacks on Marco Rubio in an interesting way:

The Ron Burgundy-ization of the Washington Post

The Washington Post has a story today on Marco Rubio–actually, correct that. The Washington Post has a story today about the Washington Post, which is pretty much all the Washington Post writes about these days.

[…]

I don’t want to dwell too much on today’s edition, because a forgettable story should be forgotten. But it’s worth noting here just why the Post’s reputation has plummeted. It isn’t bias, because that isn’t anything new. It’s the fact that the Post uses its vast resources to talk about itself in the third person. The Post operates as though it is run by Ron Burgundy and Chad Ochocinco.

Bettina Inclan weighs in on her blog how when it comes to Cuba and the exile experience, the media simply misses the boat:

[…] The one thing we have learned about the “controversies” surrounding Marco Rubio is how little most of the media and political pundits understand about the Hispanic community. They over-simplify and generalize a population of over 50 million Hispanics. The political chattering class is often perplexed when a Hispanic who doesn’t fit into their mold of a Latino voter. They assume that all Hispanics must be the same, not taking into account geography, age, generation, country of origin, among other factors.

8 thoughts on “Wapo the ‘Ron Burgundy’ of newspapers & how the media misses the boat”

  1. The MSM misses this by a mile. I was one of the group that came in Marco’s time. My parents emigrated in 1957 as long time opponents of Castro. By that time, most of eastern Cuba was ungovernable and even though my parents worked in Havana, their work was connected with agriculture in the East, now controlled by the ‘Palestinians’ as Yoani Sanchez calls those who rule Cuba now, primarily from the legacy Oriente province. With their livelihood and ideals gone, they immigrated. That was then.
    In the 1970’s while attending high school in South Florida, my counselor looked at me with disdain as one of the ‘kind’ of Cubans that NEVER approved of Castro because we came here ‘so’ early. She romanticized with the vast refugee majority, who ‘wanted’ Castro and then became ‘disillusioned’ when he ‘became’ a totalitarian. That was South Florida in the early to mid 70’s. This is the reason why the WAPO felt compelled to write ‘the story’. They want to portray Rubio’s family as belonging to the ‘wrong’ kind of Cuban refugee. This is now. The bottom line is that no one has picked up on this story, at least no now. But it was the rage when I was in high school.

    • My grandparents generation, then in their 50s, and 60s, started talking about leaving as early as 1957 as well. By the time the beast took over, they were well into the process to get US visas to exile themselves here. Legally, I might add.

  2. Have been trying to defend Marco Rubio at the Miami Herald. The castrophiles tried threats, insults, slander etc to no avail. But now find myself blocked. Now the responses to posts are full of the barking of a congress of Castro baboons. Could a few visit there a while …

  3. “Those who left in 57 you were really fleeing Batista’s Right-Wing Fascism!”

    NO! In fact:

    “THose who left in 57 you were actually clairvoynat on Castro’s Left-Wing Communism!”

    Perhaps some. But probably most who left in 53-58 were simply seeking a better job in the U.S. than those available at the time in Cuba. Y pal Carajo! Thanks to the organized labor stranglehold (thanks to that “Fascist! Oligarchic! Right-winger!!!” Batista) on the employment for so many of Cuba’s industries, unemployment was high.

    But don’t take it from this intransigent. Take if from Hugh Thomas:

    “By the 1950s labor had almost a stranglehold over the Cuban government and it would not be an exaggeration to say that Batista, during his second period of power, ran Cuba by means of an alliance with organized labor. In return for the support of labor, Batista underwrote the vast number of restrictive practices, the limitation on mechanization and the bans on dismissals, that were such a characteristic of the Cuban labor scene.”

    Hugh Thomas, “Cuba, The Pursuit of Freedom”

    Unreal

  4. Humberto,

    I believe you may be right as I recall my father constantly telling me that the biggest economic issue in Cuba in the fifties was high unemployment.

  5. People, if WaPo would publish that vile Oliphant cartoon, which would NEVER fly if its target had been ANY minority except Cubans (or perhaps Jews), this Rubio thing is simply par for the course. Biased is as biased does. Shit happens.

  6. Humberto:

    Did you mention the communists that Batista allowed to return to control some unions …

    Larry

Comments are closed.