Expensive Shirts Expose Media Bias
July 31, 2012 11 Comments
Last weekend Michelle Obama wore a $6,800 shirt to a royal Olympic function. The New York Daily News gushed over the shirt declaring she’s supporting commerce. The Washington Post declared the shirt fit for a Queen. This is the same Washington Post which groused that Ann Romney’s $990 shirt worn last May was ”tone deaf” and indicative of the Romney’s being “out of touch.” The Post even wondered how many t-shirts Mrs. Obama could buy at Target to equal the price Mrs. Romney paid for one shirt. Mrs. Romney couldn’t buy seven of her pricey shirts to equal the one Mrs. Obama wore to her Royal event.
We conservatives are constantly declaring the benefits of capitalism while we attack the Obama’s socialism. We are quite right in supporting capitalism and one of the things that capitalism stands for is choice. We should not begrudge Mrs. Obama’s or Mrs. Romney’s choices. They’re both worth millions, if they want to spend a lot of money on ugly clothes, that’s their business and not ours. That we might make different choices with our money or that we might make different choices if we had the kind of money they have shouldn’t take away from their right to make the choices they’ve made. There is nothing inherently bad about an expensive shirt, whether it costs $6,800 or $990. We should refrain from declaring our preferences to be “right” while others are tone-deaf, evil or bad.
The issue here is of course media bias. Ann Romney has been savaged by the media because she wore an expensive shirt and she’s been attacked for having expensive horses. As if any of this is any of our business. Meanwhile Mrs. Obama wears a shirt valued at seven times what Mrs. Romney wore and she’s praised as royal worthy. She jets off to Spain, on the taxpayers dime no less, and no one in the mainstream press says anything. If Mrs. Obama paid for her Spanish getaway herself, none of us should have had any problem with it whatsoever. It’s none of our business. That taxpayers had to fork over a fortune changes that analysis.
At the end of the day Mrs. Obama is not the President and if Mitt Romney wins then Mrs. Romney will not be the President. They’re just the President’s wife, nothing more. If they buy expensive clothes, ride expensive horses or go on expensive, privately paid vacations what’s it to us? These people all have the money to pay for these things, why should we in the middle class impose our personal preferences on them? Why is the media imposing their own odd preferences on either one of these women? How can it be that the same newspaper declares an expensive shirt worn by a Republican wife is tone deaf while an expensive shirt that costs nearly seven times as much worn by a Democrat’s wife is royal worthy? That the Washington Post has the audacity to mention Target in the same sentence as Michelle Obama perhaps takes the cake.
What we’re seeing here is media bias at its worst. Republicans are rich and distant from the people, when they spend money it’s the elite strutting around being tone deaf. When Democrats spend nearly seven times as much as the Republican on a nearly equally hideous shirt it’s royal worthy and to be praised. The media did the same thing to Sarah Palin in 2008, they attacked her clothes and the expense of those clothes while pretending Mrs. Obama shopped at Target. The media has a narrative and we can see it in how Mrs. Romney and Mrs. Obama are treated by the mainstream press.
About Steven
I couldn’t agree more with what you have written. I really don’t care what either woman wears, or what it costs, as long sanitary is their own money.
Having said that, the bias of the media is more than a little apparent. Michelle Obama can do no wrong, but I get the feeling that Ann Romney will be faulted, no matter what she does.
I think you’re right, the press will find fault with Mrs. Romney no matter what she does. They’ll ignore her Harvard education and call her a brainless stay at home mom. They’ll ignore the fact that she has MS and attack her horses. The mainstream press will attack Mrs. Romney’s clothes and call her tone deaf while praising Mrs. Obama for wearing a shirt nearly seven times as expensive as Mrs. Romney’s. It’s an incredible display of left-wing bias.
You have got to be kidding. Both women were praised and criticized in these articles. Both articles praised the right and the ability to spend lavishly. A couple of comments were made that perhaps it is not the right image to be presenting in hard economic times. If this is the best that you can do on any particular day to demonstrate the alleged media bias of these two news organizations than you really haven’t a clue. As far as your opinion that these designer cloths are ugly-well I would like to know about your background in fashion design. I think you are offering your opinion “ugly” in an ignorant and foolish manner. Or perhaps you are such a gifted individual that you just know which clothing is attractive and which is not. I think your appraisal of these two women’s apparel is on a par with your opinion about the media bias of the Daily News and The Washington Post. Worthless. The amazing Steven Birn!
