Print press repeats media mantra of McCain as "maverick"
SUMMARY: Numerous print publications -- including The New York Times, The Washington Post, and the Los Angeles Times -- continued a longstanding practice of referring to Sen. John McCain as a "maverick" in their coverage of the February 5 presidential primaries and caucuses.
In covering the results of the February 5 presidential primaries and caucuses, numerous print publications continued a longstanding practice of referring to Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain (AZ) as a "maverick" who has challenged Washington and his own party, despite a lifetime rating of 83 by the American Conservative Union and his recent rightward shift on high-profile issues such as immigration and taxes.
In their February 6 coverage, the following print publications all used the word "maverick" in reference to McCain:
- An Associated Press article stated that McCain "has appealed strongly to independent voters with his image as a maverick ready to work outside strict party lines." (The AP article did report: "McCain was a lead sponsor last year of the failed compromise bill, backed by President Bush and most Democrats, that would have tightened border security while also allowing illegal immigrants a pathway toward citizenship. During the campaign, as McCain sought support from GOP conservatives, he has stressed that border security would be his first priority, while his Democratic rivals continued to advocate a comprehensive approach.")*
- The New York Times reported: "This week, as Mr. McCain grew more confident of winning, the maverick who had long defied and exasperated his party began promoting himself as a true conservative who could unify Republicans for the fight in November."
- An article in The Washington Post described McCain as "a former prisoner of war in Vietnam who has carved out a career as a blunt-talking maverick on Capitol Hill."
- The Los Angeles Times noted former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's attempts to gain on McCain by writing: "For weeks, Romney has been casting McCain as a Washington insider, despite the senator's maverick reputation." In a separate article on the same day, the Times reported that a voter who liked California Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger "chose McCain because his maverick, moderate political style is most similar to the governor's."
- The Chicago Tribune reported: "Romney also sought to benefit from prominent conservative talk show hosts who repeatedly used their media outlets to blast McCain's maverick status as no friend of the Republican right." Further, an editorial in the Tribune headlined "The McCain Surge" listed several reasons why McCain couldn't win the Republican nomination, with one reason being: "He'd spent a Senate career being too much the maverick. He was often disloyal to his party -- and more often a prickly and righteous annoyance to his colleagues."
- The Philadelphia Inquirer asserted: "[T]he senator from Arizona emerged with unresolved problems on his right flank, as he tries to persuade conservative opinion leaders that they have little to fear from his maverick tendencies and willingness to work with Democrats."
- The Dallas Morning News reported that when he addressed his supporters after his February 5 primary victories, "Mr. McCain also reached beyond to the conservative and evangelical base of his party, many of whom have criticized the maverick GOP senator."
- An editorial in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch stated: "The maverick Mr. McCain is the leader, but only because the party's conservative base is badly split."
- A Salt Lake Tribune editorial asserted: "[I]t is impossible to imagine the evangelical base of the party coming out strongly for the maverick McCain in November."
- In his New York Sun column, Nicholas Wapshott compared McCain to former President Ronald Reagan, writing: "[T]he maverick senator from Arizona was as likeable and as authentic as Reagan, someone who didn't need a poll or a focus group or a finger in the wind to decide where he stood on an issue."
Media Matters for America has also documented the broadcast media's habit of using the label of "maverick" when discussing McCain.
* The original version of this item omitted the AP's reference to McCain's change on immigration. Media Matters regrets the omission.















I wonder why McCain doesn't just abandon the Republicans, form the "MAVERICK" party, and get Joe Lieberman as his running mate?
The MAVERICKS, those wild and crazy guys whose ideas don't conform with conventional definition, would then be appealing to the American People as "GUYS WITH NO REAL PRINCIPLES" ... or rather, "GUYS WITHOUT IDEOLOGICAL UNDERPINNINGS." Their "principles" follow a different, perhaps unknowable calculus.
MAVERICKS are like a box of chocolates ... you never know WHAT you're going to get. But if you VOTE for them, you'll get exactly what you deserve! The entire nation will know what it feels like to be piloting a small airplane and have the cable snap that controls the rudder. You don't know where you might be going, but eventually it will be DOWN.The Dem's already tried to get America's Maverick to abandon the repubs. Didn't Kerry try to get him as running mate?
McCain is no Maverick, Obama is no second coming of JFK.
The media creates this nonsense & no matter how infuriating it is to have to keep hearing or reading this stuff. I think we're stuck with it.
Of course the media should not market a candidate. Putting forward a constant false premise of McCain as a "maverick" when he is just the opposite influences voters impressions of him, and yes, sways votes.
Anyone who says otherwise is being purposefully disingenuous. But that's a constant problem here, the ostensibly clever poster suddenly "not getting it".
What we get is the office frenzy among the staffers here, and shared by many posters, every time some media person dares utter the name "maverick" in connection with John McCain.
You surely know what media bias is and it's influence on a media soaked populace, Tommy, why do you constantly pretend that it makes no difference?
It's such an obvious game. I just don't know why you're playing it.
