Stuff about an article on Newt Gingrich

Plodding further along the media-worn path of horse race campaign coverage, the Time magazine article "Gingrich Could Draw GOP Ire on Immigration" hones in on Gingrich and how his stance on immigration may affect his ranking:

The firebrand former House speaker broke with what has become a reflexive Republican hard line on immigration, calling for "humane" treatment for otherwise law-abiding illegal immigrants who have been in the United States for decades, establishing deep family and community ties.

"Firebrand" qualifies as an odd characterization given that Gingrich is thoroughly establishment, old guard, and a while out of the game. Nevertheless, the article never explains how Gingrich's position contrasts with his opponents and their "hard line". The closest comparison comes more than halfway throughout the piece:

But Romney has been tough on illegal immigration while running for president. He said Tuesday night that what Gingrich was proposing would act as a magnet for foreigners to enter the country illegally.

"Tougher" goes undefined. Also undefined are the immigrants. But this quote from a Gingrich supporter holds a clue:

"With me, personally, I fall right in line with him," said Columbia, S.C., Gingrich supporter Allen Olson, a former tea party official. "It's utterly impossible to round up 12 million people and ship them off.

Yep. Mexicans. When Conservatives and media discuss immigration, usually they mean Mexicans. This is understood, but rarely if ever said. The Conservative stance on Mexican immigrants goes unexamined here in this piece as it does elsewhere. The Conservative response to Gingrich, however, does not:

The response was swift. Some conservatives asserted he had wounded his candidacy, perhaps fatally.

That Gingrich's "humane" position should so offend a large segment of voters merits some examination here. The reporter might ask, Why? What are the reasons? Are those reasons valid? Instead of diving into the meaning and merits of this debated issue, the piece cynically treats the position as mere political maneuvering:

And far from a stumble, Tuesday night's remarks seemed a calculated tactic to draw a contrast with Romney, whom he now sees as his chief rival to the party nomination and who has had his own trouble with conservatives ...

This article also includes the obligatory nod to Gingrich's presupposed intelligence in this quote, courtesy of Georgia Senator Saxby Chambliss:

"He's one of the smartest politicians out there, and don't think he hasn't thought this through."

Gingrich's intellect has long been an object of admiration in his media coverage.

Congratulations on buying the Robot Romney Corp 2012

In The New York Times article "‘Corporations Are People,’ Romney Tells Iowa Hecklers Angry Over His Tax Policy", the reporter quotes Romney tossing out a line about raising taxes which draws shouts of "Corporations!" from an audience member. Romney says corporations are people:

“Of course they are,” Mr. Romney said, chuckling slightly. “Everything corporations earn ultimately goes to people. Where do you think it goes?”

The reporter shares analysis:

It was a telling, unscripted moment for Mr. Romney likely to be replayed on YouTube. In an instant, he seemed to humanize himself by pointedly squabbling with the group of hecklers, showing flashes of anger and defying his reputation as a sometimes stilted, unfeeling candidate.

This "stilted, unfeeling" reputation comes from the media. They invented it, the Romney narrative, and they reinforce it. This slight break in that narrative amuses the reporter because he's so much a part of it he can't see that it is only a characterization, and that Romney actually is human.

Here's the article's highlight:

Thursday was Mr. Romney’s most fiery day on the trail this week, even before the hecklers, affiliated with Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement, an organizing group, drew him into several aggressive exchanges. Mr. Romney took the stage with sweat already glistening on his brow and upper lip. The sweat trickled down his cheek as he worked himself into animated rhythm in a 10-minute speech that criticized President Obama.

Worked himself into animated rhythm? Did he oil his machine parts? Maybe get Dorothy and Scarecrow to lock arms for song?

By drawing attention to this supposed anomaly, the article reinforces and emphasizes the prevailing narrative that media generated. The exception seems to prove the rule. This is a much smaller version than the time Hillary Clinton got weepy toward the conclusion of the Democratic Primary in 2008.

The other narratives include Huntsman attempting to stand on his own two legs and Bachmann trying not to act psycho.