Obama’s Inexperience Tough to Ignore

[MJZiggy]

No journalism died when TV went 24/7. Blame CNN.

Actually, young lady (may I call you that?), you have a profound point. That was one of the first dominoes. Good observation.

Some of the others:

1. Gay escort Jim Gluckert
2. 77 television stations were making use of the faux news broadcasts, known as Video News Releases (VNRs). Not one told viewers who had produced the items. Some by our State dept/bush.
3. Conservative columnists on Bush payroll. Michael McManus, Maggie Gallagher, and Armstrong Williams, a conservative African-American columnist, had been paid $240,000 by the education department to champion the administration's controversial policies in his print, radio and television outlets.
4. Bob Novak outing ms. plame..among other problems with his ethics.

Some of the others: Agenda journalism - making the story fit your POV, making up facts, including documents, 'reporting' using single sources, bias in journalism by choosing what to print on page one, what to put above the fold(which has been around forever - just go look at the Hearst Papers), headline choices, story choices, and level of coverage: (for example, 'Greta' on FOX, choosing to focus her broadcast on the latest tragedy, making it seem as though there are rapists and child killers swarming around our neighborhoods thick as fleas; or media outlets choosing to focus on prisoner abuse at Abu Grahib at a level far higher than say, the murderous enemy Musab al Zarqawi).

Yes, I really hate it when Mortenson and Clayton do that...

[Kiwon]

Come on Harlan...this is News! McCain has done it..so it isn't at the same level of newsworthyness.

And, for the McCain crowd to complain about the media is laughable. McCain long got a free ride with them

Its true that McCain has been a media favorite for about 10 years.

I like to think he earned that through his reputation for speaking directly and clearly. He was a good quote.

The comparison on the earlier McCain trip and Obama's celebrated grand tour is apt. There has never been a media phenomena like Obama in my lifetime.

a friend pointed out to me the other day, that Obama got this coverage because he INVITED the network people to come along for the ride. McCain apparently forgot to mail the invitations....

HH meant "media creation."

I guess his coverage isn't influenced at all by the fact that 95% of the American media is planning to vote for him.

2008, the year that journalism died.

Putting Money Where Mouths Are: Media Donations Favor Dems 100-1

By WILLIAM TATE | Posted Wednesday, July 23, 2008

The New York Times' refusal to publish John McCain's rebuttal to Barack Obama's Iraq op-ed may be the most glaring example of liberal media bias this journalist has ever seen. But true proof of widespread media bias requires one to follow an old journalism maxim: Follow the money.

Even the Associated Press — no bastion of conservatism — has considered, at least superficially, the media's favoritism for Barack Obama. It's time to revisit media bias.

True to form, journalists are defending their bias by saying that one candidate, Obama, is more newsworthy than the other. In other words, there is no media bias. It is we, the hoi polloi, who reveal our bias by questioning the neutrality of these learned professionals in their ivory-towered newsrooms

Big Media applies this rationalization to every argument used to point out bias. "It's not a result of bias," they say. "It's a matter of news judgment."

And, like the man who knows his wallet was pickpocketed but can't prove it, the public is left to futilely rage against the injustice of it all.

The "newsworthy" argument can be applied to every metric — one-sided imbalances in airtime, story placement, column inches, number of stories, etc. — save one.

An analysis of federal records shows that the amount of money journalists contributed so far this election cycle favors Democrats by a 15:1 ratio over Republicans, with $225,563 going to Democrats, only $16,298 to Republicans .

Two-hundred thirty-five journalists donated to Democrats, just 20 gave to Republicans — a margin greater than 10-to-1. An even greater disparity, 20-to-1, exists between the number of journalists who donated to Barack Obama and John McCain.

Searches for other newsroom categories (reporters, correspondents, news editors, anchors, newspaper editors and publishers) produces 311 donors to Democrats to 30 donors to Republicans, a ratio of just over 10-to-1. In terms of money, $279,266 went to Dems, $20,709 to Republicans, a 14-to-1 ratio.

