AP Smears Palin on Behalf of Obama
Wow. The AP is soooooo in the bag for Obama. Read the beginning of this story and tell me that it’s not an opinion piece:
WASHINGTON (AP) - By claiming that Democrat Barack Obama is “palling around with terrorists” and doesn’t see the U.S. like other Americans, vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin targeted key goals for a faltering campaign.
And though she may have scored a political hit each time, her attack was unsubstantiated and carried a racially tinged subtext that John McCain himself may come to regret.
“Racially tinged?” Please. The terrorist argument is completely provable. Obama hangs around with Ayers, a terrorist. The fact that Obama views the U.S. differently is also provable. If you like Obama, he has a new vision for America that you like. If you don’t like Obama, he has a new version for America that you don’t like. Either way, he is a radical.
The AP continues to disgrace itself.
Said to say - but I think the media campaign is paying off. I really don’t see how McCain can win now. The economy issue is hitting him very hard - since is from the party “in Power” even though its the the Congress that controlls the pursestrings and is responsible for the current loan mess.
Posted by on October 05, 2008 at 2230 hrsWhen does Ayers hang around with Obama?
Posted by on October 05, 2008 at 2253 hrsI think they served on a board together, and Ayers held a fundraiser for Obama back when Obama was first running for state Senate.
I think Palin’s portrayal of their relationship is an exaggeration, but it’s silly season, so what do we really expect? Every time she opens her mouth, I cringe. I defended her as a tactical choice, but between her countless missteps and the incestuous way in which she’s run every government she’s been in charge of (she has a real tendency to hire friends without qualifications for high-level government jobs), I’m probably voting third party in November. I can’t vote for Obama but I can’t vote for a ticket with her on it either. I’d like a VP nominee who is smarter than me, and frankly, I’m not sure she’s smarter than me or most anyone else who posts here.
But I digress.
If you saw the article online, you know they don’t refer to the author as a reporter, but as a writer. (The writer does have a long background in journalism and has written a few books.) The article is also clearly labeled as “analysis,” though that can be vague as well since one can also assume that an analysis by the AP would be fact-based and not opinion-based.
The issue with material like this, I believe, is that the AP is increasingly letting its own staff do in-house analysis, and it’s letting papers that syndicate its content run this stuff in news sections.
I have no issue with the perspective. My issue is that the AP should only be releasing material like this for inclusion on the opinion page.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on October 05, 2008 at 2358 hrsHere comes the Barack Broadside with the release of the documentary on McCain and Charles Keating.
A nodding acquaintance with Ayers has a lot less impact on our lives than John and Cindy McCain going on nine vacations with the Keatings. My wife, by the way, lost money in the 80’s thanks to Keating so she will not be voting for McCain any time soon.
You want to talk about terrorists? I believe McCain has a much closer relationship with Gordon “Shoot for the head” Liddy.
McCain has stepped in it. But cheer him on. Trust me. I know what it is like being with a sinking campaign so I sympathize. But not this time. We’ve got Tina Fey on side.
Posted by on October 06, 2008 at 0645 hrsBoys and girls, America is screwed. Hard. Ammo up and get ready for the coming new dark age. Hopefully the shock to the system will wake up the average American before America truly follows the downfall of the roman republic that our children will have to live with.
Posted by on October 06, 2008 at 0829 hrsWhat? John McCain hangs out with G. Gordon Liddy? Now I finnally have a good reason to vote for McCain even without Palin!
Posted by on October 06, 2008 at 0904 hrs
Thanks Schmitz!Folks, get a grip.
Were the media for Ronald Reagan, Bush 1 or 2? No way. Buck up! Bush “should have” lost to Gore. Bush “should have” lost to Kerry.
The AP continues to disgrace itself.
The AP continues to soil itself. I have confidence that the more the MSM goes over the top the more credibility they loose.
Posted by on October 06, 2008 at 0930 hrsAmmo up and get ready for the coming new dark age.
Clearly a rule of law kind of guy.
Posted by on October 06, 2008 at 0936 hrsStrange things conservatives believe:
1. There is great scientific controversy about whether global warming is manmade.
2. A zygote should have the same constitutional protections that you do.
3. Tax cuts actually increase tax revenue.
4. Invading Iraq was the only sensible course of action in a post-9/11 world.
5. Our children should be taught that dinosaurs roamed the earth with human beings 6,000 years ago.
6. The mainstream media is increasingly biased in favor of the left.
Posted by scott on October 06, 2008 at 1037 hrsThanks for bringing this article up. You might want to check out Rich Galen’s column at:
http://www.mullings.com/mullings_10-06-08.doc
for a little background on this “news story”.
Galen was one of the sources for the story and was not too happy about the final product considering how he was approached. Can you say bait and switch?
Posted by Mullings Fan on October 06, 2008 at 1241 hrsYou mean Rich Galen, Republican strategist? He wasn’t a “source” for the story - he was asked to comment on it.
Posted by on October 06, 2008 at 1254 hrsClearly a rule of law kind of guy.
Pretty sure he’s a Moby, pjr.
I’m pretty sure everyone that has half a brain, except maybe scott (I give you credit for more than half
Posted by on October 06, 2008 at 1309 hrs
), already knows the AP is in the tank for Obama. I truly don’t monitor the television or print media for signs of bias. But I do know that you guys were making the same charge years ago when I did watch television and I found it laughably false. Plus, if you ever take a squint at sites like mediamatters.org, you’ll find it hard to believe that a media that is so “in the tank” for Democrats does some of the outrageous things documented at left-leaning watchdog sites like this.
Me, I always thought that what happened in the media during my lifetime is that they do a lot less investigation and analysis. They do stenographic reporting because it’s cheap. And they chase ambulances and scandals, because it’s good for viewership. I think the problem with the American media is that they’re so busy chasing dollars that they don’t know how to really do the job of journalism anymore.
Posted by scott on October 06, 2008 at 1315 hrsGlad nimrod you left the Keating part of my post unanswered.
Posted by on October 06, 2008 at 1448 hrsI honestly don’t know how somene can write that the AP is sooooooooooo in the bag for Obama, when one of the AP’s senior writers wrote on August 23, 2008, an article titled: “Analysis: Biden pick shows lack of confidence” by Ron Fournier.
I also don’t know how someone can link, with a straight face, this supposed ‘smear’ when the source used shows the President of the Los Angeles chapter of the National Organization for Women endorsing Palin right next to this “gosh darn” article.
I’ve heard of tunnel vision, but this is ridiculous!
Cry me a river.
Posted by on October 06, 2008 at 1525 hrsJust out of curiosity.
We have about four weeks to go to the election.
Is the McCain campaign going to get around to discussing the issues in their commercials, or this is all we’re going to hear?
Just wondering.
Posted by on October 06, 2008 at 1525 hrsKeith, to answer your question: No, they’re not. Not only that, what we’re going to hear is going to get sleazier every day, because the McCain campaign is getting more desperate every day.
There’s also a long history with Ron Fournier (the Washington bureau chief for the AP) and various conservative causes. Absolutely nothing wrong with that, but to say that the AP is in the tank for Obama is an absolute freaking joke. Google Fournier Rove.
Posted by on October 06, 2008 at 1615 hrs3. Tax cuts actually increase tax revenue.
Uhh, Scott, you might want to pay attention to economists and read a little history. One of the things that cutting the capital gains tax did was actually INCREASE tax revenue.
In fact, one reporter did challenge The One on this issue, noting that his proposed capital gains tax increase would reduce revenue, but The One said that we should still do it for “fairness.”
There’s a similar phenomenon that goes on with other taxes. When you load the economic engine too heavily growth slows and net income to the government decreases over where it would be with a lower margin tax rate and more economic growth.
It’s sad to see what passes for economic literacy on the Left and in the public at large.
Posted by on October 06, 2008 at 1617 hrsI have written here before, and will say again......if you think this type of stuff works this election cycle you are going to have a very rough landing on Election Day.
This stuff is not selling. Try as you might, hope as you may, this year it just isn’t working.
Posted by Gregory on October 06, 2008 at 2057 hrsWhat I find most interesting is this:
A not uncommon trait of a VP candidate is to attack the other parties top dog, something BOTH Palin and Biden are doing rather well. But for the top of the ticket to respond to the attacks seems, well, rather thin-skinned. If there is anything to the argument that McCain has too volatile a temper to “have his finger on the button” shouldn’t there also be concern about a President who can’t take a bit of baiting, whether it is puffery or not?
Posted by on October 07, 2008 at 0431 hrsLook, nerdbert, tax cuts do not pay for themselves. The lost revenue isn’t “made up for” through the taxes on increased productivity. At best, it gives you ten cents on the dollar.
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/have_tax_cuts_alw ays_resulted_in_higher.html
Posted by scott on October 07, 2008 at 1037 hrsre #8
18 WAYS TO BE A GOOD LIBERAL
1. You have to be against capital punishment, but support abortion on demand.
2. You have to believe that businesses create oppression and governments create prosperity.
3. You have to believe that guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens are more of a threat than U.S. nuclear weapons technology in the hands of Iran or Chinese and North Korean communists.
4. You have to believe that there was no art before federal funding.
5. You have to believe that global temperatures are less affected by cyclical changes in the earth’s climate and more affected by soccer moms driving SUV’s.
6. You have to believe that gender roles are artificial, but being homosexual is natural.
7. You have to believe that the AIDS virus is spread by a lack of federal funding.
8. You have to believe that the same teacher who can’t teach 4th-graders how to read is somehow qualified to teach those same kids about sex.
9. You have to believe that hunters don’t care about nature, but PETA activists do.
10. You have to believe that self-esteem is more important than actually doing something to earn it.
11. You have to believe that Mel Gibson spent $25 million of his own money to make “The Passion of the Christ” for financial gain only.
12. You have to believe the NRA is bad because it supports certain parts of the Constitution, while the ACLU is good because it supports certain parts of the Constitution.
13. You have to believe that taxes are too low, but ATM fees are too high.
14. You have to believe that Margaret Sanger and Gloria Steinem are more important to American history than Thomas Jefferson, Gen. Robert E. Lee, and Thomas Edison.
15. You have to believe that standardized tests are racist, but racial quotas and set-asides are not.
16. You have to believe that the only reason socialism hasn’t worked anywhere it’s been tried is because the right people haven’t been in charge.
17. You have to believe that homosexual parades displaying drag queens and transvestites should be constitutionally protected, and manger scenes at Christmas should be illegal.
18. You have to believe that this message is a part of a vast, right-wing conspiracy.
GOD BLESS AMERICA
Oops, can’t do that either.
Posted by on October 07, 2008 at 1242 hrsMake that re: #9
Posted by on October 07, 2008 at 1242 hrs1. I’m against capital punishment because I fear it’s unfairly applied and because it’s too expensive. I’m okay with the regulations on abortion that are on the books right now.
2. Totally wrong. Try listening to a liberal once in a while instead of caricaturizing them.
3. Wrong.
4. Wrong.
5. Full of snark, but basically right.
6. No, I don’t believe gender roles are “artificial.” I don’t know what you mean by “normal,” but I do not think being gay is pathological.
7. Wrong. But I believe federal funding could slow the spread and possibly help find a cure. I don’t think that’s a far-out assumption. Why do you?
8. I believe that teaching kids comprehensive sex ed actually does some good--unlike abstinence only ed.
9. Hunters care a lot. PETA is nuts. So much for that one.
10. Totally wrong.
11. Wrong. Mel Gibson spent his money presumably because he thought it was an important project that people would want to see. I guess he was right. (He’s also an anti-semite, too, and his movie does reflect that.)
12. I think the NRA is “bad” because they don’t really represent most of gun owning America. I’m not really sure who they represent, frankly--except possibly the GOP.
13. I think taxes are high enough, thanks. i’d just like to see the burden of paying for government more fairly distributed.
14. I hardly even know who those two women are. Again, a caricature.
15. Standardized tests are not “racist.” But I know from my professional training that things like intelligence tests are to a small degree measuring one’s level of inculturation in the dominant culture.
16. I don’t know what you mean by “socialism.” To some of you guys, the fact that we have social security means we’re socialists. If having some government regulation of business and a social safety net like SS and unemployment insurance makes one a socialist, then I guess I’m guilty.
17. Totally disingenuous. Nobody thinks manger scenes should be illegal. I just don’t want my taxes paying for them. You want to put one next door to me? Well, feliz navidad, MF. I just don’t want it on the courthouse lawn that I pay for.
18. No, I believe it’s part of the right-wing tendency to caricaturize, demonize and otherwise make people who disagree with you seem ridiculous--regardless of the facts.
So where does that leave your list? Like three to five of them are basically right, but the rest are wrong? Your understanding of American liberals is not that good.
Posted by scott on October 07, 2008 at 1440 hrsJeez, scott. That’s a lot of work arguing with someone who doesn’t care a whit what you think anyway.
Posted by on October 07, 2008 at 1503 hrsSteve-O: Don’t know if you’re knocking Scott or me, but touche in either case.
Posted by on October 08, 2008 at 0622 hrsHe means me. And he’s absolutely right. Waste of time.
What can I say? It’s in my nature to mix it up like this. I can’t help it. I do it even when nothing much good can come of it.
Posted by scott on October 08, 2008 at 0633 hrs
Ol' Army
