Anti-Hillary Media Bias Proven!
by Fleaflicker, Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:37:45 AM EDT
Cross posted atNo Quarter
Something unusual has occurred during the past few days. An actual journalist has been questioning what has become the conventional wisdom concerning Hillary's campaign. Finally we have a respected person bringing in other respected people to discuss the issue of this Democratic nomination process without the constant influx of lies that the Obamedia has perpetuated.
This rational discussion began March 31st on Lou Dobbs Tonight. A segment of the show was dedicated to the negative media bias against Hillary. [The VIDEOS are BELOW.] Perhaps most significant was the fact that Dobbs actually presented hard evidence that proved that the media was biased in favor of Obama.
Those voices in favor of Senator Obama say Senator Clinton should end her campaign for quote "the good of the party." And that a long campaign would quote "tear the party apart and ensure a Republican victory in November", but when it comes to the largest audiences the three nightly broadcast newscasts, the bias is seemingly most pronounced. The nonpartisan Center for Media and Public Affairs has found that since last December, 83 percent of the reporting on Senator Obama was positive. Only 53 percent of the reporting on Senator Clinton was positive.
30% is a significant difference!
It seems clear that this pro-Obama media bias (Obamedia) is an intentional strategy concocted by the Obama campaign and the Obama media supporters.
Howard Kurtz, the Host of CNN'S RELIABLE SOURCES explains the strategy best. By keeping these all these calls for Hillary to drop out of the race in the news, it makes it impossible to use her best weapon in the arsenal: discussing the issues and presenting her solutions for America. If all people are talking about is how Hillary getting out now would be for the good of the party, or if she stays in and prolongs this nomination process it will tear the party apart and ensure a Republican victory in November then people won't even listen to Hillary's great progressive solutions to move our country forward. Because the solutions won't be covered. And that is exactly what has been happening.
I think that should be up to the voters to decide and I think that by making this topic (A) in the race, it means that her message can't get through on the economy or... Well, some of the stories have made that clear apparently, for example, calling on her to bow out. But look at my newspaper, "The Washington Post", on Saturday front page headline, Clinton resist calls to drop out; Sunday front page headline, Clinton vows to stay in the race until convention, although that was an interview initiated by the senator saying that she is not getting out, but we won't let her talk about anything else.
Get that? She won't be able to talk about anything else. Her plan to fix the economy... means nothing. "She should do what is right for the party." Her plan to provide for everyone to have health insurance... "but she can't get enough delegates for the nomination". Hillary up by double digits in PA, WV, KY and IN... "she is giving this election to McCain."
See how easy this strategy works?
Lanny Davis had the courage to say what many of us have been thinking and writing about not so quietly for so long: This dreadful obvious double standard.
The second point, very quickly, Lou, is the double standard. We had this tremendous media frenzy, because I believe she made an honest mistake where news reporters at the time described and this is from the "Charleston Gazette" at the time in Bosnia that there were snipers protecting the first lady in a combat zone. She made an honest mistake when she said she was fired upon and we had two days or three days of media frenzy.
Now in the last three days we had Barack Obama on the front page of "The Post" yesterday where he misrepresented his father coming over to America through the use of Kennedy money. We have him taking credit for an immigration bill which he actually according to Senator Dodd had very little to do with. We have him saying that he didn't know that Rezko was involved in wrongdoing...
So you all see how this double standard works now, Right? It is a very simple strategy.
First of all smear Hillary as a racist and a divisive figure who is only interested in herself and doesn't care about the party. Gloss over the fact that Obama has a 20 year intimate relationship with a racist and a bigot. Kill that "typical white person" story. Next, make the case that she is a liar and reinforce that Republican meme by finding a single mistake she made and blowing it up as if it was an international incident. Cover up the fact that Obama lied about Selma and about his father's relationship to JFK. Ignore the fact that Hillary has actually been all over the world and has met with countless foreign leaders while Obama couldn't even find the time to convene an important meeting concerning NATO and Afghanistan. Facts hardly matter. Then, harp on the facts everyone already knows. She cannot win enough pledged delegates to win the nomination outright. But ignore the fact that Obama can't either. And finally make her appear evil to actually want the entire country to decide who the nominee of our party is rather than do what traitors like Bill thirty pieces of silver Richardson, Pat democracy only when it makes me look important Leahy and Chris will you please convince the people of Connecticut to love me again.. here Dodd suggest.
It is a very undemocratic strategy to be certain. And in fact it is reminiscent of some of the most heinous Republican smear campaigns ever enacted. This makes Bush's McCain sired a black baby campaign look like child's play. People like Robert Gibbs and David Axelrod should be proud to have taken this Democratic party into the realm of fascism, party bosses, henchmen and thugs that this Chicago style Obama campaign prides itself on. They will certainly go down in the history books as the most vile campaign managed in recent history.
But here... have a look for yourself what was said on Dobbs show Sunday night.
Pretty cool eh? Well, maybe not if someone is an Obama supporter.
The best thing to all of this is that Dobbs didn't just let the story go. It wasn't a token gesture of actual journalism. No, Dobbs brought back what I consider to be a forgotten time, when journalists actually reported the news and did so in a manner that merely reported the cold hard facts accurately. Dobbs is not a talking head. He is someone that Murrow would be proud of. And to those who don't know who I am referring to, it doesn't surprise me in the least.
For the second night of examining the Obamedia anti-Hillary bias Dobbs decided to level the playing field. He started out stating the obvious point that no one else seems to be discussing.
As an Independent and I've got no view one way or the other on the Republican or the Democratic side of this thing. But what you said was she can't win the nomination. Neither can Senator Obama.
Neither can Senator Obama! It's about time someone actually said that. And it explains exactly why they want Hillary to get out of the race. Because in their eyes, Hillary is standing in the way of the Democratic party of making history. God, what a bunch of undemocratic, misogynistic, fascist hacks.
But Dobbs wasn't satisfied just to state the obvious point that no one has even been whispering, he lays the whole thing out in a manner that even Axelrod and Plouffe won't be able to explain away. Nor Saint Obama the Unifier, for saying it was ok with him if Hillary stayed in the race. So kind of his arrogant, pompous, privileged ass don't you think?
And she has the lead in super delegate votes, so why in the world is there this compulsion, this absolute insistence in the national media to talk about the fact she can't win the nomination? Neither can Senator Obama. And I have never seen in my career greater favoritism being applied in the national media broadly speaking than in this campaign in behalf of Senator Obama and against Senator Clinton.
You know something Lou? I have never seen anything like this in my lifetime either. Not in over a half century. And frankly, it seems more like fascism than democracy to me. Pure propaganda. While the current bias of the media does not violate the letter of the law because it is not Congress that is suppressing the press, we are surely witnessing a concerted assault to the spirit of the law. And it is a grave insult and injustice to all those gallant patriots that have sacrificed their lives and limbs to protect our Constitutionally guaranteed Freedom of the Press.
And what of our voice? Our votes? Yes, that guaranteed expression of our voices has been suppressed as well. But not by the Congress. It has been suppressed by none other than the Democratic National Committee. Coming soon to an oxymoron near you. Yes Howard I am from the Autocratic wing of the Democratic party Dean has determined that the unfair rules that three states (IA, NH and SC) are allowed to violate are more important than the votes of every state.
There is nothing more unfair than not, not to have those votes counted in Michigan and Florida. And if this is decided by super delegates without recognizing and counting and enfranchising those voters in Michigan and Florida, that's when we'll hear something unfair is it not?
Well a division of the delegates is not a vote. And a vote is required to be Democratic with both a small "d" and a large "D" in both in Michigan and in Florida. Can we agree on that, gentlemen?
That bears repeating: A division of the delegates is not a vote. I don't know how anyone could have spoken this clearer.
In closing I leave you with the Mr. Dobbs himself. Because these printed words cannot possibly describe the absolute clarity and relevance of this wonderful American's voice. Our country needs a lot more journalists like Lou Dobbs.
He is beginning to cause me to reexamine my objection to human cloning.