Friday, May 16, 2014

Jon Chait is Obsessed with someone named Reines (not Reince not Raines, Reines)

Chait just wrote a post entitled "Lanny Davis Defending Clinton With Innovative New Media Strategy: Print-outs" "They are prone to scoff at any form of new media (Clinton media-handler Phillip Reines writing to Buzzfeed: “I typically don’t respond to BuLLfeed inquiries”) nd to dismiss even old media reporting they don’t like as somehow corrupted by new media (Clinton 2008 staffer Burns Strider: “I think it's horse[hockey]. I think The Washington Post is acting like some kind of an Internet blog or something instead of doing real reporting”)" Earlier this May (OK on May day) Chait wrote a post on "Why the Clintons Can’t Handle the Media" "Former Clinton adviser Philippe Reines ...(Reines responded to questions from BuzzFeed like so: “Thank you for the opportunity to answer BuLLfeed’s inane questions. I typically don’t respond to BuLLfeed inquiries, but given the extra special inanity BuLLfeed put into today’s inquiry, I’ve answered each of BuLLfeed’s inane questions with as much specificity as possible.”)" Notice how Reines's status as a "former" staffer was mentioned in the former post but not the current post. Did Reines run over Chait's dog ? I don't speculate that Chait might be suffering from late onset Clinton Derangement Syndrome, becuase it is beyond obvious that he has excellent reason to scoff at anyone who scoffed at internet bloggers He most recently denounced political blogs (in 2007 note the "2008" in his recent post) by dividing them into progressive and non, then progressive blogs into the wonkosphere (defined as analysts) and the netroots (evidently defined as advocates, making the 3000 word argument that those bloggers who are advocates and not analysts are advocates and not analysts which is totally tautological trash talk) . I noted that the May day post get around to addressing the question of "Why" at all and that Chait seems to have considered there to be no need to provide actual evidence for the assertion that two failed politicians (who only won two Presidential elections and are way ahead in polling for a third) can't handle the media. I neglected to speculate about how successful they might be if the could handle the media because the thought of any couple that powerful causes me to "[hockey]" in my pants. I also seem to suffer from a bit of Reines fixation myself because I typed "Reines" when I meant to type "Raines" as in the NY Times Editor who obviously was and still is out to get Bill Clinton.

No comments: