It's rumored that Wendy Davis has decided to run for governor of Texas. Whether or not she stands a chance -- it looks highly unlikely that she or any other Democrat could win a statewide election in the foreseeable future -- she's certainly getting press: she'll be featured in Voguesoon, Politico reports.
I think the Vogue story was the last straw for Dave Weigel. He asks:
Imagine a Republican in a blue state filibustering a pro-choice bill. Would she get the same "next big thing" media as Wendy Davis?
— daveweigel (@daveweigel) August 15, 2013
As a lot of people have pointed out in response to him, that's not a very good analogy. A pro-choice bill in a blue state wouldn't fundamentally change social policy the way a law effectively making abortion unavailable in vast swaths of Texas does.
Let's try this instead: Imagine a Republican in a blue state successfully using a dramatic 13-hour talking filibuster to prevent a bill legalizing gay marriage from becoming law. Is it really inconceivable that that Republican would get the same "next big thing" treatment from the right-wing media?
And when did Rand Paul's star begin to rise with the national press? When he led a filibuster against an Obama appointee who was later confirmed, in protest of a drone policy that hasn't changed one iota since the filibuster.
Hell, Ben Carson briefly became a right-wing star for something like a non-legislative filibuster -- a speech denouncing President Obama at an event attended by the president.
No, none of these people got into Vogue. But the right has its own star-maker machinery, which doesn't depend on outlets like Vogue.
2 comments:
No self-respecting Republican politician would ever want a write-up on Vogue.
Or Cosmo.
Now, Field & Stream and Guns & Ammo - YEAH!!!
Hm, google's hinky. OK, let me try again. Wendy Davis will be on the cover of Vogue, and not Guns and Ammo or Wired because she's beautiful now notorious because something something something sex and babeez. If Palin had sone some grandstanding something in Alaska, instead of quitting her job, she would have been on the cover of vogue, too. Is weigel pretending to be shocked that when beautiful people are involved magazines can get interested in putting them on the cover? Is he just shocked to discover that dirty little things like birth control and abortion actually have enough public clout not to be hidden away from the cover of fashion magazines? Either way this naivte is a bit unbecoming.
Post a Comment