AP writers are slamming Republicans today

[Dutch]

Democrats slam Bush's stem cell bill veto
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060722/ap_on_go_co/democrats_stem_cells

By JENNIFER TALHELM, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 49 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - A Colorado congresswoman said Saturday that President Bush was motivated by "cold, calculated, cynical political gain" when he vetoed a bill that would expand federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.

and at the same time on Yahoo News

Schwarzenegger's star falls with Hispanics
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060722/ap_on_re_us/schwarzenegger_hispanics

By LAURA KURTZMAN, Associated Press Writer
Sat Jul 22, 4:33 AM ET

NORWALK, Calif. - Ask Arely Gonzales about Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the 27-year-old nurse sums him up in a word: "Awful."

[duckman]

So people are not allowed to have an opinion?

[kcchief19]

Yeah, journalists really shouldn't be allowed to quote sources. Especially if the sources are critical of Republicans. :rolleyes:

[hoosierdude]

I find it amusing that they act like he wasn't going to. I mean the guy said he would veto it. Bush has a history of conservative Christian right wing decisions, and this should not be a big surprise IMO.

[Flasch186]

yeah, im not sure how this is an opinion of the writer when he quotes someone else. I guess we would need to see the whole article but the above is certainly not incriminating of the writer.

[molson]

yeah, im not sure how this is an opinion of the writer when he quotes someone else. I guess we would need to see the whole article but the above is certainly not incriminating of the writer.

A writer can obviously choose who he quotes, and can certainly go too far with expressing his bias through quotes alone - but I don't think this crosses that line. The negative quotes are basically the story here.

[Dutch]

Here's another one that comes out that starts off with a rather unflattering way for a Republican to win a campaign.

Opposition research aids political wars
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060722/ap_on_el_ge/political_sleuthing;_ylt=Ao.iW491n4c4PHnj_l7TaNmMwfIE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3OXIzMDMzBHNlYwM3MDM-

By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent
51 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Republican Rep. Anne Northup (news, bio, voting record) of Kentucky was caught in an uncomfortably close race a few campaigns back, until she plucked the fruits of months-old research that her campaign had compiled into her opponent's record.

[Dutch]

I support freedom of the press.

And freedom of speech.

Should the AP and Reuters who have a monopoly on being major producers of news support all Americans in their reporting, I mean, if they are going to be so biased in at least some of their articles?

The Democratic Party and their leaders appear to be above reproach by those sources.

[Schmidty]

What was the point of this thread, other than to get specific people pissed off and start an argument?

[Barkeep49]

I'm sorry. How is "Democrats slam Bush's stem cell bill veto" slamming Republicans? Democrats are unhappy about the veto, certainly and are slaamming bush. That whole headline is fact. The quote you bolded is an example of what is being slammed. This doesn't mean that Republicans are being slammed. I'd imagine if you were in favor of the veto the headline would be "slamming" Democrats instead.

[Johnny Slick]

A writer can obviously choose who he quotes, and can certainly go too far with expressing his bias through quotes alone - but I don't think this crosses that line. The negative quotes are basically the story here.In a related vein, a conservative can cherry-pick articles that appear to be unflattering to other conservatives to create the illusion of bias when none is actually present.

[Bubba Wheels]

In regards to the title of this thread, in other breaking news its been revealed that the Pope is actually "Catholic' and that bears relieve themselves 'in the woods.' More amazing revelations to come...

[Buccaneer]

Yeah, journalists really shouldn't be allowed to quote sources. Especially if the sources are critical of Republicans. :rolleyes:

Whatever happened to reporting the news with quotes from all sides and letting the reader make up his/her mind. You don't think they are actually trying to persuade public opinion, do you? :eek:

[st.cronin]

What was the point of this thread, other than to get specific people pissed off and start an argument?

Why do men have nipples? Some questions have no answers.

[Barkeep49]

Whatever happened to reporting the news with quotes from all sides and letting the reader make up his/her mind. You don't think they are actually trying to persuade public opinion, do you? :eek:
There are facts. Not everything has two sides. Democrats are slamming Bush. True statement. Republicans, in general, aren't doing as well with Hispanics as they were 2 years ago. Also true statement. Now you could argue that what they're writing about might be biased, that's a different idea, and one I would agree happens (and actually cuts both ways) but every side does NOT have two sides. That's how we get rediculous things like whether or not global warming exists when virtually every scientist agrees that it does.

[molson]

I'm sorry. How is "Democrats slam Bush's stem cell bill veto" slamming Republicans? Democrats are unhappy about the veto, certainly and are slaamming bush. That whole headline is fact. The quote you bolded is an example of what is being slammed. This doesn't mean that Republicans are being slammed. I'd imagine if you were in favor of the veto the headline would be "slamming" Democrats instead.

Just because something's a fact, doesn't mean it doesn't have a bias. The articles here might not be the best or most blatant examples of this (but why is the fact the Democrats don't like a Republican president's veto "news"?)

[BrianD]

Come on now, we should all take it easy on Jessie....er...Dutch.

[molson]

The fact that Hispanics don't like Arnold would be news if Hispanics initially supported him (no clue if they did or not), but otherwise, what's the point other than to throw in some anti-Arnold quotes?

[kcchief19]

Whatever happened to reporting the news with quotes from all sides and letting the reader make up his/her mind. You don't think they are actually trying to persuade public opinion, do you? :eek:
Because that's not what every story is about. It's rarely the job of a journalist to tell both sides of a story and simply leave it up to the reader. That's a fairy-tale vision of journalism. It's more simply up to the journalist to report what happens and what they see and hear.

This story is about the Democrat's weekly radio address. The reporter summarized the events that precipitated the address and reported what was said during the address. There's really nothing to be gained by asking Bush what he thinks of the Democratic response, since he likely won't comment even if he were available to be asked.

There is also a story on the AP right now -- as a matter of fact, at Yahoo it's listed well above the story cited by Dutch -- about the president's weekly radio address. That writer did not seek any Democratic response to Bush's address. Again, the story is about what Bush said.

Not every journalistic report is he said/she said journalism. Oftentimes that's not the point. But journalistic fairness wasn't the point of this post -- as Schmidty observed, it was really just about selectively quoting headlines to try and start a pointless discussion with no merit.

Mission accomplished!

[Buccaneer]

There are facts. Not everything has two sides. Democrats are slamming Bush. True statement. Republicans, in general, aren't doing as well with Hispanics as they were 2 years ago. Also true statement. Now you could argue that what they're writing about might be biased, that's a different idea, and one I would agree happens (and actually cuts both ways) but every side does NOT have two sides. That's how we get rediculous things like whether or not global warming exists when virtually every scientist agrees that it does.

What if another article started like this?

WASHINGTON - A Colorado congresswoman said Saturday that the Democrats were motivated by "cold, calculated disregard for life of the unborn" when they supported a bill that would expand federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.

or

NORWALK, Calif. - Ask Jerry Morales about Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the 54-year-old computer technician sums him up in a word: "I like him."

----------

I don't have a dog in the fight on these specific issues. Too many people want to use the media to bolster their opinions. Printing stuff like "cold, calculated, cynical political gain" is pure hyperbole - fighting words for both sides in this game. Those that agree with it would gleefully point it out and and say, "See? That's a fact because it's in black and white!". While those that disagree gladly point out media "bias". I believe most of you are being suckered into the red/blue game and will hope any piece of "evidence" to perpetuate that.

[Dutch]

Here is how the AP writers handle the US support for our Israeli ally against the terrorist Hezbollah. This isn't a political Republican/Democrat thing, but just a negative way to look at the Bush Administration's support of Israel.

U.S. threatened with more isolation
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060721/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_isolated_again;_ylt=Av7zvJ3.PSc._1jt0FU.kEOyFz4D;_ylu=X3oDMTA0cDJlYmhvBHNlYwM-

By TOM RAUM, Associated Press Writer
Fri Jul 21, 5:23 PM ET

WASHINGTON - President Bush's uncompromising support for Israel in its battle with Hezbollah, a stance now backed by Congress, is threatening to isolate the United States even further from the international community.

It is also putting the administration at odds with fragile democratic governments in the Middle East that it is simultaneously trying to prop up, and sowing increasing anger across the Arab world.

Very negative in their interpretation and subsequently, very difficult for the casual reader to not be guided to the writers intended message. Classic bias.

[SirFozzie]

Just because something's a fact, doesn't mean it doesn't have a bias. The articles here might not be the best or most blatant examples of this (but why is the fact the Democrats don't like a Republican president's veto "news"?)

Because it's the first veto.

[Buccaneer]

It's more simply up to the journalist to report what happens and what they see and hear.


Only what they want to see and hear. How long did it take to find Arely Gonzales?

[Greyroofoo]

Bush just needs to start giving AP writers unexpected back rubs.

I hear he's good at that.

[Dutch]

Bush just needs to start giving AP writers unexpected back rubs.

I hear he's good at that.


Is that what it takes? Seriously, I don't know, because I'm not a Democratic leader.

[Barkeep49]

What if another article started like this?

WASHINGTON - A Colorado congresswoman said Saturday that the Democrats were motivated by "cold, calculated disregard for life of the unborn" when they supported a bill that would expand federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.

or

NORWALK, Calif. - Ask Jerry Morales about Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the 54-year-old computer technician sums him up in a word: "I like him."

----------

I don't have a dog in the fight on these specific issues. Too many people want to use the media to bolster their opinions. Printing stuff like "cold, calculated, cynical political gain" is pure hyperbole - fighting words for both sides in this game. Those that agree with it would gleefully point it out and and say, "See? That's a fact because it's in black and white!". While those that disagree gladly point out media "bias". I believe most of you are being suckered into the red/blue game and will hope any piece of "evidence" to perpetuate that.
Then those are facts too which is my point. I've read plenty of articles whose lede is someone Republican slamming some Democrat. Doesn't make for bias.

[Dutch]

Then those are facts too which is my point. I've read plenty of articles whose lede is someone Republican slamming some Democrat. Doesn't make for bias.

Except, you can't find any right now, I understand.

[Barkeep49]

Except, you can't find any right now, I understand.
Well
A) I hadn't looked
and
B) So by virtue of the fact that there is no article from today, as I am taking your word on it, that makes for bias?

[JPhillips]

Jeez Dutch, don't you have anything better to do on the weekends?

But since the gauntlet was thrown...

"Secretary Rice will make it clear that resolving the crisis demands confronting the terrorist group that launched the attacks and the nations that support it," Bush said.

"Iran's regime has also repeatedly defied the international community with its ambition for nuclear weapons and aid to terrorist groups," Bush said. "Their actions threaten the entire Middle East and stand in the way of resolving the current crisis and bringing lasting peace to this troubled region."

He said he is concerned about the impact of the fighting on democracy in Lebanon. "By its actions, Hezbollah has jeopardized Lebanon's tremendous advances and betrayed the Lebanese people," Bush said.

[JPhillips]

Here's another

Bush fighting long odds on line-item veto
By ANDREW TAYLOR, Associated Press Writer
Sat Jul 22, 4:14 AM ET

WASHINGTON - President Bush may be pushing hard for Congress to give him line-item veto power to remove wasteful spending from the bills it passes, but the idea seems to be sinking on Capitol Hill.

[JPhillips]

And this whole story seems pretty pro-Bush

Bush admits Iraqi, Afghan doubts
Sat Jul 22, 1:20 AM ET

BUCKLEY AIR FORCE BASE, COLORADO (AFP) - US President George W. Bush has acknowledged that some Iraqis and Afghans are "wondering whether the future is bright for them" but vowed victory in both war-torn countries.

Bush's remarks came as he met with US military personnel newly returned from Iraq and Afghanistan and assured them: "I want our troops to understand that not only does the country support them, but we'll win."

"You're doing some hard work. It's hard work to defeat terrorists," the president said, less than a week before welcoming Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to the White House.

Bush praised the US military as "people who bring such dignity and honor and bring compassion to people who have been suffering under tyranny and are now wondering whether or not the future is bright for them."

The US president has repeatedly promised that US troops will not completely withdraw until Iraq's fledgling security forces can take their place, while US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld recently issued a rare open letter to the "people of Afghanistan" assuring them of US support.

The letter, which follows a visit by Rumsfeld on July 12, applauded progress made since the collapse of the Taliban in late 2001 and the determination of President Hamid Karzai, the Afghan government and NATO- and US-led troops.

"I came away impressed by their determination and the progress that has been made on the political, economic, and security fronts," the letter said.

It reaffirmed continued US support for Afghanistan amid worries that the country is dropping off the world agenda with the growing crises in Iraq and the Middle East.

[JPhillips]

And my last

Bush tells NAACP he wants to build trust By DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press Writer
Fri Jul 21, 7:09 AM ET



WASHINGTON - President Bush, addressing the NAACP after skipping its convention for five years, said Thursday he knows racism exists in America and that many black voters distrust his Republican Party.

Bush lamented the GOP's rocky relations with blacks. He pledged to improve that relationship and work with the NAACP's new leader to achieve common goals.

"I understand that racism still lingers in America," Bush told more than 2,200 people at the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People's annual gathering. "It's a lot easier to change a law than to change a human heart. And I understand that many African-Americans distrust my political party."

That line generated boisterous applause and cheers from the audience

[Dutch]

And my last

The last one is a perfect example. Here we have an article that's pretty easy to see is a positive article. Yet, if you read the quotes the AP writer found to use, none of them were positive.

"There was an amazing gap between the aspirations of his speech and the policy behind it. It was so vague," said Barbara Arnwine of the Washington-based Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.

"He doesn't have enough contact with this community," said Arnwine. The group was set up in 1963, at the request of President Kennedy, to get private lawyers to provide legal services to address racial discrimination.

Bush talked about his No Child Left Behind education program, but did not mention that it has been underfunded, said Madie Robinson of Florence, S.C., a member of the NAACP national board of directors. "He raised many issues," she said, "but didn't offer solutions."

With all that applause, they didn't find anybody who had anything nice to say about the President? Do you really believe that?

[path12]

I shake my head that people still fall for the liberal press bit when almost every big media outlet is corporatized. We haven't had a liberal press in 20 years.

[st.cronin]

I shake my head that people still fall for the liberal press bit when almost every big media outlet is corporatized. We haven't had a liberal press in 20 years.

The real problem, of course, is the liberal bias of the internets.

[Dutch]

I shake my head that people still fall for the liberal press bit when almost every big media outlet is corporatized. We haven't had a liberal press in 20 years.

Don't get me started on ABC, NBC, and CBS! But I admit, I am only picking on those who generate news in America, like the AP and Reuters.

[ISiddiqui]

I find absolutely none of the articles quoted to be biased, but some will find they are being persecuted no matter what. With FoxNews we are seeing that what Republicans really wanted was a conservative-biased news station. The fact they call it balanced, when it is by far the most biased cable news station is incredible.

[SackAttack]

I would point out two things.

1) That bill never sees the President's desk without Republican support in the first place, so OP's assertion that the AP is slamming the Republican Party is probably inaccurate.

2) the articles that JPhillips cited, virtually all of the bolded text is a direct quote from the President, and the rest is indirectly quoted (although example #2 is, IMO, a good instance of a counter-argument to Dutch).

By contrast, the article cited by Dutch doesn't even use indirect quotes to buttress its thesis assertion. I don't know that I would say that such slanting of an article is unique to one side of the debate or the other, but if the assertion here is that the press uses language construction to influence readers one way or the other on a particular topic, I think the general point is unassailable.

Bias in both directions? Absolutely.

That bias clearly exists in high-profile media publications(although may or may not be pandemic)? Also absolutely.

[Dutch]

I find absolutely none of the articles quoted to be biased, but some will find they are being persecuted no matter what. With FoxNews we are seeing that what Republicans really wanted was a conservative-biased news station. The fact they call it balanced, when it is by far the most biased cable news station is incredible.

FoxNews is the primary reason I don't have a problem with CNN slanting left. There's a balance. A liberal can watch a cable news show and a conservative can watch a cable news show and both can be content. And we can all tune in to either to get a clearer picture of the news.

[molson]

FoxNews is the primary reason I don't have a problem with CNN slanting left. There's a balance. A liberal can watch a cable news show and a conservative can watch a cable news show and both can be content. And we can all tune in to either to get a clearer picture of the news.

Liberals find FoxNews biased but think that it's ridiculous to call CNN or the NY Times biased.

Conservatives find CNN/NY Times biased, but think that it's ridiculous to call FoxNews biased.

Can't we just agree that one generally won't recognize a bias in favor of their particiular political persuasion, but they'll be more apt to find such a bias if they disagree?

[Dutch]

I would point out two things.

1) That bill never sees the President's desk without Republican support in the first place, so OP's assertion that the AP is slamming the Republican Party is probably inaccurate.

2) the articles that JPhillips cited, virtually all of the bolded text is a direct quote from the President, and the rest is indirectly quoted (although example #2 is, IMO, a good instance of a counter-argument to Dutch).

By contrast, the article cited by Dutch doesn't even use indirect quotes to buttress its thesis assertion. I don't know that I would say that such slanting of an article is unique to one side of the debate or the other, but if the assertion here is that the press uses language construction to influence readers one way or the other on a particular topic, I think the general point is unassailable.

Bias in both directions? Absolutely.

That bias clearly exists in high-profile media publications(although may or may not be pandemic)? Also absolutely.

Normally, I just let the article's bias slide. And if Issidiqui is any indicator, perhaps I too fail to see bias towards things I agree with. I don't deny that's not possible. Bias, if used properly, is generally subtle.

I think perhaps the issue that threw me for a loop this morning was seeing two articles start off about popular/well-known/poloarizing Republicans (Bush and Schwartzenegger) with the articles suggesting that the most folks on the street would come up with quotables like "cold, calculated, cynical political gain" or simply "Awful." As a Republican, in a Republican majority, I don't believe that.

I can't recall a time when I saw back to back articles about Democrats that started off with such contempt (or even a singular article for that matter). It's possible, there is nothing scientific about bias, but I don't think it's probable. I will admit I am limited to my own perception of things.

[yabanci]

I always picture Dutch as the guy in blue.


http://img154.imageshack.us/img154/1317/tmw032906zl3.jpg

[Barkeep49]

Actually Dutch the reason that you couldn't find an instance of someone saying something nice when there was such applause at the NAACP is that there really wasn't such applause. The article gets its facts wrong.

You can watch video at hxxp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KTBdAQ58Vc&mode=related&search=bush%20NAACP
to see what it is referring to and make up your own mind at how "boisterous" the applause was and what they were really applauding.

[Bubba Wheels]

Nah, the MSM is much simplier than that cartoon...Bush bad, Liberals good. Story to follow accordingly.

[Barkeep49]

Let's not forget that the MSM hates Hilary Clinton too. So it's Bush bad, Hillary bad, story to follow accordingly.

[SirFozzie]

Nah, the MSM is much simplier than that cartoon...Bush bad, Liberals good. Story to follow accordingly.

and Fox just reverses the two,

[Bubba Wheels]

Let's not forget that the MSM hates Hilary Clinton too. So it's Bush bad, Hillary bad, story to follow accordingly.

If so, only because Hillary supports or did support the war. That has made the liberals very angry with her. But, her being from New York and all, she cannot afford to lose the Jewish vote from that state until at least after her re-election.

[tanglewood]

On thing I've never understood in the supposed motives of the MSM to corrupt the nation against honest, upstanding Republicans is........ WHY?

I mean, what's their motivation? They are all huge media corporations full of white-collar, godfearing, Republican voting, shareholders. What possible reason would they have to deliberatley distort the political landscape against the side they naturally support?

[Barkeep49]

If so, only because Hillary supports or did support the war. That has made the liberals very angry with her. But, her being from New York and all, she cannot afford to lose the Jewish vote from that state until at least after her re-election.
The explains all of the stories about her hair over the years. Clearly the press knew she was not going to support a war and thus wanted to get ahead of the game.

[Dutch]

I always picture Dutch as the guy in blue.


http://img154.imageshack.us/img154/1317/tmw032906zl3.jpg

So, is there any bias in that cartoon? :)

[Greyroofoo]

I personally think CNN slants to whatever it thinks the audience is thinking. I believe you can correlate CNN's slant to Bush's approval rating. CNN seemed very conservative when Bush had high ratings, but now there is definitely a liberal slant ever since Bush's approvel has dipped below 50%

[Bubba Wheels]

and Fox just reverses the two,

Shocking that a news organization actually supports the U.S. and its interests, isn't it? I still remember the 'amazement' that other news networks had when Fox anchors had the 'audacity' to wear American flags on their lapels after the Iraq invasion. Yet they all wonder at how Fox continues to do so well in ratings with the American people.

[Barkeep49]

I personally think CNN slants to whatever it thinks the audience is thinking. I believe you can correlate CNN's slant to Bush's approval rating. CNN seemed very conservative when Bush had high ratings, but now there is definitely a liberal slant ever since Bush's approvel has dipped below 50%
I actually agree with this, more then anything. I think the media is biased but I think it follows the moods of popular opinion more then creating popular opinion.

[st.cronin]

On thing I've never understood in the supposed motives of the MSM to corrupt the nation against honest, upstanding Republicans is........ WHY?

I mean, what's their motivation? They are all huge media corporations full of white-collar, godfearing, Republican voting, shareholders. What possible reason would they have to deliberatley distort the political landscape against the side they naturally support?

I believe the stereotype is that the media is predominantly made up of Chardonnay-sipping, Ivy League educated intellectual elitists. I have definitely known more than a few of those type over the years, but I don't remember any of them working in media.

edit - Jane Fonda/Ted Turner may be the archetypes. I don't think there's any doubt that both of those two are way to the left of the center, not that that means anything at all about the entire industry.

[tanglewood]

I personally think CNN slants to whatever it thinks the audience is thinking. I believe you can correlate CNN's slant to Bush's approval rating. CNN seemed very conservative when Bush had high ratings, but now there is definitely a liberal slant ever since Bush's approvel has dipped below 50%

Yes.


The media got behind the Contract With America, swung back to Clinton when he faced Dole, swung back against Clinton during the impeachment proceedings, went against Gore after the 2000 election calling the whole recount demands a farce, got right behind Bush post 9-11, almost unamimously supported the Iraq War at first, then when Bush started nosediving about 3 years ago out come the knives. Every swing, slant and move was populist. They are companies, and like any other company, they make money by providing the consumer with what they want, hence populist media.

[SirFozzie]

Shocking that a news organization actually supports the U.S. and its interests, isn't it? I still remember the 'amazement' that other news networks had when Fox anchors had the 'audacity' to wear American flags on their lapels after the Iraq invasion. Yet they all wonder at how Fox continues to do so well in ratings with the American people.

Subtract "Supports the US and its interests" and add "Unofficial Republican party spokesman network" and you have how I feel about it.

Fox leads because they are the only network that slants their news toward a republican viewpoint, compared to the other networks which fights it out in the slants moderate-to-liberal side, so they have a captive audience.

Hell, look at the survey recently done:

http://www.sjsu.edu/spri/06survey/foxnotfox0606.pdf

"Among those who watch Fox for their news, 59 percent approve of the job George W. Bush is doing as president and 29 percent disapprove. But among non-Fox viewers, just 25 percent approve of the president’s performance and 66 percent disapprove."

So, if you want to hear the good news about Iraq, you watch Fox. It's that simple.

[Bubba Wheels]

The explains all of the stories about her hair over the years. Clearly the press knew she was not going to support a war and thus wanted to get ahead of the game.

What stories about her hair? And clearly she does or did support the war, until it does or will suit her not too. This has been how she has operated her entire political career and is pretty standard fair for democrats in general. Moistened fingers upheld into the wind substituted for real convictions.

As Kerry once said "I voted for the bill before I voted against it!"

[st.cronin]

Yes.


The media got behind the Contract With America, swung back to Clinton when he faced Dole, swung back against Clinton during the impeachment proceedings, went against Gore after the 2000 election calling the whole recount demands a farce, got right behind Bush post 9-11, almost unamimously supported the Iraq War at first, then when Bush started nosediving about 3 years ago out come the knives. Every swing, slant and move was populist. They are companies, and like any other company, they make money by providing the consumer with what they want, hence populist media.

I also agree with this assesment. Now that we're all in agreement, what's next on the agenda?

[ISiddiqui]

Yes.


The media got behind the Contract With America, swung back to Clinton when he faced Dole, swung back against Clinton during the impeachment proceedings, went against Gore after the 2000 election calling the whole recount demands a farce, got right behind Bush post 9-11, almost unamimously supported the Iraq War at first, then when Bush started nosediving about 3 years ago out come the knives. Every swing, slant and move was populist. They are companies, and like any other company, they make money by providing the consumer with what they want, hence populist media.

Yep... also remember that right before the MSM was slamming Gore, they had Clinton up on a pedestal. So in the span of 2 years (abouts) they went from super anti-Clinton (right before impeachment) to super pro-Clinton (when he was going to beat it out) to super anti-Gore (insinuating he was a whiner).

[Barkeep49]

I also agree with this assesment. Now that we're all in agreement, what's next on the agenda?
And Fozzie even quoted something from your school to do it. What unity.

[st.cronin]

And Fozzie even quoted something from your school to do it. What unity.

San Jose State University is NOT my school. St. Johns College is my school. Our Ultimate Frisbee squad is vastly superior to theirs.

[Barkeep49]

My bad. My brain is clearly not working correctly to not be able to accurately match up letters between his link and your signature.

[Dutch]

So, if you want to hear the good news about Iraq, you watch Fox. It's that simple.

I agree with that as far as TV news goes.

[JPhillips]

Dutch: Do you not read much or do you purposefully ignore everything that doesn't fit with your ideology? I seem to recall a glut of "Dems have no convictions/ideas" stories after the election. I also read a number of stories about some Swift Boat folks. There were stories galore about the lack of foreign policy interest in the Democratic party. And what about the host of stories on the Dems not having any religious supporters?

Now I'll admit there aren't currently any negative stories about the Democratic President or the Democratic Governor of California. But there are plenty of negative stories about the Democratic Senator from New York and the Democratic Governor of Michigan. You guys are in charge of all of the federal government so naturally more things are going to be written about the Republicans. When you take the almost historic low approval ratings of the President and the Republican majority it stands to reason that there will be negative stories.

Bias is just a boogey man to throw out whenever something comes out that you disagree with.

[Crapshoot]

Fox is far, far more to the right than CNN is to the left -seriously. This isn't a binary spectrum - there are degrees of bias, and Fox's parody of a slogan "Fair and Balanced" is hilarious. I like watching Fox occasionaly, but let's be real here.

[st.cronin]

My bad. My brain is clearly not working correctly to not be able to accurately match up letters between his link and your signature.

No worries mate, but pay attention.

St. Johns College, formerly a military academy, is the third oldest college in America. It is famous for it's Great Books program, and boasts alumni such as Eva Brann, Leo Strauss, Francis Scott Key, Lee David Zlotoff (creator of McGyver), Ahmet Ertegun (founder of Atlantic Records) and Jac Holzman (founder of Elektra Records). Our primary athletic rival is the Naval Academy; annual contests in croquet and crew draw hundreds of onlookers.

[Barkeep49]

I know all about St. Johns as I considered it back when I was looking at colleges. The Great Books program was quite interesting, I thought. Again my sincerest apologies at the mix-up.

[Bubba Wheels]

Fox is far, far more to the right than CNN is to the left -seriously. This isn't a binary spectrum - there are degrees of bias, and Fox's parody of a slogan "Fair and Balanced" is hilarious. I like watching Fox occasionaly, but let's be real here.

Posted from someone so far left himself that the only direction to go is right.

[Crapshoot]

Posted from someone so far left himself that the only direction to go is right.

Yes Bubba - I'm so far to the left that I would have voted for Bush in 2000 and Badarik in 2004 - and I subscribe to the Economist. You really are an intellecual wasteland.

[duckman]

Posted from someone so far left himself that the only direction to go is right.

Your lack of attention to detail is astounding.

