It is no surprise that Pakistanis have a low opinion of the United States. The American military kills innocent civilians with its anti-terror missiles inside Pakistan’s territory, while President Bush agrees a major nuclear trade treaty with India, Pakistan’s historic enemy. “This agreement sends a signal to the world,” said the President. “Nations that follow [...]
The Conservative Paper
The News Without The Left’s Bias
8
Oct
First we see their selective editing of quotes from last night’s debate. Regarding John McCain’s plan for the economic crisis, they "quote" McCain as saying, "It’s my proposal. It’s not Sen. Obama’s proposal." The AP goes on to note
Obama charged that the current crisis was the "final verdict on the failed economic policies of the last eight years" that President Bush pursued and were "supported by Sen. McCain." He contended that Bush, McCain and others had favored deregulation of the financial industry, predicting that would "let markets run wild and prosperity would rain down on all of us. It didn’t happen."
But McCain’s full quote — which the AP edits above — reads as follows: "It’s my proposal. It’s not Sen. Obama’s proposal, it’s not President Bush’s proposal." Why would the AP leave this quite important nugget out of McCain’s full quote? Wait, I have an idea: Because the full quote directly contradicts Obama’s rebuttal. Next, the AP neglects "a certain bit of information" in this story:
A federal grand jury in Tennessee has indicted a man in connection with the hacking of the e-mail account of Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin. Federal officials say that 20-year-old David Kernell of Knoxville, Tenn., was indicted by a federal grand jury in Knoxville for intentionally accessing without authorization the e-mail account of Palin, Alaska’s governor. Kernell has turned himself in to authorities and is scheduled to be arraigned Wednesday before a magistrate. Kernell faces a maximum of five years in prison, a $250,000 fine and a three-year term of supervised release.
What "certain information" has been omitted by the AP? Well, just that Kernell is the son of Democratic Tennessee State Rep. Mike Kernell. Back on Sept. 18 the Democratic representative pretty much admitted that his son was in hot water; now it’s official. But if the person of interest is a politician’s relative of a "certain party," the AP doesn’t find that worthy of your knowledge — even if it involves the illegal snooping into the private communications of the opposing party’s vice-presidential candidate!
(h/t in part to the Copious Dissent blog.)
(Cross-posted at The Colossus of Rhodey.)
8
Oct
The mainstream media thought that the membership of Todd Palin, who is not a candidate for any office, in the Alaska Independence Party important enough to report in such outlets as the Los Angeles Times, MSNBC, and the New York Times, among others. So now that Barack Obama’s membership in the far left New Party has been unearthed, will they report his membership in that Socialist organization?
Proof of Obama’s membership in the New Party was discovered by the Politically Drunk On Power blog:
In June sources released information that during his campaign for the State Senate in Illinois, Barack Obama was endorsed by an organization known as the Chicago "New Party". The ‘New Party’ was a political party established by the Democratic Socialists of America (the DSA) to push forth the socialist principles of the DSA by focusing on winnable elections at a local level and spreading the Socialist movement upwards. The admittedly Socialist Organization experienced a moderate rise in numbers between 1995 and 1999. By 1999, however, the Socialist ‘New Party’ was essentially defunct after losing a supreme court challenge that ruled the organizations "fusion" reform platform as unconstitutional.After allegations surfaced in early summer over the ‘New Party’s’ endorsement of Obama, the Obama campaign along with the remnants of the New Party and Democratic Socialists of America claimed that Obama was never a member of either organization. The DSA and ‘New Party’ then systematically attempted to cover up any ties between Obama and the Socialist Organizations. However, it now appears that Barack Obama was indeed a certified and acknowledged member of the DSA’s New Party.On Tuesday, I discovered a web page that had been scrubbed from the New Party’s website. The web page which was published in October 1996, was an internet newsletter update on that years congressional races. Although the web page was deleted from the New Party’s website, the non-profit Internet Archive Organization had archived the page.
From the October 1996 Update of the DSA ‘New Party’:
"New Party members are busy knocking on doors, hammering down lawn signs, and phoning voters to support NP candidates this fall. Here are some of our key races…Illinois: Three NP-members won Democratic primaries last Spring and face off against Republican opponents on election day: Danny Davis (U.S. House), Barack Obama (State Senate) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary)."
