Much Clamor, Little Consequence

     Michelle Wolf has sinned.  She has sinned against the sanctity of journalism celebrated at The White House Correspondence Association Dinner.  Both liberals and conservatives were aghast at her vulgar and personal insults.  It's no surprise that conservatives would be offended by Wolf's coarse humor and use it to paint liberals as typically tolerant of "obscene language."  After all, it's one more way to blame liberals for the crass culture and disintegration of moral values in American.  However, many liberals also criticized Wolf's performance.  Ashley Feinberg of The Huffington Post has compiled a list of liberals who have (tweeted) criticized Wolf:

Mike Allen:  "Media hands Trump big, embarrassing win." 

Peter Baker:  "Unfortunately, I don't think we advance the cause of journalism tonight."

Maria Bartiromo:  "The resist movement decided its [sic] cool to go against the leader of the free world. Inappropriate, mean, stupid."     

Maggie Haberman:  "That Press Sec sat and absorbed intense criticism of her physical appearance, her job performance, and so forth, instead of walking out, on national television, was impressive."

Jonathan Karl:  "The monologue at last night's WHCA crossed the line."

Andrea Mitchell:  "Apology is owed to Press Sec and others grossly insulted by Michelle Wolf at White House Correspondence Assoc. Dinner."

     Fineberg's full title of her piece is ""A Running List Of Cowards, Strivers, and Suck-Ups. Democracy dies in the Washington Hilton."  Fineberg is rather incensed that these journalists have chosen to join conservatives in condemning Wolf.  However, the complaints Fineberg cites from respectable media figures should surprise no one, since Wolf's monologue mauled several in the Trump administration with caustic and coarse personal ridicule.  To expect the media to defend Wolf would be more than improbable.  The men and women in media are conventional to the point of being Victorian (At least in public; behind closed doors, some of them behave far worse than Wolf's words.)  

     As I watched Wolf's performance and I sometimes winced along with the wincing faces in the audience.  Her bawdiness is not to my taste.  More than anything else, her remarks about Sarah Sanders' eye make-up, which seemed tame compared to her much of what she said, instigated the most severe criticism of her routine.  She aroused such strong female solidarity that journalists who ordinarily censure Sanders for her elasticity with the truth, crowded to her defense.  Mikia Brzezinski tweeted, " Watching a wife and mother be humiliated on national television for her looks is deplorable.  I have experienced insults about my appearance from the President.  All women have a duty to unite when these attacks happen and the WHCA owes Sarah an apology."  That Press. Sec. sat and absorbed intense criticism of her physical appearance, her job performance, and so forth, instead of walking out, on national television, was impressive."

Not everyone has found fault with Wolf's humor. As I noted above, Fineberg has compiled her own Librorum Prohibitorum of those heretical individuals who have attacked Wolf's performance. Arwa Mahdawi, in this week's Guardian, argues that those "urging" Wolf to apologize for her "uncontroversial joke" about Sanders' make-up send "an incredibly dangerous message." Mahdawi believes that the journalists who have criticized Wolf are in fact suggesting "that it's not okay to criticize the president and his people. And it lends credence to Trump's repeated claim that the mainstream media is out to get him."

Calling on Wolf to apologized strikes me as unnecessary. Mahdawi is right; Wolf's jokes about Sanders were certainly benign. She might have expressed some of her jokes with less vulgarity, but her repertoire is well known, so no one should have been shocked by her comic mode. The stream of outrage appears to be more synthetic than genuine.

Nevertheless, Feinberg and Mahdawi overstate the damage and danger of journalists upbraiding Wolf for her monologue. Within days of the correspondence dinner, the journalists were toiling away, reporting the latest lies and chaos convulsing the White House. Maggie Haberman and the rest of the media are back at work, detailing the administration's misdeeds, lies and chaos. (See "On Attack for Trump, Giuliani May Aggravate Legal and Political Perils." 5/4/18) Fox continues to defend Trump and redirect public attention to Hilary Clinton. (See Hannity interview on Fox News with Giuliani) The balance of the universe remains intact; the wheels of justice continue to roll, however slowly. Mueller will inculpate or exculpate Trump of collusion or other crimes. If exonerated, we'll have to wait till 2020, vote Trump out of office, fumigate 1600 Pennsylvania ave, and try to forget the four years of churlish vulgarity we had been subjected to.