[st.cronin]

I know all about St. Johns as I considered it back when I was looking at colleges. The Great Books program was quite interesting, I thought. Again my sincerest apologies at the mix-up.

I wasn't even close to being offended. My indignation was all mock.

[Barkeep49]

I wasn't even close to being offended. My indignation was all mock.
I know :)

[sabotai]

Subtract "Supports the US and its interests" and add "Unofficial Republican party spokesman network" and you have how I feel about it.

I don't think Bubba can differentiate those two statements.

[Dutch]

But there are plenty of negative stories about the Democratic Senator from New York and the Democratic Governor of Michigan.

AP's recent articles on Hillary Clinton

Students Say Democrats Misunderstood
Jul 21, 3:45 PM EDT

By CHRISTOPHER LEONARD
Associated Press Writer

ST. LOUIS (AP) -- College Democrats sound a lot like the 1960s British rock band, the Animals, who sang - "I'm just a soul whose intentions are good, please don't let me be misunderstood."

...

"I still believe Democrats are right on the issues," said Andrew Gordon, 20, a junior at the University of Wisconsin. "I don't think we've had an election on the issues for a while. I just never feel that Republicans are very honest with voters."

....

"As a Christian I feel like I have to love everyone the same and I feel like (Republicans) are cutting taxes for the rich and services for the poor," Straw said.

...

Students mentioned Warner and Obama when questioned about 2008. Most didn't single out perceived front-runner New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton although they expressed support.

"I love her," said Michael Davis, 23, a Stetson University law student. "It's the idea that we can go back to the good old days of Bill," he said, referring to her husband, former President Clinton.

But could Hillary win?

"I think she could do better than (John) Kerry," Davis said of the Massachusetts senator who lost to President Bush in 2004.



Democrats Have Eyes Fixed on Colorado
Jul 20, 10:31 PM EDT

By JON SARCHE
Associated Press Writer

DENVER (AP) -- Colorado glistened like a small gem among coals for Democrats in 2004, with two congressional wins and majority control of the state legislature for the first time since John F. Kennedy was president.

Democrats are hoping Colorado shines even brighter this November.

...

This weekend, the moderate Democratic Leadership Council holds its annual meeting in Denver, attracting a handful of potential 2008 presidential candidates such as New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh and Govs. Tom Vilsack of Iowa and Bill Richardson of New Mexico.



Democrats Press Bush on Voting Rights Act
Jul 19, 11:38 PM EDT

By LIZ SIDOTI
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Two Democrats called on President Bush to use his rare appearance before the NAACP's annual conference to renew the landmark 1965 Voting Rights Act, arguing that such a step would ensure a basic right for minorities.

...

"He could sign it right here on this stage," Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., told the NAACP on Wednesday, eliciting cheers from the audience.

...

Clinton, perceived as the Democratic front-runner among White House hopefuls, and Obama, a rising star often mentioned in presidential talk, focused on an issue that the party hopes will energize a core Democratic constituency.

...

The crowd at the NAACP meeting gave Clinton and Obama similar warm receptions. Some attendees stood and applauded, and many cheered when the two senators were introduced. A group gathered before the stage to take pictures of the two and Kennedy.

At one point, a handful of people chanted "Run, Hillary, run," an apparent reference to 2008.

Those are the most current three articles involving Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, the Democrat Senator from New York.

If these are negative stories, I challenge you on your definition of the word negative.

[Bubba Wheels]

Yes Bubba - I'm so far to the left that I would have voted for Bush in 2000 and Badarik in 2004 - and I subscribe to the Economist. You really are an intellecual wasteland.

To paraphrase Will Farrell "And your a really angry (leftist)."

[yabanci]

To paraphrase Will Farrell "And your a really angry (leftist)."

Will Farrell apparently needs to work on his grammar.

[Crapshoot]

To paraphrase Will Farrell "And your a really angry (leftist)."

Will Farrell's grammar is likely to bet better than yours Bubba....

[st.cronin]

FERRELL

C'mon people.

[Glengoyne]

Here is how the AP writers handle the US support for our Israeli ally against the terrorist Hezbollah. This isn't a political Republican/Democrat thing, but just a negative way to look at the Bush Administration's support of Israel.

U.S. threatened with more isolation
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060721/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_isolated_again;_ylt=Av7zvJ3.PSc._1jt0FU.kEOyFz4D;_ylu=X3oDMTA0cDJlYmhvBHNlYwM-

By TOM RAUM, Associated Press Writer
Fri Jul 21, 5:23 PM ET



Very negative in their interpretation and subsequently, very difficult for the casual reader to not be guided to the writers intended message. Classic bias.

Now this one is closer to an example of what you are citing at the beginning of the thread. A writer clearly editorializing in a news piece.

[st.cronin]

I don't really like this particular argument, but I like how on NPR they always say "Israel's attack on Lebanon" and then say "also rockets continue to be fired by Hezbollah at Israel." Note the radically different verb usage. I don't know that they do that all the time, but it does catch my attention.

[Glengoyne]

Fox is far, far more to the right than CNN is to the left -seriously. This isn't a binary spectrum - there are degrees of bias, and Fox's parody of a slogan "Fair and Balanced" is hilarious. I like watching Fox occasionaly, but let's be real here.

I disagree with this, but I am talking strictly about the News portion of the network's offerings. Most people can't separate Fox News from O'Reilly,Hannity, and the rest of the partisan talking heads. Compare the typical Fox News broadcast to an Arron Brown newscast, and the difference is clear.

[Johnny Slick]

Posted from someone so far left himself that the only direction to go is right.Hey Ace! You're a lib now! Now get on back to that other forum and start agreeing with me on stuff!

Oh, man. This has to be the most hilarious post by a conservative I've read on these boards.

[MrBigglesworth]

Why do men have nipples?
Because it's easier through evolution than to lose things that have no negative effects. Either early male mammals nursed their young, or the nipples were selected for because as a whole they helped the species, even though the males did not produce the right hormones to activate milk production.

[MrBigglesworth]

I feel like I have read this thread before...

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=40165

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=46507

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=38906

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=26240

[BrianD]

"I'm just a soul whose intentions are good, please don't let me be misunderstood."

In the above articles, I find it interesting to see the (intentional?) misquote of the song lyrics. "I'm just a soul whose intentions are good, Oh Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood."

[duckman]

I feel like I have read this thread before...

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=40165

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=46507

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=38906

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=26240

Congratulations, you can use the search function! http://images.google.com/url?q=http://www.netchatforum.hu/forum/skins/base/images/smiley/msn/thumbs_up.gif

[Crapshoot]

Hey Ace! You're a lib now! Now get on back to that other forum and start agreeing with me on stuff!

Oh, man. This has to be the most hilarious post by a conservative I've read on these boards.

Bubba ain't a conservative - he's an idiot who's spouting whatever he read on newsmax today.

[Dutch]

I feel like I have read this thread before...

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=40165

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=46507

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=38906

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=26240

What can I say? I like examples to back up my claims. ;)

[Bubba Wheels]

I disagree with this, but I am talking strictly about the News portion of the network's offerings. Most people can't separate Fox News from O'Reilly,Hannity, and the rest of the partisan talking heads. Compare the typical Fox News broadcast to an Arron Brown newscast, and the difference is clear.

Well, fact is most folks can and do know the difference between the two...almost always its the liberals that cannot (not capable?) of discerning the difference. So if someone thinks because they 'almost' voted for Bush one time or other but thinks that Fox is right-wing (not even close to being, really, other than a couple of commentators that identify themselves as such) then my calling him/her/it a 'lefty' is really entirely understandable.

And the other 'defense' is also very laughable...I should know better but am an 'idiot' because I don't read the miscreant's postings on some other board? HA!

[SirFozzie]

No.. you're an idiot because you never reason out your arguments, or back them up with facts.. any one who disagrees with you MUST be a "liberal" or "left-wing nut", regardless of the facts

[Bubba Wheels]

No.. you're an idiot because you never reason out your arguments, or back them up with facts.. any one who disagrees with you MUST be a "liberal" or "left-wing nut", regardless of the facts

It is so blatantly obvious that the MSM is liberal. Just the very way that they slant and word every so-called news story and maybe more importantly what they don't print at all. The NYT guy got caught red-handed proclaiming his radical leftist status in front of a graduating college class he had been invited to speak before during graduation.

The evidence is so overwhelming and continuing that anyone claiming the MSM is not biased liberal is clearly leftist, delusional or both. Call me anything you want, but the only 'idiot' is the one arguing otherwise.

[yabanci]

It is so blatantly obvious that the MSM is liberal. Just the very way that they slant and word every so-called news story and maybe more importantly what they don't print at all. The NYT guy got caught red-handed proclaiming his radical leftist status in front of a graduating college class he had been invited to speak before during graduation.

The evidence is so overwhelming and continuing that anyone claiming the MSM is not biased liberal is clearly leftist, delusional or both. Call me anything you want, but the only 'idiot' is the one arguing otherwise.

http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/4371/tmw030106ne8.jpg

[Buccaneer]

I don't know, I looked at each of the Headline news stories on foxnews.com and all but two of the them were bylined by AP (one was written by FoxNews and the other by MarketWatch). Does this mean that AP has a right-leaning and a left-leaning package deal to choose from?

[Dutch]

I don't know, I looked at each of the Headline news stories on foxnews.com and all but two of the them were bylined by AP (one was written by FoxNews and the other by MarketWatch). Does this mean that AP has a right-leaning and a left-leaning package deal to choose from?

No. The bias at foxnews.com is generally only it's lead in headlines (the titles that you click on to get to the AP/Reuters stories) and the surrounding editorials.

I'm pretty sure that foxnews.com does not/cannot alter the AP writers articles.

[Chubby]

So to clarify, everyone BUT fox news is biased.


Got it.


I guess I don't need these comedy club tickets after all...

[Buccaneer]

Everyone else basically uses the same AP stories so what would be the real difference of foxnews (besides the headlines themselves) to make the "ultra-rightwing" as some claim? Surely you don't consider those talking heads (or any talking heads anywhere) as news???

[Dutch]

So to clarify, everyone BUT fox news is biased.

You clarified incorrectly.

[Chubby]

You clarified incorrectly.


So they are all biased, it's just that Fox News "got it right"?

[Young Drachma]

No. The bias at foxnews.com is generally only it's lead in headlines (the titles that you click on to get to the AP/Reuters stories) and the surrounding editorials.

I'm pretty sure that foxnews.com does not/cannot alter the AP writers articles.

You can't alter wire stories, but you can cut them or edit them for brevity and to match your publication's style.

I edited more than enough wire stories when I copy edited to know that depending on what a story has/doesn't have, can change the meaning of what it says.

Not saying they do that (I don't visit their site for news) but just saying its more than possible to do it.

[MrBigglesworth]

Well, fact is most folks can and do know the difference between the two...almost always its the liberals that cannot (not capable?) of discerning the difference. So if someone thinks because they 'almost' voted for Bush one time or other but thinks that Fox is right-wing (not even close to being, really, other than a couple of commentators that identify themselves as such) then my calling him/her/it a 'lefty' is really entirely understandable.

And the other 'defense' is also very laughable...I should know better but am an 'idiot' because I don't read the miscreant's postings on some other board? HA!
I think arguing with Bubba in this issue is fruitless not because he is an idiot, but because he is coming into the discussion with different premises. Most people would put the spectrum as:

| Left --------- Center --------- Right |

...but Bubba just sees it as:

| ------------------ Left - Bubba ---|

...so that when Bubba says 'leftist', it could really mean anything from ultra-liberal to moderate conservative to a normal observer. So from that view, the entire MSM is liberal, as is nearly every other institution.

[MrBigglesworth]

Surely you don't consider those talking heads (or any talking heads anywhere) as news???
I don't understand this argument. How does having ultra-conservative shows that talk about the news not contribute to the conservativeness of a news station? Let's look at the FoxNews primetime lineup for Monday:

4:00pm - 5:00pm Your World w/ Neil Cavuto (cc)

5:00pm - 6:00pm The Big Story w/ John Gibson (cc)

6:00pm - 7:00pm Special Report w/ Brit Hume (cc)

7:00pm - 8:00pm FOX Report w/ Shepard Smith (cc)

8:00pm - 9:00pm The O'Reilly Factor (cc)

9:00pm - 10:00pm Hannity & Colmes (cc)

That's 6 hours of programming, with only one hour with someone that could be considered a real unbiased news person, Shepard Smith (and I guess Colmes counts for something as playing second fiddle to Hannity). So how can people say that that single hour is the only thing that you can look at to tell the neutrality of the station?

[Dutch]

So they are all biased, it's just that Fox News "got it right"?

Of course they are all biased, including the AP and Reuters, it's pretty impossible to avoid it.

The topic at the moment that Buc is wondering about--which I am commenting about--is foxnews.com's website's use of AP articles.

foxnews.com has a bias, but they cannot alter the bias in the AP articles it sites, which Buc is asking about.

[Bonegavel]

Straight news story:
Bush vetoes bill on stem cell research funding.

Foxnews:
Bush follows through on a promise as he vetoes a bill regarding stem cell research funding.

CNN:
Bush causes CO2 levels to rise another 20% and caused the problem in Gaza to escalate as he vetoes a bill condemning millions to suffer with diseases and spinal injuries that would be cured if only he would fund the research. Bloody bastard.


:D

[Honolulu_Blue]

I reckon it's about time conservatives stop bitching about this "liberal bias" in the media and just go straight to the actual source: reality.

Because, as Stephen Colbert so eloquently said "reality has a well-known liberal bias."

Damn that reality! Damn those actual facts and events!

[miked]

If so, only because Hillary supports or did support the war. That has made the liberals very angry with her. But, her being from New York and all, she cannot afford to lose the Jewish vote from that state until at least after her re-election.

I'm still stuck on page 1 of this thread trying to figure out what the Jews have to do with this...:confused:

[cartman]

I'm still stuck on page 1 of this thread trying to figure out what the Jews have to do with this...:confused:

I'm pretty sure there was a World Net Daily or NewsMax article expounding on this.

[duckman]

Your a pinko commie bastard, cartman!

