Idiot Punditocracy Watch: Maggie Haberman To The Corner

I LIKE MAGGIE Haberman. She has that stern, stentorian on-air persona that would strike fear and trembling in the hearts of subordinates were she lecturing them on substandard performance in a corporate boardroom setting. When Maggie drops her important Beltway Media denizen guard, she can flash a winning smile and give us a glimpse of a fun person outside the POLITICO-John Harris orbit. But such is the gravitational pull of the Beltway Media/Idiot Punditocracy that Maggie seems obliged to toe the Pravdaesque party line narrative (see Major Garrett, deligitimized puppet of the Beltway Media). First, quotable Pravda on Mittens:

Mitt Romney: Out-of-Touch,Out-of-Date, Unelectable (March 28, 2012):

"Electing Mitt Romney as the next president of the United States of America would be like appointing a serial pedophile as a kindergarten teacher, a rapist as a janitor at a girl’s dormitory, or a psychopath with a fixation on knives as a kitchen hand. His comments on Russia are a puerile attempt at making the grand stage and boy, did he blow it."

Timothy Babcroft-Hinchey, @Pravda.ru

Maggie: “I think that’s a tad bit of hyperbolae — The Democrats in this country are seizing on what Romney said about “geopolitical foe” and “greatest” as a huge gaffe. Republicans are arguing otherwise, that there are all sorts of reasons why this remains of great concern. I think that for Romney's campaign this is an attempt to try to pivot toward substance, an attempt to pivot out of the smallness of this primary.”

Alex was incredulous: “Do you think so, really?! In terms of substance, antagonizing Russia in such strident terms after what he said about China …”

Maggie, defensively: “It’s saber-rattling, I’m not saying there’s depth behind what he’s saying, but I think they’re trying to speak on a grander scale.” Ari Melber and Sam Stein blow Maggie’s argument out of the park. Watch:

Uh, Maggie … If you’d like your candidate to speak on a “grander scale” he should first make a grand, cogent, informed argument; not, as you reluctantly concede, “saber rattling, I’m not saying there’s depth behind what he’s saying, but [he's] trying to speak on a grander scale.” Right. Instead, we get ancient Cold War rhetoric, i.e., dangerous, strident hyperbole from the Republican Party’s presumptive nominee. Oh, if only there were depth behind what Mitt Romney is saying, that is the question. Right, Maggie? So, without further ado, Maggie Haberman please: