Skip to comments.The Nancy vs. Newt contrast
Posted on 01/10/2007 10:02:59 AM PST by Ouderkirk
Anyone remembering the ascent of Newt Gingrich to House speaker in 1995 surely noticed a difference between media coverage of that historic event and Nancy Pelosi taking the gavel back for the Democrats in 2007. One had all the joy of a child's funeral. The other was "New Year's Rockin' Eve."
CNN even had a countdown clock to the Democrats regaining the majority. All that was missing was a lighted crystal donkey that would descend down a pole on the top of the Capitol dome. CNN's Dana Bash called Pelosi's gavel grab a "moment to savor," surely true for her supporters, but the bitterest of pills to swallow for those who worked their hearts out last year to keep Pelosi and her liberal army from retaking the House. CNN left no doubt where it stood on this divide. The liberal media despised Newt and adore Nancy. They've demonstrated this by the way they played up the Gingrich threat in the weeks after the '94 GOP tsunami, while virtually ignoring Pelosi and her radical agenda for the last two months.
Their response to Gingrich was swift, intense and severe. Their reaction to Pelosi was pleased -- but noticeably restrained. Gingrich was portrayed as an extremist threat to everything near and dear to Americans. The arrival of the San Francisco ultraliberal is apparently business as it should be, the natural order of a reasonable and civilized society.
Newsweek featured the infamous cartoonish holiday cover at the end of 1994, titled, "How the Gingrich Stole Christmas!" But Newsweek has yet to publish a Nancy Pelosi cover. Time pictured Gingrich on its cover as a red, white and blue menace, with the words: "Uncle Scrooge: 'Tis the season to bash the poor. But is Newt Gingrich's America really that heartless?" Time has also published no Pelosi cover. Time's idea of a tough Pelosi piece after the Democrat victory was an article by her daughter Alexandra describing how much her mother and President Bush have in common. What ultraliberal San Francisco Democrat?
CBS attacked Gingrich with poetry on its program "Sunday Morning." CBS anchor Charles Osgood's poem also began with the theme "How the Gingrich Stole Christmas." The anchor-poet charged, "He'd even take kiddies away from their mamas." In fact: "The Gingrich said things that the Whos thought were shocking. He'd take back each present and empty each stocking." (On another "Sunday Morning" show, CBS commentator John Leonard suggested the new conservatives in Congress were a "slash-and-burn Khmer Rouge.")
I may have missed it, but I'm fairly certain CBS hasn't compared Pelosi liberals to any mass-murdering communist regime. Nor did CBS offer any weekend poetry for Pelosi. In fact, in one Saturday morning report, CBS correspondent Joie Chen couldn't even find liberalism anywhere, just progress. She's a "milestone" as the first female speaker of the House, basking in a "landmark" moment, and "she has a history of crashing barriers." She was the only daughter in a Baltimore political family who "recalls a determined little sister." Her brother insisted she was a "trailblazer."
Was she a threat? Apparently, only if you were a meanie. Chen concluded that "she vows to use her mother-of-five voice to keep unruly politicians in line." For CBS, Gingrich was a horror flick, and still is, while Pelosi is a heart-warming Hallmark movie of the week.
Pelosi is just our First Female, and the Honorable Speaker/Grandma. What about her political agenda? To listen to the media, Pelosi's extreme liberalism is merely a fiction painted by Republicans. It doesn't actually exist.
On NBC's "Today" show, co-host Meredith Vieira approached swearing-in day with undisguised joy at the Pelosi takeover. "I'm excited, as a woman, to see that happen." It nicely matched then-NBC co-host Katie Couric greeting Pelosi's arrival as minority leader in 2002 with a "You go, girl!" on NBC's airwaves. But could you imagine that much joy if the first female speaker had been a Republican? Or even just a pro-lifer?
All this joy was quite a contrast to swearing-in day in 1995. Some of us cannot forget the "Today" hysterics from Bryant Gumbel. In an interview with minority leader Dick Gephardt, he asked: "You called Gingrich and his ilk, your words, 'trickle-down terrorists who base their agenda on division, exclusion and fear.' Do you think middle-class Americans are in need of protection from that group?"
The worst part of all of this is that reporters in the dawn of 1995 actually believed Gingrich and his ilk were receiving fair coverage. Isn't that what they always claim? (ABC's John Cochran even dared to say Gingrich received "very positive press.") Apparently, it was and is fair to compare Republicans to terrorists and mass murderers. One wonders what they would say if allowed to deliver their unrestrained opinions.
From day one the Republicans were never to advance their agenda. Not one item was to be passed.
I remember John Kaisich on the floor of the House say to the democrats "we're going to do this now" meaning advance their agenda.
John Lewis D-Georgia, the coming for the young, the weak, the elderly....
Richard Gephardt D- Missouri, Taking food from the mouths of children.
I'm getting tired of seeing these pieces comparing Newt to Nancy.
We lost. No whining, Brent.
If Newt had held a baby when he got hte position he would have been accused of politicking and trying to corrupt the morals of a child- but when Nancy "Pedophile lover/NAMBLA promoter" Pelosi holds one the whole world goes 'awwww- aint that cute'?
The following link does not relate to this thread http://sacredscoop.com
"Positive press" means they mentioned his name and spelled it correctly.
That's my point,rockrr, let's look to the future and getting back a majority in the Congress in 2008.
This is how the media introduced Newt Gingrich.
That's CRAZY. How can they deny the bias.
re: let's look to the future and getting back a majority in the Congress in 2008.
Any look to the future has to be done with a wary look to the past. It will do us no good to elect a majority in Congress if we can't find a way to keep the MSM from it usual tricks. Although I must hasten to add, if the Republicans had stayed true to the promises that got them elected in 1994 they would have had a much better chance of keeping the majority.
The incident that always comes to mind for me was when Newt had traveled with the President on Air Force One and was not allowed to exit the aircraft via the main exit, but had to use a rear exit. This had NEVER been done before and that was all Newt pointed out when asked about it by the press. By the next day he was declared a big cry baby. It went on for a week or more.
Until we find a way to handle situations like this we are going to continue to live a very frustrated lives!
"Time's idea of a tough Pelosi piece after the Democrat victory was an article by her daughter Alexandra describing how much her mother and President Bush have in common."
In Time's defense, to most lefties, that is like comparing her to Adolf Hitler
As long as we have a press in this country that considers itself sancrosanct and the PR wing of the Dem Party, this is what we will always get. Conservatives need to learn to ignore the press gnats nipping at their heels and focus on the business of running the country in accordance with conservative philosophies and principles. These are ideaological concepts that the liberals hate but most Americans love.
We have endlessly beaten our gums on this site about the need to replace the linguini-spined politicians in the Republican Party with conservative fighters who aren't afraid to get into the gutter and go mano-a-mano with the leftists out to destroy what remains of this country. The time has come to stop beating our gums (or our keyboards) and start getting the field ready for '08 with STRONG candidates who have STRONG conservative values and won't sellout to the Dems every time they get their knickers in a twist.
Pelosi, Reid, Schumer, Kennedy, Kerry and all of the other Dem caricatures are doing their best to drive the last nail into the coffin of what once was the greatest nation on earth. If we let them by failing to field STRONG, CONSERVATIVE candidates, we are only helping them and have no one to blame but ourselves!
Allow me to suggest that you re-read my original post. I wasn't kidding, being satirical or sarcastic - I was being serious. That is what the MSM considers giving Republicans "positive press". If we expect fairness, equality, or anything similar from the MSM, we are not only demented, we are deluding ourselves!!