[Cringer]

I want to slam a Republican. I envy the AP. Do they get to do it in a steel cage death match too?

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Surely you don't consider those talking heads (or any talking heads anywhere) as news???

I notice your disdain for television news, but the fact is the vast majority of Americans get their news from TV. In this regard, you can't underestimate how vital the talking heads are.


And clearly she does or did support the war, until it does or will suit her not too. This has been how she has operated her entire political career and is pretty standard fair for democrats in general. Moistened fingers upheld into the wind substituted for real convictions.

How sad has this country become that it is considered a weakness to be able to change your mind? I'm guessing no Republican has ever changed his/her mind. It must be nice living in a world where you are always correct. :rolleyes:

And, correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure politicians represent their constituency. Shouldn't they change their position if the public changes? Why is it considered good to ignore the people and only do what you want? "Facts be damned, I've got convictions!!!"

[cartman]

Your a pinko commie bastard, cartman!

Not to mention a charter member of the squishy circle!

:D

[Johnny Slick]

The Republican hatred of Hillary Clinton is a weird, weird thing. I mean, you can see why they hate big-time libs like Teddy Kennedy or Jim McDermott, but Hillary is and always has been a moderate to conservative Democrat like her husband. It's not just that she's a woman; there are powerful Republican women, too, and I don't see this kind of hatred directed at Nancy Pelosi, for example. It's just... I don't know, like the Germans' love of David Hasselhoff. We know it exists, we just don't know why.

[Dutch]

I reckon it's about time conservatives stop bitching about this "liberal bias" in the media and just go straight to the actual source: reality.

Because, as Stephen Colbert so eloquently said "reality has a well-known liberal bias."

Damn that reality! Damn those actual facts and events!

Bias is not lying. It's a prejudice. Or better yet, in this regard, a partisanship.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I don't see this kind of hatred directed at Nancy Pelosi

I think the biggest difference is their profile, or perhaps the level of their profile would be more accurate

I dare say you'd be hard pressed to find many conservatives that would be any more willing to piss on Pelosi if she spontaneously combusted before their eyes than you would the she-demon.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Bias is not lying. It's a prejudice. Or better yet, in this regard, a partisanship.

Not sure where all this talk of lying, prejudice, or partisanship comes from. It's not the media's fault that the reality of the situation is the reality of the situation.

But since you brought up lying... Figuring out you could lie about pretty much anything was Carl Rove's great discovery. He learned along the way that you can pretty much lie about anything. Just straight up lie. It takes 10 seconds to tell a lie and 10 months trying to disprove it. By that time they've told so many more lies that you can't possible keep up. It's worked masterfully.

That's all a bit off topic.

Again, reality's liberal bias (call it prejudice or partisanship, I don't care how it's defined) is well-known.

[Dutch]

Not sure where all this talk of lying, prejudice, or partisanship comes from. It's not the media's fault that the reality of the situation is the reality of the situation.

But since you brought up lying... Figuring out you could lie about pretty much anything was Carl Rove's great discovery. He learned along the way that you can pretty much lie about anything. Just straight up lie. It takes 10 seconds to tell a lie and 10 months trying to disprove it. By that time they've told so many more lies that you can't possible keep up. It's worked masterfully.

That's all a bit off topic.

Again, reality's liberal bias (call it prejudice or partisanship, I don't care how it's defined) is well-known.

And Clinton lied, that's representative of all Democrats? That's a weak argument and I agree, off-topic.

[Honolulu_Blue]

And Clinton lied, that's representative of all Democrats? That's a weak argument and I agree, off-topic.

The Carl Rove thing wasn't an argument at all. It was just a statement of fact/observation about how the current administration operates. It wasn't meant to be representative of anyone or anything else. Just figured I'd drop a little wisdom about lying liars and the lies they tell.

(On the other hand, it's probably more on topic than I first thought, since many people probably think there is a "liberal media bias" because they've been fed so many lies about everything. Reality can seem a bit... different if you're accustomed to being lied to about it.)

Saying "Clinton lied" in response to that is like comparing some second rate comedian doing dinner theater it Peoria to Chris Rock, Eddie Murphy, or some other big-time stand-up comedian in there prime. Totaly different scale.

[Dutch]

The Carl Rove thing wasn't an argument at all. It was just a statement of fact/observation about how the current administration operates. It wasn't meant to be representative of anyone or anything else. Just figured I'd drop a little wisdom about lying liars and the lies they tell.

(On the other hand, it's probably more on topic than I first thought, since many people probably think there is a "liberal media bias" because they've been fed so many lies about everything. Reality can seem a bit... different if you're accustomed to being lied to about it.)

Saying "Clinton lied" in response to that is like comparing some second rate comedian doing dinner theater it Peoria to Chris Rock, Eddie Murphy, or some other big-time stand-up comedian in there prime. Totaly different scale.

Well, good, now that we know all our scales are screwed up, what about those horrible AP stories about the senator from New York. I showed the last three posted by the AP and couldn't find anything so horrible as what was *suggested*.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Well, good, now that we know all our scales are screwed up, what about those horrible AP stories about the senator from New York. I showed the last three posted by the AP and couldn't find anything so horrible as what was *suggested*.

I follow you know. (Had to go back in the thread to find the reference). I could only search the last 7 days on the AP website and couldn't find anything "horrible" on Hillary Clinton. I reckon if I searched a little further back that wouldn't be a problem. But it appears as if you either ignored or forgot the "Democrat Governor of Michigan" who was also mentioned in that post.

Low and behold...

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/MICHIGAN_GOVERNOR?SITE=WIMAR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Faltering Economy Obstacle for Granholm

By KATHY BARKS HOFFMAN
Associated Press Writer
<!-- BEGIN MEDIA BOX NUMBER 1 --><TABLE class=ap-story-table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=180 align=right><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX 9451575 --><!-- $Id: MediaBox.java,v 1.8 2006/06/12 17:55:03 gmavrom Exp $ --><TBODY><TR class=ap-mediabox-tr><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX LEFT SIDE SPACER --><TD class=ap-mediabox-td>http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</TD><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX LEFT SIDE SPACER --><TD class=ap-mediabox-td><TABLE class=ap-mediabox-table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><!-- BEGIN PACKAGE 959062, 'online' --><!-- $Id: Package.java,v 1.10 2005/07/20 22:05:22 mike Exp $ --><!-- BEGIN SMALLPHOTO ID 1785652 --><!-- $Id: SmallPhoto.java,v 1.9 2006/06/12 17:55:02 gmavrom Exp $ --><TBODY><TR class=ap-smallphoto-tr><TD class=ap-smallphoto-td-image>http://hosted.ap.org/photos/8/82c5d62e-d9c6-4c79-a5c5-aafee8c60832-small.jpg (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/photos/8/82c5d62e-d9c6-4c79-a5c5-aafee8c60832.html?SITE=WIMAR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT)
AP Photo/CARLOS OSORIO</TD></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM SMALLPHOTO ID 1785652 --><!-- BEGIN PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><TR class=ap-contentcontainer-tr><TD class=ap-contentcontainer-td>http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</TD></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><!-- BOX_BOTTOM PACKAGE 959062 --><!-- BEGIN PACKAGE 125911, 'ADVERTISEMENT_POLITICS' --><!-- $Id: Package.java,v 1.10 2005/07/20 22:05:22 mike Exp $ --><!-- BEGIN HTML FRAGMENT ID 4373 --><!-- $Id: HtmlFragment.java,v 1.7 2006/06/12 17:55:03 gmavrom Exp $- --><TR class=ap-htmlfragment-tr><TD class=ap-htmlfragment-td><SCRIPT language=JavaScript>tcdacmd="cc=wdn; dt";</SCRIPT><SCRIPT language=JavaScript src="http://an.tacoda.net/an/11676/slf.js"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT language=JavaScript src="http://anrtx.tacoda.net/rtx/r.js?cmd=WDN&si=11676&r=hosted.ap.org&v=3.1.0.26azzz&cb=0.30402454139643764"></SCRIPT></TD></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM HTML FRAGMENT ID 4373 --><!-- BEGIN PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><TR class=ap-contentcontainer-tr><TD class=ap-contentcontainer-td>http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</TD></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><!-- BEGIN HTML FRAGMENT ID 1117 --><!-- $Id: HtmlFragment.java,v 1.7 2006/06/12 17:55:03 gmavrom Exp $- --><TR class=ap-htmlfragment-tr><TD class=ap-htmlfragment-td><!-- THIS AD IS FOR POLITICS STORIES --><!-- AP call to x96 --><SCRIPT language=JavaScript>var SECTION_TPL='POLITICS'; var excVal = check_exc(); if( excVal == 1 ) { document.write('Advertisement
'); document.write('<div align="center"><SCRIPT LANGUAGE="JavaScript1.1" SRC="http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_jx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1' + RNS+ '@x96">'); document.write(''); document.write('http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_nx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1' + RNS+ '@x96 (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/)'); document.write('<\/SCRIPT>'+'<\/div>'); }</SCRIPT>Advertisement
<SCRIPT language=JavaScript1.1 src="http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_jx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1828119936@x96">http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_nx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1828119936@x96 (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/)</SCRIPT>
<!-- ---------- Advertising.com Banner Code -------------- --><SCRIPT language=JavaScript> var bnum=new Number(Math.floor(99999999 * Math.random())+1); document.write('<SCR'+'IPT LANGUAGE="JavaScript" '); document.write('SRC="http://servedby.advertising.com/site=700203/size=180150/bnum='+bnum+'/optn=1"></SCR'+'IPT>'); </SCRIPT><SCRIPT language=JavaScript src="http://servedby.advertising.com/site=700203/size=180150/bnum=8044311/optn=1"></SCRIPT><!-- ---------- Copyright 2000, Advertising.com ---------- -->[/URL] <!-- AP end call to x96 --><!-- AP call to x03 --><SCRIPT language=JavaScript> var excVal = check_exc(); if( excVal == 1 ) { document.write('<SCRIPT LANGUAGE="JavaScript1.1" SRC="http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_jx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1' + RNS+ '@x03">'); document.write('[URL="http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/"]'); document.write('http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_nx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1' + RNS+ '@x03 (http://servedby.advertising.com/click/site=0000700203/mnum=0000275124/genr=1/tkdt=B0P0R1T0/cstr=8044311=_44c51e8b,8893051520,700203^275124^1^0,1_/bnum=8044311)'); document.write('<\/SCRI'+'PT>'); }</SCRIPT><SCRIPT language=JavaScript1.1 src="http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_jx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1828119936@x03">http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_nx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1828119936@x03 (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/)</SCRIPT>http://a248.e.akamai.net/7/800/1134/0/oasc03.247realmedia.com/RealMedia/ads/Creatives/default/empty.gif (http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1378342618/x03/default/empty.gif/30633934333633333434306438666330?) <!-- AP end call to x03 --></TD></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM HTML FRAGMENT ID 1117 --><!-- BEGIN PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><TR class=ap-contentcontainer-tr><TD class=ap-contentcontainer-td>http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</TD></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><!-- BOX_BOTTOM PACKAGE 125911 --></TBODY></TABLE></TD><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX RIGHT SIDE SPACER --><TD class=ap-mediabox-td>http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</TD><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX RIGHT SIDE SPACER --></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX 9451575 --></TBODY></TABLE><!-- END MEDIA BOX NUMBER 1 -->
LANSING, Mich. (AP) -- Gov. Jennifer Granholm was once a darling of the Democratic Party - a Canadian-born rising star who was mentioned along with California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger as a possible presidential candidate if the Constitution were changed to allow foreign-born citizens to run for the White House.

But then the state's economy faltered because of the struggling auto industry, leading Republicans to target Michigan as the most likely place to defeat a Democratic incumbent.

"I think the governor of Illinois, the governor of Wisconsin, the governor of Pennsylvania are all Democratic incumbents that face challenges this year," Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman said. But Granholm's record "is harder to defend than any governor of either party that I can think of."

Granholm, 47, is up against a well-financed campaign by multimillionaire challenger Dick DeVos, who is getting free political help from Matthew Dowd, one of President Bush's senior campaign advisers.
<!-- BEGIN MEDIA BOX NUMBER 2 --><TABLE class=ap-story-table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=180 align=right><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX 9451576 --><!-- $Id: MediaBox.java,v 1.8 2006/06/12 17:55:03 gmavrom Exp $ --><TBODY><TR class=ap-mediabox-tr><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX LEFT SIDE SPACER --><TD class=ap-mediabox-td>http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</TD><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX LEFT SIDE SPACER --><TD class=ap-mediabox-td><TABLE class=ap-mediabox-table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><!-- BEGIN PACKAGE 507192, 'X_BEHAVIORAL_POLITICS' --><!-- $Id: Package.java,v 1.10 2005/07/20 22:05:22 mike Exp $ --><!-- BEGIN HTML FRAGMENT ID 3854 --><!-- $Id: HtmlFragment.java,v 1.4 2005/06/15 16:32:32 mike Exp $- --><TBODY><TR><TD><!-- start behavioral tag 1 --><SCRIPT language=Javascript src="http://hosted.ap.org/specials/AP_Tacoda_AMS_DDC_Header.js"></SCRIPT><!-- end behavioral tag 1 --><!-- start behavioral tag 2 --><SCRIPT language=Javascript>AP_Tacoda_AMS_DDC_addPair("SECTION", "POLITICS")</SCRIPT><!-- end behavioral tag 2 --><!-- start behavioral tag 3 --><SCRIPT language=JavaScript>AP_Tacoda_AMS_DDC("http://te.ap.org/tte/blank.gif", "1.0")</SCRIPT>http://te.ap.org/tte/blank.gif?0.07587295686155937&snippet_version=1.3.a&referrer=http%3A//hosted.ap.org/dynamic/external/search.hosted.ap.org/wireCoreTool/Search%3Ftype%3DStory%26output_format%3DPARA%26query%3Dgranholm%26SITE%3DWIMAR%26SECTION%3DHOME&page=http%3A//hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/MICHIGAN_GOVERNOR%3FSITE%3DWIMAR%26SECTION%3DHOME%26TEMPLATE%3DDEFAULT&timezone=240&clist_TID=0pjd50c120r7es&var_SECTION=POLITICS <!-- end behavioral tag 3 --></TD></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM HTML FRAGMENT ID 3854 --><!-- BEGIN PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><TR><TD>http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</TD></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><!-- BOX_BOTTOM PACKAGE 507192 --></TBODY></TABLE></TD><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX RIGHT SIDE SPACER --><TD class=ap-mediabox-td>http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</TD><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX RIGHT SIDE SPACER --></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX 9451576 --></TBODY></TABLE><!-- END MEDIA BOX NUMBER 2 -->
Granholm has tried to pin some of the blame on Bush, claiming the president has turned his back on the auto industry and failed to enforce trade agreements that she says would give domestic automakers a level playing field abroad.

Bush supporters insist the president is responsible for the economic resurgence in the rest of the country; they blame Granholm for the "single-state recession" plaguing Michigan.

Michigan remains the only state besides hurricane-ravaged Louisiana to lose jobs between May 2005 and May 2006. Its unemployment rate has hovered two percentage points above the national average, and many economists expect that rate to climb until 2008.

Those same economists often agree that the weak economy is not Granholm's fault. But they know it's an opening for her opponents.
<!-- BEGIN MEDIA BOX NUMBER 3 --><TABLE class=ap-story-table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=180 align=right><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX 9451577 --><!-- $Id: MediaBox.java,v 1.8 2006/06/12 17:55:03 gmavrom Exp $ --><TBODY><TR class=ap-mediabox-tr><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX LEFT SIDE SPACER --><TD class=ap-mediabox-td>http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</TD><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX LEFT SIDE SPACER --><TD class=ap-mediabox-td>
</TD><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX RIGHT SIDE SPACER --><TD class=ap-mediabox-td>http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</TD><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX RIGHT SIDE SPACER --></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX 9451577 --></TBODY></TABLE><!-- END MEDIA BOX NUMBER 3 -->

"It gives an opportunity to the DeVos campaign to say, 'Lousy employment picture, it's all the governor's fault,'" said Charles Ballard, an economics professor at Michigan State University. But if DeVos had been elected in 2002, "the economy would not be dramatically different from what we see now."

DeVos, 50, draws much of his wealth from Amway Corp., the direct-marketing company founded by his father, Richard DeVos, who owns the Orlando Magic basketball team. The younger DeVos was president of the company from 1993 to 2002 and remains a major shareholder. He and his wife, former state GOP Chairwoman Elisabeth DeVos, own a 16,000-square-foot home in Ada, where Amway - now part of a company called Alticor Inc. - has its headquarters.

Dick DeVos will not say how much of his own money he has poured into the race. But his campaign has run television campaign ads since mid-February at a cost of more than $7 million, and DeVos already had given $750,000 to his campaign by the end of last year.

The Michigan Democratic Party began running TV ads promoting Granholm's jobs plan four weeks ago, but Granholm so far has run no ads of her own.

<!-- BEGIN MEDIA BOX NUMBER 4 --><!-- END MEDIA BOX NUMBER 4 -->The attacks on Granholm have also included a full-page newspaper ad featuring a swastika and photos of the governor and Adolf Hitler. The ad in the Michigan Chronicle, the largest black newspaper in Detroit, drew criticism from both Granholm and her challenger after it was placed by Voice the Vote, an independent political action committee.

Granholm responds to critics by pointing to her record of creating jobs in biotechnology and advanced manufacturing, and the passage of a tax break that will give manufacturers $600 million in tax cuts over four years.
When the state is competing with countries such as China and India, "you can offer zero taxes and you can't compete with $1.57 an hour" wages, she said. "We have to invest in order to grow. We cannot slash our way to the bottom."

Still, many voters have begun to doubt her performance. Last month, a poll of 600 likely voters showed that 58 percent gave the Democratic governor a negative rating. That same survey by the political polling firm EPIC-MRA had DeVos getting 46 percent of the vote to Granholm's 44 percent, with 10 percent undecided. Last November, Granholm led DeVos 58 percent to 35 percent. Both polls had a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percent.

<!-- BEGIN MEDIA BOX NUMBER 5 --><!-- END MEDIA BOX NUMBER 5 -->Granholm remains undaunted. "I'm excited about the campaign," she said. "I look forward to the battle."

[JPhillips]

Damn Dutch you got me.

Just because the current articles on Hillary(btw-only one was really about Hillary) aren't negative doesn't mean there never were any. When the next one is published will you say there has never been a positive story written on Hillary?

But if we look at the NYT we can find a story written about Hillary last week that flat out lies to get her to sound critical of other Democrats. That must prove the NYT is conservative, right?

From the New York Times:


ROGERS, Ark., July 15 -- Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, returning to her red-state ties, chastised Democrats Saturday for taking on issues that arouse conservatives and turn out Republican voters rather than finding consensus on mainstream subjects.

Without mentioning specific subjects like gay marriage, Mrs. Clinton said: "We do things that are controversial. We do things that try to inflame their base."

"We are wasting time," the senator told a group of Democratic women here, on part of a two-day swing through a state that could provide an alternate hub to New York if she starts a national political campaign.


Clinton obviously meant no such thing. The "we" was Congress, as led by Republicans, not Democrats. Here's the bit:


You have to ask yourself, we have all these problems, and we have solutions sitting out there, why can't we move in the right direction? And it really comes down to a difference in values and philosophy. . . . And so we were talking one day and saying, you know, we as individuals, we have all of this legislation, we can't get it on the floor of the Senate. We can't get a vote on it because the Republican majority wants to vote on other things. . . . You know, Blanche Lincoln has a bill to make healthcare affordable for small business, I have a bill I was talking to you about with respect to energy independence, we have legislation sitting in the Senate to address these problems. But with the Republican majority, that's not their priority. So we do other things, we do things that are controversial, we do things that try to inflame their base so that they can turn people out and vote for their candidates. I think we are wasting time, we are wasting lives, we need to get back to making America work again, in a bipartisan, nonpartisan way."

[Glengoyne]

Damn Dutch you got me.

Just because the current articles on Hillary(btw-only one was really about Hillary) aren't negative doesn't mean there never were any. When the next one is published will you say there has never been a positive story written on Hillary?

But if we look at the NYT we can find a story written about Hillary last week that flat out lies to get her to sound critical of other Democrats. That must prove the NYT is conservative, right?

I've read the story you point out, and it doesn't sound like the story mis represented her position in the least. I think you read the story with an incredible partisan bent, if you are really saying that she is suggesting that congress, as led by republicans, is doing things to inflame the republican base. How badly do you need to find an evil scheming republican machine. She clearly IS being critical of other democrats, and is saying that instead of expending so much energy doing controversial things, the Democrats should focus on things that can achieve broader bi-partisan support.

[MrBigglesworth]

I've read the story you point out, and it doesn't sound like the story mis represented her position in the least. I think you read the story with an incredible partisan bent, if you are really saying that she is suggesting that congress, as led by republicans, is doing things to inflame the republican base. How badly do you need to find an evil scheming republican machine. She clearly IS being critical of other democrats, and is saying that instead of expending so much energy doing controversial things, the Democrats should focus on things that can achieve broader bi-partisan support.
Glen, I think you need to read it again because you missed something. Here is Clinton's quote again:

We can't get a vote on it because the Republican majority wants to vote on other things. . . . You know, Blanche Lincoln has a bill to make healthcare affordable for small business, I have a bill I was talking to you about with respect to energy independence, we have legislation sitting in the Senate to address these problems. But with the Republican majority, that's not their priority. So we do other things, we do things that are controversial, we do things that try to inflame their base so that they can turn people out and vote for their candidates. I think we are wasting time, we are wasting lives, we need to get back to making America work again, in a bipartisan, nonpartisan way.

Obviously she is saying that the GOP who are in control of congress is wasting time bringing up votes to inflame their base (this was around the time that the flag burning thing was talked about and voted on). The NYT said that she was saying that Democrats were wasting time, which is rediculous on its face because there is no way that the Dems are the ones bringing things like the flag burning amendment to the floor, they don't have power to bring ANYTHING to the floor the way our parliamentary system works.

[JPhillips]

Glen this is clearly about Republicans. Just look at one line in Biggles cutout.

we do things that try to inflame their base so that they can turn people out and vote for their candidates

If its about what you say, why would Dems want to turn out candidates to vote for Republicans?

[Glengoyne]

Well, color me mistaken. I re-read what Biggles quoted, and you look to be correct. I re-read a third time, and thought for a second that I was right, but all successive passes result in the assessment that she is clearly talking about Republicans. I don't think I'd go out on a limb and say the original article lied about her statement, as I certainly thought that was what she said as well. That reading doesn't exactly fail to parse because her use of "we" is particularly Faulkneresque. I thought the "we" was democrats, and I don't think it is that outlandish.



Edit: I had to come back and change Giggles to Biggles. The funny thing is that when I typed the post I consciously had decided NOT to insult him. Muscle memory is hard to overcome.

[Bubba Wheels]

I follow you know. (Had to go back in the thread to find the reference). I could only search the last 7 days on the AP website and couldn't find anything "horrible" on Hillary Clinton. I reckon if I searched a little further back that wouldn't be a problem. But it appears as if you either ignored or forgot the "Democrat Governor of Michigan" who was also mentioned in that post.

Low and behold...

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/MICHIGAN_GOVERNOR?SITE=WIMAR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Faltering Economy Obstacle for Granholm

By KATHY BARKS HOFFMAN
Associated Press Writer
<!-- BEGIN MEDIA BOX NUMBER 1 --><TABLE class=ap-story-table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=180 align=right><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX 9451575 --><!-- $Id: MediaBox.java,v 1.8 2006/06/12 17:55:03 gmavrom Exp $ --><TBODY><TR class=ap-mediabox-tr><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX LEFT SIDE SPACER --><TD class=ap-mediabox-td>http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</TD><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX LEFT SIDE SPACER --><TD class=ap-mediabox-td><TABLE class=ap-mediabox-table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><!-- BEGIN PACKAGE 959062, 'online' --><!-- $Id: Package.java,v 1.10 2005/07/20 22:05:22 mike Exp $ --><!-- BEGIN SMALLPHOTO ID 1785652 --><!-- $Id: SmallPhoto.java,v 1.9 2006/06/12 17:55:02 gmavrom Exp $ --><TBODY><TR class=ap-smallphoto-tr><TD class=ap-smallphoto-td-image>http://hosted.ap.org/photos/8/82c5d62e-d9c6-4c79-a5c5-aafee8c60832-small.jpg (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/photos/8/82c5d62e-d9c6-4c79-a5c5-aafee8c60832.html?SITE=WIMAR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT)
AP Photo/CARLOS OSORIO</TD></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM SMALLPHOTO ID 1785652 --><!-- BEGIN PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><TR class=ap-contentcontainer-tr><TD class=ap-contentcontainer-td>http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</TD></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><!-- BOX_BOTTOM PACKAGE 959062 --><!-- BEGIN PACKAGE 125911, 'ADVERTISEMENT_POLITICS' --><!-- $Id: Package.java,v 1.10 2005/07/20 22:05:22 mike Exp $ --><!-- BEGIN HTML FRAGMENT ID 4373 --><!-- $Id: HtmlFragment.java,v 1.7 2006/06/12 17:55:03 gmavrom Exp $- --><TR class=ap-htmlfragment-tr><TD class=ap-htmlfragment-td><SCRIPT language=JavaScript>tcdacmd="cc=wdn; dt";</SCRIPT><SCRIPT language=JavaScript src="http://an.tacoda.net/an/11676/slf.js"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT language=JavaScript src="http://anrtx.tacoda.net/rtx/r.js?cmd=WDN&si=11676&r=hosted.ap.org&v=3.1.0.26azzz&cb=0.30402454139643764"></SCRIPT></TD></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM HTML FRAGMENT ID 4373 --><!-- BEGIN PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><TR class=ap-contentcontainer-tr><TD class=ap-contentcontainer-td>http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</TD></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><!-- BEGIN HTML FRAGMENT ID 1117 --><!-- $Id: HtmlFragment.java,v 1.7 2006/06/12 17:55:03 gmavrom Exp $- --><TR class=ap-htmlfragment-tr><TD class=ap-htmlfragment-td><!-- THIS AD IS FOR POLITICS STORIES --><!-- AP call to x96 --><SCRIPT language=JavaScript>var SECTION_TPL='POLITICS'; var excVal = check_exc(); if( excVal == 1 ) { document.write('Advertisement
'); document.write('<div align="center"><SCRIPT LANGUAGE="JavaScript1.1" SRC="http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_jx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1' + RNS+ '@x96">'); document.write(''); document.write('http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_nx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1' + RNS+ '@x96 (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/)'); document.write('<\/SCRIPT>'+'<\/div>'); }</SCRIPT>Advertisement
<SCRIPT language=JavaScript1.1 src="http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_jx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1828119936@x96">http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_nx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1828119936@x96 (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/)</SCRIPT>
<!-- ---------- Advertising.com Banner Code -------------- --><SCRIPT language=JavaScript> var bnum=new Number(Math.floor(99999999 * Math.random())+1); document.write('<SCR'+'IPT LANGUAGE="JavaScript" '); document.write('SRC="http://servedby.advertising.com/site=700203/size=180150/bnum='+bnum+'/optn=1"></SCR'+'IPT>'); </SCRIPT><SCRIPT language=JavaScript src="http://servedby.advertising.com/site=700203/size=180150/bnum=8044311/optn=1"></SCRIPT><!-- ---------- Copyright 2000, Advertising.com ---------- -->[/URL] <!-- AP end call to x96 --><!-- AP call to x03 --><SCRIPT language=JavaScript> var excVal = check_exc(); if( excVal == 1 ) { document.write('<SCRIPT LANGUAGE="JavaScript1.1" SRC="http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_jx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1' + RNS+ '@x03">'); document.write('[URL="http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/"]'); document.write('http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_nx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1' + RNS+ '@x03 (http://servedby.advertising.com/click/site=0000700203/mnum=0000275124/genr=1/tkdt=B0P0R1T0/cstr=8044311=_44c51e8b,8893051520,700203^275124^1^0,1_/bnum=8044311)'); document.write('<\/SCRI'+'PT>'); }</SCRIPT><SCRIPT language=JavaScript1.1 src="http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_jx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1828119936@x03">http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_nx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1828119936@x03 (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/)</SCRIPT>http://a248.e.akamai.net/7/800/1134/0/oasc03.247realmedia.com/RealMedia/ads/Creatives/default/empty.gif (http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1378342618/x03/default/empty.gif/30633934333633333434306438666330?) <!-- AP end call to x03 --></TD></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM HTML FRAGMENT ID 1117 --><!-- BEGIN PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><TR class=ap-contentcontainer-tr><TD class=ap-contentcontainer-td>http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</TD></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><!-- BOX_BOTTOM PACKAGE 125911 --></TBODY></TABLE></TD><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX RIGHT SIDE SPACER --><TD class=ap-mediabox-td>http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</TD><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX RIGHT SIDE SPACER --></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX 9451575 --></TBODY></TABLE><!-- END MEDIA BOX NUMBER 1 -->
LANSING, Mich. (AP) -- Gov. Jennifer Granholm was once a darling of the Democratic Party - a Canadian-born rising star who was mentioned along with California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger as a possible presidential candidate if the Constitution were changed to allow foreign-born citizens to run for the White House.

