4 votes

U.S. Press "would rather continue helping Americans not understand" than cover Ron Paul - Economist

From the Economist of April 18, 2011:

I think Mr Paul's influence on the ideological cast of American conservatism has been underestimated and underreported, but to take even his influence, if not his candidacy, more seriously would require the talking haircuts and the newspaper typing corps to wrestle with a charged set of geopolitical and economic topics they would rather continue helping Americans not understand. So Ron Paul's a proven loser we can neglect with a clear conscience, while it is a matter of great public interest whether or not Michele Bachmann actually attended a family reunion, because, you see, the winner of the Ames straw poll is a real up-and-comer who's pulling down a fearsome 10% in national polls, right up there with non-candidates Rudy Giuliani and Sarah Palin. Right up there with Ron Paul.

Brought to you via Reddit

Read the entire analysis at the Economist



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

" but to take even his

" but to take even his influence, if not his candidacy, more seriously would require the talking haircuts..."

What is this phrase "talking haircuts?" I think I've heard it before but haven't caught oon yet what it means.

An alternate phrase is "talking heads"

From urbandictionary,

A term used in the Television business. Used on news shows and reports, 'talking heads' refers to when the camera focuses on the head and upper shoulders of the newscaster. The resulting footage is that of a head which does not seem to be connected to a body. Thus, the term that is implied is 'talking heads'.

Thank you!

Thank you!

Not the same cachet as "nattering nabobs of negativism",

but there was only one Bill Safire.

.

I like Benton's categorization of them as "The Chattering Class."