Slimy Dishonest Scumbag Todd Purdum Compares ObamaCare to Brown v. Board

Posted on Comments

Ace of Spades dismantles the preposterous nonsense whereby Todd S. Purdum tries to blame Republicans for the failure of ObamaCare.

It’s kook stuff: “calculated sabotage by Republicans,” a phrase redolent of Stalin-era Soviet propaganda blaming problems on “saboteurs,” and then totally throwing down the rhetorical gauntlet:

The GOP faithful then kept up their crusade past the president’s reelection, in a pattern of “massive resistance” not seen since the Southern states’ defiance of the Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954.

Whoa! Hold on there, Sparky! The Department of Bad Analogies just issued a recall on that sentence, which is part of an emerging pattern of Wrong History as Political Journalism. First it was James Fallows invoking John C. Calhoun, then it was Colbert King invoking Jefferson Davis, and now Purdum goes all Brown v. Board on us?

Instead of trying to gin up invidious racially charged comparisons like this, maybe liberals could actually enlighten their readers by making the apt comparison to FDR’s National Recovery Administration, an unworkable anti-competitive price-fixing scheme that was eventually struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

But Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States isn’t taught in schools the way Brown v. Board is taught, and our nation’s press corps is full of clever half-educated liberal fools like Todd Purdum who can’t distinguish between their partisan prejudices and objective fact.

By the way, you may be wondering, who is this Todd Purdum guy?

The name rang a bell, and he only joined Politico three months ago, but he had a long, rich history of liberal bias before then. Of course, he’s an Ivy Leaguer (Princeton, ’82) and worked for the New York Times, becoming White House correspondent in the 1990s before marrying Bill Clinton’s first press secretary, Dee Dee Myers. Purdum left the Times in 2005 and joined Vanity Fair as national editor, where he established a reputation for blatant unfairness. His savage attack on Hillary in 2008 inspired Bill Clinton to denounce Purdum:

“He’s a really dishonest reporter,” Clinton said during the tirade that followed, according to Fowler’s report. “And I haven’t read (the article). There’s just five or six blatant lies in there. But he’s a real slimy guy.”
Reminded that Purdum is married to his former press secretary Dee Dee Myers, Clinton responded in part: “That’s all right — he’s still a scumbag.” The former president added: “He’s just a dishonest guy — can’t help it.”
Clinton went on to observe: “It’s all politics. It’s all about the bias of the media for Obama. Don’t think anything about it. But I’m telling ya, all it’s doing is driving her supporters further and further away — because they know exactly what it is — this has been the most rigged coverage in modern history — and the guy ought to be ashamed of himself. But he has no shame. It isn’t the first dishonest piece he’s written about me or her.”

The Slimy Dishonest Scumbag Todd Purdum — hey, just quoting a Democrat because I’m all about bipartisanship, see? — went on to publish one of the most hateful Palin Derangement Syndrome outbursts ever to make print, notorious for this paragraph:

More than once in my travels in Alaska, people brought up, without prompting, the question of Palin’s extravagant self-regard. Several told me, independently of one another, that they had consulted the definition of “narcissistic personality disorder” in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders — “a pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy” — and thought it fit her perfectly.

Whatever you think of Sarah Palin, she’s a paragon of humility compared to our thin-skinned self-regarding Narcissist-in-Chief.

As I’ve previously noted, however, in career fields where liberalism enjoys hegemonic dominance — including academia, the entertainment industry and especially journalism — being a liberal is an acceptable substitute for any virtue. In such environments, if a coward wishes to be praised for “courage” or a liar wants to be lauded for his “honesty,” he need merely be a dutiful outspoken liberal, and he will be showered with encomiums. Just as the wretched drunken womanizer Ted Kennedy was awarded laurels as a heroic champion of women’s rights — Mary Jo Kopechne could not be reached for comment — so it was that Politico‘s hiring of the utterly despicable Todd Purdum was celebrated in July by editor-in-chief John Harris:

Todd S. Purdum, who over 30 years in journalism has fashioned a deserved reputation as one of the most perceptive reporters and elegant stylists of his generation, is coming to POLITICO in September.  . . .
Todd will maintain a strong affiliation with Vanity Fair. As a contributing editor, he will continue to write longer profiles and historical essays on its pages. POLITICO will be his home for the wealth of more in-the-moment reporting and observations that are in Todd’s head and his notebook at any time. Todd, Graydon Carter at Vanity Fair, and I all believe this will be a winning arrangement from every perspective.