And while the money totals pale in comparison to the $9-million-plus that just one union's PACs have spent to get Obama elected, they are more substantial than the amount that Obama has criticized John McCain for receiving from lobbyists: 96 lobbyists have contributed $95,850 to McCain, while Obama — who says he won't take money from PACs or federal lobbyists — has received $16,223 from 29 lobbyists.

A few journalists list their employer as an organization like MSNBC, MSNBC.com or ABC News, or report that they're freelancers for the New York Times, or are journalists for Al Jazeera, CNN Turkey, Deutsche Welle Radio or La Republica of Rome (all contributions to Obama). Most report no employer. They're mainly freelancers. That's because most major news organization have policies that forbid newsroom employees from making political donations.

As if to warn their colleagues in the media, MSNBC last summer ran a story on journalists' contributions to political candidates that drew a similar conclusion:

"Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left."

The timing of that article was rather curious. Dated June 25, 2007, it appeared during the middle of the summer news doldrums in a non-election year — timing that was sure to minimize its impact among the general public, while still warning newsrooms across the country that such political donations can be checked.

In case that was too subtle, MSNBC ran a sidebar story detailing cautionary tales of reporters who lost their jobs or were otherwise negatively impacted because their donations became public.

As if to warn their comrades-in-news against putting their money where their mouth is, the report also cautioned that, with the Internet, "it became easier for the blogging public to look up the donors."

It went on to detail the ban that most major media organizations have against newsroom employees donating to political campaigns, a ban that raises some obvious First Amendment issues. Whether it's intentional or not, the ban makes it difficult to verify the political leanings of Big Media reporters, editors and producers. There are two logical ways to extrapolate what those leanings are, though.

One is the overwhelming nature of the above statistics. Given the pack mentality among journalists and, just like any pack, the tendency to follow the leader — in this case, Big Media — and since Big Media are centered in some of the bluest of blue parts of the country, it is highly likely that the media elite reflect the same, or an even greater, liberal bias.

A second is to analyze contributions from folks in the same corporate cultures. That analysis provides some surprising results. The contributions of individuals who reported being employed by major media organizations are listed in the nearby table.

The contributions add up to $315,533 to Democrats and $22,656 to Republicans — most of that to Ron Paul, who was supported by many liberals as a stalking horse to John McCain, a la Rush Limbaugh's Operation Chaos with Hillary and Obama.

What is truly remarkable about the list is that, discounting contributions to Paul and Rudy Giuliani, who was a favorite son for many folks in the media, the totals look like this: $315,533 to Democrats, $3,150 to Republicans (four individuals who donated to McCain).

Let me repeat: $315,533 to Democrats, $3,150 to Republicans — a ratio of 100-to-1. No bias there.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArti...1702713742569#

[Freak Out]

The Mac camp is at it again. Just more wacky stuff on the campaign trail.

McCain memo is riddled with inaccuracies

McCain's campaign claims to have debunked "three prevailing myths about Obama's foreign policy," but it's the McCain camp that isn't connected to reality.

Alex Koppelman

Jul. 25, 2008 | On Friday, John McCain's campaign put out a memo that purports to debunk that "three prevailing myths about Barack Obama's foreign policy ... [that] work to Obama's benefit, are indeed propagated by his campaign at times, but have no real basis in fact." The memo, written by Randy Scheunemann, a senior advisor to McCain, is separated into three sections, each with its own "myth" and countervailing "fact." But it's the memo itself that's full of myths -- actually, as a colleague quipped to me, the memo would have been much more accurate if the "myth" and "fact" headers had been reversed.

