The press remains allergic to the topic of what Bush's deep political stain could mean for the GOP on Election Day. The press has virtually erased Bush as a player in this campaign, which is striking because back in 2000, when Bill Clinton was the retiring two-term president, the press couldn't stop writing and gabbing about his role in the unfolding campaign. (It was mostly bad for Dems, the pundits agreed.) But Bush? Who's he?
It's fitting, really, that as the media's lapdog performance under Bush comes to its conclusion, the press would soft-peddle the president's role in his farewell convention fiasco. It's fitting because, let's face it, Bush's presidential failure is really the media's failure, and what journalist wants to dwell on that? Remember, this is the same political press corps that just had a gut feeling about Bush in 2000; just liked the guy. They vouched for him. Said he was a real, authentic politician who would restore bipartisanship to Washington.
Aren't these the same claims being proclaimed by McCain's media buttkissers........one foot in the grave and a heartbeat away.............
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old. To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database manipulation?
We are manipulating it right now with all the poisonous gases, with the killing/managing of animals..We have manipulated this earth into most surely destruction. If man was not here, animals and plant life would have existed just fine. We have manipulated this earth since humans have been on this earth and as time goes on, it only gets worse. With the global warming protocol, we would try to diminish some of the harmful things we have done to this poor earth, i.e., pollution. But, hey, Bush is all for traveling in space, space cadet that he is, guess he thinks once the earth is messed up and noninhabitable, we will just fly off to another planet..Oh, but, like Bush said, who cares, we will be dead anyway. Well, I care. This is not the legacy I want to leave future human beings.
Behind the scenes manipulation......wait for that
and then ask yourself why. Why suddenly companies that have been around forever seem to have trouble staying afloat but then miraculously another company steps in to buy them up or MERGE. Ain't falling for it. There is big behind the scenes manipulation going on and that word I dread -- "globalization" is taking place. That is how world order begins, strong companies suddenly being bought out and another bought out until you end up with only one company offering this or that, instead of competition, which is what a free society is all about. Once world banks become involved everyone should be seriously concerned of things to come.
I've been reading the comments on this board and it reminds me a lot of when George Bush was running - first and second time. For his first term and much of his second term no matter what he did a lot of people defended him. And a lof of the same people who supported Bush now support McCain. We are all paying for the decision 50% of the voters in this country made in November 8 years ago and then again 4 years ago. Are we all going to have to pay for the next 4 years too?
Bush has been a disaster for this country. If you vote for McCain in a lot of ways we continue on the same path. The people on this board who are worrying about things that don't matter should look more closely at the things that do. Instead of trying to prove a point or that you are right and acting like anything negative said about John McCain is a personal insult why not spend that time learning more about the important issues and what exactly will happen to this country if we elect John McCain and continue on a similar path to the one we have been on for the past 8 years?
Barack Obama is not perfect. But he's not a Muslim. He's not an elitist. He's not for sex education for kindergartners. Those things are absurd but John McCain and his campaign managers know those are the things that get people riled up. Those are the things that some people in this country will occupy themselves with instead of the things that matter. He sure doesn't want you talking about the war and how he was for it and Barack Obama was not.
Barack Obama is an intelligent person who is honest, ethical and who has the insight and good judgment to make the best decisions for this country. He has a gift of being able to motivate and encourage people. He may not have executive experience but neither does John McCain or Joe Biden. Bush did.
Sometimes history provides the right person at the right time. I believe that Barack Obama has come along just we need him. Like Lincoln and Roosevelt did.
I am hearing on the news programs that the repub base is fired up. I am certain this is the same language I heard in 2004. How many times do we have to repeat and relive the consequences of Bush's election, reelection and McCain's same policies until we get it? What needs to happen to make citizens actually look critically at the past and apply the lessons to the future. I am gobsmacked.
