Over four years ago I said to my wife, "You watch, Barack Obama will be the next Democratic nominee for President." It seemed obvious to me due to the high amount of press coverage he was getting at the time. As the years went on that guess became more and more right. What finally sealed the deal for me was a cover story of a prominent magazine (Newsweek if memory serves) a while ago with a photo of Barack Obama and the words "Barack Obama - the Next President."
It seemed fishy to me then and it still does now.
In the presidential debates it is the media who can pick who can participate and which candidates can't. This gives more face time to the candidates the media prefers and little to no face time for the other candidates.
I recall when Romney won the caucus in Wyoming - the first one of the year - even before New Hampshire! - and how the media didn't even cover it! You couldn't find news of his win anywhere - but when John McCain won New Hampshire he was slated as sure to win because New Hampshire was the first primary - but McCain didn't get the first win - Romney did.
In short, the media picks the contenders and then advertises for the ones they want.
Finally, today when I saw this article I was aghast. The media's new role is to disprove arguments - but not for both parties.
They want Obama as president and there isn't anything you or I can do to change that. They will give him the coverage that he needs and will not give like treatment to McCain. You may think from this article that you know who I am voting for but you don't - not even I do. I just think it is wrong for the media to play an unequal role in politics. The government was not made for them - it was made for us. The media are here for us as well - not the other way around.
Here is the article:
By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer Wed Sep 3, 11:48 PM ET
ST. PAUL, Minn. - Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and her Republican supporters held back little Wednesday as they issued dismissive attacks on Barack Obama and flattering praise on her credentials to be vice president. In some cases, the reproach and the praise stretched the truth.
Some examples:
PALIN: "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending ... and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress 'thanks but no thanks' for that Bridge to Nowhere."
THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a "bridge to nowhere."
PALIN: "There is much to like and admire about our opponent. But listening to him speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform — not even in the state senate."
THE FACTS: Compared to McCain and his two decades in the Senate, Obama does have a more meager record. But he has worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year. To demean that accomplishment would be to also demean the work of Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, a respected foreign policy voice in the Senate. In Illinois, he was the leader on two big, contentious measures in Illinois: studying racial profiling by police and requiring recordings of interrogations in potential death penalty cases. He also successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform legislation.
PALIN: "The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes, raise payroll taxes, raise investment income taxes, raise the death tax, raise business taxes, and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars."
THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama's plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly $2,200 annually. McCain's plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded.
Obama would provide $80 billion in tax breaks, mainly for poor workers and the elderly, including tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers and higher credits for larger families.
He also would raise income taxes, capital gains and dividend taxes on the wealthiest. He would raise payroll taxes on taxpayers with incomes above $250,000, and he would raise corporate taxes. Small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year would see taxes rise.
MCCAIN: "She's been governor of our largest state, in charge of 20 percent of America's energy supply ... She's responsible for 20 percent of the nation's energy supply. I'm entertained by the comparison and I hope we can keep making that comparison that running a political campaign is somehow comparable to being the executive of the largest state in America," he said in an interview with ABC News' Charles Gibson.
THE FACTS: McCain's phrasing exaggerates both claims. Palin is governor of a state that ranks second nationally in crude oil production, but she's no more "responsible" for that resource than President Bush was when he was governor of Texas, another oil-producing state. In fact, her primary power is the ability to tax oil, which she did in concert with the Alaska Legislature. And where Alaska is the largest state in America, McCain could as easily have called it the 47th largest state — by population.
MCCAIN: "She's the commander of the Alaska National Guard. ... She has been in charge, and she has had national security as one of her primary responsibilities," he said on ABC.
THE FACTS: While governors are in charge of their state guard units, that authority ends whenever those units are called to actual military service. When guard units are deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, for example, they assume those duties under "federal status," which means they report to the Defense Department, not their governors. Alaska's national guard units have a total of about 4,200 personnel, among the smallest of state guard organizations.
FORMER ARKANSAS GOV. MIKE HUCKABEE: Palin "got more votes running for mayor of Wasilla, Alaska than Joe Biden got running for president of the United States."
THE FACTS: A whopper. Palin got 616 votes in the 1996 mayor's election, and got 909 in her 1999 re-election race, for a total of 1,525. Biden dropped out of the race after the Iowa caucuses, but he still got 76,165 votes in 23 states and the District of Columbia where he was on the ballot during the 2008 presidential primaries.
FORMER MASSACHUSETTS GOV. MITT ROMNEY: "We need change, all right — change from a liberal Washington to a conservative Washington! We have a prescription for every American who wants change in Washington — throw out the big-government liberals, and elect John McCain and Sarah Palin."
THE FACTS: A Back-to-the-Future moment. George W. Bush, a conservative Republican, has been president for nearly eight years. And until last year, Republicans controlled Congress. Only since January 2007 have Democrats have been in charge of the House and Senate.
___
Associated Press Writer Jim Drinkard in Washington contributed to this report.
___
Associated Press Writer Jim Drinkard in Washington contributed to this report.
Found at http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080904/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_fact_check on September 4, 2008.
Tell me, when have you seen anything like this on Barack Obama? You probably can't and you probably won't.
2 comments:
The mainstream media drives me crazy. I don't trust anything they say. They put a spin on so much that it is impossible to know what they are being upfront about. So mostly anything they endorse, I reject. If I don't reject it, I at least view it very, very skeptically and ask a whole lot of questions.
Ethan,
They drive me crazy as well. I believe there is evidence - such as that article - that points to a bias in the media. There is bias in all we do - no matter how much we would like to be unbiased. We all have opinions and we all have beliefs that go into how we view the world and what we would like to see happen. The problem with the media is that you could probably fit all of the world's major media owners in your front room.
That small group of individuals has a huge sway on the rest of the six billion people on planet earth and they have a duty and responsibility to present all sides of an issue. However, the other sides are not proportionally represented in the media. There are more than just democrats and republicans as well but their voice is almost never heard.
The best way to manage the media coverage of the different views would be to ensure that the coverage was proportionate to the amount of holders of those opinions and or beliefs. That however is way far away from what actually takes place. I believe you have to watch a little bit of everything and then average it to get the closest thing to the truth.
Just the same as some news channels seem to favor the left, I can't stand - absolutely can't stand - listening to FOX news that supposedly represents the right. Now if ABC and NBC are biased towards the left then FOX news is more than just biased towards the "right."
I think there is a lot of truth from the left and a lot from the right - the problem though is that it isn't balanced. That is the real problem. If they are going to write an article like this about the Republican's speeches then they should do the exact same for the Democrats. That is all I ask for - balance.
Ken