A Perennial Press Opera

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: AndreaNYC @ 02/19/2008 3:21:30 PM

    The media is not only giving Obama a free ride, you are cheering for him and whipping up enthusiasm .... if you don't see it, you're not looking. The problem is not that the press is giving Clinton an especially bad time because it is your job to ask questions and analyze; the problem is you are not doing that to Obama. The country will suffer because of a lack of fairness in the media. AndreaNYC

  • Posted By: lafit @ 02/19/2008 3:09:29 PM

    Comment: It???s obvious that the media is IN FAVOR to Obama.
    My personal opinion is: WHO IS BEHIND THIS FAVORITISM?

    Who wants to have an activist for president? All you that do not want to see the reality?

    Those that get impress by his yelling words.

    It is happening like the last election in Mexico, when one of the candidates; ???AMLO??? talked very nice and have movements.

    Obama is another ???AMLO??? but, in USA.

    Open your eyes, movements, are disorder; remember what happen in Watts California, when the blacks had their movement?

    Eye
    Ojo!!!!!

    • Posted By: D. Affiliated @ 02/19/2008 3:21:22 PM

      "remember what happen in Watts California"

      WTF?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! You REALLY need to give it a rest with the inept robo-spamming there "pal", you're not helping your candidates' cause with pyschobabble like this.

  • Posted By: steve4america @ 02/19/2008 3:20:18 PM

    regaurding the statement by seemaryc, you start off by saying your not going to cast a blind ballot with out hearing there stance on an issue but then you immidiately follow it with rehtoric about some crap about a moving co.the truth is any one who would put clinton(bill)in the same catagory as either bush partison in nature or politicaly ignorant clinton stoped the raid of social socurity imposed the first new campain laws since teddy rosevelt increased inhis first two yr border patrol(while bush decreased it in his 1st yr)ie man power.as well as created tax cuts for small buisness which any one who understands economics would know that is the true foundation of our economy.you may or may not want to vote for a clinton that is your choise as an american but please do not spread untruths about a cadidate. BECAUSE THERE IS NOTHING MORE UNAMERICAN THAN AN UNFAIR FIGHT. SO LET THE FACTS,NOT THE RETORIC BE THE POINT THANK YOU .And please vote whom ever you see fit to run the country .

  • Posted By: rsagi @ 02/19/2008 3:20:06 PM

    So, OBama is not divisive - look at truck loads of his land-mark legislation; President Bush - look truck loads of debt generating legislation; yes, definitely Mrs. Clinton is very divisive for the simple reason that she attempted to tackle the most pressing issue crippling America - the run-away healthcare costs. A real Democrat.

  • Posted By: Marty63 @ 02/19/2008 3:19:53 PM

    Please! it is true the media has given Mr Obama a free ride, just one example Keith O, of Countdown used to be in my opinion very neutral between Hillary and others, but I guess he got on the "hope" wagon and gave Mr Obama part of the free ride that mr Obama needed. Hope equals waiting and that's what Mr Obama is offering some more waiting for the middle class.

  • Posted By: Dixiechick @ 02/19/2008 3:16:52 PM

    Watching CNN news made me realize how the press has now made this a campaign of the presidential nomination a case of all kinds of segregation or discrimination. Call it what you want.
    We have :
    black verses White verses Latino
    Men verses Women
    Old verses young
    Over 50 under 50
    Rich verses poor---note: no middle class
    Educated :college verses uneducated note: high school grads or less.
    I think they left out Orientals
    They make it sound like Hillary can only attract Old,stupid,poor latinos and some white women
    Then Barack Obama attracts blacks white men (a few of Hillary's white women)who are young rich and educated. Hmmm.
    I think they left out the family dog. Oh yeah they also forgot Blonds brunettes red heads and bald.
    The dog: one bark for Hillary and two barks for Obama! That should be the deciding factor unless they want to go by breed.
    Cats don't count-they are too independant. Then again that quality may place them in the Obama column.

  • Posted By: lafit @ 02/19/2008 12:55:09 PM

    IT???s OBVIOUS YOU HAVE NOT SEEN THIS INFORMATION:

    WE AMERICAN PEOPLE DESERVE THE TRUTH. DO WE WANT THIS GUY TO BE OUR PRESIDENT?

    WHERE IS THE MEDIA THAT THEY DO NOT TALK ABOUT IT?
    check out the video on youtube for yourself:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch/v=sVeFVtcdSYY

    This has also been covered by The Smoking Gun but no one else.