Perhaps you should do some studying. SOS all over again, just like all the lies leading to regime change in Iraq, except this time with NUKES. Once again, Bush believes he knows the Iranian people and thinks he can predict how they will respond. Bush's messianic vision is labeled as worrisome, which is a rather kind description of this President.
You really should read the entire article, but I doubt that you will. It's likely to actually cause you to think.
http://www.newyorker.com/press
Issue of 2006-04-17 Posted 2006-04-08
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 8, 2006
THIS WEEK IN
THE NEW YORKER
PRESS CONTACTS: Perri Dorset, (212) 286-5898 Daniel Kile, (212) 286-5996 Maria Cereghino, (212) 286-7936
The Bush Administration’s Plan For Iran
“The Bush Administration, while publicly advocating diplomacy in order to stop Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon, has increased clandestine activities inside Iran and intensified planning for a possible major air attack,” Seymour M. Hersh reports in the April 17, 2006, issue of The New Yorker (“The Iran Plans,” p. 30). Moreover, he writes, “There is a growing conviction among members of the United States military, and in the international community, that President Bush’s ultimate goal in the nuclear confrontation with Iran is regime change.” One former senior intelligence official tells Hersh that Bush and others in the White House have come to view Iran’s President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, as a potential Adolf Hitler. “That’s the name they’re using,” he says. A senior Pentagon adviser on the war on terror says, “This White House believes that the only way to solve the problem is to change the power structure in Iran, and that means war.” The danger, he adds, is that “it also reinforces the belief inside Iran that the only way to defend the country is to have a nuclear capability.” The former senior intelligence official, referring to activity at three U.S. military facilities, says, “The planning is enormous.” He depicts it as hectic and operational—far beyond the contingency work that is routinely done. One former defense official tells Hersh that the military planning was premised on a belief that “a sustained bombing campaign in Iran will humiliate the religious leadership and lead the public to rise up and overthrow the government.” He adds, “I was shocked when I heard it, and asked myself, ‘What are they smoking?’ ” A government consultant with close ties to civilians in the Pentagon confirms that undercover units are working with minority groups in Iran, and that while one goal is to have “eyes on the ground,” the broader aim is to “encourage ethnic tensions” and undermine the regime.
Hersh reports, “In recent weeks, the President has quietly initiated a series of talks on plans for Iran with a few key senators and members of Congress, including at least one Democrat.” A senior member of the House Appropriations Committee, who did not take part in the meetings but has discussed their content with his colleagues, tells Hersh that the Administration is “reluctant to brief the minority.” He adds, “The people they’re briefing are the same ones who led the charge on Iraq.... There’s no pressure from Congress” not to take military action. “The only political pressure is from the guys who want to do it.” Speaking of President Bush, the House member said, “The most worrisome thing is that this guy has a messianic vision.”
Hersh also reveals that one of the options under consideration involves the possible use of “a bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon, such as the B61-11, to insure the destruction of Iran’s main centrifuge plant, at Natanz.” The former senior intelligence official tells Hersh that the attention given to the nuclear option has created serious misgivings inside the military and that some officers have talked about resigning after an attempt to remove the nuclear option from the evolving war plans in Iran failed. Hersh writes, “The Pentagon adviser on the war on terror confirmed that some in the Administration were looking seriously at this option.... He also confirmed that some senior officers and officials were considering resigning over the issue.” The adviser explains, “There are very strong sentiments within the military against brandishing nuclear weapons against other countries.”
The Pentagon adviser warns, as do many others, that bombing Iran could provoke “a chain reaction” of attacks on American facilities and citizens throughout the world: “What will 1.2 billion Muslims think the day we attack Iran?” he asks. He tells Hersh that any attack might also reignite Hezbollah. “If we go, the southern half of Iraq will light up like a candle,” he says. A retired four-star general tells Hersh that, despite the eight thousand British troops in the region, “the Iranians could take Basra with ten mullahs and one sound truck.” “If you attack,” a high-ranking diplomat in Vienna tells Hersh, “Ahmadinejad will be the new Saddam Hussein of the Arab world, but with more credibility and more power. You must bite the bullet and sit down with the Iranians.” The diplomat went on, “There are people in Washington who would be unhappy if we found a solution. They are still banking on isolation and regime change. This is wishful thinking.” He adds, “The window of opportunity is now.”
Also this week: In “A Church Asunder” (p. 44), Peter J. Boyer reports that the election of Gene Robinson as the first openly gay bishop of the Episcopal Church “posed the biggest crisis for Anglicanism since the Reformation, and brought the worldwide church to the edge of schism.” Boyer writes that while a belief in the power of compromise has always permeated the Anglican faith, to several conservative bishops the move “pushed the Anglican notion of comprehensiveness beyond its historically implied limits. What the Church had affirmed, in the view of these traditionalists, was not just a different expression of Christianity but a different religion altogether.” Bishop Robert Duncan, of Pittsburgh, led a small delegation of twenty bishops in protest the day of Robinson’s affirmation and has since reached out for support from the worldwide Anglican community, and specifically from bishops in the Global South, who tend to be far more conservative. Boyer writes, “More than half of all Anglicans live in Africa, South America, and Asia.... There are more Anglicans in Kenya (roughly three million) than there are Episcopalians in the U.S.... The balance of power has shifted dramatically.” While Anglicanism has no global hierarchy as in the Catholic Church, Duncan hopes that through an alliance with the Global South, he and like-minded bishops can convince the worldwide Anglican Communion that the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States of America, or ecusa ... has already departed from the faith, and that an alternative body of orthodox Episcopalians should be recognized as the true church in America.” Boyer writes, “Duncan says that his battle is not with Gene Robinson, or even over the issue of homosexuality, but with what he considers a radical reinterpretation of the faith by the liberal church.” He says that the future may hold many unpleasant legal battles, “And the question that the state courts are going to have to figure out is, ‘Who are the Episcopalians.’ ” Boyer writes, “Gene Robinson watches these developments with a mixture of sadness and alarm.” He tells Boyer, “Bob Duncan wants to ally our church with the church of Kenya, where the primate there said that, when I was consecrated, Satan entered the church. What most people don’t realize is that homosexuality is something that I am, it’s not something that I do.... We’re not talking about taking a liberal or conservative stance on a particular issue; we’re talking about who I am.” Later, he adds, “I have to tell you—I felt called by God to come out. It seems to me that if God stands for anything, God stands for integrity. And to be a priest, calling other people to integrity, when you’re not exercising it yourself—it’ll kill you.”
Plus: Hendrik Hertzberg, in Comment, on the drawbacks of the Bush Administration’s health-care plan (p. 25); Adam Gopnik on “The Gospel of Judas,” a recently released translation (p. 80); Alec Wilkinson on Pete Seeger and on a new album inspired by his work by Bruce Springsteen (p. 44); Cynthia Zarin on the works of Maurice Sendak (p. 38); David Denby on the new films “The Notorious Bettie Page” and “Friends with Money” (p. 86); John Lahr on the life of playwright Clifford Odets (p.72); and fiction by Bernard MacLaverty (p. 66)
The April 17, 2006, issue of The New Yorker goes on sale at newsstands beginning Monday, April 10th.
often creates more questions and issues than politics in general. I think all politicians are crooks and only out to line their own pockets with money, as evident by all the promises made during election year that never came into play during their actual term.
I go through spurts. I get mad and then I stop watching and then I calm down and I start watching again and then I get mad again. It is a vicious cycle.
not going to be timid this election about the deceptive way the RNC wants to paint them as liberal and pro-Obama.. They are openly discussing it as a divisive tactic that has been used over and over by the RNC. Chris Matthews heatedly faced down Pat Buchanan last night over Pat's attempt to be Mr. Women's Rights regarding SP. Chris noted that with this election, no one is supposed to look into McC or SP's activities or views. If the media rightly investigates McC, they throw up the POW story. With Palin, it is going to be Sexist story. The media's job is to bring us information so we can decide. Free press is essential to our country. For this reason we must tolerate all extremes of opinion, as we must on this board. See MediaMatters.org for facts on media misstatements.