It’s magic: Any mendacious scumbag can be transformed into a “perceptive reporter” and an “elegant stylist,” merely by being liberal.

 

 


51 comments

  1. Hey! He got 30 years experience in journalism. Now, who else was it who had that level of experience?

    Oh, yeah, that guy from Elkridge, but no one has accused him of being “perceptive” or “elegant.” “Slimy” and “scumbag” seem to fit though. So does that bit about having no shame.

    Of course, they are both liberal hacks, but one has the advantage of the connections that may be derived from an Ivy League education.

  2. Hmmmm. They have compared opposition of obamacare to Brown v Board, segregation, jim crow, etc ,etc,etc. I wonder, does that mean that they think obamacare is exclusively available to blacks ? Isn’t that racist ? What a bunch of asinine idiots.

  4. I am so farking sick of the J School bastards in the Make Believe Media it is starting to make me crazier than my dogs when somebody rings the front door’s bell. Sooner than later I’m gonna snap the governor off the mental engine and go completely ‘open to a lawsuit’ regarding irretrievable asshats like Purdum.
    First, the ones in NYC; they have to have a watering hole, right? I’ll bring a couple of wingmen and they’ll never know what hit them when we stroll into “their” bar.
    Then we climb aboard the Acela and go deal with the bastards inside the Beltway.

  6. It’s kook stuff: “calculated sabotage by Republicans,” a phrase redolent of Stalin-era Soviet propaganda blaming problems on “saboteurs,”

    Totally saw that coming.

    And anybody with sense knows Obamacare is more like what Brown overturned: bad law enshrining a bad practice, and built on a bald-faced lie (“separate but equal) to boot.

  8. Has no one reminded the elegant stylist with the bad combover that Brown v. Board of Education provoked “massive resistance” from Democrats?

  13. As I’ve previously noted, however, in career fields where liberalism enjoys hegemonic dominance — including academia, the entertainment industry and especially journalism — being a liberal is an acceptable substitute for any virtue. In such environments, if a coward wishes to be praised for “courage” or a liar wants to be lauded for his “honesty,” he need merely be a dutiful outspoken liberal, and he will be showered with encomiums.

    I often say that being a “liberal” is what is essentially an indulgence, like Gore’s oft-mocked “carbon offsets”. Espousing the “correct” politics — or even just claiming to — is the ultimate indulgence for any possible leftist-defined “sin”.

    A sex-obsessed misogynist is magically transformed into an immaculate “honorary feminist” with the correct leftist credential: abortion. A privileged, well-connected cronyist who ships jobs out of the country is magically transformed into a “champion of the poor” by running for office as a Democrat. Think of any leftist “sin”: racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, intolerance, discrimination, bigotry, pollution… (wow, and they think Catholics have a lot of rules?) and any one can be “offset” merely by being a leftist “liberal”.

    Of course, the leftist “unforgivable sin” is the only one that an indulgence cannot cover, and that is the unforgivable sin of daring to think differently than they do.

  16. Rush Limbaugh responded to criticism that his success was due to attacking Clinton by noting that his biggest surge in audience came while Bushes were in the White House. He theorized it was because “liberals are funniest when they are out of power.”

    If Obama had bothered to compromise a small amount, and worked with Republicans towards reforms he had personally previously endorsed, he might have become unassailably popular. But from Day One he was totally dedicated to a radical leftist agenda. Now his crowning achievement of socializing health care is crashing about him due to his own incompetence, and his defenders are beclowning themselves by offering laughable excuses.

Comments are closed.