IMITATIONS OF LIFE: Lawrence O'Donnell flips on Mitt!

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 2022

Pure propaganda prevails: Watching Lawrence on Monday night, the analysts had to laugh.

It's true! As a general matter, Ronna McDaniel has been a nightmare as head of the RNC. But there was Lawrence, of all people, praising her uncle, Senator Mitt Romney, while mocking McDaniel for having flipped concerning her uncle's greatness. 

Lawrence offered the remarks shown below. The analysts chose to laugh—perhaps more accurately, to shift uneasily on their benches as they issued mordant chuckles:

LAWRENCE (2/7/22): The chair of the Republican Party had to change her name for Donald Trump.

Ronna McDaniel climbed her way to the top of the Republican Party by trading on her famous Republican name that included two Republican candidates for president...

Of course, Mitt Romney was the Republican nominee for president in 2012 when Ronna McDaniel proudly called herself "Ronna Romney McDaniel." She did not want to walk into any room with her married name masking the fact that she is Mitt Romney`s niece.

So she was "Ronna Romney McDaniel" until Donald Trump rose to power and displayed his public hatred of Mitt Romney, whereupon Ronna Romney McDaniel became "Ronna McDaniel."

The analysts shifted uncomfortably on their benches. They couldn't help thinking of the way Hillary Clinton had changed her name, at least two separate times, to serve political ends. 

They displayed discomfort when our most performative feminist went after McDaniel's name change. But they laughed out loud at the very idea that Lawrence, of all the corporate multimillionaire clowns, was effusively praising Senator Romney, Ronna McDaniel's uncle.

McDaniel has flipped on her uncle, Mitt Romney? What about Lawrence himself? He had engaged in astonishingly stupid behavior back when Romney was running for president, repeatedly trashing the basics of the candidate's Mormon faith. He'd even adopted his tough-guy, blue-collar Boston Dorchester accent as he angrily challenged one of Romney's sons to meet him for a (literal) fight.

(Lawrence is one of those people for whom Catholic belief makes perfect sense while Mormon belief does not. You pretty much can't get dumber than that, but our own tribal icons will try.)

If memory serves, that lunatic invitation to fight was the last of the famous meltdowns Lawrence has staged on MSNBC's air. If memory serves, he had to make a formal apology about this manifest act of lunacy, though you'll have to look that up yourself. 

At this older-but-wiser site, we no longer waste our tome providing such pointless services

At any rate, no one has been weirder about the Romneys than our own Lawrence has. But on Monday night, there he was, criticizing McDaniel for flipping on Mitt even as he himself was flipping on Mitt in the most obvious way.

That was the comic relief; suddenly, Mitt qualified as Lawrence's hero because of something he'd said. In that way, Lawrence's discomfiting attack on McDaniel for changing her name provided the comical underbelly to the astonishing wave of propagandization which has swept across our failing blue tribe over the past five days.

The propagandization was general on blue tribe cable last night. We cringed at the behavior of John Berman and Van Jones on CNN. Later, the analysts screamed as they watched Lawrence continue the onslaught.

They wept as they watched the transparently phony showmanship performed by Chris Hayes.

(People will do a lot of things to retain those multimillion dollar jobs. We first stated that point decades ago, while discussing the idiocy of Brian Kilmeade on Fox.)

Last night, the propagandization was general over our own "cable news." Tomorrow, we'll show you some of what was said. 

For today, we'll focus on a news report from the top of page A1 of this morning's New York Times. The propaganda is astonishing there, as it is elsewhere today in both the Washington Post and in today's New York Times.

In print editions, the news report appears at the top of the New York Times' front page. The report was written by Weisman and Karni. Inexcusably, they start like this:

WEISMAN AND KARNI (2/9/22): Senator Mitch McConnell, the minority leader, pushed back hard on Tuesday against the Republican Party’s censure of Representatives Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger and its characterization of the Jan. 6 riot as “legitimate political discourse,” saying the riot was a “violent insurrection.”

Say what? Has "the Republican Party" (i.e., the RNC) characterized the January 6 riot as "legitimate political discourse?"

That's what Weisman and Karni say at the start of this morning's report. Last night, our own tribe's beloved corporate stars clung to that claim in much the way a drowning multimillionaire corporate cadre might cling to the edge of a raft they'd taken from their yacht's drowning hands.

That said, is it true? Has "the Republican Party" (actually, the RNC) characterized the January 6 riot as "legitimate political discourse?" All the clowns said so last night--all the clowns from Berman and Jones right on through Lawrence and Hayes. 

(At 11, we were disappointed to see Chris Jansing follow suit.)

Everybody said it last night—but has [the RNC] actually done that? Atop this morning's front page, the New York Times flatly states that as a fact—but is the claim factually accurate?

Last Saturday morning, the same paper trafficked a similar claim, also on page A1. Starting with the headline, the journalism was inexcusably poor, even then—but check that report's fourth and fifth paragraphs:

G.O.P. Declares Jan. 6 Attack ‘Legitimate Political Discourse’

The Republican Party on Friday officially declared the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol and events that led to it “legitimate political discourse,” and rebuked two lawmakers in the party who have been most outspoken in condemning the deadly riot and the role of Donald J. Trump in spreading the election lies that fueled it.

The Republican National Committee’s voice vote to censure Representatives Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois at its winter meeting in Salt Lake City culminated more than a year of vacillation, which started with party leaders condemning the Capitol attack and Mr. Trump’s conduct, then shifted to downplaying and denying it.

On Friday, the party went further in a resolution slamming Ms. Cheney and Mr. Kinzinger for taking part in the House investigation of the assault, saying they were participating in “persecution of ordinary citizens engaged in legitimate political discourse.”

After the vote, party leaders rushed to clarify that language, saying it was never meant to apply to rioters who violently stormed the Capitol in Mr. Trump’s name.

“Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger crossed a line,” Ronna McDaniel, the Republican National Committee chairwoman, said in a statement. “They chose to join Nancy Pelosi in a Democrat-led persecution of ordinary citizens who engaged in legitimate political discourse that had nothing to do with violence at the Capitol.”

That journalism was inexcusably poor. Right in its opening paragraph—right in its front-page headline!—the Times was saying that "the Republican Party" (the RNC) had officially said that the Capitol riot was “legitimate political discourse.” 

That was an inexcusably shaky claim. But even then, the Times was willing to quote McDaniel and cite others, in paragraphs 4 and 5, as she and they explicitly denied that claim. 

In this morning's inexcusable report, McDaniel's denial is gone. The propagandization is total. 

According to various experts, failing tribes have nothing to offer acolytes except for propaganda of such obvious kinds. Much later in today's report, Weisman and Karni even present this howler:

WEISMAN AND KARNI (2/9/22): “Republicans have been very clear, we condemn the violence on Jan. 6. We also condemn the violence in 2020 as violent criminals attacked federal buildings including parts of Washington, D.C.,” said Representative Elise Stefanik of New York, the House Republican Conference chairwoman, equating racial justice protests with the deadly assault on the Capitol. She added that “we believe the Jan. 6 commission is political theater about punishing partisan opponents.”

In the quoted statement, the routinely horrendous Stefanik became the ten millionth Republican to say that the GOP condemns the violence of January 6.

Still, the journalism in that paragraph is astonishing too. Like about a million others by now, Stefanik was referring to types of looting and arson from the summer of 2020, not to "racial justice protests." Sadly, we've reached the point where journalists at the New York Times just won't stop doing things like that.

In that pitiful paraphrase, the propagandization by the stars of our dying tribe has basically become total. You can't get more false than that.

Tomorrow, we'll look at some of porridge fed to us on "cable news" last night. We'll also look at the text of the RNC's official statement—the text in which the RNC supposedly said that the violent attack on the Capitol was "legitimate political discourse."

Again and again and again and again, McDaniel and others have said that isn't what the RNC actually meant—and it certainly isn't something the RNC explicitly said. People like Berman and Jones and Lawrence and Hayes weren't willing to tell you that last night. This morning, the Times may be even worse.

By now, our "journalists" are desperate for product to serve us, for product to soothe our souls. This is the way societies die, with progressive ideals going first.

Meanwhile, there was Lawrence on Monday night, flipping hard—swooning, almost—in favor of Mitt Romney. 

Once, he actually challenged Romney's son to a literal fight. He'd adopted his stupid Dorchester accent to do it.

That was propaganda then. Today, there's little but propaganda and its rules in the gruesome imitations of journalism produced by our corporate stars. 

These people aren't willing to tell you the truth. Their imitations of journalism are sad imitations of life.

Tomorrow. Something you've basically never been shown—the RNC's actual text!