The media is doing its best
to make sure Obama is elected. It is sickening how one-sided they all are, CNN, ABC, NBC, etc. They totally overlook anything that might reflect negatively on Obama/Biden, and jump with glee on anything having to do with McCain/Palin. What that CNN reporter did to Palin was a disgrace.
I wish I could believe everything the media
I have family that live in Arizona and Texas who are democrats. They said it was a known fact that illegals were voting left and right, all with fake SS#s and fake IDs. It hasn't been a secret that illegals are acquiring fake SS#s.
One family member, who runs a large company out there, said he stood in line with many he knew were illegal while he watched them vote and pull out so-called IDs. He knew some of the companies (through the grapevine) some of these illegals work for and knew they were hiring illegals and yet there they stood, voting as if they had the right. Even standing in line bragging about how Obama would help their families. It's not a secret if you live in these areas where you see it happening all the time. Now, if you want to believe all the hundreds of thousands of illegals voting were somehow "legal" that's your business, but I do transcription every day from Texas with doctors questioning how a patient got on disability when they aren't even legal residents of this country, so it's no surprise to me how O got in there. Factor in all the illegals in California, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and it was a done deal.
Media would be ALL over it if
--
when it happens, the media has been sm
all over it! I don't know where you have been. Do I need to send you examples? My goodness they have even taken some of the more publicized cases and made movies out of them.
is so liberally biased....I'm sure there is a lot that we aren't being told the truth about.
Treating captive terrorists like dinner guests will not make them like us. It will not stop attempts on American lives by terrorists. All that will accomplish is letting them know that they can blow us up and kill thousands of Americans and all they have to do is sit in a prison until released and that is all they get out of it.
Terrorists that we have released from Gitmo have gone right back. We didn't waterboard them. They were released and joined back up with their terrorist pals again. Gee....I guess they sure learned their lesson, huh? Another free terrorist who can come back again and try to kill more Americans in the name of Allah.
It seriously amazes me how you people defend these guys.
Actually, the way I am reading it is the media is DOING it. SM
Looking for some dirt. That's the way I read the article. Time will tell I guess.
Did the media jump all over...
the horrible HORRIBLE things that Charlie Rangel said about Bush the other day. Only O'Reilly. The rest of the media has given it a pass, as usual.
It's clearly the LIBERAL media
It's okay to trash Clinton but don't touch St. Ronnie. Besides, the producer is a friend of Rush,
so clearly it's fact based....uh huh.
http://www.anonymousliberal.com/2006/09/liberal-media-strikes-again.html
Not so funny when it comes to the media
doing the same thing to Repubs as they do to Dems?
I do think it's wrong. Sound byte politics is wrong, wrong, wrong, no matter who it's directed toward. try Media Matters
They go after both sides for inaccuracies. They back up their points with facts.
Have you seen the two US Weekly covers, the one for Obama and the one for Palin?
I just love this email sent by former Clinton operative and Us Weekly employee, Mark Neschis, that went out to all media in St. Paul:
Thought I would send over our Us Weekly/Sarah Palin cover story, on stands Friday, if helpful in your coverage. Might be useful as an illustration of how the news is playing out.(Us Weekly has 12 million, mostly female readers)
Mark Neschis Corporate Communications Director Wenner Media Us Weekly | Rolling Stone | Men’s Journal
A former Clinton operative....smearing another woman in politics. What a double standard! Whatever respect I EVER had for the Democratic party...is gone. Party before country, party before decency....party BEFORE. NO thanks.
What Obama needs to do now is put his money where is mouth is, and tell all his operatives to tell all their buddies on the blogs and media to cease and desist...if indeed he was sincere in his objection to this treatment.
You got that right. Point is that media
nm
Media breakdown
Sticking this here in case it's relative, not as a reply to above post. Have LOTS more if you want newspapers and radio too. Sorry, but this is a driveby for the night. I'm tired, irritated and incapable of human interaction today. *Disclaimer: Informational only, not interested in arguing.
GENERAL ELECTRIC --(donated 1.1 million to GW Bush for his 2000 election campaign)
Television Holdings:
* NBC: includes 13 stations, 28% of US households.
* NBC Network News: The Today Show, Nightly News with Tom Brokaw, Meet the Press, Dateline NBC, NBC News at Sunrise.
* CNBC business television; MSNBC 24-hour cable and Internet news service (co-owned by NBC and Microsoft); Court TV (co-owned with Time Warner), Bravo (50%), A&E (25%), History Channel (25%).
Other Holdings:
* GE Consumer Electronics.
* GE Power Systems: produces turbines for nuclear reactors and power plants.
* GE Plastics: produces military hardware and nuclear power equipment.
* GE Transportation Systems: runs diesel and electric trains.
==================================================
WESTINGHOUSE / CBS INC.
Westinghouse Electric Company, part of the Nuclear Utilities Business Group of British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL)
whos #1 on the Board of Directors? None other than:
Frank Carlucci (of the Carlyle Group)
Television Holdings:
* CBS: includes 14 stations and over 200 affiliates in the US.
* CBS Network News: 60 minutes, 48 hours, CBS Evening News with Dan Rather, CBS Morning News, Up to the Minute.
* Country Music Television, The Nashville Network, 2 regional sports networks.
* Group W Satellite Communications.
Other Holdings:
* Westinghouse Electric Company: provides services to the nuclear power industry.
* Westinghouse Government Environmental Services Company: disposes of nuclear and hazardous wastes. Also operates 4 government-owned nuclear power plants in the US.
* Energy Systems: provides nuclear power plant design and maintenance.
================================================================
VIACOM INTERNATIONAL INC.
Television Holdings:
* Paramount Television, Spelling Television, MTV, VH-1, Showtime, The Movie Channel, UPN (joint owner), Nickelodeon, Comedy Central, Sundance Channel (joint owner), Flix.
* 20 major market US stations.
Media Holdings:
* Paramount Pictures, Paramount Home Video, Blockbuster Video, Famous Players Theatres, Paramount Parks.
* Simon & Schuster Publishing.
=============================================
DISNEY / ABC / CAP (donated 640,000 to GW's 2000 campaign)
Television Holdings:
* ABC: includes 10 stations, 24% of US households.
* ABC Network News: Prime Time Live, Nightline, 20/20, Good Morning America.
* ESPN, Lifetime Television (50%), as well as minority holdings in A&E, History Channel and E!
* Disney Channel/Disney Television, Touchtone Television.
Media Holdings:
* Miramax, Touchtone Pictures.
* Magazines: Jane, Los Angeles Magazine, W, Discover.
* 3 music labels, 11 major local newspapers.
* Hyperion book publishers.
* Infoseek Internet search engine (43%).
Other Holdings:
* Sid R. Bass (major shares) crude oil and gas.
* All Disney Theme Parks, Walt Disney Cruise Lines.
======================================================
TIME-WARNER TBS - AOL (donated 1.6 million to GW's 2000 campaign)
America Online (AOL) acquired Time Warner–the largest merger in corporate history.
Television Holdings:
* CNN, HBO, Cinemax, TBS Superstation, Turner Network Television, Turner Classic Movies, Warner Brothers Television, Cartoon Network, Sega Channel, TNT, Comedy Central (50%), E! (49%), Court TV (50%).
* Largest owner of cable systems in the US with an estimated 13 million subscribers.
Media Holdings:
* HBO Independent Productions, Warner Home Video, New Line Cinema, Castle Rock, Looney Tunes, Hanna-Barbera.
* Music: Atlantic, Elektra, Rhino, Sire, Warner Bros. Records, EMI, WEA, Sub Pop (distribution) = the world’s largest music company.