    America wants to know: where's the media coverage on this???? We deserve to hear the truth!

    http://www.worldnetdaily.com is the latest website covering the story.

    www.whitehouse.com

    www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=56626

    • Posted By: D. Affiliated @ 02/19/2008 1:16:21 PM

      They also need to look into whether those rape allegations against Bill Clinton are true (a woman inists until this day that she was raped by Bill Clinton) and why Maggie Williams was seen running out of Vince Foster's office with papers that have yet to be discovered right after his death.

      • Posted By: JakeNYC @ 02/19/2008 1:30:09 PM

        And just why is this relevant in Hillary's campaign?

        • Posted By: D. Affiliated @ 02/19/2008 1:37:07 PM

          It's relevant first of all because Hillary Clinton is running on her husband's record by counting being married to him while he was President as experience and the Maggie Williams incident matters because it was Hillary Clinton who she was working for then and is still working for now (she's now her campaign manager I believe).

          • Posted By: D. Affiliated @ 02/19/2008 1:54:13 PM

            But in all seriousness, Senator Clinton has not been charged with anything or convicted of anything and neither has Senator Obama, so salacious allegations against either of them need to be left off the table until there is more proof to back them up.

            • Posted By: JakeNYC @ 02/19/2008 2:50:20 PM

              I agree with you there.
              However, she is not running on "being married" to Bill. She is running on being in the White House and being part of policy meeting and knowing how the bureaucracy in Washington works and leading a huge public policy project (Healthcare reform) that although failed, it shows that she and the rest of the Clinton administration was ahead of the populace.
              The funny thing about mentioning Hillary's failure in the healthcare reform initiative in the 90's is that it illustrates exactly what can happen when someone, who has no experience in Washington, goes in with a ideological belief that they can change the process. This is exactly what would happen to Obama if he tried to actually keep all these campaign promises and exactly what those of us supporting Hillary are trying to avoid. This is not the time in America to waste time engaging in ideological battles, but rather to list the problems and fix them one by one with clinical, bureaucratic efficiency. Not glamorous or inspirational per se, but essential.

              • Posted By: D. Affiliated @ 02/19/2008 3:16:26 PM

                I actually agree with much of what you said, but I think the difference is that Obama is not interesting in fighting any ideological battles. One of the criticisms against him by his detractors is that he isn???t enough of a fighter to take on the Republicans, they think his willingness to compromise is a liability. Obama???s whole approach is much more diplomatic than the Clintons???, so I really don???t see him getting into any large protracted ideological battles.

  • Posted By: barbinPa @ 02/18/2008 8:41:12 PM

    So now the press is going to start running stories explaining their hatcheting of Hilary Clinton. .what a bunch of slim-bag, anything-for-a-story, snakes in the grass. They should all go back from whence they came- selling used cars!

    • Posted By: JakeNYC @ 02/19/2008 3:09:32 PM

      You're right barbin! All they ever wanted was a horserace so they could pump up their egos and their coffers with advertising money. Funny that Obama slams all those "big corporate interests" but is more than willing to play along as the press subverts our democracy by using its power to influence election outcomes.

  • Posted By: lafit @ 02/19/2008 3:07:01 PM


    WHERE IS THE MEDIA THAT THEY DO NOT TALK ABOUT IT?

    www.whitehouse.com

    www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=56626

    http://www.worldnetdaily.com


    WE AMERICAN PEOPLE DESERVE THE TRUTH.
    WE WOULD NOT WANT THIS GUY TO BE OUR PRESIDENT.

    THE MEDIA LOVES TO HEAR NEGATIVE, HORRIBLE COMMENTARIES ABOUT MRS. CLINTON AND IT IS OK. BUT WHEN IT COMES TO OBAMA IS WRONG?


    MEDIA, IT IS OK TO HAVE SOMEONE FOR PRESIDENT THAT ???HAS BEEN ADICTED TO DRUGS????

    IS THIS A MODEL FOR THE YOUNG GENERATION?

  • Posted By: 1dsherr @ 02/19/2008 9:24:21 AM

    What is Hillary suppose to do? No "Hardball" from Chris Matthews for Obama. David Shuster indirectly calls Chelsea a prostitute, and Hillary a pimp. I guess if she were a real lady, she would stay home, and be quiet.

    • Posted By: ublair @ 02/19/2008 12:43:53 PM

      You are an ass****. Punk bastard.. SHut up and go to hell!!!!