But then the state's economy faltered because of the struggling auto industry, leading Republicans to target Michigan as the most likely place to defeat a Democratic incumbent.

"I think the governor of Illinois, the governor of Wisconsin, the governor of Pennsylvania are all Democratic incumbents that face challenges this year," Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman said. But Granholm's record "is harder to defend than any governor of either party that I can think of."

Granholm, 47, is up against a well-financed campaign by multimillionaire challenger Dick DeVos, who is getting free political help from Matthew Dowd, one of President Bush's senior campaign advisers.
<!-- BEGIN MEDIA BOX NUMBER 2 --><TABLE class=ap-story-table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=180 align=right><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX 9451576 --><!-- $Id: MediaBox.java,v 1.8 2006/06/12 17:55:03 gmavrom Exp $ --><TBODY><TR class=ap-mediabox-tr><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX LEFT SIDE SPACER --><TD class=ap-mediabox-td>http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</TD><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX LEFT SIDE SPACER --><TD class=ap-mediabox-td><TABLE class=ap-mediabox-table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><!-- BEGIN PACKAGE 507192, 'X_BEHAVIORAL_POLITICS' --><!-- $Id: Package.java,v 1.10 2005/07/20 22:05:22 mike Exp $ --><!-- BEGIN HTML FRAGMENT ID 3854 --><!-- $Id: HtmlFragment.java,v 1.4 2005/06/15 16:32:32 mike Exp $- --><TBODY><TR><TD><!-- start behavioral tag 1 --><SCRIPT language=Javascript src="http://hosted.ap.org/specials/AP_Tacoda_AMS_DDC_Header.js"></SCRIPT><!-- end behavioral tag 1 --><!-- start behavioral tag 2 --><SCRIPT language=Javascript>AP_Tacoda_AMS_DDC_addPair("SECTION", "POLITICS")</SCRIPT><!-- end behavioral tag 2 --><!-- start behavioral tag 3 --><SCRIPT language=JavaScript>AP_Tacoda_AMS_DDC("http://te.ap.org/tte/blank.gif", "1.0")</SCRIPT>http://te.ap.org/tte/blank.gif?0.07587295686155937&snippet_version=1.3.a&referrer=http%3A//hosted.ap.org/dynamic/external/search.hosted.ap.org/wireCoreTool/Search%3Ftype%3DStory%26output_format%3DPARA%26query%3Dgranholm%26SITE%3DWIMAR%26SECTION%3DHOME&page=http%3A//hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/MICHIGAN_GOVERNOR%3FSITE%3DWIMAR%26SECTION%3DHOME%26TEMPLATE%3DDEFAULT&timezone=240&clist_TID=0pjd50c120r7es&var_SECTION=POLITICS <!-- end behavioral tag 3 --></TD></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM HTML FRAGMENT ID 3854 --><!-- BEGIN PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><TR><TD>http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</TD></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><!-- BOX_BOTTOM PACKAGE 507192 --></TBODY></TABLE></TD><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX RIGHT SIDE SPACER --><TD class=ap-mediabox-td>http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</TD><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX RIGHT SIDE SPACER --></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX 9451576 --></TBODY></TABLE><!-- END MEDIA BOX NUMBER 2 -->
Granholm has tried to pin some of the blame on Bush, claiming the president has turned his back on the auto industry and failed to enforce trade agreements that she says would give domestic automakers a level playing field abroad.

Bush supporters insist the president is responsible for the economic resurgence in the rest of the country; they blame Granholm for the "single-state recession" plaguing Michigan.

Michigan remains the only state besides hurricane-ravaged Louisiana to lose jobs between May 2005 and May 2006. Its unemployment rate has hovered two percentage points above the national average, and many economists expect that rate to climb until 2008.

Those same economists often agree that the weak economy is not Granholm's fault. But they know it's an opening for her opponents.
<!-- BEGIN MEDIA BOX NUMBER 3 --><TABLE class=ap-story-table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=180 align=right><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX 9451577 --><!-- $Id: MediaBox.java,v 1.8 2006/06/12 17:55:03 gmavrom Exp $ --><TBODY><TR class=ap-mediabox-tr><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX LEFT SIDE SPACER --><TD class=ap-mediabox-td>http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</TD><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX LEFT SIDE SPACER --><TD class=ap-mediabox-td>
</TD><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX RIGHT SIDE SPACER --><TD class=ap-mediabox-td>http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</TD><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX RIGHT SIDE SPACER --></TR><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX 9451577 --></TBODY></TABLE><!-- END MEDIA BOX NUMBER 3 -->

"It gives an opportunity to the DeVos campaign to say, 'Lousy employment picture, it's all the governor's fault,'" said Charles Ballard, an economics professor at Michigan State University. But if DeVos had been elected in 2002, "the economy would not be dramatically different from what we see now."

DeVos, 50, draws much of his wealth from Amway Corp., the direct-marketing company founded by his father, Richard DeVos, who owns the Orlando Magic basketball team. The younger DeVos was president of the company from 1993 to 2002 and remains a major shareholder. He and his wife, former state GOP Chairwoman Elisabeth DeVos, own a 16,000-square-foot home in Ada, where Amway - now part of a company called Alticor Inc. - has its headquarters.

Dick DeVos will not say how much of his own money he has poured into the race. But his campaign has run television campaign ads since mid-February at a cost of more than $7 million, and DeVos already had given $750,000 to his campaign by the end of last year.

The Michigan Democratic Party began running TV ads promoting Granholm's jobs plan four weeks ago, but Granholm so far has run no ads of her own.

<!-- BEGIN MEDIA BOX NUMBER 4 --><!-- END MEDIA BOX NUMBER 4 -->The attacks on Granholm have also included a full-page newspaper ad featuring a swastika and photos of the governor and Adolf Hitler. The ad in the Michigan Chronicle, the largest black newspaper in Detroit, drew criticism from both Granholm and her challenger after it was placed by Voice the Vote, an independent political action committee.

Granholm responds to critics by pointing to her record of creating jobs in biotechnology and advanced manufacturing, and the passage of a tax break that will give manufacturers $600 million in tax cuts over four years.
When the state is competing with countries such as China and India, "you can offer zero taxes and you can't compete with $1.57 an hour" wages, she said. "We have to invest in order to grow. We cannot slash our way to the bottom."

Still, many voters have begun to doubt her performance. Last month, a poll of 600 likely voters showed that 58 percent gave the Democratic governor a negative rating. That same survey by the political polling firm EPIC-MRA had DeVos getting 46 percent of the vote to Granholm's 44 percent, with 10 percent undecided. Last November, Granholm led DeVos 58 percent to 35 percent. Both polls had a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percent.

<!-- BEGIN MEDIA BOX NUMBER 5 --><!-- END MEDIA BOX NUMBER 5 -->Granholm remains undaunted. "I'm excited about the campaign," she said. "I look forward to the battle."

Bye Bye Jennifer, we hardly knew ya...but one-term wonders are like that. Don't let the construction barrels hit you on the way out. Good luck in your inevitable next life as a lobbyist.

[Bubba Wheels]

I'm still stuck on page 1 of this thread trying to figure out what the Jews have to do with this...:confused:

Jews vote. There are many more Jews in the State of New York than Arabs. Especially in New York City (see Jessie Jackson: H...town/comment.)

This makes Hillary, who must first win re-election to the Senate from the State of New York before she can run for President, much more vulnerable than some of her fellow dems from other states if she comes out against the war.

For more on Hillary standard operating political procedure, refer to her first election when husband/then President Bill suddenly freed about 10 convicted Puerto Rican terrorists that had bombed a building and killed at least one police officer. That would be...ready boys and girls?...the H I S P A N I C vote! Get it? If not, please report to remedial politics for politicians class.

And for the really slow ones, please to not attempt to construe this as an anti-anything thread other than possibly and correctly anti-Hillary. I myself am pro-Israel and support them whole-heartedly.

[Buccaneer]

I notice your disdain for television news, but the fact is the vast majority of Americans get their news from TV. In this regard, you can't underestimate how vital the talking heads are.



Jonathan, I was referring to all those heads that one can click on at sites like foxnews, cnn, et al. I read foxnews because their presentation is better than cnn but read cnn for more comprehensiveness (I don't do TV). To me, I basically see the same thing on both (mostly all AP stories). If those screaming about foxnews radical rightness because one can scroll further on down and click on Hannity or O'Reilly or whomever, what does that have to do with the AP news stories?? Besides, why would I click on those heads or Greta or Anderson Cooper or Wolf or whomever? Those people aren't news, just commentators.

[Dutch]

H_B and JPhillips,

I will take the Senator from Michigan as a negative article, congratulations. I wish it would have started with...

"Joe Smith summed up the Democrat in one word, 'Awful.'" But I'll accept it as a negative article. To be honest, I had no clue and still don't have any idea who that lady is, so she must not be as "Awful" as Gov Schwartzenegger if the AP is even close to being unbiased.

The NYT is not even close to conservative, and one article won't change that. But in any event, it's not a part of this equation. I'm taking it to the AP (and even Reuters, if you like.) Not partisan sources like the NYT, CNN, or Fox News.

The question this weekend was if the AP was just delivering the news or were they offering up some classic forms of bias. It is opinion based, I agree, but so far, I am not anywhere near convinced that the AP is trying to be unbiased.

[MrBigglesworth]

Jonathan, I was referring to all those heads that one can click on at sites like foxnews, cnn, et al. I read foxnews because their presentation is better than cnn but read cnn for more comprehensiveness (I don't do TV). To me, I basically see the same thing on both (mostly all AP stories). If those screaming about foxnews radical rightness because one can scroll further on down and click on Hannity or O'Reilly or whomever, what does that have to do with the AP news stories?? Besides, why would I click on those heads or Greta or Anderson Cooper or Wolf or whomever? Those people aren't news, just commentators.
Can someone that isn't on Buc's ignore list tell him that people are talking about the FoxNews TV channel as being biased, and not FoxNews.com?

[MrBigglesworth]

Jews vote. There are many more Jews in the State of New York than Arabs. Especially in New York City (see Jessie Jackson: H...town/comment.)

This makes Hillary, who must first win re-election to the Senate from the State of New York before she can run for President, much more vulnerable than some of her fellow dems from other states if she comes out against the war.

For more on Hillary standard operating political procedure, refer to her first election when husband/then President Bill suddenly freed about 10 convicted Puerto Rican terrorists that had bombed a building and killed at least one police officer. That would be...ready boys and girls?...the H I S P A N I C vote! Get it? If not, please report to remedial politics for politicians class.

And for the really slow ones, please to not attempt to construe this as an anti-anything thread other than possibly and correctly anti-Hillary. I myself am pro-Israel and support them whole-heartedly.
You may want to check out the polls and rethink your logic:
U.S. Jews Oppose Iraq War, Anti-Terror Efforts, Poll Finds

By Chanan Tigay



NEW YORK, Dec. 21 (JTA) -- Most American Jews disapprove of the war in Iraq and the way the United States is handling the campaign against terrorism, according to a new study.

The American Jewish Committee's annual Survey of American Jewish Opinion, released Wednesday, found that 70 percent of U.S. Jews disapprove of the Iraq war, with 28 percent backing it. Sixty percent of respondents said they did not support America's handling of the war on terror, while 36 percent approve.
http://www.cjp.org/content_display.html?ArticleID=169151

Furthermore, Jews comprise only 5% of the population of the state of New York. Clinton's current lead in NY is 27 percentage pts. If every Jewish person is currently voting for Clinton, and they all decide to switch to her challenger, she will still lead by 17 pts.

All I did to find this out was type in "jewish poll iraq" and "demographics religion new york", respectively, in Google. Knowing these new facts, how does that change your rationale for Clinton's behavior?

[JPhillips]

Dutch wins.

There were negative articles about Bush this past weekend, therefore the AP is biased and is working to discredit Republicans.

[tanglewood]

Was cruising aimlessly on TV and thought, why not, let's switch it to Fox News. It's the O'Reilley Factor and the next issue is if gas prices are rising why are more Americans not cutting back on usage? An interesting issue I think, I wonder what insightful comments and facts the respective interviewees will present us with. But no, within 30 seconds (literally, I wish I was exaggerating) it goes from "Well Americans just don't want to cut back no matter the cost" to "THE DEMOCRATS ARE AIDING THE TERRORISTS BY STALLING ENERGY LEGISLATION!!!".

[JPhillips]

From today's Washington Post:


Two Views of the Same News Find Opposite Biases

By Shankar Vedantam
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, July 24, 2006; A02



You could be forgiven for thinking the television images in the experiment were from 2006. They were really from 1982: Israeli forces were clashing with Arab militants in Lebanon. The world was watching, charges were flying, and the air was thick with grievance, hurt and outrage.

