You are currently browsing the daily archive for October 28, 2008.

Politico is once again giving the finger to those who call their bias – in this case, the writer’s own mother

under the title WHY MCCAIN IS GETTING HOSED IN THE PRESS

Hidden in 3 pages of silly reasons, I picked this revealing paragraph:

In addition, Obama has benefited from his ability to minimize internal drama and maximize secrecy — and thus to starve feed the press’ bias for palace intrigue. In this sense, his campaign bears resemblance to the two run by George W. Bush.

Wow! knock me with a feather, for a change, I agree with them! So it is. All photo ops and stealth viciousness – not to mention the fraud at the polls.

No, they don’t get as far as to praise election stealing.

However, it’s an extraordinary revelation for anyone who knows that “teflon” is not a fateful occurrence but a careful rallying of the powers that be.

The media has been more successfully with Reagan – as the snow job outlasted his presidency than with W – where reality prevailed. But not for lack of trying.

And now, we find out from the media in its narcissistic self-examining mode that – they can’t help it!

Let me repeat that:

his (Obama’s) campaign bears resemblance to the two run by George W. Bush.

Good times, good times!

So, be ready boys and girls. Expect a continuation of those 8 (7) years of fawning if they install this new W – or Jr.Jr as I call him.

I wonder how that last attempt came out for everyone?


Surprisingly, a Reuters piece on Hollywood insiders that are not all in the tank for Obama

LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) – In a room full of television industry executives, no one seemed inclined to defend MSNBC on Monday for what some were calling its lopsidedly liberal coverage of the presidential election.

The cable news channel is “completely out of control,” said writer-producer Linda Bloodworth-Thomason, a self-proclaimed liberal Democrat.

She added that she would prefer a lunch date with right-leaning Fox News star Sean Hannity over left-leaning MSNBC star Keith Olbermann.

and she doesn’t disappoint:

Bloodworth-Thomason and others seemed especially critical of the way MSNBC — and other media — has attacked Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin while demeaning her supporters.

“We should stop the demonizing,” she said, adding that Democrats have been worse than Republicans as far as personal attacks on candidates are concerned. “It diminishes us,” she said of her fellow Democrats.

Bloodworth-Thomason even suggested a defense of Palin and her supporters should be written into TV programing, just as she went out of her way to portray Southern women as smart in her hit TV show “Designing Women.”

and on this high note, adding a great article from the former editor of MS

What is often called her “confidence” is actually a rarity in national politics: I saw a woman who knows exactly who she is.

Look, I am obviously personally pro-choice, and I disagree with McCain and Palin on that and a few other issues. But like many other Democrats, including Lynn Rothschild, I’m tired of the Democratic Party taking women for granted. I also happen to believe Sarah Palin supports women’s rights, deeply and passionately.

To end this on a fun note, I’ll quote the one good thing I heard from someone who’s always been wrong except for this one:

Pollster Frank Luntz, a regular guest on the Fox News, joked that MSNBC is “the only network with more letters in its name than viewers.”

I had got this impression the other day, but there are a few more facts at Hillbuzz that strengthen that impression:

never in any of our careers have any of us ever seen members of one party switching sides and voting for the other party as we see in this election with Democrats for McCain. There has never been anything like it.  Not even the “Reagan Democrats” who voted for Reagan over Carter, for the simple fact that these “Reagan Democrats” weren’t identified and labeled until AFTER the election.  No, Democrats for McCain are real, are voting for McCain right now, and are open and organized, as well as self-identifying.

Another element:

Union members repeatedly tell all of us that they are lying to pollsters because the unions have been polling these people — and the unions will threaten people’s jobs if they don’t tow the union line. So, the people lie when asked whom they are supporting. But, the unions can’t control who they vote for on Election Day. And that’s when things are going to get interesting.

and they conclude that

We do not believe Obama will carry Pittsburgh or Harrisburg in PA. He’ll win Philly, but not by the large margin he needs to take the state. You’ve heard Governor Ed Rendell is “worried” about Obama’s chances in Pennsylvania. That is an understatement. Obama will lose a state that hasn’t gone red in generations.

Based from what I am hearing from volunteers, it makes sense to me.

I am adding – for more than Pa these two ignored facts:

– the 80% hang-up rate on pollsters is a poll in itself – that pretty much negates the results that are reported

– the lack of Obama signs in places that had Kerry signs in 2004. I am hearing reports of this from Pa, Fla, NJ and other states – from people who know their own neighborhoods and see a difference.

Not Your Sweetie