* 33 magazines including Time, Sports Illustrated, People, In Style, Fortune, Book of the Month Club, Entertainment Weekly, Life, DC Comics (50%), and MAD Magazine.
Other Holdings:
* Sports: The Atlanta Braves, The Atlanta Hawks, World Championship Wrestling.
=======================================================
NEWS CORPORATION LTD. / FOX NETWORKS (Rupert Murdoch) (donations see bottom note)
Television Holdings:
* Fox Television: includes 22 stations, 50% of US households.
* Fox International: extensive worldwide cable and satellite networks include British Sky Broadcasting (40%); VOX, Germany (49.9%); Canal Fox, Latin America; FOXTEL, Australia (50%); STAR TV, Asia; IskyB, India; Bahasa Programming Ltd., Indonesia (50%); and News Broadcasting, Japan (80%).
* The Golf Channel (33%).
MEDIA HOLDINGS:
* Twentieth Century Fox, Fox Searchlight.
* 132 newspapers (113 in Australia alone) including the New York Post, the London Times and The Australian.
* 25 magazines including TV Guide and The Weekly Standard.
* HarperCollins books.
OTHER HOLDINGS:
* Sports: LA Dodgers, LA Kings, LA Lakers, National Rugby League.
* Ansett Australia airlines, Ansett New Zealand airlines.
* Rupert Murdoch: Board of Directors, Philip Morris (USA).
*(Phillip Morris donated 2.9 million to George W Bush in 2000)*
about Media Matters....
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7150
That is how most of the media is showing it....
McCain speaks at every rally also. Same with Obama and Biden. Biden speaks first, then Obama. That is the way they have done it for years. The VP candidate speaks first, then the Pres. candidate when they are at the same venue.
No wonder they don't let her loose with the media.
coached, rehearsed, restrictive and repetitive responses. It's like one of five answers fits all or is interchangeable between questions. How many times did she call him "Charlie?" So watch. Instead of "my friends," she's a first-namer. Did I hear the word nookuler, or am I just imagining that? Shallow. No suprise there.
try not to believe everything the media tells you to....
x
because of lopsided media
all these Obama supporters just sweep that under a rug. They continue to point fingers and blame others and yet they will take no responsibility at all for what they did. They will not give McCain credit for his warning. They will not admit that they ignored that warning. I'm tired of the media having their nose up Obama's ars. They call McCain a coward for wanting to postpone the debate when it was McCain who was pushing for the debate before until this and now he wants to be in Washington to help find a solution. He wants to put the country first instead of his own personal campaign. To me...this says a lot about McCain and yet the dems and the media can do nothing but downgrade. How in the world are we to have a fair election when the media is so obviously one-sided?
At this point, I really don't know that any candidate can get us out of this mess. I guess I've just lost hope all around. As for all those so-called plans Barry Obama promised.....he can't do a one of them....not that they would have worked in the first place but now it is impossible for him to even try. So now what, Barry? What else are you going to promise you will do that you can't deliver on?
when she says she is picking McCain and the media is so far up Uhhhbama's butt that if they opened their mouth, you could see the top of his head.
As for McCain disrespecting woman....that makes no sense. He picks a woman as his VP and that is disrespectful to women? McCain pays his women employees more than Uhhhbama does AND employs more women than Uhhhbama.
media brainwashing
You want to buy a car that costs $45,000 and gets 11 miles to the gallon? You want a $100,000 loan for your kid's college. You want to buy a house that costs $350,000. Because if they don't pass this bill, all of these things will be cheaper and more affordable. And if they pass this bill they will keep house prices the same, the 401Ks the same, gas prices the same, food prices the same, college expenses the same, car prices the same..... Are you getting paid the same or less?
You have to look at who owns the media. sm
All the media is basically owned by 3 huge corporations. They have monopolized everything. The owners are part of the establishment (rich elites). Naturally, they want candidates who will fulfill their agendas so the establishment candidates get all the face time on TV. They marginalize and ignore the rest.
