|
Mark Twain knew a thing or two about politics and the human experience. "A lie," he observed, "goes half way around the world before the truth gets its boots on." Today, that lie goes around the world twice, through two news cycles and then develops a life of its own as accepted fact. It brings to mind another Twain observation: "It's not what they don't know that bothers me, it's what they know that ain't so."
The growth of twenty-four hour cable news and talk radio has substantially changed political debate in America. For a number of years, conservative political philosophy has dominated that discourse. In many respects, conservative control of the airwaves has lead to disdain for honest, intellectual and factual discussion. But now, many liberal commentators and writers have simply had enough. Like Howard Beale in Paddy Chayefsky's Network they have stood up, gone to the window and announced, "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore!"
BIG LIES, by political writer Joe Conason, is one of those books that has begun to peel away and expose that element of conservative politics that cares little for the truth. Recent months have marked the publication of several books in this vein. LIES AND THE LYING LIARS WHO TELL THEM by Al Franken was recently reviewed on Bookreporter. Efforts by liberals Jim Hightower, Molly Ivins and others have been or soon will be published. While Franken is more entertainer than political pundit, Conason writes from the perspective of a man who covers politics on a full time basis. He writes for the New York Observer and Salon. Along with Gene Lyons, Conason authored THE HUNTING OF THE PRESIDENT, an account of the actions of the right wing radicals who tried to hound Bill Clinton out of the White House. Quite simply, he knows of what he speaks.
In each of ten chapters, BIG LIES confronts what Conason believes are the false notions that are currently essential elements of the conservative mantra. In one chapter he attacks the notion that "liberals control the media and misuse their influence to promote left-wing policies." Conason shows that this assertion is simply false. How? By resorting to a method that many conservative pundits would find appalling --- reliance upon cold, hard facts. An empirical study by Professor Geoffrey Nunberg of Stanford University finds that it is liberal politicians who are more often labeled than their conservative counterparts. In addition, Conason points out numerous examples in the past two elections, where print and electronic media found fault with liberal politicians when similar actions by conservatives were ignored. Finally, Conason goes through the roster of commentators appearing on the political circuit. Just a list of the names coupled with their political viewpoint establishes the myth of liberal domination.
Next, Conason takes on the notion that "conservatives truly love America and support the armed forces while liberals are unpatriotic draft dodgers." This canard is easy pickings. A review of the resumes of conservative and liberal politicians and commentators shows that liberals do not shirk their responsibility to their country. In fact, many liberals have fought for their country and are decorated veterans. While conservatives are equally patriotic, Conason does point out the irony that some very brave people have been maligned as unpatriotic by others who, when given the opportunity, avoided service to their country. In 2002 Senator Max Cleland, a Vietnam veteran who lost three limbs in the war, was attacked by his opponent for being unpatriotic. Saxby Chambliss, who defeated Cleland in the Georgia Senate race, avoided service in Vietnam with four student deferments.
There is much more material in BIG LIES. While it is a well-written and researched book, it faces the problem that many political books of this nature must confront. The people who should read this book, conservatives, will avoid it. In the same fashion, liberals eschew reading books by conservative authors. Preaching to the choir is the nature of political writing. Equally important in these political books is their lack of a solution to the problem of the sinking level of political discourse. Democracy thrives on robust political debate. As both sides of the debate sink deeper and deeper into the muck of personal political attacks, the quality of discussion and of democracy also sink. Both sides of the political spectrum need to address that dilemma. Democracy deserves that effort from all its citizens. Its very survival rests upon improving both the quality and civility of political debate.
--- Reviewed by Stuart Shiffman
• Click here now to buy this book from Amazon.
© Copyright 1996-2010, Bookreporter.com. All rights reserved.
Back to top.
|
