Ralph Nader tells the truth on 'independent' media

We're always interested in media criticism and, last week, Ralph Nader offered needed media criticism:





You have to wonder about self-proclaimed "progressives."

Take Matthew Rothschild, for example.

He's a self-proclaimed progressive.

He's the editor of the so-called Progressive Magazine.

He has written an editorial in the current issue (April 2008) of the magazine titled "Don't Worry About Ralph."

In it, Rothschild claims that "to the extent that there is anything like a progressive movement going on right now, it is foursquare behind Obama."Rothschild must be plugged in.The question is -- to what?

Nader/Gonzalez have put together a campaign to push for public health insurance (single-payer), to cut the bloated, wasteful military budget, to reverse U.S. policy in the Middle East, to take nuclear power off the table and to put solar energy on the table, to repeal the anti-union Taft-Hartley law, and to impeach Bush/Cheney.

Obama stands with Clinton and McCain against Nader/Gonzalez on all of these issues.

Rothschild says he barely knows "anyone who has voted for Nader in the past who will vote for him this time."

That's because Rothschild is living in his little viral liberal bubble -- where the anti-Nader virus has taken hold and won't let go.

Visit our website and you will meet voters from all across America -- from outside the little viral liberal bubble in which Rothschild is ensconced -- who stand foursquare behind Nader/Gonzalez.

They are voting with their donations of hundreds of thousands of dollars for the Nader/Gonazlez democracy agenda.

They are voting with their feet -- collecting signatures all across the country to get Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot.

And they are voting with their writing to respond to viral liberals like Rothschild.

It doesn't matter that you call yourself a progressive, Matt, or that you call your magazine The Progressive.

You are not progressive.

And your magazine is not progressive.

You are supporting the corporate Democrats.

Therefore, you are a corporate Democrat.

Stop deceiving the public.

Onward

The Nader Team

PS: We welcome your comments to the blog.



Though Rothschild really has no comeback to the above, we checked to see if he had offered it one. It wasn't easy. See Matty's been all over the map with his Bambi Love. He's, for example, repeatedly praised Bambi in debates and then, when Bambi loses a state's primary, gone back to explain Bambi was so-so in the debate. So Matty appears to be attempting to hide some of his online writing at present.



One thing we did learn was that "From The Editors" is now identified: Matthew Rothschild and conservative Amitabh Pal (we doubt there's a more conservative voice at any left or 'left' magazine than Pal) which does at least reveal how "From the Editors" traffics in sexism.



But with the archives more or less closed, we consulted on our own archives: C.I. First off, ignore anything Matthew Rothschild said. It was him, after all, who wrote on page four of the September 2004 issue of The Progressive ("Kerry's Mistake"), "She [Ruth Conniff] is predicting, as I am, that Kerry will prevail" in the 2004 election. Ha! In the same column, he favorably cited a joke that Bill Clinton told at the 2004 DNC convention. (That would be the same Bill Clinton that Matty regularly vilifies these days.) In April 2004, the magazine offered campaign 'counseling' via Matty: "Nader's Wrong Turn." Nothing says "Democracy!" like telling a candidate not to run apparently. On page nine of the July 2004 issue of The Progressive, Matty wrote ("Bush on the Ropes") of "the flinty Ralph Nader" which we're oh so sure was intended as a compliment. And of course there was Ruth Conniff's infamous hatchet job on Nader's 2004 campaign.



The realities on Panhandle Media come at you via the now ceased publication Clamor. In their September/October 2004 issue, Todd Steven Burroghs spoke with self-loathing lesbian Laura Flanders who went into wide-eyed wonder as she spoke of The Heritage Foundation, a right-wing echo chamber, and how the left (or 'left') was now assembling its own. That's what you see in Panhandle Media today. That's how everyone can be on board with Bambi -- people who would never agree on anything else. It's a circle-jerk passed off as journalism. It's independence sold out to create an echo chamber and, as several are slowly starting to grasp, it's a way to lose your audience.



A name writer who sometimes contributed pieces to Panhandle Media has now sworn them off. He finds them disgusting and actually cites The Progressive in particular. He notes that the left has always had a "glow" for "the Black man, but rarely the Black woman" and states that their "hormones go a long way toward explaining their current madness." As proof, he offers the touchy-feely cover story of the May 2005 issue of The Progressive which featured an African woman who was not taken to task for her talk of AIDS as a conspiracy. "There's nothing progressive about that," he states, "but such is the level of their 'standards' that they'll rush to print her perceptions and set aside her crazy talk."



Ourselves, we point to The Progressive's October 2004 interview with Barack. As all pieces of objective journalism should be, it was conducted by an old friend of Bambi's. Bambi's asked about Iraq and offers, "Well, we can't just pull out immediately." That statement alone -- while Bambi was running as the 'anti-war' candidate for the US Senate -- should have resulted in a serious probing of his position on Iraq. But you won't get serious journalism when you farm a piece out to Bambi's close friends, will you? (And no follow up was included in the printed interview. The Progressive: Boldly providing cover for Barack since 2004.)



Nader's right to criticize The Progressive. It is supposed to be an 'independent' publication. But as they've demonstrated for the last four years, they're nothing but cheerleaders for the Democratic Party. As they've demonstrated in the last months, they've narrowed that down to Cheerleaders for Barack. We're sure Matty looks smashing in his tights and short skirt while he flings his pom-poms in the air, but we're equally sure that his contributions qualify neither as 'independent' nor as 'journalism.'