I don't believe everything the media tells me to... Media causes trouble
I think half the time it is the broadcasting of such statements that prompt people to react in such a way. It's almost like they feel it is expected, so they then act out.
Plus the whole group mentality is freaky. Look at what people do sometimes after big sports events (like college games) ... even the winners. Like a pack of dogs!
or maybe it's just media bias, you think?? nm
nm
I don't think you need to depend on the media
If you lose your job (or don't have any work), if your neighbors lose their jobs; if you can't afford groceries much less health care and if you can't make your house or car note you can be pretty well certain that he is failing. On the other hand if you start seeing all those things going the other way, you can safely conclude that he is succeeding. At some point here common sense has to take over.
Media Malpractice...
Video Exclusive: A Revealing Morning With Sarah Palinby John Ziegler
If someone told me five months ago that in early January I would pay over $1,400 for an incredibly inconvenient plane ticket and $120 for a 3 a.m. cab fare to get from sunny Los Angeles to Wasilla, Alaska, I would have told them there was a better chance the Dow Jones would be below 9,000 and a gallon of gas less than two dollars.
If they would have told me I’d be glad to have made the journey (even with a seven-hour, weather-aided stop in Seattle), I would have told them Sarah Palin had a better chance to be John McCain’s running-mate. Of course, as we all now know this turned out to be true. And even though I still have the flu I got just before the trip, I’m thrilled to have experienced minus-eleven degrees in Alaska.
Obviously, I was there to interview Governor Palin for my forthcoming documentary about the media coverage of election 2008. My understanding is that the only reason Governor Palin did this interview (while rejecting hundreds of other requests) is because of her sincere devotion to setting the record straight on what really happened during the campaign and to determine why the news coverage was as dangerously slanted as it so clearly was.
Largely because of absurd claims by Democrats that she was violating ethics rules by answering campaign questions on state grounds (one of several ways in which the Democrats in Alaska, who used to love her, are now fully invested in the “take Sarah Palin down” industry), we did the interview at the Palin home. At 9 a.m., without a security guard or handler in sight, Bristol Palin, eight days removed from giving birth, politely answered the door and Governor Palin, not yet fully put together, rushed out to tell myself and my crew to make ourselves at home.
One of the things you quickly learn when you visit the Palins is that the legend created around who they are and how they live is no myth. It appears to be absolutely real and everything about them seems 100% sincere. From the stuffed hunting trophies on the wall, to Track’s military photo by the TV set, to Piper’s crayon school projects on the refrigerator door - everything is exactly as you imagined.
What’s particularly valuable about my perspective is that I am not Charlie Gibson, Matt Lauer or Greta Van Susteren (who I understand now gets her mail delivered to the Palin home) — the conductors of the three most prominent interviews done in this Wasilla home on a frozen lake at the end of a drive with the sign “Palins” posted on a tree. I am virtually unknown nationally and there was absolutely no reason for anything to be done differently as “show” for us. We saw the genuine Sarah Palin and it is patently obvious this is the only one who exists.
She is the real deal.
As a former TV sportscaster and radio talk show host I’ve interviewed a lot big-time “celebrities,” and can honestly say that even though you could argue Sarah Palin was the most prominent, she is also by far the nicest, most sincere and seemingly honest subject I’ve ever questioned.
For context, I admit to being a Sarah Palin fan even before she was named John McCain’s VP candidate. I attended her convention speech and consider it by far to be the finest I have ever personally witnessed. But being a world-class cynic I also wondered if maybe there was at least some truth to the negative media narrative created about her. Maybe she really wasn’t that smart, maybe she was indeed a “diva” or a “wack job.” Well, if any of those smears are remotely true, Palin should move to LA permanently because she’s a far better actor (not to mention better looking) than the vast majority of actresses in Hollywood.
