Stop Blaming The Messenger

» 9 Comments | Post a Comment

Stop the presses: The New York Times is no longer a legitimate news organization and has become a political action committee working for Sen. Barack Obama. So says Steve Schmidt, the chief operating officer of Sen. John McCain’s campaign. He held a press conference earlier this week to run down the press, and specifically the Times, for pointing out how McCain campaign manager Rick Davis received $2 million as president of an advocacy group set up by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to prevent stricter regulations.

It’s particularly embarrassing since McCain has tried to point out Obama’s loose ties to the mortgage giants.

“Whatever The New York Times once was, it is not today by any standard a journalistic organization,” Schmidt said Monday. “It is a pro-Obama organization that every day attacks Sen. McCain, attacks Gov. Palin, and excuses Sen. Obama.”

How can he talk at all when his mouth is brimming full of sour lemons?

Schmidt is trying to intimidate the press and turn voters against newspapers. It’s a tactic that is tried every time a politician doesn’t like what is said about them in print. And when handlers squawk loudly enough, a portion of voters listen.

No politician has benefitted more from a friendly press than John McCain. His straight talk in 2000 so stunned journalists by its candor that the press is as much responsible for McCain’s primary win this year than any other faction: The media kept McCain on the front page when his campaign foundered and his campaign finances dried up and during a time when evangelicals were ripping him apart.

McCain and his handlers need to stop attacking the press and start attacking Obama on the issues. The GOP nominee should be proactive and get off the defensive. The fact is the press has called McCain on being dishonest about his campaign manager.

The Times didn’t help itself earlier this year when it ran a less-than-stellar piece alleging McCain had an affair with a lobbyist.

As ill-advised as that piece was, the Times’ latest reporting on Davis’ conflicts of interest is fair game, however, particularly in light of a $700 billion bailout and the worst financial calamity since the Great Depression.

The Times has become a dirty word among conservatives because its editorial board is decidedly liberal. There are plenty of conservative editorial pages in this country as well.

But opinion pages and news reporting have no connection with each other. And politicians should stop blurring those lines for voters who don’t know better.

Advertisement

 
View More: No tags are associated with this article
Not what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
 

Advertisement

Reader Reactions

Flag Comment Posted by captainkona on September 26, 2008 at 3:02 pm

There are plenty of Party Line Dems, X. I’m not one of them. Do some blog reading and that will become quite clear.

And of course, I have never voted for a Republican, or a Clinton for that matter. Are you kidding? Why would I stab my country in the back? I believe in Jesus, X. Why would I vote for those who do exactly the opposite of what he taught?

Republican = Failure. Republican Lite = enablers of failure.
Not a formula I would embrace.

Flag Comment Posted by CITIZEN X on September 26, 2008 at 2:42 pm

Captain,

It’s a funny thing that t folks that I see with Obama signs are the same ones that had Clinton signs,(both Clintons).
Most dems would vote for the donkey if it ran.

Here’s one for you….when was the last time you voted for a republican?

Flag Comment Posted by captainkona on September 26, 2008 at 12:19 pm

X…X…whatever shall I do with you?

One simply has to read my Blog, which I assume you have, to see that I’ve been against the Clinton’s since the mid nineties. They are not true Dems.

And one only need read just a few months back as I lambasted Hillary from one end of the internet to the other. So your “If Hillary was the candidate you would be backing her” comment is quashed.
Sen. Dorgan explained what went wrong if you had read it. The poor choice of Clinton siding with the fiscally inept Republicans started a snowball effect that slowly drove us to where we are now. Total failure by Republicans and their lap dogs at the DLC.

Time for a Liberal, competent America. That’s what Americans want and that’s why McLamer is losing this election.

Flag Comment Posted by CITIZEN X on September 26, 2008 at 10:40 am

Hey Captain,

I’m laughing so hard, I can’t contain myself.

All the Democrats want to go give Bill a great big hug because he was so great.  But when he speaks up and supports something that conflicts with the usual closed-minded democrats they want to call him things like a “Bushbot”. 

If Hillary was the candidate you would be backing her.

Bill was right then; we had great growth in this country and a balanced budget, and he’s right now.