      • Posted By: JakeNYC @ 02/19/2008 3:05:43 PM

        Why attack a post with insults? Everything it said is true. I dare you to find one fault with the facts in the post above yours!
        Comments like yours illustrate who is really supporting Obama; the "my way or the highway" crowd. Gee... sounds a lot like that last 8 years of Bush to me.

  • Posted By: nadeem.ahmed@xwave.com @ 02/19/2008 9:41:21 AM

    From Wikipedia:

    Clinton has been criticized for not giving credit to a ghostwriter in connection with It Takes a Village. The majority of the book was reportedly written by ghostwriter Barbara Feinman. When the book was first announced in April 1995, The New York Times reported publisher Simon & Schuster as saying ???The book will actually be written by Barbara Feinman, a journalism professor at Georgetown University in Washington. Ms. Feinman will conduct a series of interviews with Mrs. Clinton, who will help edit the resulting text.???

    Feinman spent seven months on the project and was paid $120,000 for her work. Feinman, however, was not mentioned anywhere in the book???.

    During her promotional tour for the book, Clinton said, ???I actually wrote the book ??? I had to write my own book because I want to stand by every word.??? Clinton stated that Feinman assisted in interviews and did some editorial drafting of ???connecting paragraphs???, while Clinton herself wrote the final manuscript in longhand.

    This led Feinman to complain at the time to Capitol Style magazine over the lack of acknowledgement.[12] In 2001, The Wall Street Journal reported that ???New York literary circles are buzzing with vitriol over Sen. Clinton???s refusal, so far, to share credit with any writer who helps on her book.???

    Later, in a 2002 article for The Writer???s Chronicle, Barbara Feinman Todd (now using her married name) related that the project with Clinton had gone smoothly, producing drafts in a round-robin style. Feinman agrees that Clinton was involved with the project, but also states that, ???Like any first lady, Mrs. Clinton had an extremely hectic schedule and writing a book without assistance would have been logistically impossible.???

    Feinman reiterates that her only objection to the whole process was the lack of any acknowledgement. A 2005 Georgetown University web page bio for Barbara Feinman Todd states that It Takes a Village was one of ???several high-profile books??? that she has ???assisted, as editor, writer and researcher.???

    • Posted By: JakeNYC @ 02/19/2008 3:01:55 PM

      ...and we're using Wikipedia as sources now? I can go to Wikipedia and edit Obama's page to reflect he attended terrorism training schools. Will that make it factual.

  • Posted By: Fasteddy33 @ 02/19/2008 3:01:10 PM

    JakeNYC, great concept regarding clinical, bureaucratic efficiency. In principle I agree. There are so many things which need to be fixed. Unfortunately, H. Clinton is too divisive to make that happen.

  • Posted By: Fasteddy33 @ 02/19/2008 3:00:27 PM

    JakeNYC, great concept regarding clinical, bureaucratic efficiency. In principle I agree. There are so many things which need to be fixed. Unfortunately, H. Clinton is too divisive to make that happen.

  • Posted By: ccollins222 @ 02/19/2008 12:27:44 PM

    Who is Obama??? He has 2 years of experience as a Senator? Democrats, please pay attention!! If Obama faces McCain, he will lose because he has very little experience. The anti-Clinton campiagn is focused on a McCain win! We are in a recession and only experience will assist with this issue. The media focuses on the negative aspects of the campiagn and not the issues. Again I ask, who is Obama?? Would you make him the CEO of your company after working there only two years??? No, then don't do that to your country.

    • Posted By: 1sprigg @ 02/19/2008 12:46:02 PM

      If we were going on experiance then hillary and obama should both be out of the democratic race, being that they were the least experianced. furthermore, Obama has more legislative experiance. "35 years of experiance," I wish my wife could use my federal government experiance to improve her resume!

      • Posted By: JakeNYC @ 02/19/2008 2:58:15 PM

        I agree with you there. If the electorate were smart and experience was the issue, the Joe Biden would be the nominee. But given where we are, we should be nominating the candidate with the most experience to contrast against McCain. Obama's record and experience is limited in national politics. Hillary has 3 times the national politics experience as Obama (6 years in the Senate vs. 2 years). Obama has never had to fight a strong Republican opponent in any of his campaigns.

  • Posted By: Cliff n WA @ 02/19/2008 2:54:09 PM

    Republican dreams come true. Just when they thought all was lost; along comes Barak.

