BS: The liberal media bias...

Subject: BS: The liberal nedia bias...
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 22 Sep 08 - 08:29 PM

"The broadside was prompted by a Times report saying that campaign manager Rick Davis had been paid nearly $2 million by mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to protect them against stricter regulations. Davis is no longer a lobbyist.

In a conference call with reporters, chief strategist Steve Schmidt said: "Whatever the New York Times once was, it is today not by any standard a journalistic organization. It is a pro-Obama advocacy organization. This is an organization that is completely, totally, 150 percent in the tank for the Democratic candidate."

Schmidt also charged that the Times is not giving similar scrutiny to former lobbyists working for Barack Obama's campaign.

Hitting back at news organizations has been part of the McCain strategy. In May, Schmidt said that MSNBC is "an organ of the Democratic National Committee" that "exists for the purpose of attacking John McCain." Earlier this month, Schmidt told The Washington Post that the news media are on "a mission to destroy" Sarah Palin, calling a Times story on the vetting of the Alaska governor "an absolute work of fiction." And in February, when the Times published a widely criticized story linking the Arizona senator to a female lobbyist, McCain senior adviser Charles Black responded that "it's a shame that the New York Times has chosen to smear John McCain like this."

Nobody seems to be denying the accusation, though.

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal nedia bias...
From: Donuel
Date: 22 Sep 08 - 08:31 PM

SNL already did a skit on this

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal nedia bias...
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 22 Sep 08 - 08:50 PM

U guess that resolves the problem, then.

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal nedia bias...
From: Amos
Date: 22 Sep 08 - 09:01 PM

It would be tons easier to invalidate the source if you could just disprove what they are saying...



A

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal nedia bias...
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 22 Sep 08 - 11:13 PM

Apparently Davis was receiving $30,000 per month by Fanny May and Freddie mav not to lobby for them. I wish BB and DougR and Teribus would explain this thing to me.

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal nedia bias...
From: Peace
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 12:28 AM

I will not lobby for them for $15,000 a month. Hell, I ain't hired yet and I have already saved them $180,000 per year. In effect, I'd be working the first year for free.

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal nedia bias...
From: katlaughing
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 12:41 AM

Dick, was "nedia" a deliberate misspelling? I figured it might be since they are all so needy!:-) I'd like to hear some explanations, too.

McCain's article in the American Actuary something or other which talks about what he'd do for health care, may be read HERE. Bottom of the first page, first column, continued at the top of the second column, he's got some "interesting" things to say about opening up health care insurance, the way "we have done over the last decade in banking." Some of that has been quoted in the media, today.

Can someone answer for me why in the aitch any of these guys think giving families a tax break of five thousand is going to help them "buy their own health insurance?" Most families I know don't HAVE a spare five thousand to spend on anything but basics. A tax break of any kind is just going to mean money for gas, food, maybe some clothes for the kids,maybe some long needed repairs of some kind, but it's not going to be enough to get health insurance, esp. if a person has to fork out from their paycheck and wait for the tax credit in the spring. It just boggles my mind how they think this is a solution. We need socialised medicine NOT socialised Wall Street!


Barack Obama's article on health care may be read HERE. It's much easier to read, imo, and makes more sense. At least he addresses the fact that some people will not be able to buy insurance without subsidies.

Sorry, Dick, I didn't mean to go off, but there was the liberal media going off on McCan't again and his unhealth plan!

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal nedia bias...
From: katlaughing
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 12:45 AM

PS. I note Obama has a long list of references cited while McCan't's has none.

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal media bias...
From: Genie
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 01:03 AM

Part of the (brilliant, though diabolical) strategy of neocon strategists like Lee Atwater and his disciple Karl Rove (not to mention whatshisname Strauss) has been to first nullify the press by convincing the public that they are irremediably biased against whatever propaganda you will be spewing.    I fear it's worked beyond their wildest dreams.

"Liberal media," my arse!

Genie

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal nedia bias...
From: Desert Dancer
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 01:13 AM

McCain Camp Takes Issue With Times Coverage
By THE NEW YORK TIMES
Published: September 22, 2008

The McCain campaign lashed out at The New York Times on Monday, accusing it of dropping its journalistic standards and being "150 percent in the tank" for Senator Barack Obama.

In a conference call with reporters, Steve Schmidt, Senator John McCain's senior campaign adviser, was asked about an article in The Times on Monday reporting that Mr. McCain's campaign manager, Rick Davis, had been paid nearly $2 million by Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac to head a group devoted to defend the mortgage giants against the imposition of stricter regulations.

Asked about the article, Mr. Davis, who was on the call, said the group's sole function was to promote home ownership. But Mr. Schmidt criticized The Times for its coverage.

"Whatever the New York Times once was, it is today not by any standard a journalistic organization," Mr. Schmidt said. He added, "This is an organization that is completely, totally, 150 percent in the tank for the Democratic candidate, which is their prerogative to be."

He added, "Everything that is read in The New York Times that attacks this campaign should be evaluated by the American people from that perspective."

Bill Keller, executive editor of The Times, responded in a statement: "The New York Times is committed to covering the candidates fully, fairly and aggressively. It's our job to ask hard questions, fact-check their statements and their advertising, examine their programs, positions, biographies and advisers. Candidates and their campaign operatives are not always comfortable with that level of scrutiny, but it's what our readers expect and deserve."

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal nedia bias...
From: Desert Dancer
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 01:18 AM

Here's the start of the "biased" article:

By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK and CHARLES DUHIGG
Published: September 21, 2008

Senator John McCain's campaign manager was paid more than $30,000 a month for five years as president of an advocacy group set up by the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to defend them against stricter regulations, current and former officials say.

A 2004 photograph from a report by the Homeownership Alliance, an advocacy group for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, shows John McCain with Ken Guenther, a former chairman of the group, left, and David Lereah of the National Association of Realtors.

Mr. McCain, the Republican candidate for president, has recently begun campaigning as a critic of the two companies and the lobbying army that helped them evade greater regulation as they began buying riskier mortgages with implicit federal backing. He and his Democratic rival, Senator Barack Obama, have donors and advisers who are tied to the companies.

But last week the McCain campaign stepped up a running battle of guilt by association when it began broadcasting commercials trying to link Mr. Obama directly to the government bailout of the mortgage giants this month by charging that he takes advice from Fannie Mae's former chief executive, Franklin Raines, an assertion both Mr. Raines and the Obama campaign dispute.

Incensed by the advertisements, several current and former executives of the companies came forward to discuss the role that Rick Davis, Mr. McCain's campaign manager and longtime adviser, played in helping Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac beat back regulatory challenges when he served as president of their advocacy group, the Homeownership Alliance, formed in the summer of 2000. Some who came forward were Democrats, but Republicans, speaking on the condition of anonymity, confirmed their descriptions.

"The value that he brought to the relationship was the closeness to Senator McCain and the possibility that Senator McCain was going to run for president again," said Robert McCarson, a former spokesman for Fannie Mae, who said that while he worked there from 2000 to 2002, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac together paid Mr. Davis's firm $35,000 a month. Mr. Davis "didn't really do anything," Mr. McCarson, a Democrat, said.

Mr. Davis's role with the group has bubbled up as an issue in the campaign, but the extent of his compensation and the details of his role have not been reported previously.

[rest of article with details not copied here]

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal nedia bias...
From: astro
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 01:59 AM

Standard attack process of the Republican group. Try to hide their actions by attacking the other side with the same actions, even if it's not true or only partially true.

The only thing that I can't figure is that anyone who supports the Republicans seem to have selective memory loss of what has happened over the last 8 years. I guess they say, it'll work now, this time....I hope....just vote for McCain....maybe....

Astro....who used to like McCain a lot until he turned into a Bush...with their election techniques....Keep saying a untruth until it becomes a truth....a real post-modern man

Again, Astro in Tucson Az

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal nedia bias...
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 02:55 AM

Can you trust a man who can present "150% behind" as a statistic? If the FMs could count like that no wonder they went south.

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal nedia bias...
From: kendall
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 07:27 AM

Can you trust a man who calls his wife a C**T in public?

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal media bias...
From: Greg F.
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 08:14 AM

Isn't she?

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal media bias...
From: artbrooks
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 11:10 AM

Fact is, most people who are Democrats and/or on the left believe everything that Senator McCain and his cheering section says is a lie, and those who are Republicans/rightists think the same of Senator Obama and his ilk. Both groups have long since decided on who gets their vote. Both parties are playing for the 10-20% percent who are undecided or in the middle. Personally, I hope these people get the FactCheck and PolitiFact daily newsletters, so they can judge these claims with more data. My own very unscientific poll says that McCain and the anti-Obama camp are running about 3 to 1 above the opposition in misrepresentations and outright lies, but that doesn't mean the Obamites haven't come up with some real zingers as well.

BTW, did you know that calling various parts of the political spectrum "right" or "left" refers to where different groups sat in the National Assembly during and just after the French Revolution?

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal media bias...
From: Stringsinger
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 11:27 AM

what you are getting here is a Rovian diversionary tactic. The formula is this, you accuse others of what you are doing.

The media is in the hands of a right-wing monopoly. GE owns MSNBC and NBC,
Disney owns ABC and of course the reprehensible Murdoch is responsible for the trash on Fox News.

In essence, the Republicans own the media and accuse Democrats of subverting it to their cause. It's the Rovian Hypocrisy and it's amazing how people buy into it.