There was only one thing on which pro-Israeli and pro-Arab audiences agreed. Both were certain that media coverage in the United States was hopelessly biased in favor of the other side.

The endlessly recursive conflict in the Middle East provides any number of instructive morals about human nature, but it also offers a psychological window into the world of partisan behavior. Israel's 1982 war in Lebanon sparked some of the earliest experiments into why people reach dramatically different conclusions about the same events.

The results say a lot about partisan behavior in general -- why Republicans and Democrats love to hate each other, for example, or why Coke and Pepsi fans clash. Sadly, the results also say a lot about the newest conflicts between Israel and its enemies in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories, and why news organizations are being besieged with angry complaints from both sides.

Partisans, it turns out, don't just arrive at different conclusions; they see entirely different worlds . In one especially telling experiment, researchers showed 144 observers six television news segments about Israel's 1982 war with Lebanon.

Pro-Arab viewers heard 42 references that painted Israel in a positive light and 26 references that painted Israel unfavorably.

Pro-Israeli viewers, who watched the very same clips, spotted 16 references that painted Israel positively and 57 references that painted Israel negatively.

Both groups were certain they were right and that the other side didn't know what it was talking about.

The tendency to see bias in the news -- now the raison d'etre of much of the blogosphere -- is such a reliable indicator of partisan thinking that researchers coined a term, "hostile media effect," to describe the sincere belief among partisans that news reports are painting them in the worst possible light.

Were pro-Israeli and pro-Arab viewers who were especially knowledgeable about the conflict immune from such distortions? Amazingly, it turned out to be exactly the opposite, Stanford psychologist Lee D. Ross said. The best-informed partisans were the most likely to see bias against their side.

Ross thinks this is because partisans often feel the news lacks context. Instead of just showing a missile killing civilians, in other words, partisans on both sides want the news to explain the history of events that prompted -- and could have justified -- the missile. The more knowledgeable people are, the more context they find missing.

Even more curious, the hostile media effect seems to apply only to news sources that strive for balance. News reports from obviously biased sources usually draw fewer charges of bias. Partisans, it turns out, find it easier to countenance obvious propaganda than news accounts that explore both sides.

"If I think the world is black, and you think the world is white, and someone comes along and says it is gray, we will both think that person is biased," Ross said.

The experiment, of course, did not address whether news reports were in fact biased -- who would decide? -- or how the media ought to cover conflicts. Partisans argue that assigning equal weight to both sides is wrong when one side (theirs) is right. In any event, psychologists such as Ross are less interested in rating the news or in which side is right than in the curiosities of human perception: Why are partisans invariably blind to how news coverage might help their side?

If someone says several nice things about you and one derogatory thing, what sticks in your mind? People who are deeply invested in one side are quicker to spot and remember aspects of the news that hurt than they are to see aspects that help, said Richard Perloff, a Cleveland State University political communication researcher.

Perloff elicited the same clashing perceptions of bias from pro-Israeli and pro-Arab audiences when he showed them news clips with equal amounts of violence.

Ross and Perloff both found that what partisans worry about the most is the impact of the news on neutral observers. But the data suggest such worry is misplaced. Neutral observers are better than partisans at seeing flaws and virtues on both sides. Partisans, it turns out, are particularly susceptible to the general human belief that other people are susceptible to propaganda.

"When you are persuaded by something, you don't think it is propaganda," Ross said. "Israelis know they see the world the way they do because they are Israelis, and Arabs, too. The difference is people think in their case, their special identities are a source of enlightenment, whereas other people's source of enlightenment is a source of bias."

[Barkeep49]

Nice find. That's a very interesting article.

[Dutch]

According to the article, if this were accurate with regard to the AP and Reuters, shouldn't left-leaning readers find just as many negative articles about Democrats as right-leaning readers do about Republicans?

[Honolulu_Blue]

According to the article, if this were accurate with regard to the AP and Reuters, shouldn't left-leaning readers find just as many negative articles about Democrats as right-leaning readers do about Republicans?

No. Republicans control the White House and Congress. There are 28 republican governors to 22 democrats. They actually have power and are capable of doing things. There are more of them and they do more, thus you'll find more negative articles about them. If the numbers were reversed, there'd be more negative articles about the democrats. It's hard to write a bunch of negative stuff about a bunch of ineffectual people who can't really accomplish anything (e.g., democratic congressmen).

If I recall correctly there were a fare share of negative articles about president Clinton back in the day.

[SirFozzie]

Maybe A) with one side in power and the other not, there's a heck of a lot more attention paid to the side in power.. and B) if there is, people don't compain about it as much?

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Jonathan, I was referring to all those heads that one can click on at sites like foxnews, cnn, et al. I read foxnews because their presentation is better than cnn but read cnn for more comprehensiveness (I don't do TV). To me, I basically see the same thing on both (mostly all AP stories). If those screaming about foxnews radical rightness because one can scroll further on down and click on Hannity or O'Reilly or whomever, what does that have to do with the AP news stories?? Besides, why would I click on those heads or Greta or Anderson Cooper or Wolf or whomever? Those people aren't news, just commentators.

Ok, I misunderstood what you were talking about. When someone mentions Fox News, I figure they are talking about the cable channel. Foxnews.com is a different beast. Same goes for CNN and cnn.com. Without the .com I'm lost.

Having never used foxnews.com, I'm still confused by your statement regarding talking heads. I use cnn.com, but I don't see their commentators on the site except for every now and again (mainly Lou Dobbs). Perhaps it's just more prominent on foxnews.com?

[MrBigglesworth]

According to the article, if this were accurate with regard to the AP and Reuters, shouldn't left-leaning readers find just as many negative articles about Democrats as right-leaning readers do about Republicans?
Left-leaning readers do find negative articles about Democrats, they just don't whine about it as much, and instead of blaming it on a general partisan bias in the media, they blame it on laziness and a desire to make money over advancing the public interest. You can go to any lefty blog and see critique after critique of the media, same as the righty blogs.

[Dutch]

No. Republicans control the White House and Congress. There are 28 republican governors to 22 democrats. They actually have power and are capable of doing things. There are more of them and they do more, thus you'll find more negative articles about them. If the numbers were reversed, there'd be more negative articles about the democrats. It's hard to write a bunch of negative stuff about a bunch of ineffectual people who can't really accomplish anything (e.g., democratic congressmen).

If I recall correctly there were a fare share of negative articles about president Clinton back in the day.

So you do agree then that the AP has bias against the Republicans?

[Chubby]

So you do agree then that the AP has bias against the Republicans?

:rolleyes:

[Johnny Slick]

A quick Newsday search of AP articles that could be construed as being anti-Democrat... since Dutch has set the bar so hilariously low, I'll just post the links, the offending snippet, and why it's evidence of bias. This, of course, is not to convince the conservatives that there's a conservative bias, but the moderates and thinkers on this board that you can interpret subtle things like word choice a million different ways:

http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-democrats,0,2599961.story

DENVER -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, sounding a lot like a 2008 presidential candidate Monday, accused President Bush and the Republicans of making a mess of the economy and failing to ensure affordable services for the nation's middle class and poor.

"It's the American dream, stupid," said the former first lady in a riff on her husband's successful 1992 campaign mantra -- "It's the economy, stupid." Democrat Bill Clinton served two terms in the White House."Hey, a Democrat is accusing the President of something!!! She must be a candidate!!!! Also, the woman was elected Senator by the state of New York, and yet the AP writer chooses to note as her largest accomplishment that she is a "former first lady." Why not call her a "first term Democratic senator" instead? I'll answer that for you. Because the MSM perceives Hillary as nothing more than a carpetbagging opportunist, and will tell you this every chance it has.

http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-democrats-religion,0,5773414.story

This may as well have been called "Moderates: Dems Should Be More Moderate". What was the point of this article? Other than subtly bashing the Democratic Party for being too liberal, that is.

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/ny-bc-ct--connecticutsenate0721jul20,0,6941364.story

HARTFORD, Conn. -- Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman is enlisting help in his re-election campaign from former President Clinton, the man he criticized in 1998 for "disgraceful behavior" in a sex scandal with a White House intern.1. It's been 8 freaking years, guys. Give it a rest.
2. "Lookit them libs and their libral hypocrisy!!!! I bet if a Republican cheated on his wife or gave them their divorce papers while they were recovering from cancer surgery, we'd totally lock him out!!!!"

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-bigfoot-lawsuit,0,5479097.story

I include this as one of many examples of the horrendous attitude towards science evinced by the MSM. Okay, this one may not be outwardly anti-lefty (although there's a little shot at "evolution's missing link" that, well, demonstrates why people who don't know anything about science probably shouldn't be writing about it), but it does show something that is absolutely endemic to this crap: no matter how ludicrous the "other side" of the argument is in something involving smart people, the MSM goes out of its way to create "balance" by invoking said other side. Well, guess what... not every news story has an equally balanced other side.

I have noticed that global warming stories have gotten better over the last couple months in that I don't see so much "Bob Andrews of Right Wing Think Tank 24 disagrees because [insert horribly unlearned "slam" of global warming here]." There had been a rather pernicious belief, thanks to this, that there was some sort of debate going on in the scientific community about this issue. There's not. Similarly, whenever some moron school district tries to feed its kids creationism - whether they call it creationism or "intelligent design" or "creation science" or "smarty smarty smart smart sciencey Earth facts" - you *always* get Stephen Johnson or some Discovery Instituter quoted in those things. Why? There is about as much evidence for evolution as there is for the existence of William the Conqueror, and you don't see the AP invoking medieval "scholars" who say that England was actually invaded by Golgoth the Rat King.

Is that enough? Because I'm sure I can produce more.

[Honolulu_Blue]

So you do agree then that the AP has bias against the Republicans?

Not at all. They just do more and, as politicians, simply doing more means they do more stupid things. When someone does something stupid and someone reports on it and calls it "stupid" the article may come across as negative but really its just that reality again. Damn youse, reality!!!

The liberal media bias in the U.S. theory is as ridiculous as the liberal bias at FOFC theory.

[Bonegavel]

I follow you know. (Had to go back in the thread to find the reference). I could only search the last 7 days on the AP website and couldn't find anything "horrible" on Hillary Clinton. I reckon if I searched a little further back that wouldn't be a problem. But it appears as if you either ignored or forgot the "Democrat Governor of Michigan" who was also mentioned in that post.

Low and behold...

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/MICHIGAN_GOVERNOR?SITE=WIMAR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Faltering Economy Obstacle for Granholm

By KATHY BARKS HOFFMAN
Associated Press Writer
<!-- BEGIN MEDIA BOX NUMBER 1 --><table class="ap-story-table" align="right" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="180"><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX 9451575 --><!-- $Id: MediaBox.java,v 1.8 2006/06/12 17:55:03 gmavrom Exp $ --><tbody><tr class="ap-mediabox-tr"><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX LEFT SIDE SPACER --><td class="ap-mediabox-td">http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</td><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX LEFT SIDE SPACER --><td class="ap-mediabox-td"><table class="ap-mediabox-table" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><!-- BEGIN PACKAGE 959062, 'online' --><!-- $Id: Package.java,v 1.10 2005/07/20 22:05:22 mike Exp $ --><!-- BEGIN SMALLPHOTO ID 1785652 --><!-- $Id: SmallPhoto.java,v 1.9 2006/06/12 17:55:02 gmavrom Exp $ --><tbody><tr class="ap-smallphoto-tr"><td class="ap-smallphoto-td-image">http://hosted.ap.org/photos/8/82c5d62e-d9c6-4c79-a5c5-aafee8c60832-small.jpg (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/photos/8/82c5d62e-d9c6-4c79-a5c5-aafee8c60832.html?SITE=WIMAR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT)
AP Photo/CARLOS OSORIO</td></tr><!-- BOX_BOTTOM SMALLPHOTO ID 1785652 --><!-- BEGIN PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><tr class="ap-contentcontainer-tr"><td class="ap-contentcontainer-td">http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</td></tr><!-- BOX_BOTTOM PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><!-- BOX_BOTTOM PACKAGE 959062 --><!-- BEGIN PACKAGE 125911, 'ADVERTISEMENT_POLITICS' --><!-- $Id: Package.java,v 1.10 2005/07/20 22:05:22 mike Exp $ --><!-- BEGIN HTML FRAGMENT ID 4373 --><!-- $Id: HtmlFragment.java,v 1.7 2006/06/12 17:55:03 gmavrom Exp $- --><tr class="ap-htmlfragment-tr"><td class="ap-htmlfragment-td"><script language="JavaScript">tcdacmd="cc=wdn; dt";</script><script language="JavaScript" src="http://an.tacoda.net/an/11676/slf.js"></script><script language="JavaScript" src="http://anrtx.tacoda.net/rtx/r.js?cmd=WDN&si=11676&r=hosted.ap.org&v=3.1.0.26azzz&cb=0.30402454139643764"></script></td></tr><!-- BOX_BOTTOM HTML FRAGMENT ID 4373 --><!-- BEGIN PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><tr class="ap-contentcontainer-tr"><td class="ap-contentcontainer-td">http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</td></tr><!-- BOX_BOTTOM PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><!-- BEGIN HTML FRAGMENT ID 1117 --><!-- $Id: HtmlFragment.java,v 1.7 2006/06/12 17:55:03 gmavrom Exp $- --><tr class="ap-htmlfragment-tr"><td class="ap-htmlfragment-td"><!-- THIS AD IS FOR POLITICS STORIES --><!-- AP call to x96 --><script language="JavaScript">var SECTION_TPL='POLITICS'; var excVal = check_exc(); if( excVal == 1 ) { document.write('Advertisement
'); document.write('<div align="center"><SCRIPT LANGUAGE="JavaScript1.1" SRC="http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_jx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1' + RNS+ '@x96">'); document.write(''); document.write('http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_nx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1' + RNS+ '@x96 (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/)'); document.write('<\/SCRIPT>'+'<\/div>'); }</script>Advertisement
<script language="JavaScript1.1" src="http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_jx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1828119936@x96">http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_nx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1828119936@x96 (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/)</script>
<!-- ---------- Advertising.com Banner Code -------------- --><script language="JavaScript"> var bnum=new Number(Math.floor(99999999 * Math.random())+1); document.write('<SCR'+'IPT LANGUAGE="JavaScript" '); document.write('SRC="http://servedby.advertising.com/site=700203/size=180150/bnum='+bnum+'/optn=1"></SCR'+'IPT>'); </script><script language="JavaScript" src="http://servedby.advertising.com/site=700203/size=180150/bnum=8044311/optn=1"></script><!-- ---------- Copyright 2000, Advertising.com ---------- --> <!-- AP end call to x96 --><!-- AP call to x03 --><script language="JavaScript"> var excVal = check_exc(); if( excVal == 1 ) { document.write('<SCRIPT LANGUAGE="JavaScript1.1" SRC="http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_jx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1' + RNS+ '@x03">'); document.write(''); document.write('http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_nx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1' + RNS+ '@x03 (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/)'); document.write('<\/SCRI'+'PT>'); }</script><script language="JavaScript1.1" src="http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_jx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1828119936@x03">http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/adstream_nx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1828119936@x03 (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/)</script>http://a248.e.akamai.net/7/800/1134/0/oasc03.247realmedia.com/RealMedia/ads/Creatives/default/empty.gif (http://oascentral.hosted.ap.org/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/WIMAR.hosted.ap.org/POLITICS/1378342618/x03/default/empty.gif/30633934333633333434306438666330?) <!-- AP end call to x03 --></td></tr><!-- BOX_BOTTOM HTML FRAGMENT ID 1117 --><!-- BEGIN PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><tr class="ap-contentcontainer-tr"><td class="ap-contentcontainer-td">http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</td></tr><!-- BOX_BOTTOM PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><!-- BOX_BOTTOM PACKAGE 125911 --></tbody></table></td><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX RIGHT SIDE SPACER --><td class="ap-mediabox-td">http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</td><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX RIGHT SIDE SPACER --></tr><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX 9451575 --></tbody></table><!-- END MEDIA BOX NUMBER 1 -->
LANSING, Mich. (AP) -- Gov. Jennifer Granholm was once a darling of the Democratic Party - a Canadian-born rising star who was mentioned along with California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger as a possible presidential candidate if the Constitution were changed to allow foreign-born citizens to run for the White House.