Take the first section, which begins with this "myth": "Barack Obama Claims People Have Adopted His Unconditional Timetable for Withdrawal From Iraq." Under "fact," Scheunemann writes:

John McCain, our military commanders and the Iraqi government agree that our troops should come home based upon conditions on the ground -- not the unconditional timetable Barack Obama supports. Unlike Barack Obama, John McCain believes our troops should come home with honor and victory. Barack Obama's support for an unconditional timetable has led to an "open disagreement" with our military commanders. Even Iraqi leaders believe our troops should leave depending upon conditions on the ground. The only one advocating an arbitrary, unconditional timetable is Barack Obama. Everyone but Barack Obama agrees that a withdrawal dictated purely by politics invites chaos and the possibility that our troops would have to return.

Set aside for its pure silliness the implication that Obama wants American troops to come home in dishonor and defeat. There's also the implication that Obama wants to withdraw all troops from Iraq, something that's clearly not true. Nor has Obama advocated an "arbitrary, unconditional" timetable. After laying out his plan for withdrawal in his recent Op-Ed in the New York Times, Obama wrote, "In carrying out this strategy, we would inevitably need to make tactical adjustments. As I have often said, I would consult with commanders on the ground and the Iraqi government to ensure that our troops were redeployed safely, and our interests protected." And former Obama advisor Samantha Power has previously made clear that Obama's plan is a "best-case scenario" subject to change based on conditions on the ground.

Then there's Scheunemann's contention that "even Iraqi leaders believe our troops should leave depending upon conditions on the ground." McCain himself says he has heard that in private meetings he has held with Iraqis. But that's certainly not what Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has said in public statements recently.

The second part of Scheunemann's memo is no better. The "myth" Scheunemann claims to explode is, "Barack Obama Claims the United States Has Adopted His Policy of Unconditional, Presidential-Level Meetings With Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad."

Ahmadinejad makes a great boogeyman for the McCain campaign to exploit. But as I've written in this space before, and as Time's Joe Klein has repeatedly done a superlative job of explaining, there's no real reason to believe that the Iranian leader Obama would meet with would be Ahmadinejad. In May, Klein wrote:

I promised to check into whether Obama had ever said that he would negotiate -- specifically, by name -- with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Indeed, according to the crack Time Magazine research department and the Obama campaign, he never has. He did say that he would negotiate with the Iranian leadership -- but, on matters of foreign policy and Iran's nuclear program, the guy in charge is the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. As of today, John McCain was still accusing Obama of wanting to negotiate with Ahmadinejad. Why doesn't the McCain campaign and other assorted Republicans ever accuse Obama of wanting to negotiate with Khamenei? Well, because Khamenei isn't quite the flagrant anti-Semite Ahmadinejad is.


McCain Campaign Memo on Obama’s Foreign Policy

All: Please see this memo highlighting three prevailing myths about Barack Obama’s foreign policy. The myths work to Obama’s benefit, are indeed propagated by his campaign at times, but have no real basis in fact.

To: Interested Parties

From: Randy Scheunemann, Senior Foreign Policy Adviser

Date: July 25, 2008

Re: The Barack Obama Foreign Policy Myths

In the past few days, Barack Obama has been trying to alter the reality of international developments to the benefit of his political campaign. Please find below the key Obama myths from this week.

MYTH: Barack Obama Claims People Have Adopted His Unconditional Timetable For Withdrawal From Iraq

FACT: John McCain, our military commanders and the Iraqi government agree that our troops should come home based upon conditions on the ground – not the unconditional timetable Barack Obama supports. Unlike Barack Obama, John McCain believes our troops should come home with honor and victory. Barack Obama’s support for an unconditional timetable has led to an “open disagreement” with our military commanders. Even Iraqi leaders believe our troops should leave depending upon conditions on the ground. The only one advocating an arbitrary, unconditional timetable is Barack Obama. Everyone but Barack Obama agrees that a withdrawal dictated purely by politics invites chaos and the possibility that our troops would have to return.

MYTH: Barack Obama Claims The United States Has Adopted His Policy Of Unconditional, Presidential-Level Meetings With Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

FACT: Barack Obama’s policy of unconditional, presidential-level summits between himself and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad undermines the current multilateral efforts between the U.S., our European allies and Iran. As they have been for years, the U.S. and our European allies are engaged in diplomatic talks with Iran and John McCain supports these multilateral efforts. Barack Obama’s stated policy of meeting unconditionally with leaders like Ahmadinejad undermines these efforts. As The Washington Post reported, our European allies “are uncomfortable” with Barack Obama’s unconditional pledge believing that grants unilateral concessions to Iran and undermines multilateral diplomacy. If Barack Obama is truly interested in listening to our allies, he will have to address these concerns.

MYTH: Barack Obama Claims Others Have Adopted His Strategy For Afghanistan

FACT: John McCain has long supported adding troops in Afghanistan and been in favor of the successful counterinsurgency strategy that Barack Obama continues to oppose. The situation in Afghanistan is about more than just about troops. We need to adopt and adapt the tactics and strategy that were behind the surge’s success in Iraq – opposed by Barack Obama. Without employing the strategy, tactics and unity of command that turned Iraq around, increased troop levels in Afghanistan will not result in the same improvement we saw in Iraq.

[mraynrand]

Harlan,

What's your take on Barack as 'Citizen of the World?'

[Freak Out]

Harlan,

What's your take on Barack as 'Citizen of the World?'

I think he's been just a little busy with the raging horde of jocklickers present these days to worry about some mulatto speaking in Germany.

[sheepshead]

No journalism died when TV went 24/7. Blame CNN.

Actually, young lady (may I call you that?), you have a profound point. That was one of the first dominoes. Good observation.

Some of the others:

1. Gay escort Jim Gluckert
2. 77 television stations were making use of the faux news broadcasts, known as Video News Releases (VNRs). Not one told viewers who had produced the items. Some by our State dept/bush.
3. Conservative columnists on Bush payroll. Michael McManus, Maggie Gallagher, and Armstrong Williams, a conservative African-American columnist, had been paid $240,000 by the education department to champion the administration's controversial policies in his print, radio and television outlets.
4. Bob Novak outing ms. plame..among other problems with his ethics.

Plame was not outed. There was a very long very expensive investigation that Fitzgerald ran and the conclusion was , there was no "outing" - youre drinking the koolaide on that one from the zealots that cant let it go. They thought for sure they had Cheney in a striped jump suit.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Harlan,

What's your take on Barack as 'Citizen of the World?'

I think he's been just a little busy with the raging horde of jocklickers present these days to worry about some mulatto speaking in Germany.

Oh, I was able to tear myself away to watch a little of the tan Kennedy.

The only substantive point of his speech was when he said the world needs German participation in Afghanistan. So much for the love fest! The German media bitch-slapped Obama on that point.

In Obama's rhetoric, Afghanistan is the good war, Iraq the cauldron of American Imperialism. I think Obama is going to have a very hard go of it as president, the charisma is going to wear thin. I fear he doesn't know what he is doing.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

No journalism died when TV went 24/7. Blame CNN.

Actually, young lady (may I call you that?), you have a profound point. That was one of the first dominoes. Good observation.

Some of the others:

1. Gay escort Jim Gluckert
2. 77 television stations were making use of the faux news broadcasts, known as Video News Releases (VNRs). Not one told viewers who had produced the items. Some by our State dept/bush.
3. Conservative columnists on Bush payroll. Michael McManus, Maggie Gallagher, and Armstrong Williams, a conservative African-American columnist, had been paid $240,000 by the education department to champion the administration's controversial policies in his print, radio and television outlets.
4. Bob Novak outing ms. plame..among other problems with his ethics.

Plame was not outed. There was a very long very expensive investigation that Fitzgerald ran and the conclusion was , there was no "outing" - youre drinking the koolaide on that one from the zealots that cant let it go. They thought for sure they had Cheney in a striped jump suit.

Plame was indeed outed. CIA operatives aren't supposed to be outed..nor discussed.

Please, go back and put on your tinfoil hat.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Obama couldn't have been in germany..i watched some sort of speech and large crowd attending, but there wasn't any flag burning.