You can find the above quote from the scubbed New Party web page at this Internet Archive Organization link. More confirmation of Obama’s membership in the New Party can be found at an article in the November 1996 Progressive Populist magazine:
New Party members and supported candidates won 16 of 23 races, including an at-large race for the Little Rock, Ark., City Council, a seat on the county board for Little Rock and the school board for Prince George’s County, Md. Chicago is sending the first New Party member to Congress, as Danny Davis, who ran as a Democrat, won an overwhelming 85% victory. New Party member Barack Obama was uncontested for a State Senate seat from Chicago.
The Democratic Socialist Party of America also reported on Obama’s New Party membership in its July/August 1996 edition:
The Chicago New Party is increasely becoming a viable political organization that can make a different in Chicago politics. It is crucial for a political organization to have a solid infrastructure and visible results in its political program. The New Party has continued to solidify this base.
First, in relation to its infrastructure, the NP’s membership has increased since January ‘95 from 225 to 440. National membership has increased from 5700 in December ‘95 to 7000. Currently the NP’s fiscal balance is $7,000 and receives an average of $450/month is sustainer donations.
Secondly, the NP’s ‘96 Political Program has been enormously successful with 3 of 4 endorsed candidates winning electoral primaries. All four candidates attended the NP membership meeting on April 11th to express their gratitude. Danny Davis, winner in the 7th Congressional District, invited NPers to join his Campaign Steering Committee. Patricia Martin, who won the race for Judge in 7th Subcircuit Court, explained that due to the NP she was able to network and get experienced advice from progressives like Davis. Barack Obama, victor in the 13th State Senate District, encouraged NPers to join in his task forces on Voter Education and Voter Registration. The lone loser was Willie Delgado, in the 3rd Illinois House District. Although Delgado received 45% of the vote, he lost by only 800 votes. Delgado commented that it was due to the NP volunteers that he carried the 32nd Ward. Delgado emphasized that he will remain a visible community activist in Humbolt Park. He will conduct four Immigration workshops and encouraged NP activists to get involved.
Kudos to Politically Drunk On Power for digging up this information about Obama’s membership in the socialist New Party. The question now is if the MSM will deem his party membership important enough to report on. They sure didn’t hesitate to report on Todd Palin’s membership in the Alaska Independence Party.
UPDATE: Yet more proof of Obama’s close involvement in the socialist New Party from NewsBusters’ Hermano who provided this link to the Chicago Democratic Socialists of American September-October 1995 New Ground 42 edition:
About 50 activists attended the Chicago New Party membership meeting in July. The purpose of the meeting was to update members on local activities and to hear appeals for NP support from four potential political candidates. The NP is being very active in organization building and politics. There are 300 members in Chicago. In order to build an organizational and financial base the NP is sponsoring house parties. Locally it has been successful both fiscally and in building a grassroots base. Nationwide it has resulted in 1000 people committed to monthly contributions. The NP’s political strategy is to support progressive candidates in elections only if they have a concrete chance to "win". This has resulted in a winning ratio of 77 of 110 elections. Candidates must be approved via a NP political committee. Once approved, candidates must sign a contract with the NP. The contract mandates that they must have a visible and active relationship with the NP.
The political entourage included Alderman Michael Chandler, William Delgado, chief of staff for State Rep Miguel del Valle, and spokespersons for State Sen. Alice Palmer, Sonya Sanchez, chief of staff for State Sen. Jesse Garcia, who is running for State Rep in Garcia’s District; and Barack Obama, chief of staff for State Sen. Alice Palmer. Obama is running for Palmer’s vacant seat.
So Obama signed a contract with the New Party? Verrrry interesting.
8
Oct
All three morning shows on Wednesday skipped a startling claim by Senator Barack Obama during the previous night’s presidential debate. During a discussion on spending, he bizarrely asserted, "Actually I’m cutting more than I’m spending so that it will be a net spending cut." However, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, that statement doesn’t even close to being true.
Their numbers show an increase in spending of $425 billion over four years of an Obama administration and only a decrease of $144 billion. And this is factoring in Obama’s tax increases as a way of "saving" money. And yet, ABC’s "Good Morning America," CBS’s "Early Show" and NBC’s "Today" all failed to report on the discrepancy or the math oddity of including more taxes as a cut. GMA reporter John Berman even filed a "fact check" segment on the debate, but ignored the Obama claim, which was picked up the AP.
Instead, Berman focused on other issues and critiqued the town hall format, rival network NBC and debate host Tom Brokaw: "And finally, with more questions coming from the moderator than the audience, it’s safe to say the biggest factual error in the debate last night, was calling it a town meeting to begin with."
A transcript of ABC’s fact check, which aired at 8:03am on October 8, follows:
CHRIS CUOMO: The economy did play a big part in last night’s presidential debate as well. The candidates made many charges against each other, on everything from taxes to health care. The question is, did they get it right? Here’s John Berman within the fact-check.
JOHN BERMAN: The boldest, most strangely-worded charge was that one on energy.
SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN: There was an energy bill on the floor of the Senate, loaded down with goodies. Billions for the oil companies. And it was sponsored by Bush and Cheney. You know who voted for it? You might never know. That one.
BERMAN [Big red "True" is stamped across screen.]: That’s true. Obama did vote for the Bush plan. Obama aides say it was because it was the largest investment of renewable energy in our history. McCain didn’t get it so quite right on Pakistan.
MCCAIN: Senator Obama likes to talk loudly. He says he likes to announce he’s going to attack Pakistan.
BERMAN [Big red "False" is stamped across screen.]: That’s false. Obama is not mustering troops. What he said is that if, if there are high-value terrorist targets in Pakistan and Pakistan won’t act, he would. Then, there was tax policy.
MCCAIN: His tax increases will increase taxes on 50 percent of small business revenue.
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA: Only a few percent of small businesses make more than $250,000 a year. So, the vast majority of small businesses would get a tax cut under my plan.
BERMAN [Big red "True" is twice stamped across screen.]: Remarkably, that’s true and true. McCain is right. According to IRS data ,about 57 percent of small business income is earned by businesses making more than $250,000. Obama would raise taxes on them. However, that income is made by a tiny present of businesses. About 95 percent of them make less than$250,000 and would actually get a tax cut. So, Obama is right, too. It should be noted that the energy plan Obama voted for, most analysts agree resulted in a net tax increase on oil companies, not a decrease, as McCain said. And finally, with more questions coming from the moderator than the audience, it’s safe to say the biggest factual error in the debate last night, was calling it a town meeting to begin with. Chris?
8
Oct
At the top of CNN.com’s most popular stories at midday Wednesday was a commentary by CNN contributor Roland Martin, a relentless unpaid Obama spin controller and host of a series of weekend specials. Martin’s commentary argued that the Bill Ayers issue is a "smokescreen" and that if Barack Obama is tarred by working with Ayers, McCain is just as tarred by working with….Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, and Robert Byrd, who was "once a member of the Ku Klux Klan, a domestic terrorist organization!"
The McCain camp, along with their right-wing media comrades, want to convince you that Obama should not have decided to serve with Ayers, who was named the Citizen of the Year in Chicago in 1987 for his education work, and who is a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
Now, if someone was seen as an acceptable figure by business, political and education figures, many of whom support both Democrats and Republicans, should Obama be faulted for sitting on a board with the guy?
So, let’s use that same logic and apply it to McCain.
Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., a Democrat from Chicago who serves as one of the national co-chairs for Obama, told me on The Tom Joyner Morning Show that if we are to use the association tag as evidence of a candidate being unfit for president, what about McCain serving and working alongside people with virulent bigoted pasts like Sens. Jesse Helms, Strom Thurmond and Robert Byrd?
Do we have evidence that these individuals committed specific acts against African-Americans during Jim Crow? No. But we do know that their hateful words, and willingness to uphold laws that were absolutely anti-American, did not represent the best of this nation.
Thurmond ran for president as a Dixiecrat in 1948 with a platform of maintaining segregation. Based on Helms’ policies, he didn’t see blacks as full Americans.
Bombing the Pentagon is horrible and indefensible. But declaring yourself a patriot while you speak such hateful and venomous words against your own countrymen, who just happen to be black, and then trying to oppress them, is just as indefensible.
So, did McCain work with them? Did he not speak with them? Should McCain have declared that he would not work alongside these men because of their past? Should the self-described maverick who believes in integrity and character have taken the honorable stance of resigning from the Senate to protest these hateful characters serving in the U.S. Senate?
No. And this is why this association argument is so weak and impotent.
For goodness’ sakes, Byrd was once a member of the Ku Klux Klan, a domestic terrorist organization!
Martin did not seem to consider that if these associations were suspect, then Sen. Joe Biden would also match McCain in the bad-associations department. But the difference between these men and Ayers is obvious: unlike the politicians, Ayers is completely unrepentant about his past.
Despite Martin’s service in the tank for Obama, he resists being categorized as a liberal. On CNN’s Election Center on Tuesday night, deputy political director Alex Wellen promoted CNN.com/forum by noting you could create your own political badge on the site, and used Martin as an example:
Roland Martin has crated his badge. Let’s annotate this. There is his name, he’s a political analyst. He’s a political junkie. And we see that his top three issues, and you will have your own three issues, social issues, the economy and Iraq. Where does he stand on Iraq? He is way left. But when it comes to social issues, he leans to the right.
How can anyone who leans right on social issues be such an Obama partisan? In addition, a peek at RolandSMartin.com finds this hilarious article from Editor & Publisher from March, when Roland was furiously spinning for Obama during the Reverend Wright controversy, noting that Martin objected when Creators Syndicate decided to categorize their columnists as conservatives, liberals, libertarians, and unaffiliated. Martin insisted he was the last one:
Columnists can change their categorization, Fryrear emphasized. For instance, Roland Martin was originally labeled as liberal but asked to switch to unaffiliated. Creators quickly complied.
Brent Bozell is syndicated by Creators, and happily accepts a "C."
8
Oct
On Wednesday, all three network morning shows interviewed Democratic vice presidential nominee Joe Biden and offered no Republican counterpoint, punishing the McCain campaign for Sarah Palin declining to make similar appearances. On ABC’s Good Morning America, co-host Diane Sawyer concluded her interview with Biden by declaring: "And we want you to know that we have asked Governor Palin to come on Good Morning America. And, of course, debate Senator Biden again here. And repeatedly, she has declined. Although, Senator Biden has said that he’s willing to debate her again, if she wants."
On NBC’s Today, co-host Ann Curry made a similar declaration: "And we should also note that we invited Governor Sarah Palin to join us this morning, but she declined. The Governor has an open invitation to appear on Today, but so far she has not accepted our offers." On CBS’s Early Show co-host Harry Smith explained: "We also invited Governor Sarah Palin, John McCain’s running mate, but the McCain campaign declined." Apparently, the mainstream media deems itself as John McCain’s communications director.
Meanwhile, all three shows asked Biden about his reaction to Palin’s criticism of Obama. On Good Morning America, Sawyer asked: "Governor Palin has become the point person for the McCain attacks in her speeches. Do you think – she said she’s taking off the gloves, putting on the heels. Is it fair game? Or gone too far?" On Today, Curry wondered: "But let’s talk about the new style of the campaign because Sarah Palin is now saying that the gloves are off. She’s linked Obama to domestic terrorism. She’s, she’s been bringing up Reverend Wright’s name. She, she was hearing at one of these events, Obama introduces "Barack Hussein Obama." Is there a tone, where is this, all this going? Explain what’s happening here Joe…Is this an ugly stop? Can you characterize how you view this stop?" Finally, on the Early Show, Smith asked: "Let me ask you about Sarah Palin on the other side of the — on the other side of the aisle. She’s been going to these rallies, tens of thousands of people showing up. Talking about a friend of your running mate’s as a domestic terrorist. Does your campaign have an answer for that?"
All three network morning shows have routinely attacked Palin since she was named as McCain’s running mate in late August.