But then the state's economy faltered because of the struggling auto industry, leading Republicans to target Michigan as the most likely place to defeat a Democratic incumbent.

"I think the governor of Illinois, the governor of Wisconsin, the governor of Pennsylvania are all Democratic incumbents that face challenges this year," Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman said. But Granholm's record "is harder to defend than any governor of either party that I can think of."

Granholm, 47, is up against a well-financed campaign by multimillionaire challenger Dick DeVos, who is getting free political help from Matthew Dowd, one of President Bush's senior campaign advisers.
<!-- BEGIN MEDIA BOX NUMBER 2 --><table class="ap-story-table" align="right" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="180"><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX 9451576 --><!-- $Id: MediaBox.java,v 1.8 2006/06/12 17:55:03 gmavrom Exp $ --><tbody><tr class="ap-mediabox-tr"><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX LEFT SIDE SPACER --><td class="ap-mediabox-td">http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</td><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX LEFT SIDE SPACER --><td class="ap-mediabox-td"><table class="ap-mediabox-table" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><!-- BEGIN PACKAGE 507192, 'X_BEHAVIORAL_POLITICS' --><!-- $Id: Package.java,v 1.10 2005/07/20 22:05:22 mike Exp $ --><!-- BEGIN HTML FRAGMENT ID 3854 --><!-- $Id: HtmlFragment.java,v 1.4 2005/06/15 16:32:32 mike Exp $- --><tbody><tr><td><!-- start behavioral tag 1 --><script language="Javascript" src="http://hosted.ap.org/specials/AP_Tacoda_AMS_DDC_Header.js"></script><!-- end behavioral tag 1 --><!-- start behavioral tag 2 --><script language="Javascript">AP_Tacoda_AMS_DDC_addPair("SECTION", "POLITICS")</script><!-- end behavioral tag 2 --><!-- start behavioral tag 3 --><script language="JavaScript">AP_Tacoda_AMS_DDC("http://te.ap.org/tte/blank.gif", "1.0")</script>http://te.ap.org/tte/blank.gif?0.07587295686155937&snippet_version=1.3.a&referrer=http%3A//hosted.ap.org/dynamic/external/search.hosted.ap.org/wireCoreTool/Search%3Ftype%3DStory%26output_format%3DPARA%26query%3Dgranholm%26SITE%3DWIMAR%26SECTION%3DHOME&page=http%3A//hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/MICHIGAN_GOVERNOR%3FSITE%3DWIMAR%26SECTION%3DHOME%26TEMPLATE%3DDEFAULT&timezone=240&clist_TID=0pjd50c120r7es&var_SECTION=POLITICS <!-- end behavioral tag 3 --></td></tr><!-- BOX_BOTTOM HTML FRAGMENT ID 3854 --><!-- BEGIN PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><tr><td>http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</td></tr><!-- BOX_BOTTOM PACKAGE ITEM VERTICAL SPACER --><!-- BOX_BOTTOM PACKAGE 507192 --></tbody></table></td><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX RIGHT SIDE SPACER --><td class="ap-mediabox-td">http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</td><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX RIGHT SIDE SPACER --></tr><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX 9451576 --></tbody></table><!-- END MEDIA BOX NUMBER 2 -->
Granholm has tried to pin some of the blame on Bush, claiming the president has turned his back on the auto industry and failed to enforce trade agreements that she says would give domestic automakers a level playing field abroad.

Bush supporters insist the president is responsible for the economic resurgence in the rest of the country; they blame Granholm for the "single-state recession" plaguing Michigan.

Michigan remains the only state besides hurricane-ravaged Louisiana to lose jobs between May 2005 and May 2006. Its unemployment rate has hovered two percentage points above the national average, and many economists expect that rate to climb until 2008.

Those same economists often agree that the weak economy is not Granholm's fault. But they know it's an opening for her opponents.
<!-- BEGIN MEDIA BOX NUMBER 3 --><table class="ap-story-table" align="right" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="180"><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX 9451577 --><!-- $Id: MediaBox.java,v 1.8 2006/06/12 17:55:03 gmavrom Exp $ --><tbody><tr class="ap-mediabox-tr"><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX LEFT SIDE SPACER --><td class="ap-mediabox-td">http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</td><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX LEFT SIDE SPACER --><td class="ap-mediabox-td">
</td><!-- BEGIN MEDIABOX RIGHT SIDE SPACER --><td class="ap-mediabox-td">http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</td><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX RIGHT SIDE SPACER --></tr><!-- BOX_BOTTOM MEDIABOX 9451577 --></tbody></table><!-- END MEDIA BOX NUMBER 3 -->

"It gives an opportunity to the DeVos campaign to say, 'Lousy employment picture, it's all the governor's fault,'" said Charles Ballard, an economics professor at Michigan State University. But if DeVos had been elected in 2002, "the economy would not be dramatically different from what we see now."

DeVos, 50, draws much of his wealth from Amway Corp., the direct-marketing company founded by his father, Richard DeVos, who owns the Orlando Magic basketball team. The younger DeVos was president of the company from 1993 to 2002 and remains a major shareholder. He and his wife, former state GOP Chairwoman Elisabeth DeVos, own a 16,000-square-foot home in Ada, where Amway - now part of a company called Alticor Inc. - has its headquarters.

Dick DeVos will not say how much of his own money he has poured into the race. But his campaign has run television campaign ads since mid-February at a cost of more than $7 million, and DeVos already had given $750,000 to his campaign by the end of last year.

The Michigan Democratic Party began running TV ads promoting Granholm's jobs plan four weeks ago, but Granholm so far has run no ads of her own.

<!-- BEGIN MEDIA BOX NUMBER 4 --><!-- END MEDIA BOX NUMBER 4 -->The attacks on Granholm have also included a full-page newspaper ad featuring a swastika and photos of the governor and Adolf Hitler. The ad in the Michigan Chronicle, the largest black newspaper in Detroit, drew criticism from both Granholm and her challenger after it was placed by Voice the Vote, an independent political action committee.

Granholm responds to critics by pointing to her record of creating jobs in biotechnology and advanced manufacturing, and the passage of a tax break that will give manufacturers $600 million in tax cuts over four years.
When the state is competing with countries such as China and India, "you can offer zero taxes and you can't compete with $1.57 an hour" wages, she said. "We have to invest in order to grow. We cannot slash our way to the bottom."

Still, many voters have begun to doubt her performance. Last month, a poll of 600 likely voters showed that 58 percent gave the Democratic governor a negative rating. That same survey by the political polling firm EPIC-MRA had DeVos getting 46 percent of the vote to Granholm's 44 percent, with 10 percent undecided. Last November, Granholm led DeVos 58 percent to 35 percent. Both polls had a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percent.

<!-- BEGIN MEDIA BOX NUMBER 5 --><!-- END MEDIA BOX NUMBER 5 -->Granholm remains undaunted. "I'm excited about the campaign," she said. "I look forward to the battle."

You consider this a hit-piece?

[Bonegavel]

H_B and JPhillips,

I will take the Senator from Michigan as a negative article, congratulations. I wish it would have started with...

"Joe Smith summed up the Democrat in one word, 'Awful.'" But I'll accept it as a negative article. To be honest, I had no clue and still don't have any idea who that lady is, so she must not be as "Awful" as Gov Schwartzenegger if the AP is even close to being unbiased.

The NYT is not even close to conservative, and one article won't change that. But in any event, it's not a part of this equation. I'm taking it to the AP (and even Reuters, if you like.) Not partisan sources like the NYT, CNN, or Fox News.

The question this weekend was if the AP was just delivering the news or were they offering up some classic forms of bias. It is opinion based, I agree, but so far, I am not anywhere near convinced that the AP is trying to be unbiased.
Negative article? They state right in there that some economists admit the economy isn't her fault. Does the article ever come out and slam her for her plight? No.


Those same economists often agree that the weak economy is not Granholm's fault. But they know it's an opening for her opponents.
<table class="ap-story-table" align="right" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="180"><tbody><tr class="ap-mediabox-tr"><td class="ap-mediabox-td">http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</td><td class="ap-mediabox-td">
</td><td class="ap-mediabox-td">http://hosted.ap.org/icons/spacer.gif</td></tr></tbody></table>

"It gives an opportunity to the DeVos campaign to say, 'Lousy employment picture, it's all the governor's fault,'" said Charles Ballard, an economics professor at Michigan State University. But if DeVos had been elected in 2002, "the economy would not be dramatically different from what we see now."

The article goes out of its way to give her a pass.

[Dutch]

Negative article? They state right in there that some economists admit the economy isn't her fault. Does the article ever come out and slam her for her plight? No.


The article goes out of its way to give her a pass.

I tend to give more importance to the first paragraph (and one line paragraphs within the article) than I do elsewhere. But if you want to break it down by paragraph, let's see what happens.

1. "once a rising star" pretty much lends itself to either a negative or making her a victim, you have to read further to find out which.

2. Actually here, the auto industry is blamed for her faltering with no tie to her and mentions Republicans "targetting" her.

3. A Republican talks about how easy of a target she is.

4. This paragraph mentions her "well-financed, multi-millionaire" Republican opponent that is getting "free" help from noe of President Bush's top advisors.

5. This paragraph shows how the Governor "blames Bush" and gives examples of how she thinks Bush has failed her. (I was kind of hoping for these sorts of examples from the Republican earlier about his "easy target" accusations about the Governor.)

6. "Bush supporters claim" the rest of the nation is on an up-swing and her state is a "single-state recession". Some of those supporters probably could have dropped the 'Awful' bomb I bet. ;)

7. Facts-Stats-I love it! All negative, too.

8. Those who do the fact finding agree however, that it's not her fault, but also agree it gives her opponents an opening. I don't get that paragraph at all. Who were the "expert" economists that are now offering insight into the political race and defending her record?

9. The "experts" now are there to speak for the Republicans and to say that even if the Republican opponent was elected in 2002, the state would still be in the same bad shape. Not a ringing endorsement for the Republicans either, so I guess that's fair. :)

10. This now talks about the Repbulican opponents wealth and size of his house.

11. This paragraph shows how the Republican opponent isn't talking about how much money he's "poured" into the race. But despite his secrecy, they have all the facts and figures ready for you in the ensuing sentence. He's spent $7 million on an ad campaign.

12. This paragraph discusses that the Governor too has an ad campaign, run by the DNC, but despite not suggesting she won't talk about it, they give no figures on how much is spent. As a Republican, I just say, "Thanks for nothing." :)

13. This paragraph discusses an article that poses her with Adolph Hitler and a swastica! WTF? It wasn't her opponent btw (who also chastised the ad apparently) but some "independent" group.

14. Granholm finally gets a paragraph to defend herself by mentioning certain job growth and a big tax-cut for businesses.

15. Granholm now takes the fight to outsourcing in China and India and blames them.

16. The dreaded polls paragraph. It's last but it shows her support "Bushing" it from high popularity last year to losing the lead to her opponent now.

17. A strong positive conclusion in her favor.

If you break it down, it doesn't help her, but it's pretty negative towards her opponent as well. Neither side is "slammed", but both sides are accounted for in the article.

Overall, I think it's a pretty fair (and negative) article.

[Dutch]

Now, if you go back a reread the piece on this governor and then Gov Schwartzenegger's article I cited in the first post, I think you will better understand the difference. Gov Schwartzenegger really gets it handed to him.

[Johnny Slick]

If we're going to give undue importance to the first couple paragraphs because of the "pyramid" format, there is no question that Hillary Clinton was demeaned and misrepresented in that article that I posted. None whatsoever. If you'd like, I can pull up all kinds of articles that do this with Democrats.

[MrBigglesworth]

Fun site showing how Dutch sees the NYT:

http://rightwingnytimes.cf.huffingtonpost.com/

[Dutch]

Damnit, I thought for sure you were going to actually show an AP article that tweaked liberal readers. Oh well, maybe one day. :)