No Forest, Only Trees


Teenagers in 2009 believe that there were always iPods, MP3s, wireless internet, automobiles, telephones, airplanes, television, and radio. Do young journalists in Boston believe there always was a one-party state government and that is normal? Do students get through journalism school without learning the basics of a functioning democracy, allowing them to mislead their readers?

Bernstein goes from the sublime ("Roast pork," Boston Phoenix, May 27, 2009) to the ridiculous with his fundamentally flawed article. (DAVID S. BERNSTEIN, "Mass betrayal," Boston Phoenix, June 19, 2009) He creates a fantasy of liberal reformers versus anti reform (corrupt?) traditionalists in the MA legislature. He contrasts those opposing change with those who try to change. But change in this screen is no change at all. The legislature remains a one-party system. Even if the "liberal reformers" gain control they will become the pigs in Animal Farm continuing corrupt one party rule.

State reps say there is a need for systemic and cultural change. Not at all. What is needed is an opposition party. For Bernstein liberal reformers are incorruptible, there is no need for a two-party system because Democrats are angels. Republicans are mentioned once in a negative context as if criticizing the opposition was dirty politics. How many times a day does Obama blame Bush for his "inheritance?"

Saying "an eight-year limit on the Speaker's term [. . .] limits consolidation of power." is nonsense. With one-party rule there is no limit on the abuses of that party. He says DeLeo gives "[reps] the freedom to act independently." Oh? Then it's not the lack of a spine that prevents that? Does DeLeo issue spines to these members?

Is Bernstein clueless in his vision of state government? He writes as if trying to keep Noam Chomsky's "herd bewildered." What part of one-party state does he not understand? Cosmetics will not suffice. A strong opposition party is the solution. Journalists who support democracy can inspire citizens to create one.

In a companion piece (ADAM REILLY, "Weakened watchdogs," Boston Phoenix,
June 19, 2009) Adam Reilly asks "If the Globe shrinks, will Beacon Hill run amok?" The answer is only if journalists let them. Reilly values quantity over quality. In New York state Fred Dicker exposed more malfeasance than other reporters assigned to the capital. The Albany Times Union, the Albany County DA, and the state Public Integrity Commission helped former Gov. Spitzer's staff cover up malfeasance and abuses of power.

Boston has a different problem -- the blind leading the blind. Reilly is a media critic on a PBS show yet fails to recognize or to report the dangers of one-party government. Hello? David Letterman continues to bash Gov. Sarah Palin and her family. The election ended 7 months ago. Plenty of new clowns in DC but he is as blind to them as Reilly and Bernstein are blind to the source of the corruption.

Boston journalists fail to focus on exposing corruption. Instead readers get political styles coverage and analysis. The focus is on public officials not on voters who elect them. Many MA voters (and journalists?) support corrupt government and knowingly re-elect corrupt officials. Outraged voters who read trying to keep informed are being cheated by journalists.

http://thephoenix.com/Boston/News/85189-Mass-betrayal/

or

http://tinyurl.com/nlet4f

Mass betrayal
How House progressives have let you down — and why they'll do it again
By DAVID S. BERNSTEIN
Boston Phoenix
June 19, 2009

* * *

http://thephoenix.com/Boston/News/85190-Massholes/

or

http://tinyurl.com/klv2ma

Massholes
A timeline of modern-day state house corruption
By DAVID S. BERNSTEIN
Boston Phoenix
June 17, 2009

* * *

http://thephoenix.com/Boston/News/85192-Weakened-watchdogs/

or

http://tinyurl.com/n78xoc

Weakened watchdogs
If the Globe shrinks, will Beacon Hill run amok?
By ADAM REILLY
Boston Phoenix
June 19, 2009