Here are the relevant excerpts of the three interviews:
GOOD MORNING AMERICA
ABC
SAWYER: One question about style and debate last night, and there was one moment that’s gotten a lot of attention. Some people say — asking was It respectful or not? Other people saying, right on. It was Senator McCain. He was talking about Senator Obama.
SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN: There was an energy bill on the floor of the Senate, loaded down with goodies. Billions for the oil companies. And it was sponsored by Bush and Cheney. You know who voted for it? Might never know. That one. You know who voted against it? Me.
SAWYER: "That one." What do you think?
BIDEN: John- I think when John knows he’s sort of in attack mode, it’s always kind of difficult to look the other person in the eye and say, it’s you, John. It’s you, Barack. It’s you, Harry. I think it’s- I think it reflects his more - he’s ill at ease with the attack he has under way.
SAWYER: Governor Palin has become the point person for the McCain attacks in her speeches. Do you think- she said she’s taking off the gloves, putting on the heels. Is it fair game? Or gone too far?
BIDEN: I think it goes way too far. Look, this really is a case where, when you don’t have anything to talk about, attack. And it gets really over the edge. I mean, some of the stuff she’s saying about Barack Obama and the stuff that people are yelling from the crowd, if she hears it, she should at least be saying, whoa, whoa, whoa, that’s overboard. I mean, this is volatile stuff. And it’s — I just — I thought we were kind of beyond this place that it seems to be going.
TODAY
NBC
CURRY: Okay, well I’m gonna turn and, and ask you about something else. Your campaign made much of the fact that last night, John McCain referred to Obama as, "that one." Was this, in your view, dismissive, Joe?
BIDEN: No, it was, for me, I know John well. I may be wrong, I think it was, when John knows that he’s on the attack and, and he’s not feeling good about it, John never looks you straight in the eye. John doesn’t go and refer to you by your first name. I think it’s part of this whole thing, if you noticed, John didn’t make a whole lot of eye contact last night because I think John, when he’s on the attack mode, and making the other guy a bad guy, it’s just not his style. So I think it was unfortunate but I don’t think it was, I don’t read anything into it other than just like last debate he didn’t look at Barack. I mean when John is attacking he doesn’t walk up to you and say, "Ann Curry let me tell you something." He says, "You know that Curry person over there." He does it that way. I think that’s all it was.
CURRY: So you’re saying it’s just his style. But let’s talk about the new style of the campaign because Sarah Palin is now saying that the gloves are off. She’s linked Obama to domestic terrorism. She’s, she’s been bringing up Reverend Wright’s name. She, she was hearing at one of these events, Obama introduces "Barack Hussein Obama." Is there a tone, where is this, all this going? Explain what’s happening here Joe.
BIDEN: They’re losing. She’s been told to go out and pull out all the stops. I think it borders on being-
CURRY: Is this an ugly stop? Can you characterize how you view this stop?
BIDEN: Well I think it is ugly. I mean to have somebody stand up there and, you know, for example I heard people, I watch the news, and I heard that a couple of people hollering from the audience, you know, semi-vile things, you know about terrorists, things like that. And idea that a, that a leading American politician who might be Vice President of the United States would not just stop mid-sentence and turn and condemn that, you know? I just, it’s just, this is slippery slope. This is a place we shouldn’t be going.
EARLY SHOW
CBS
SMITH: Let me ask you about Sarah Palin on the other side of the — on the other side of the aisle. She’s been going to these rallies, tens of thousands of people showing up. Talking about a friend of your running mate’s as a domestic terrorist. Does your campaign have an answer for that?
BIDEN: Yeah. It’s just malarkey. Flat malarkey. Barack Obama was 8 years old when this guy was engaged in activities he was engaged in. He is no part of our campaign. He would be no part of anything having to do with the White House. The guy Barack Obama’s going to turn and ask opinion of is me. Not that guy. You know, the idea here that somehow these guys are once again injecting fear and loathing into this campaign, it’s — it’s — I think it’s mildly dangerous. I mean, here you have out there these kinds of, you know, incitements out there, a guy introducing Barack using his middle name as if it’s some epitaph or something. This is over the top.