    The perfect storm continues to brew toward the total destruction of the Democratic Party

    A divided and fractured party in a divided and fractured country.

  • Posted By: seemaryc @ 02/19/2008 2:48:59 PM

    comment: I am not casting my vote blindly for any of the canidates until I have hdv a chance to listen to them answer the hard questions about our ecomony,the war in Iraq, loss of home and health insurance for all americans. Gender and Race does not matter. What does matter is who will get the job done. I can't remember any President coming to the White House with experience unless it was a second term.Our lives and values are at stake here as american people. My last memory of Hillary Clinton leaving the White House was the Media reported twhen she left the White house for he last time furniture and other valuables were removed supposely be mistake by her moving company. She later paid the sum of money to the White House.I am tried of Bush,Clinton,Bush and now another Clinton wanting back into the White House. I want a new and fresh President that also has ideas and fresh throughts to come to the House of power. As far as I have sen so far and I amnot an Obama fan is he is really the only one with a true vision for our country.

  • Posted By: Cliff n WA @ 02/19/2008 2:33:20 PM

    The Rise and Fall of the 4th Estate
    For many years now I have been concerned with the news media, especially television, not accepting the responsibility to be fair arbitrators of information. Ratings and entertainment are more important than educating the electorate. I now feel manipulated so the press can have a horse race. Any objective analysis of political news coverage will show the so called "free press" is stumping for Obama. Pay particular attention to the graphics during Super-Tuesday election coverage emphasizing Obama wins. The legitimate issue of qualification and competence to be POTUS is being ignored and discouraged. Chris Matthews (Feb.9) had a guest, who happens to be black, say he questions Obama as a "viable and serious" candidate; they could not get his face off the screen fast enough, the same for the other guy who try to say it was silly to believe polls today can tell what will happen in November. My question is do you think this will continue through November? Will the news machine try to salvage credibility?

  • Posted By: JakeNYC @ 02/19/2008 2:31:48 PM

    It is also amazing to me that some people say they are voting for Obama because electing a black President would move America past the era of racial politics. So...let me get this straight... in order to get us to a post-racial society you are voting based on race? Isn't voting for someone based on race the definition of racism?

  • Posted By: JakeNYC @ 02/19/2008 2:28:43 PM

    Here is an excerpt from an Op-ed piece by Ambassador Joseph Wilson (who's wife Valerie Plame was outed by the Bush Administration)
    ...will Obama fight? His brief time on the national scene gives little comfort. Consider a February 2006 exchange of letters with McCain on the subject of ethics reform. The wrathful McCain accused Obama of being "disingenuous," to which Obama meekly replied, "The fact that you have now questioned my sincerity and my desire to put aside politics for the public interest is regrettable but does not in any way diminish my deep respect for you."
    McCain was insultingly dismissive, but successful in intimidating his inexperienced colleague. Thus, in his one known encounter with McCain, Obama failed to stand his ground.
    What gives us confidence that Obama will be stronger the next time he faces McCain, a seasoned political fighter with extensive national-security credentials? Even more important, what disadvantages does Obama carry into this contest on questions of national security?
    How will Obama answer McCain about his careless remark about unilaterally bombing Pakistan -- perhaps blowing up an already difficult relationship with a nuclear state threatened by Islamic extremists? How will Obama respond to charges by the Kenyan government that his campaigning activities in Kenya in support of his distant cousin running for president there made him "a stooge" and constituted interference in the politics of an important and besieged ally in the war on terror?
    How will he answer charges that his desire for unstructured personal summits without preconditions with a host of America's adversaries, from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Kim Jong-il, would be little more than premature capitulation?
    Contrary to the myth of the Obama campaign, 2008 is not the year for transcendental transformation. The task for the next administration will be to repair the damage done by eight years of radical rule. And the choice for Americans is clear: four more years of corrupt Republican rule, senseless wars, evisceration of the Constitution, emptying of the national treasury -- or rebuilding our government and our national reputation, piece by piece.
    To effect practical change against a determined adversary, we do not need a would-be philosopher-king, but a seasoned gladiator who understands the fight Democrats will face in the fall campaign and in governing.
    Full Op-Ed here: http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentary/15746427.html

  • Posted By: jlowell1 @ 02/19/2008 2:22:45 PM

    Don't forget...this is the same media that gave Bush a free ride for almost 6 years...

    The media is nothing more than a bunch a mealy-mouthed self-serving souless cowards who have no interest in the "truth"...only in being the tools of those selling ad space.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse