A Defeat Of Obama Would Also Mean A Defeat For The Liberal Media
By Dave Gibson (10/31/08)
For the last several months, John McCain has been running against two major opponents. While it is true that Barack Obama has been outspending McCain with his enormous war chest as the nominee for the Democratic Party, the mainstream press have been doing most of the hard work for the man Oprah Winfrey refers to as “The One.” Whether it is attacking McCain or covering-up Obama’s terrorist connections, network anchors and editorial boards are always happy to put journalism aside in favor of propaganda.
A few days ago, Editor and Publisher announced that Obama now leads McCain in newspaper endorsements with 170 to 69. That is an incredibly lopsided margin of nearly 3-1, and represents the overwhelming number of liberal editorial boards across the country.
Of course, amongst liberal newspapers, the New York Times has led the smear campaign against John McCain.
On Feb. 21, 2008, Jim Rutenberg, Marilyn W. Thompson, David D. Kirkpatrick and Stephen Labaton, reporting for the New York Times, wrote: "A female lobbyist had been turning up with him at fundraisers, in his offices and aboard a client’s corporate jet. Convinced the relationship had become romantic, some of his top advisers intervened to protect the candidate from himself - instructing staff members to block the woman’s access, privately warning her away and repeatedly confronting him, several people involved in the campaign said on the condition of anonymity.“
A little over two weeks later, the paper followed-up on that aforementioned bit of tabloid journalism with an article on McCain’s cancer scars.
The article by Lawrence Altman appeared in the New York Times on March 9, 2008, and begins:
“Along with his signature bright white hair, the most striking aspects of Senator John McCain’s physical appearance are his puffy left cheek and the scar that runs down the back of his neck.”
“The marks are cosmetic reminders of the melanoma surgery he underwent in August 2000. Mr. McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, sometimes tells audiences that he has “more scars than Frankenstein.”
The article featured two pictures of John McCain, one of which highlights the long scar on McCain’s face, while the other was a 2002 photo which showed McCain with a heavily bandaged nose shortly after surgery to remove skin cancer.
As for whether or not the members of the press who ply their trade on television have given McCain a fair shake…Perhaps, the perfect summation to that question could be found on MSNBC on the night of February 13, 2008. Obama had just won the D.C., Maryland, and Virginia primaries, the coverage then cut to him giving a speech to a cheering crowd. Once Obama finished, the camera then found a grinning Chris Matthews who said: "It's part of reporting this case, this election, the feeling most people get when they hear Barack Obama's speech. My, I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don't have that too often."
Obviously, Matthews could no longer contain his enthusiasm for Barack Obama. In my opinion, It was in fact, the single most embarrassing moment in television journalism.
Not to be outdone, when MSNBC’s anchor Keith Olbermann is not indulging in his nightly obsession with Bill O’Reilly, he is attacking the McCain/Palin ticket. Olbermann frequently skewers the Republican nominees during the new “Campaign Comment” segments during his show.
On September 8, 2008, Olbermann conducted an interview with Sen. Obama. What follows are a few of the ‘hard-hitting’ questions asked by the MSNBC host:
1)“To something from your own convention, maybe the most compelling moment of your acceptance speech in Denver was that one strongly voiced word, "enough." A lot of people who have felt angry about what has been done to this country in the last seven or eight years have that same sense of urgency and simplicity to it.
Have you thought of using on the campaign trail and in your speaking engagements, more exclamation points? Have you thought of getting angrier?”
2)“You pointed out last week how little time at their convention Republicans spent talking about the economy. I think the time might have been zero, zero, zero. I'm not sure. We weren't running a clock. But if the election does, in fact, hinge on the economy, on how Americans are doing, has there been thought given to breaking this down to its simplest element, in much the way one of the Republican icons, Mr. Reagan did during the 1980 campaign, and ask the voters if today, are you better off now than you were eight years ago?”
And my personal favorite:
3)“In your opinion, is Governor Palin experienced enough and qualified enough to become president of the United States in the relatively short-term future?”
Why not ask that same question of Obama? He and Gov. Palin have about the same number of years spent in elected office, and of the two, Obama is the only one who is actually running for President!
In early September, CNN anchor Campbell Brown went on a very personal attack against Republican Vice-Presidential candidate and Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. McCain campaign spokesman Tucker Bounds was giving Brown an interview, when she decided to place the focus of the conversation on the Governor’s 17-year old daughter Bristol, who is pregnant.
Brown said: “Tucker, though, this obviously putting this young woman, Bristol Palin smack in the media spotlight at what’s already got to be a very challenging time in her life. I mean, how do you respond to people who wonder why her mother would have subjected her to this scrutiny by accepting this high-profile position?”
Brown went on to say: “I recognize that in an ideal world, it would be private. You know, this is a presidential campaign. Nothing is private. The world is watching and if we, you know, as much as everyone might want to give this young woman her privacy, you know that’s not going to happen. And so you do risk putting her through an incredibly difficult process by accepting this job if you’re her mother. You can’t deny that, right?”
Well, this is obviously not an ideal world. Nor is it any longer a world in which the press gives legitimate, unbiased coverage to any and all candidates.
A recent Pew Research Center study examined 857 stories from 43 news outlets, concerning both Obama and McCain. They found that fewer than two out of ten stories showed McCain in a positive light, while fewer than one third of the stories showed Obama in a negative light. The study concluded what most of us already knew…The coverage the two candidates receive is completely opposite of one another.
This Presidential campaign has set a dangerous precedent in which the press blatantly allows their own political beliefs to influence the way they cover the candidates. What that means is that tough questions are only being asked of one side, and while flaws in one particular camp are highlighted, they are simply ignored when occurring in the other.
Is this the way that all future campaigns will be covered? If so, it is not the candidate with the “R” behind his name who stands to lose the most from such biased reporting, but the public.
It is obvious that if John McCain can manage to pull-off a victory next Tuesday, that it will be a blow felt just as sharply by the media as it will be by the Obama campaign.
(Printer friendly version) Email: Dave Gibson
