What’s new is that there’s a Breitbart to cover the story of one more inside-the-beltway narcissistic opportunist cashing in on fleeting DC experience.
New View co-host Nicole Wallace. Do you
think she’s had some work done? See below.
Monday during the season premier of “The View,” the new co-hosts were introduced during “getting the 411” segments.
The cast joining long-time panelist Whoopi Goldberg are Rosie O’Donnell, Rosie Perez, and Republican strategist Nicolle Wallace.
Nicolle Wallace’s introduction segment was filled with loud cackling laughter as Wallace told the story of Vice President Dick Cheney accidentally shooting a hunting partner.
But the strongest criticism was was aimed at former Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK), who co-host Whoopi Goldberg could not even say Palin’s name without laughing as co-host Rosie Perez asked, “Can I have three specific questions? One, what was it like when you first met her? Two, did the winking get on your nerves? And three, when did you want to just pop her?”
Rosixe O’Donnell did not miss the opportunity to rip former President George W. Bush’s “Katrina fly-by” being sure to point out Wallace was on her honeymoon at the time.
Wallace who was previously the communications chief for George W. Bush, and a senior adviser for the McCain–Palin campaign, has admitted she was no fan of Palin and has previously blamed the McCain loss on Palin’s interview with Katie Couric.
What’s not new is that the conservative communications establishment totally blew the headline, which in the case of Breitbart, was:
BUSH, CHENEY, PALIN CRITICIZED [BY] ‘THE VIEW’S’ NEW ‘CONSERVATIVE’ PREMIER
What’s in square brackets is what the illiterate Breitbart copy editors left out. A complete reversal of meaning. Typical.
What’s also old is conservative communications incompetence generally. Exhibit I. An Instapunk post. It was called “You’re Fired,” dated November 29, 2005, and it features the following graphic, as well as two others:
Nicole Devenish. Pre-surgery.
Yeah, it’s the same highly coiffed, self satisfied little phony who conned her way into a position she didn’t believe in. The same girl who was getting married during Katrina. And I do mean girl. She is that still. Here’s some text from that long ago post.
THE LIST. George W. Bush doesn’t like to fire people. It’s his greatest weakness. If he wants to prevail in his most important policies, however, it’s time he overcame that weakness. Pictured above are the first three heads that must fall: Dan Bartlett, Strategic Communications Planning; Scott McClellan, White House Press Secretary; and Nicolle Devenish, White House Communications Director.
These people assumed their current posts in the wake of the President’s highly successful campaign for reelection. Since then, they have presided over one public relations debacle after another — the needless Schiavo brouhaha, the incompetently presented Social Security reform initiative, the appalling failure to take credit for successes in Iraq or to counter the MSM’s “Vietnam quagmire” fantasy, the Cindy Sheehan farce, the self-destructive Miers nomination, the Valerie Plame fiction, the cone of silence enforced while the Democrats screamed and shouted their “Bush lied” lie into every network microphone for months, and the feeble counterattack that led to the ridiculous playacting of John Murtha.
By any possible standard of competence in communications, these people are miserably and irredeemably inept. If they were merely obedient soldiers executing the instructions of the big boss, they should have resigned en masse long ere this in protest at being deprived of the opportunity to exercise their good judgment. If they actually concocted the communication plans that responded to the crises listed above, as seems more likely in the court of the Great Delegator, they should be drummed out of the profession — hollow square, buttons ripped off, swords broken — the works.
The one thing I can’t understand is why more Republicans haven’t demanded exactly this step. It may be difficult to see into the workings of Bartlett’s and Devenish’s jobs, but we see McClellan every day. The picture shown here is typical — hands up in surrender. He is continually at a loss, defensive, borderline oafish, argumentative when he should be cool, placating when he should be predatory. His performance alone is enough to indict his communication superiors. He’s minor league and even his surname is unpleasantly evocative of the blowhard general who was always piling up more resources for a battle he could never bring himself to fight. Get rid of him. NOW.
Dan Bartlett is, according to his official bio, “Counselor to the President…. responsible for all aspects of President Bush’s strategic communications planning and the formulation of policy and implementation of the President’s agenda. He also oversees the White House Press Office and the Offices of Communications, Media Affairs, and Speechwriting.” Which means he can offer up the excuse that he’s too busy and important to get involved in the disastrous day-to-day bumbling of White House communications. But it’s not a good excuse. There’s no value in architecting the big plans for tomorrow when today is a fire burning out of control. His bio says he’s from Austin, Texas. Another old friend in over his head in the big time. Get rid of him. NOW.
Nicolle Devenish. Has anybody even heard of this babe? She’s 33. She’s a graduate of the University of California at Berkeley. [!] She’s also the White House Communications Director. Her sole responsibility is to advance the president’s agenda in the press and protect him from partisan assaults. Is it possible that her schooling so accustomed her to the treasonous and hateful rhetoric of the left that it doesn’t even raise her blood pressure? “Never you mind, Mr. President. When you meet them for wine and cheese in the faculty lounge, they’re really pussycats. Just let them talk.” Or is she too busy preening in the mirror of her corner office — sexy power player already and only 33!! Actually, it doesn’t matter what the story is with Nicolle. She’s a bimbo, and she needs to be fired. With prejudice. NOW.
You can whine if you want about the sin of shooting the messenger. But in this case it’s a misnomer. Delivering bad news to the President isn’t their primary job. Going to war in the communications arena on his behalf is. And their performance in this respect has branded them as fools, cowards, and stooges.
Now tell me why the blogosphere isn’t seething and bubbling with exactly these sentiments? Are you all asleep?
Their failures paved the way for the election of the worst president in U.S. history, beginning with their shared responsibility for the catastrophic 2006 congressional elections. Nicolle, though, has an extra portion of blame to bear for the role she played in sabotaging Sarah Palin in the 2008 campaign. She wasn’t even quiet about her animus at the time. The Berkeley lineage will tell. This little bitch is almost a war criminal. But her coif has not changed. Her coif IS her brain. Cold, hard, and as well designed for spearing as an NFL helmet.
Men aren’t the only abusers to fear. Also not new. Older than dirt. And dirty work is the best we could ever expect from her like. So why is Breitbart still surprised by her brass? Because conservatives never ever learn about the perfidy and emptiness of the left.
-
No self-respecting conservative would be caught dead on “The View”. That she was ever hired by the Bush administration is just one pebble in the mountain of evidence that the Republicans have gone completely freaking stupid.
Why the hell is anything “The View” does even considered news?
-
Trying to hold Breitbart’s feet to the fire. They’re amateurs and look like it. Every day. Not Andrew’s vision, I’m thinking.
-
Isn’t it time for a well researched expose of Nicolle Devenish/Wallace? A documented abjuration?
-
When I read Breitbart, I’m constantly reminded of a joke an old writer friend of mine once made about USA Today. They won the Pulitzer Prize in Journalism for “Best Investigative Paragraph.”
Unfortunately, Breitbart’s legion of mediocrities can’t even identify the lede of a story they’re not really planning to write. Their reporters write like failed would-be columnists, or vo-tech novelists trying to imitate oblique New Yorker feature writers sneaking up on a story — but in their case through brambles of typos, broken sentences, and mangled headlines. And then they never quite get to the point. Breitbart Sports is the worst. Can’t write at all. Second worst is the managing editor (supposedly) of the whole enterprise, John Nolte, who works hard, tries hard, but hasn’t the talent or the command of syntax and spelling to justify the constant snark of what is supposed to be reporting or the ill-informed bias of his reviews. He watches movies without understanding them. But movies are supposed to be his area of expertise. As a naked ideologue, he is nevertheless constantly confounding because he likes the crap of his youth and is seduced by the crap of the present, while occasionally objecting. There is no there there.
Most conservatives have some ability to live decent lives. They suck when they pretend, without qualifications, to be intellectual. I think I’d like John Nolte. As an editor, reporter, and columnist, I find him unutterably horrifying. Because he reminds me of all the dumb conservative comments I read at right-leaning sites.
Why, once again, I am giving up forever, for today.
-
What Tim said. What Instapunk said.
Who watches the View?
-
“Who watches the View?”
That’s the million dollar question, isn’t it? There’s a story about something said on the view almost daily at conservative sites. Not very interesting. The only real story here is, as RL has said, the one Breitbart didn’t report.
-
Despicable. Maybe her next gig will be managing Huckabee’s 2016 campaign.
-
So, Breitbart’s target audience doesn’t even watch “The View”. Which means this is just linkbait shield-beating on their part. It’s just a gripe-fest for “our side” that does nothing but draw eyeballs, which is all an ad-supported website cares about. If you can’t draw eyeballs with your good content (hard), you draw them with sensationalism (easy). That’s why you can’t hit most “free” news sites without being inundated with celeb porn, bogus scare stories, and top ten lists. Or, in this case, crappy stuff to get irate about.
I know quite a few conservatives who get all worked up about stuff like that. They seem permanently outraged, but mostly over superficial crap. I suspect that it is subconsciously rooted in the fact that they don’t really know what exactly they should be the most angry about… or if they do, they see that there’s virtually nothing they can do about it (in any kind of near timeframe). So they pick easy, obvious things to get irate over. Two minutes hate, and all that. “Oooh! Hey, readers: we called out a host of ‘The View’ for dissing Republicans!” “Yeah! Those lib scumbags! Thanks for keeping us informed!” And everybody feels like they’ve Done Something.
You know a journalist I respect (and listen to)? Dan Carlin of the “Common Sense” podcast. Carlin also has an absolutely outstanding history podcast.
Oh, I also find that G. K. Chesterton is often even more timely now than he was in his day. There is nothing new under the sun, after all…
-
Comment plugin ate my link. Here’s Carlin again:
http://www.dancarlin.com/disp.php/cs -
Oh, cool. Dan is beta-testing a new website:
http://www.dancarlin.net-
I listened. Ten minutes on each track.
-
Sorry, submitted the comment by accident before I was finished.
I can’t imagine anyone wanting to watch that crew of shrews talking. I’d rather watch paint dry.
And Breitbart is shameful. No one watching what is being done. You are so right to call them to account.
-
-
-
-
-
Comments are now closed.
12 comments