Mrs. Obama has not been criticized like Mrs. Romney. Mrs. Obama has been criticized in the conservative media, largely by comparing the media coverage of her expensive shirt to Mrs. Romney’s coverage. There have been some conservative attacks over the expensive of Mrs. Obama’s shirt, which is why I supported her right to wear an expensive shirt if she can afford it.
But when we look at the mainstream press, the coverage of Mrs. Obama’s shirt has been glowing for the most part. Compare that to Mrs. Romney’s coverage of a much less expensive shirt and there’s clear bias. The Washington Post itself is wildly bias in their coverage.
Do I need a degree in fashion design to know whether something is ugly or not. This is your problem, you want everything run by experts. If one isn’t a fashion designer, one cannot comment on fashions. I’ve got news for you though, I have my own expert degrees. I hope never to hear from you on law or politics, after all I’m the credentialed expert with my law and political theory degrees.
Frankly I think it absurd to limit opinion only to those who have taken time to get a degree. As though the only way to obtain knowledge is to sit in a bunch of classes, take some tests and write a few papers. The fact is, we can all independently obtain knowledge, even expert knowledge, without the aid of a classroom. To limit opinion only to credentialed experts only encourages people to remain ignorant and dumb, it encourages people not to be intellectually curious beyond their area of expertise.
That is fine Steve. You are right you don’t need a degree or other academic credentials to be an expert on something. I have your read your blogs, however, and you are no expert on law or politics either. Your rhetoric is always extreme and filled with hateful adjectives such as “ugly” “stupid” “foster hatred of the church and hatred of God”, “war on religious freedom”, ” wearing those ridiculous hoodies”, “Martin was dressed in a thuggish manner”, “race hustling”, “to frighten people into silence” and on and on and on.
When I was 12 years old I read a column by your hero William Buckley Jr. Mr. Buckley also deemed himself an expert on just about everything imaginable. In his column he took Mick Jagger to task for having a voice as good as only one in four people one could randomly pick on the street. I didn’t really care what Buckley thought about Mick Jagger at the time. The point being that he was also a conservative who believed himself so brilliant as to be an expert on all matters. Obviously, Mr. Buckley’s opinion on Mick Jagger’s talent was, to say the least, ludicrous.
As far as your political brilliance and expertise read this response to your statement that conservative women are free thinkers and liberal women are brain washed by authoritarian liberals:
So, liberal women “think what’s expected of them” and think “as she’s told to”, while conservative women “think for themselves”. In other words, you are asserting that liberal women are collectively unthinking while simultaneously accusing liberals of a “Hatred of Thinking Women” because the intelligence (or lack thereof) of some female public figures has been attacked.”You are amazing Steve.
When have I ever cited William Buckley, much less declared him my hero? You’re making some pretty grand assumptions here. Having said that, and for the record I’ve never read Buckley’s opinion on Mick Jaggar, it sounds like he was spot on. Jaggar is a dreadful singer with even worse morals. Both could be argued objectively though arguably his singing talent can be argued subjectively.
You’re building up straw men in your last paragraph and thus it will be ignored. If you don’t think I’m an expert in law, that’s fine. Don’t hire me, go hire someone else.
You miss the point of course. You and Buckley bubble with such arrogance that you believe there isn’t anything that you don’t instinctively have a superior appreciation and understanding of then anyone else. Thus your ability to make judgmental remarks that are mostly idiotic, ignorant and crude. I have know a lot of conservatives with that personality defect.
You are amazing Steve.
So if Buckley and I disagree with you on any particular subject then we’re arrogant, ignorant, idiotic and crude. But you of course are heroic for disagreeing with a conservative.
There is nothing wrong with a disagreement. There is something wrong with someone like you who when confronted with an error of logic and/or fact refuses to acknowledge the error. You just dig deeper into your own little hermetically sealed world that is entirely illuminated by the thinking of people who are even less rational then you are. I disagree with all kinds of people-left and right. That doesn’t mean I am always right nor does it make me heroic. I didn’t say Buckley was an idiot or crude-just arrogant. You on the other hand make extremely idiotic and illogical statements, you make very crude remarks and you can’t seem to get your facts straight. Look Steve, you have been feeding your brain nothing but unadulterated, right wing propaganda for a long time. It would take you years to find your way out of the wing-nut fog that you have inflicted upon yourself.
So Steve, what is your opinion of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony -I am sure that you are an expert on that kind of music as well. And please, tell me which shoe maker makes the best shoes? And what do you think of Keats?
What note of the scale is best? Who has the best God? Whose God is nonsense?
Thank you.
You are truly amazing Steve.
If you don’t like what I have to say why do you comment so much?
Because I can.