WATERSHED:
If you remember the film, "The Wizard of OZ", there was the final scene where Dorothy had accomplished the task of obtaining the broom of the Wicked Witch of the West, and was demanding that the Wizard fulfill his promises to her and her friends.
Todo, the dog, discovers a curtain, and pulls it aside, exposing an old man frantically working the mechanisms that gave a BOOMING VOICE and FRIGHTFUL IMAGES to the Wizard the public saw, a created and fraudulent IMAGE that kept the Wizard "IN POWER".
"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" Booms the IMAGE of the Wizard.
That PHONY IMAGE of a powerful leader, the loud proclamations that FOOL the public into belief ... that's today's MEDIA.
The person saying "Pay no attention" ... is TOMMY.
If we pay attention to the phonyness and deceptions perpetrated by the MEDIA (our "Wizard"), then the game is up.
Tommy wishes to close the curtain, allowing the fraud of the Wizard to continue.
Hope this helps explain why Tommy behaves as he does.
To put it another way, Tommy is smart enough to realize when the media forwards misinformation. The problem is that a large percentage of the citizenry doesn't have the time/access to realize they are being misinformed.
Exactly, there would be a mad dash towards conservative talk radio if a Democrat gets elected in November.
You're right. Say the Mav wins, what's limbaugh gonna do, join the leftwing and bash him for four years, or would he defend some guy he despises? He'd be in a pickle. Joining the chorus from the left certainly will alienate his listeners. But I think his hatred for Mav runs deep, and that big-headed dope would have a hard time pretending he likes the fellow. Dopes like him want a straight message, like someone or hate him/her.
"But I think his hatred for Mav runs deep, and that big-headed dope would have a hard time pretending he likes the fellow."
I doubt it. Remember, Limbaugh told everyone that he was relieved after the '06 elections because he wouldn't have to carry water for people who didn't deserve it anymore (or similar phrasing). Either he was pretending when he said that or he was pretending throughout Republican rule of Congress. I think it's easy to act when you have no investment in the honesty of your own words, only the desired result.
holy smokes. maybe he could get a big 'M' on his shirt...and a cape. that would be cool!
Actully, the current Adminstration has a great deal of accouterment and paraphernalia emblazened with "W"s.
All that material would work just fine for "M for MAVERICK" ... provided McCain learned to stand on his head ... ass over teakettle, as it were.
And, hell, that's the way he's RUNNING for OFFICE, so he should be able to use all of "W's" old flight suits and boots and what-have-you! And what better image for a "Maverick", standing on his head while all others are following the tired old practice of standing upright on their feet?
With this in mind, I think they'll soften their attacks on McCain, and maybe even support him by the time November rolls around, even if they secretly hope for a Democratic win. Rush left the door open today, saying that McCain would have to exhibit "leadership" to win back Conservative support. I believe that most of the Republican base will finally cave in to the jingoistic rhetoric and appeal for party unity. The Talk Radio Screechers can't afford to alienate their audience, so they'll come around, too.
Or, maybe I'm wrong... Maybe Rush and Sean and Glenn will put their Conservative "values" above all else and abandon the Republican party.... but I doubt it.
Even if Rush doesn't do a 180 on McCain he already covered his back. He's been spouting for weeks how it was the liberal media supporting McCain even though he's really a liberal. So know that McCain is going to get the nod he can still claim the liberals hijacked his party. He will be the hero fighting to take back his party blah..blah... I mean he went off for twenty minutes last week about if anyone is a Maverick its him, not John McCain, whatever.
I've had zero respect for McCain ever since this little scene:
http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/R/e/1/mccain_bush_hug.jpg
The Religious Right Troglodytes will pitch a hissy fit and threaten to take their toys and go home unless McCain bends over and grabs his ankles. He will grovel before them like a whipped puppy, even though it was Moderates and Independents who gave him the nomination.
Hey, Nerzog, that doesn't sound too unlikely. Several of us were tossing out theories on a thread the other day, as to how the righty talkers were going to "come around" to McCain.
Will Rush decide that the Maverick/Gremlin's "liberal" act was a canny ploy to the center? Will the true con come out later? Is the GOP base throwing the election in order to deliberately put the Dems in charge of the current mess? Who knows?
I tuned in Rush yesterday, and I think I got a hint of his plan too. Of course, El Rushbo never admits to being wrong, so what I heard him saying is that McCain will realize how far he is from the principles of "Real Americans" (i.e., the ever -dwindling- throiugh -education -and -natural-death extreme right minority that Rush imagines is still vital) and metamorphose into a genuine knuckledragging Bible thumping wingnut.
So I guess that no matter what McCain does in the next few months, Rush and his clones will explain to their audience that he really is a con, and, yes, they are not part of an endangered species of bed-wetting, paranoid extremists.
Once he says the right things, they'll swarm to him like flies to a steaming fresh cow pile. His past heresies will be forgotten. After all, their chosen one, Romney, was just as liberal as McCain ever was before he started pandering to the Neanderthals. They'll forgive McCain, after they piss and moan for an appropriate period of time.
"Maverick" may not be an accurate term for McCain. All of his major bills are with Democrats and not Republicans. In order to be a maverick he would have to write major bills with both Republicans and Democrats. "Liberal" is probably a more accurate term.