Friday, November 15, 2002
Boston -- let the clichés begin: The Christian Science Monitor scores a hat trick on the first major national story, as far as Hub Blog has seen, about Boston landing the 2004 Democratic National Convention: it calls Boston a “liberal city,” mentions how Massachusetts voted for McGovern in ‘72, and refers to Boston’s desegregation controversy of the mid-1970s. Good job!
And, oh, the article throws in: “Republican snickering about Boston being out of the mainstream has already begun. ‘If I were a Democrat, I would feel a heck of a lot more comfortable in Boston than, say, in America,’ teased Texas Rep. Dick Armey at a Monitor breakfast yesterday.” Ah, a bonus cliché joke!
This article is going to be hard for other national reporters to beat. Mixing Boston and the rest of Massachusetts together when it fits the stereotype and separating the two when it doesn’t, the CSM article obviously didn't mention Reagan winning Massachusetts in ‘80 and ‘84; four straight GOP gubernatorial wins; the surprising results of the anti-income tax Question 1 last Tuesday; last Tuesday’s overthrow of bilingual education in Massachusetts; the enduring popularity of Proposition 2 1/2; how the Dem machine keeps Massachusetts predominantly Democratic via redistricting, even though the majority of voters are now Independents while Dems are losing numbers (see above item and accompanying article on voting trends); George Bush's solid approval ratings here etc. etc. etc. But including such nuanced facts would have complicated the stereotype, and certainly wrecked the joke. Can't have that! ...
And think: This was written by a Monitor reporter. You know, the Boston-based Christian Science Monitor.
And, oh, the article throws in: “Republican snickering about Boston being out of the mainstream has already begun. ‘If I were a Democrat, I would feel a heck of a lot more comfortable in Boston than, say, in America,’ teased Texas Rep. Dick Armey at a Monitor breakfast yesterday.” Ah, a bonus cliché joke!
This article is going to be hard for other national reporters to beat. Mixing Boston and the rest of Massachusetts together when it fits the stereotype and separating the two when it doesn’t, the CSM article obviously didn't mention Reagan winning Massachusetts in ‘80 and ‘84; four straight GOP gubernatorial wins; the surprising results of the anti-income tax Question 1 last Tuesday; last Tuesday’s overthrow of bilingual education in Massachusetts; the enduring popularity of Proposition 2 1/2; how the Dem machine keeps Massachusetts predominantly Democratic via redistricting, even though the majority of voters are now Independents while Dems are losing numbers (see above item and accompanying article on voting trends); George Bush's solid approval ratings here etc. etc. etc. But including such nuanced facts would have complicated the stereotype, and certainly wrecked the joke. Can't have that! ...
And think: This was written by a Monitor reporter. You know, the Boston-based Christian Science Monitor.