Sarah Palin has received too much coverage for her lack of credentials to be Vice President already. They have given her a pass on corruption in Alaskan firing of state troopers Monaghan (sp.?) and Wooten. Only Keith Olbermann and Rachel Madow talk about this.

The news media will not cover the extreme religious aberrations of her "witch-hunting"
mentor, Thomas Muphee or the anti-science and creationist views that her church holds.

Not only is the so-called "liberal media bias" a red-herring but it is a deliberate Karl Rove distortion and would be risible if it weren't so prevalent in the non-thinking these days.

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal media bias...
From: Amos
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 12:32 PM

It is still risible. It's remarkable that Rove has built up such a Machiavellian reputation for himself, isn't it? A little rolypoly Napoleon (not a jelly-doughnut).


A

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal media bias...
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 12:35 PM

Nobody's tried to deny the allegation: they're just trying to disparage the allegator.

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal media bias...
From: Genie
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 12:58 PM

Ah, but it didn't start with Karl Rove. He was just been very good at soaking up the lessons of his mentor Lee Atwater (and some lessons from Joseph McCarthy as well).

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal media bias...
From: Peace
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 01:01 PM

"they're just trying to disparage the allegator."


Judging by the look, he knows!

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal media bias...
From: Bobert
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 01:35 PM

"Liberal media bias???"

Well then, "The Dems want to burn your flags, kill your babaies and make yer kids marry queers..." will be paraded out soon...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal media bias...
From: Amos
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 01:49 PM

GE owns MSNBC and NBC,
Disney owns ABC and of course the reprehensible Murdoch is responsible for the trash on Fox News.

In essence, the Republicans own the media and accuse Democrats of subverting it to their cause. It's the Rovian Hypocrisy and it's amazing how people buy into it.


Listen to the man--he's wicked sharp.



A

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal media bias...
From: Peace
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 01:51 PM

Put some spin on it, Bobert.

Here's the political official statement which I submit for your perusal: 'Well then, given the times and difficulties we as a nation face, "The Democrats will warm that symbol that was raised at Iwo Jima, be involved deeply and significantly in child rearing AND encourage people to make decisions about people based on the fundamental freedoms enshrined in our Constitution.'

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal media bias...
From: Art Thieme
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 03:10 PM

Frank,
Correct!

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal media bias...
From: Bill D
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 04:41 PM

"Whatever the New York Times once was, it is today not by any standard a journalistic organization," Mr. Schmidt said.


Old story on an old lawyer advising a young one: "When the law is against you, argue the facts...when the facts are against you, argue the law."

"So...", the young lawyer asked,"What if both are against you?"

"Pound on the table and impugn the character of the other side!"

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal media bias...
From: Goose Gander
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 07:11 PM

"Whatever the New York Times once was, it is today not by any standard a journalistic organization," Mr. Schmidt said."

Ironically enough, this is a valid point when you consider the NYT's pre-war coverage on WMDs in Iraq . . .

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal media bias...
From: Bobert
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 07:29 PM

Exactly... Judith Miller ordered the NYT reporters to treat Scott Ritter as if he was an invisable man... The time she did in jail was justice... The woman was a big time enabler of the Bush administration's War Machine...

The Washington Post was, too... I have an article from August 17, the following year where tghe Post confessed (on page A-17) to having fallen victim to a "culture" during the mad-dash-to-Iraq so I wrote them and asked what changes thay had made to insure that they "would not get fooled again"... I'm still waiting for their response...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: The liberal media bias...
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 09:03 PM

I do have to laugh at the constant US tirade about "liberal media bias" - would they prefer to acknowledge 'fascist media bias'...?

And American Politics have so corrupted the meaning of the word 'liberal' - equating it with the bogey 'communist'...

ROFL

""Pound on the table and impugn the character of the other side!""

That's ALL that USA politics seems to be now... refer 'left brain/right wing politics' below.



"did you know that calling various parts of the political spectrum "right" or "left" refers to where different groups sat in the National Assembly during and just after the French Revolution"

This is where our parties sit in Aus too...

Funnily enough, it has also been linked to 'Political Right - uses Left brain hemisphere - thinks in simple manner only mode' : 'Political Left - uses right hemisphere - thinks in complex gestalt seeing whole picture mode'... :-)

All children run in mostly L-mode (left hemisphere) thinking - not until maturity - about 25, when the brain stops changing, some aspects of R-mode start to kick in - unless you can brainwash the population... aggh! it's the USA! :-) No wonder other parts of the world call the USA 'a big teenager'.... :-) Just had some ignoramus delete a new Wikipedia article on the recent Aussie movie '12 Canoes', cause he had never heard of it, so it couldn't be 'notable' - didn't even bother to Google it to see all the International awards it has won!... :-)

Most normal mature people use both parts of the brain in synchronousity.