Our interview started early and ended late (ask Barbara Walters how often that happens at this level). The Governor fully answered every question, even though some of them brought up media episodes which clearly upset her. When the subject turned to her kids being targeted, she was even a little emotional. She then posed for pictures and signed autographs for the entire crew, and casually discussed all sorts of topics, including how the local newspaper is absurdly still trailing the “story” that her youngest son is not really hers (this, while Todd walked around with Trig on his back and Bristol cared for Trip, her newborn, in a nearby bedroom; even Trig conspiracy theorist Andrew Sullivan would have had a hard time not seeing the insanity in his own delusion).
The madness of the local paper’s efforts to prove Trig is really not Sarah’s baby is not all we learned in post interview conversations. Conservatives will be thrilled to know she immediately “got” and seemed to fully appreciate my joke that Pete Wilson (and not Arnold Schwarzenegger) would go down as the last Republican Governor in the history of California. If that wasn’t enough, when she looked at the back cover of my first film (“Blocking the Path to 9/11” www.blockingthepath.com) and saw the photo of one of the film’s targets, Keith Olbermann, she literally let out a shriek and, pointing to his photograph, declared, “THAT guy is EVIL!”
Beyond the great interview for the film (from which there is still plenty of tremendous stuff yet to come), the most important part of my visit to the Palin home was learning there’s a big difference between thinking something is true and knowing for sure it is. I now know Sarah Palin is exactly who I thought she was.
I also know, with moral certitude, that the media assassination of her, her character and family, was one of the greatest public injustices of our time and that I’m totally justified in devoting my life to correcting the historical record in my forthcoming film, “Media Malpractice… How Obama Got Elected and Palin Was Smeared.”
ALERT THE MEDIA!!!!
There have been reports that the US is harboring a fugative who goes by the name of Just the big bad. This fugative is considered to be an athiest liberal who does not agree with supporting the terroist nation of Israel, and most recently was discovered to smoke cigarettes. If you see this person, please use extreme caution. She is known to carry a sharp pen and has employed tactics (otherwise known as logic and facts) that confuse republicans.
Fox should be like the mainstream media....ya know.....just turn your head when Obama does something and only report on the positive stuff. Praise the people he appoints even though some of lobbyists that he said wouldn't have a place in Washington if he were president and by all means.....appoint a man who didn't pay taxes to the IRS because THAT is super smart!
Fox may lean conservative but mainstream media leans way liberal and they don't report the news fairly at all. MSNBC is about as one-sided as they come. So I find it so hypocritical when you libs complain about Fox.
I can cite three sources right away that state that statistically this move is supported more than not by the Jews as well as major U.S. Jewish organizations.
Oh please:) The only thing the MSM media passes on...
...and has for six years is the blatant incompetence and fascist strongarm tactics of this admin. and its Hoover/Hitler protege Rove. He has pundits and talking heads and newspeople all over America in a suffocating death grip - they don't dare make a peep about anything but the NeoCon talking points handed out by Karl each day.
The reason you're hearing so much about DeLay in a bad light right now is because the WH doesn't much like him by all accounts, so it's open season on the lap dog, so long as the newscasters don't step off the white line and start insulting the WH itself.
Left-leaning media? You mean
has given him a free pass on...uh, everything? LOL...that is soooooooooooooo funny!!
Corporations control the media.sm
Wonder who controls the corporations? I do not watch mainstream television news because it is censored and compromised, so I could not tell if you if they are left-leaning or not. Republican/Democrat same thing to me - divide and conquer.
The media are supposed to be acting as sm
civil and political watchdogs, not government censors and apologists.
I don't think this guy qualifies as mainstream media...sm
I can see his point even though he's going out on a limb to say we are 'protecting' pro-Hezbollah protestors (so as to suggest we are protecting them only).
However, our soldiers are securing Baghdad and working hard at it. The fact that they have to even secure a rally for the very same people who wouldn't spit on them if they were on fire was more of the point I took from it.
marks the location of current message within thread