Flag Comment Posted by captainkona on September 25, 2008 at 11:59 pm

Sorry, X wink

Bill Clinton is a BushBot and always has been. He’s a liar and a fraud.
A disgrace to the Democratic party along with his lousy wife.

A quick fact check:
In 1933, Congress passed a law called the Glass-Steagall Act. The purpose of the law was to reform the banking industry after the stock market crash in 1929. The law prevented bank holding companies from owning other financial companies. This particular aspect of the Act was repealed in 1999 when the Republicans passed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (a.k.a Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999). 53 Republicans voted for the law along with only 1 Democrat (McCain voted for it). 44 Democrats voted against it and not a single Republican opposed it. Bill Clinton signed it into law despite the fact that the Democrats vigorously opposed the law. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act is considered the primary cause of the current economic crisis we are seeing in the news day in and day out.

Sen Byron Dorgan (D) predicted every economic woe we face today back in ‘99. Here is his speech on the floor as Republicans and their crony, Bill Clinton, began this disaster.

Library of Congress

Excerpt:

“I want to sound a warning call today about this legislation. I think this legislation is just fundamentally terrible. I hear all these words about the indus try remaking itself—banks, security firms and insurance companies, and that we’d better catch up and put a fence around where they are or at least build a pasture in the vicinity of where they are grazing. What a terrible idea.

What is it that sparks this need to modernize our financial system? And what does modernization mean? This chart shows bank mergers in 1998, in just 1 year, last year, the top 10 bank mergers. We have discovered all these corporations have fallen in love and decided to get married. Citicorp, with an insurance company—that is a big one—$698 billion in combined assets; NationsBank—BankAmerica, $570 million; and the list goes on. This is a massive concentration through mergers.

Is it good for the consumers? I don’t think so. Better service, lower prices, lower fees? I don’t think so. Bigger profits? You bet”.

Flag Comment Posted by CITIZEN X on September 25, 2008 at 4:44 pm

Newspapers around the coutry take what the Times prints as the gospel.
I have found quite a bit on the internet that refutes their claim about Rick Davis, but I have yet to find any proof that Rick Davis did in fact work as stated by the Times.  Doesn’t any newspaper in the country try to verify what the other papers are saying.  Maybe that is why they say to only believe half of what you read.  Whether Rick Davis was involved with this group, it seems funny to me that Bill Clinton on GMA this morning flat out laid the blame for this mess at the feet of those that are responsible; The Democrats.  He said that the democrats were to blame, because they fought the republican and himself when they proposed more regulations.  The Dems were against more regs, The Rep., and Clinton himself were in favor.  Intresting take on the situation, from someone who was there and ought to know.

Flag Comment Posted by dadw5boys on September 25, 2008 at 8:09 am

Yeah Republicans want to go back to the day when Faniie Mae AND Freddie Mac only gave huge amounts of money to the Republican Party instead of both partys.

Funny Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac only had 4 % on bad loans which was really great considering the loss of wages most Americans have faced since 2000.
Then the banks and Bear Sterns begin to fail and the FEDERAL RESERVE forces Fannie and Freddie to assume the bad loans which puts them in the position of failure too.
MOST OF THE BAD LOANS CAME FROM COUNTRY WIDE !!!!!
Country Wide had been running a CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION according to the RICO ACT !
Country Wide employeed Property Appraisers who Constantly Overvalued homes. When County Wide paid a Bonus for the Property Appraisers to Overvalue these home that became COLLUSION.
When Country Wide packaged tha sold these loans that was Fraud!
Selling these loan bundles 3 times or more is considered by law as Operating a Criminal Organistion.
See the Overvalued Homes made the loans look great on paper. Reading the numbers showed the home buyers would have a lot of Equity in the home when actually the homes were worth about $130,000 to $180,000 less.

But if you think Bush’s fellow Religious buddy will do jail time think again he bailed out with over $100 million and ran away fast.

Flag Comment Posted by horsefly on September 25, 2008 at 5:46 am

Thanks for keeping us straight on that topic.

Speaking of the $700 million dollar bailout, I am wondering why we cannot get some good examples of some of those assets.  I think it would help if we knew what they are.  Can’t the investigative arm of the press dig some of those out.  Show us that pig…in a poke!!

Post a Comment(Requires free registration)

The commenting period has ended or commenting has been deactivated for this article.
 

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement