What is Michael Hirsh drinking?

Eric Boehlert:

Newsweek blames the bloggers

Writes Michael Hirsh:

For the last few days, the blogosphere has been ablaze with speculation about the kind of damage Hillary Clinton could do to the Obama presidency if she becomes secretary of state.

Of course, for the last few days there's been comparatively little speculation within the blogosphere about what kind of "damage" Hillary Clinton could to the Obama presidency. It's been the mainstream media that's played up the "damage" angle and been childishly obsessed with pushing the "soap opera" angle of the story.

For the most part, lib bloggers have been treating the story seriously, like adults. We're still waiting for the Beltway pundits to catch up.

We've been writing much more about Lieberman if he actually bothered to read more than one blog. And if Hirsh wants to talk about damage being done, how about he take a good hard look at what the traditional media has done to our country?

As noted, we have no particular view on Hillary Clinton as Sec of State. But we do have a reaction to the pundit corps’ renewed Clinton/Gore-loathing: Things have reached the point where these sad life-forms are “objectively anti-American.” The nation is in a set of major messes; a new president is trying to pick the people he thinks will serve him best in a difficult time. But so what? Even in such a perilous time, the loonier members of the Dowd-Matthews axis can’t quit their Clinton-loathing. Nothing will keep them from this vast pleasure, the one pleasure of their sad lives.

It’s almost like they loathe the country itself. In the past, they’ve done astounding harm to that country through their aggressive Clinton/Gore-trashing -- especially when they worked so hard to put George Bush where he is. But even now, they refuse to abandon their childish games. Nothing will ever make them stop. They care about little else.

They did their very best to elect George Bush in 2000 and it took a stolen election to get it done. But then again, this is the traditional media we're talking about.

What a nice headline from FOX.

I wonder if they got a memo from Newt Gingrich?

GINGRICH: Look, I think there is a gay and secular fascism in this country that wants to impose its will on the rest of us, is prepared to use violence, to use harassment. I think it is prepared to use the government if it can get control of it. I think that it is a very dangerous threat to anybody who believes in traditional religion. And I think if you believe in historic Christianity, you have to confront the fact.

Sheppard Smith has been full of surprises lately. First he smacks down wingnut extraordinaire Joe the Plumber and then he smacks down Nick DiPaolo.

DiPaolo:...the MSM being so in the tank for Obama...

Smith: Oh, please. That's preposterous. (Why?)
The MSM reflected what was happening in this nation. It did not drive it. The blogs didn't drive this movement, the media didn't drive this movement. Barack Obama did not lose this election. It was his to lose. It was not John McCain's to win. The Republicans had no shot unless the Democrats gave it to them and they didn't and to blame the media is a cop out and ridiculous....

DiPaolo The MSM has been liberal since its inception. It's years and years of pounding...

Smith: How did George Bush win twice?

DiPaolo: I don't know. Karl Rove is a genius.

We can debate some of the merits of Smith's argument, but his central point about media bias in this election is correct. And Karl Rove embodies everything that is wrong with American politics.

Thanks for the memories, but you were all completely "Irrelevant" during the historic victory that Barack Obama achieved during 2008 Presidential election. All your smears failed to change the course of history.

"Irrelevant"

"Irrelevant"

"Irrelevant"

"Irrelevant"

"Irrelevant"

"Irrelevant"

"Irrelevant"

"Irrelevant"

(The list keeps growing. More below the fold.)

Continue reading »

CNN's The Situation Room released some great new battleground state poll results which included NV, VA, OH, NC and WV. No mention of FL, CO or PA. It's great that Obama has a 4 pt. lead in NC at this time, but this election is not going to turn on NC or WV.
OH, FL, VA, PA are the big ones...What is CNN doing? Here's some of the latest battle ground polling.

And here....

The polls are looking pretty good right now, but until the votes are counted I'm fighting all the way.

Joe Sudbay discusses the flawed new AP poll.

McCain actually uses Joe in an ad...Another typical right wing trick late in the game. Joe would actually benefit mightily if Obama wins, but that doesn't matter to "Joe."

The MSM is finally doing a little research on another mistake by Rick Davis. Bloomberg writes a very detailed article and says:

Analysts said Wurzelbacher's circumstances have muddled McCain's effort to profit politically from the tax issue, making it unlikely ``Joe the plumber'' will have any more long-term benefit for his campaign than did the selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate.

snip

Before living in Ohio, Wurzelbacher was a resident of Mesa, Arizona, in McCain's home state, according to property records.

McCain gave Wurzelbacher an apology yesterday for throwing him into the spotlight.

Since the media does read our blogs they are slowly reporting that Joe ain't all that he was cracked up to be by McCain. They do have the resources to dig very deep. And he doesn't even have a Plumber's license.

Joe the Plumber's story sprang a few leaks Thursday. Turns out that the man who was held up by John McCain as the typical, hard-working American taxpayer isn't really a licensed plumber. And court documents show he owes nearly $1,200 in back taxes.

"Joe," whose name is Samuel J. Wurzelbacher, was cited repeatedly in Wednesday night's final presidential debate by McCain for questioning Barack Obama's tax policy.

Continue reading »

First there was Ghidorah, the Three-Headed Monster, and now I bring you CNBC's The Decagon! The Ten headed behemoth. Watch out America! Pretty soon Pundit Zombies will rise....

Write your own Caption.

FO writes to the C&L inbox after watching Tom on Meet the Press Sunday: "What is a "senior Republican" doing calling Brokaw for campaign advice?"

MR. BROKAW: Chuck, a very senior Republican was startled the other day when he called me and said, ‘What in the world is going on in Florida? Why are we in trouble there?’

He is moderating Tuesday's Presidential Debate so I think it's called "working the refs." I'd kind of like to know who that Republican is.

   One of the jobs I do as a punditry critic is to check out the talking heads on TV after a major speech, debate, primary or whatever the hot event is that the networks all are covering. I sometimes like that more than the actual event. Anyway, what I noticed immediately after the debate was that Brit Hume was very disappointed there were no "sound bytes" to cover. He seemed a little bored. No glaring gaffes by McCain or Obama that they could then play endless loops about and reduce a very important event down to its lowest common denominator.

His all-star panel all felt the same. Fred Barnes, Nina Easton, Bill Kristol and Juan Williams all agreed. I saw the same on the other networks as well. As I checked around that sentiment seemed to carry over in the print world.

Obama will benefit from having the better sound bite of the night. Cable-news producers didn't have many to choose from for the endless analysis of the debate, but one clip they'll show will certainly be Obama's criticism of McCain on Iraq. 

Now on substance, John Dickerson is correct. (one example) Obama was able to highlight a strength of his during the debate, but it really wasn't the kind of "sound byte' cable was looking for. They wanted a major league flub, or even better---a heated exchange between the two that had them glaring at each other and having to be separated by Jim Lehrer.

Here's MoDo:  Sound, but No Fury

Have they been watching Obama all these many months? He doesn't operate like that. Would I love to see him attack more forcefully?  Yes I would, but I won't be surprised if he never does... 

Can't they just cover the event as it happens and report on it? 

Gawker slaps Drudge about the phony Oprah story.   Like so many aspects of Sarah Palin's history, the Oprah story went contrary to logic and common sense.  

As they say, it's too late though.   The media have spoken.   Truth be damned.

(h/t Country Fair)

Just because Carl Cameron of FOX repeats John McCain talking points does not make them true.

Here's the DNC response:

"American flags were proudly waved by the 75,000 people who joined Barack Obama at the Democratic Convention. John McCain should applaud that, but instead his supporters wrongfully took leftover bundles of our flags from the stadium to play a cheap political stunt calling into question our patriotism. On the same day he agrees to join Barack Obama at Ground Zero on September 11, John McCain attacks the patriotism of Obama supporters who so proudly waved the American flag at our historic event in Denver just days ago."
---DNC spokeswoman Karen Finney.

I'm really shocked they didn't find lapel pins too....

Every time I turn on the TV and watch CNN and FOX (my hotel doesn't get MSNBC) every Republican operative controls the dialog and direction of the panel discussion and it's disgusting. Just one example---Hillary Clinton gave a brilliant speech last night, but every Amy Holmes-type talking head throws as much cold water on the speech as he or she can. The result is that the Dem talkers spend the rest of the time disputing the outrageous claims made and thus the GOP controls the entire framing and the entire segment. It's shameful that the networks are allowing this to happen. I saw Jeffrey Toobin tell Amy that she was out of her mind with some of her comments and the discussion continues to that end. Soledad O'Brien comes back and says "well, that was a lively discussion." Oh, no it was not. It's a calculated ratf&@k. This is going on all day and all night.

Why is the Democratic Convention being ruined by these creeps? And why do all the networks allow it to happen? Why do we need them on in force to counter what is supposed to be our event?

I'm in Denver and it's a completely different atmosphere. Party unison abounds, but you'd never know it from watching TV. Karl Rove acts like the biggest troll known to man---making sure to point out every little detail he dislikes. Well, his mission is to get McCain in the White House. But he's the expert that Chris Wallace goes to for his "unbiased" take.

Will the Democratic talkers be allowed to do the same to the Republican Convention? I think not. It will be viewed as being an incredible event.

Sorry for the light blogging the last few days, but I've been getting ready to go to the land of Colorado. It will be pretty crazy in Denver, but it should be very, very interesting.  I can't wait to meet so many of my on-line friends and party activists for the first time. I'll try to grab a few interviews and represent the Progressive movement as best as I can.

You know traveling  isn't my favorite thing to do, but this is a historic event....

Obama's text message campaign was a great move and immensely successful. Even FOX was camped out at  Biden's house giving him the Anna Nicole Smith treatment.

Duncan is right:

As I've written before, Republicans will inevitably throw some sort of hissy fit over something real or imagined that happens at the Democratic convention in order to try to prevent any kind of convention bounce for Obama. Be prepared.

Drudge will rule the world and Mark Halperin will be in awe of his incredible influence. Then...when you see most pundits on TV---they will never be talking to you or me, but to each other.

Yes, John Edwards had an affair that was handled privately and the Edwards story is big news. It will get the Anna Nicole Smith/Brett Favre treatment for a while now. Elizabeth Edwards responds here.

From the email inbox:

David Gregory just said young people were inspired by him and are let down...and questioned whether it will have "broader implications for the party." during the election. This week, Ron Suskind's book revealed the Bush team knew Iraq didn't have WMD, forged letters, paid hush money, and lied us into war. (Chirp, chirp...) Any broader implications for the Republican party there? How about instead of us buying into all the clamoring to analyze Edwards betrayal (wait, no, BETRAYAL!) we analyze the absurdity of a media culture where THIS is what passes for holding politicians accountable.

Broader implication for the party. OK, let's talk party.

McClellan said that FOX News got talking points from the White House

Bush authorized rendition.

Bush authorized torture. Yes, that means waterboarding.

Bush authorized a war based on lies resulting in millions of innocent Iraqi and Afghani civilian deaths as well as an ethnic cleansing.

Thousands of our troops have been killed or seriously injured.

The US dollar is in the tank.

The housing/mortgage crisis has almost caused a depression.

How about the trampling of our Constitution with warrantless wiretapping?

Laptops are being confiscated at airports and the border.

Under Bush, oil companies are raking in record profits while Americans suffer.

The US attorney scandal.

A health care epidemic.

Monica Goodling

A standing ovation in Congress for David Vitter's return.

Military TV Analysts/Generals scandal.

Larry Craig's bathroom adventure.

And many, many more.

Would any of this have "broader implications" to the Republican party during the election if the media did its job?

Newt Gingrich STILL gets on TV every other day and everyone KNOWS he had affairs, even dumping his wife right after cancer surgery. And yet all these MSM types are wringing their hands about what this means to the Democratic Party. Ridiculous. Throw a stone in DC and try not to hit some one with a little something on the side, and that includes those in the press corps.

And they have the nerve to talk about betrayal of Edwards to the media and his wife -- in that order. Why aren't they more outraged about the betrayal of the White House to get us into a war?

What screwed up priorities.