Mitt Romney Criticizes Political Media For Cynical Games He Absolutely Loves Playing

  there's always the sunday funnies

Going to hellMitt Romney addressed an Associated Press luncheon today to chit-chat with his good friends, the reporters, who fawned over his every word. What do you think about us!, the giggling media children demanded. Do you like us?? OMG you hate us maybe??? And so, to the delight of this hard-nippled assembly of navel-gazers, Mittens shared a basic critique of the political media’s obvious shortcomings — superficial, cynical, smug, lazy, shitty sourcing, thoughtless, 100% wrong all the time. All the bad habits that the Romney campaign loves engaging reporters with, every day, basically.

Here’s Romney version of the standard What Ever Happened To The Good Ol’ Days Of Journalism moral superiority spiel:

In just the few years since my last campaign, the changes in your industry are striking. Then, I looked to Drudge or FOX or CNN online to see what stories were developing. Hours after a speech, it was being dissected on the Internet. Now, it’s Twitter, and instantaneous reaction. In 2008, the coverage was about what I said in my speech. These days, it’s about what brand of jeans I am wearing and what I ate for lunch.

Most people in my position are convinced that you are biased against us. We identify with LBJ’s famous quip that if he were to walk on water, your headline would read: “President Can’t Swim.”

Some people thus welcome the tumult in your industry, heralding the new voices and the unfiltered or supposedly unbiased sources. Frankly, in some of the new media, I find myself missing the presence of editors to exercise quality control. I miss the days of two or more sources for a story – when at least one source was actually named.

Haw haw haw. Yes, sources.

Your Wonkette, [sigh], read that damn POLITICO EBOOK about the last few months of the campaign last night, vomiting the whole way through. That story about Rick Perry getting high and singing everywhere was easily the best part; otherwise it was mostly tick-tock accounts of every deputy communications aide’s telephone calls with focus group leaders, pollsters, message gurus, “prominent lobbyists,” etc., over the course of several months, as well as authors Mike Allen and Evan Thomas’ self-defeating effort to name-drop all of the very important people they’ve had dinner with while keeping them anonymous. Don’t read it. It’s twisted, man, it’s nuts. There *is* noble work to be found for reporters who want to expose the extraordinary cynicism and depravity of campaigns’ anonymous-political-consultant culture, and how a few behind-the-scenes psychopaths manipulate the entire nation in order to collect their fees, but only when it’s correctly framed as muckraking. POLITICO writes it all out with an earnest, adoring smile. It’s fucked up. And even worse, boring.

Anyway, the point is that 150% of that damn POLITICO EBOOK was sourced by Romney aides and supporters bragging (anonymously) about all of the lies and smears and unfair nonsense attacks they planted in the media to destroy rival campaigns, and how much they enjoyed doing it and look forward to doing it more down the road. So Mitt Romney is full of it, like everyone, the end, though maybe he’s right somehow.

[THE POLITICO WEBSITE]

Related

 
Related video

About the author

Jim Newell is Wonkette's beloved Capitol Hill Typing Demon. He joined Wonkette.com in 2007, left for some other dumb job in 2010, and proudly returned in 2012 as our "Senior Editor at Large." He lives in Washington and also writes for things such as The Guardian, the Manchester paper of liberals.

View all articles by Jim Newell

Hola wonkerados.

To improve site performance, we did a thing. It could be up to three minutes before your comment appears. DON'T KEEP RETRYING, OKAY?

Also, if you are a new commenter, your comment may never appear. This is probably because we hate you.

77 comments

    1. freakishlywrong

      You couldn't ask this fucker what his favorite color is and get a straight answer.

          1. Gleem McShineys

            What I would give for a press that would launch these assholes off of cliffs when they lied.

  1. PuckStopsHere

    Since he brought it up, maybe the media will begin to do some actual fact checking on this guy. That would be nice.

  2. OneYieldRegular

    "…it's about what brand of jeans I am wearing…"

    He's just dying for some reporter to ask him, "Zipper or button-fly?"

  3. Baconzgood

    "I looked to Drudge or FOX or CNN online to see what stories were developing. Hours after a speech, it was being dissected on the Internet. Now, it’s Twitter, and instantaneous reaction. Why can't you just go back to the Gutenberg Press or better yet chiseling on stone tablets"

  4. OC_Surf_Serf

    What Ever Happened To The Good Ol’ Days Of Journalism

    Like back before 'sources' were the journalist's own asshole?

    1. SorosBot

      Considering that he considers Drudge to be part of the good days of journalism, no Mitt appears perfectly happy with that.

  5. CapnFatback

    These days, it’s about what brand of jeans I am wearing

    Whatever the brand, I'm sure that the inseams are the right length.

  6. mrpuma2u

    So if he hates the media for all the half-assed research and fact checking does that mean he also hates his staff, speechwriters, and himself????

  7. Mumbletypeg

    Frankly, in some of the new media, I find myself missing the presence of editors to exercise quality control.

    Frankly, Mitt, I find myself missing the presence of credible candidates who could coin an original joke as masterfully as your esteemed LBJ.

  8. Baconzgood

    Listen Mitt Baconz's doing his best to NOT pay attention to every little thing you're doing.

  9. actor212

    Editors?

    Dammit, Mitt! Get with the program! It's EDITRICES!!!!!!

    A thousand pardons, my lovely, sensual Editrix. I will slash the infidel in two for belittling Your Grace.

    Oh. Wait. Ginger posted this.

    Well, I guess it still applies…

  10. anniegetyerfun

    heralding the new voices and the unfiltered or supposedly unbiased sources

    Being "new" and "unfiltered" is pretty much the opposite of being "unbiased." I mean, so far.

  11. FakaktaSouth

    Mitt's biggest media problem is video tape. Physically showing a person speaking about his "fundamental values" while espousing every disparate opinion possible on every political subject – but always with the exact same tone of voice, facial expression and sincerity level starts to make you look like a schmuck.

    His biggest help from the media is that it is basically only interested in how what a candidate is saying about a policy is "playing" with folks, not what a policy REALLY is or actually DOES or whether the candidate or member of government is lying their ass off about it in the first place – so the citizenry has no idea what's going on anyway.

    And this is why I am crazy now.

    1. Native_of_SL_UT

      Just yesterday in a speech he declared entitlement spending our greatest problem and that Obama didn't have a plan to cut them AND that Obama cut $500 billion from them.
      He said that all in one breath.

  12. BarackMyWorld

    And I find myself missing the presence of candidates who didn't constantly contradict themselves.

    The fact that someone this dishonest hasn't been completely destroyed him yet with his own words is proof the media is going too easy on him, not the other way around.

  13. BlueStateLibel

    Cliff Notes version: "Blah, blah, says Mitt Rmoney, be nice to me and stop making fun of me for being the most boring, mean-spirited man in the world." Will not do.

  14. prommie

    Campaign people soooooo hate people who actually believe in any kind of principles. They do. I had to hide my beliefs the whole time I did that stuff, or else they would never have let me near the candidate for fear I encourage him to go off the rails and be himself. I hate myself.

  15. prommie

    Also, all campaign people have seen The War Room and they are trying to be that. Trying really really really hard to be that, trying to be characters, and gunslingers, and trying to have amusing quirks, trying with all their might to pass as straight, just too too much trying to be something they got some idea of from some fucking movie and from the West Wing. Its worse than hanging around with a bunch of guineas who are trying to be The Sopranos. Then you go into legislative affairs and your hopes slowly shrivel and die.

  16. Callyson

    In 2008, the coverage was about what I said in my speech. These days, it’s about what brand of jeans I am wearing and what I ate for lunch.

    Mittens, maybe that's because your food and clothing choices are more consistent than your political positions…

  17. Toomush_Infer

    It's because you're wearing jeans, fer crissake, you rich succubus pretending to be one of the people….

  18. Native_of_SL_UT

    STFU Mitt, you were never swiftboated in "08.
    Yeah, things have really changed since 2004 & 2008.

  19. bikerlaureate

    Most people in my position are convinced that you are biased against us.

    1%ers ?
    Corporations ?
    Health insurance plan creators ?

    Androids ?

    (Also too – being convinced of a belief is of somehow of greater importance than whether or not the belief is true.
    If Rmoney had competent campaign staff, of course, they'd be exploiting that disconnect more thoroughly.)

  20. Wilcoxyz

    Mittens, you just copied (stole) your shitty competition's meme from last week – I have to chew out NYT reporters to get press, distract from shortcomings and fire up my base.

    In the jernalizms, that's called plagiarism. Or copyright infringement. Or some shit about you not having any of your own ideas.

  21. Wilcoxyz

    Yeah, integrity. Sigh. Who's got any?

    It's like when your campaign deliberately plays tape of Obama talking about the bad economy killing McCain's 2008 campaign, but you edit it to make it sound like he's talking about his own 2012 campaign.

  22. bureaucrap

    "There *is* noble work to be found for reporters who want to expose the extraordinary cynicism and depravity of campaigns’ anonymous-political-consultant culture, and how a few behind-the-scenes psychopaths manipulate the entire nation in order to collect their fees, but only when it’s correctly framed as muckraking"

    [snark off] You ask the $64m question, Jim. What happens when the malfeasors trumpet their malevolent "achievements" from the rooftops, to the praise and applause of the nation's political establishment? Muckrakers are no longer necessary because the "muck" is a matter of public record. And those of us who are not in the charmed circle of beneficiares of this clusterf**k can do nothing but watch. We truly are screwed. [snark on].

  23. Negropolis

    You said nipple and navel in the same sentence, and now you've gotten me all hot-and-bothered.

    Anyway, even the devil can quote scripture and the broken clock is right twice per day.

  24. Negropolis

    Some people thus welcome the tumult in your industry, heralding the new voices and the unfiltered or supposedly unbiased sources.

    Who the hell talks like this? Like, who the hell?

  25. eaglewon

    where does Romney rent those black people they stick in the background every now and then?

Comments are closed.