Look, I am concerned. I've just spent two weeks travelling and speaking with media elites in L.A., Chicago, NYC, and D.C. and among other things, I was repeatedly told that The New York Times and The L.A. Times are "sitting on a BIG Clinton story." What concerns me is that this story has nothing to do with Hillary, her policy positions, her record, or her presidential potential. The "big story" everyone is sitting on apparently has to do with the many current affairs of Bill Clinton, whom, they will allege, has a gal in every port. I know, I know, you roll your eyes, you yawn, you wonder how anyone could possibly care about such things, true or not, when there is so much at stake in this upcoming election. But then you see what is going on with today's Trent Lott/gay hustler rumors, this week's Hillary /lesbian aide rumors, and you remember that the ghost of Karl Rove still haunts us.
I am concerned not for the welfare of Senator Clinton's campaign, but for our election cycles, which have turned into the same bipolar gossip cycles of the newsstand tabloids. I worry that these news organizations are sitting on the story for the wrong reasons, waiting for the moment of maximum impact for such drivel. For some reason, hearing about this dusty-sounding rumor-story raised a red flag for me that we may not have come as far as I'd hoped since 2004. I see the same gay-baiting, underhanded political tricks, the Obama/Osama slurs, and it reminds me that like many of the online communities I surf, I live in a media-elite bubble where we forget that the vast majority of people get their political news from network television, which in turn culls it from the ever diminishing journalistic resources of the ever consolidating, ever partisan print media, which most definitely has skin in the game this time around... which is terrifying.
Of course, like the Writers Guild strike, I blame the whole thing on Ronald Reagan de-regulating everything, but that's another blog.