CBS Face the Nation host Bob Schieffer‘s October 20 commentary took aim at the government shutdown, as the veteran journalist discussed a nearby takeout sandwich shop that suffered when government workers were at home instead of at the office.
He went on:
A big story like the shutdown tends to push things that often matter off the front pages and TV. Here’s just one that got almost no attention–a survey out last week showed nearly half the students in our public schools, 48 percent, come from families so poor they qualify for free or reduced-price meals. Even more disgraceful, a majority of student now qualify for food subsidies in 17 states across the South and West. I’d like to see our elected officials begin to focus on how we fix things like that.
Like my friend at the carry-out, I’m losing interest in who wins the partisan games.
It’s hard to argue with the idea that poverty matters–and that politicians should be forced to pay attention to poverty and inequality. And it’s not a stretch to say these issues are grossly undercovered by corporate media.
But Bob Schieffer isn’t just a guy with an opinion about what’s not being discussed on TV. He hosts a TV show every week. Before this commentary, he interviewed politicians–Republican senators Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham, and also Democrat Mark Warner of Virginia. They talked about the effects of the government shutdown and the strategic moves by leaders in both major parties–“partisan games,” in other words. He had a roundtable discussion later on with insider Beltway journalists, mostly discussing the same things.
That’s a typical week at Face the Nation. Schieffer’s most frequent guest has been Republican Sen. John McCain. His show, like the other network Sunday programs, are a forum for mostly white, mostly male, mostly Republican lawmakers and establishment journalists.
If Bob Schieffer is really “losing interest in who wins the partisan games,” and thinks we should be talking about issue like poverty that are “off the front pages and TV,” he can do something about it.
Please define “partisan games” because I am honestly not certain what this refers to. Some current examples would help.
I am guessing this phrase is supposed to mean D’s v R’s in the Congress, but I simply do not see this. These two parties DO work together on many projects, including tying up continuing operation of the government; that could not possibly be accomplished through anything short of unipartisanship.
But there is more. What about drone strikes? What sort of partisanship do we see there? It seems to me that Democrats in Congress are more than happy to support Obama’s drone wars and the expansion of the drone industry for use domestically (some good uses, such as in agriculture and scientific research, but also for invasion of privacy and other nefarious purposes).
The two parties seem to cooperate on nearly everything. This makes sense to me since their benefactors are all the same group of wealthy elites.
Again, please provide examples of where there is genuine bickering (aside from the PPACA, where even there we can see there is not so much disagreement as claimed; Congress’ insurance company sugar-daddies will be making their mandatory profits soon enough). A convincing response will help reduce my ignorance about partisanship by a factor. Thanks.
Yes, he can, but he won’t. Here’s why. The rule is that one has to use a little of the truth to effectively tell a lie. And in this case that is what he is doing with these comments, or, in other words, he is playing a “partisan game.”
Like so many of his mainstream colleagues in the official media he is simply a partisan sophist, i.e., a liar, and because they always spice their prevarications with a little bit of the truth, or supposedly objective fact, it is difficult for citizens, products of the American school system, to tell the difference. Why? Well, they simply have had no training in how to tell the difference between sophistical rhetoric and straight shooting–another thing all these ethical morons claim to be involved in, “straight shooting.” Bah! JWC
And those guests – as well as Mr. Schieffer and ilk – promote policies that have and will increase that immiseration.
The math of mainstream media only works if two plus two never equals four.
“Like my friend at the carry-out, I’m losing interest in who wins the partisan games”
As always, the parsing of the statement shows that he is not tired of the “partisan games” themselves, he is tired of “someone who isn’t handing him millions of dollars for his personal pleasure” winning the games. In other words he has his money on the wrong dog in this fight, and so he doesn’t care if the other person wins, he wants only his dog to win.
if the government is at a stalemate, PART of the problem is the media that stresses conflict over cooperation.
I don’t know, can he really? Or will his corporate masters continue to ensure he doesn’t?
@NoDifference – I think the article’s point is that corporate media continues to cover “partisan games” (as if they are a real thing) to serve as a distraction from real issues like poverty and inequality. Having written numerous articles on the topic of the Kabuki theater that is the so-called “partisan divide,” it seems FAIR is well aware of the media’s divide-and-conquer strategy.
Bob the only folks that were inconvenienced by the shut down were a few taxpayers in DC. No one else even knew there was one despite Baraks best efforts
Ok funniest thing of the week…..yesterday Senate Dems went to the President to ask for major push backs on Obama care mandate and triggers.It took all of 5 seconds to see that it looked exactly like the list asked for by the tea party when they were called “radicals,fanatics,the government of no,and all the rest during the government shut down.It looked like it because it IS it.Wonder how the press will attack them?NOT!!!!!!!! NBC has a good article today in findings that they say proves Obama was lying and knew 3 years ago he was lying when he made claims like”you can keep your own Dr” and other such things.Hmmmm those crazy tea party types strike again.Isn’t that exactly what they said at the time?