New York Post, please define "Obama Plane"
April 28, 2009 10:30 am ET by Eric Boehlert
Is there any opportunity Rupert Murdoch's media outlets (I don't think 'news outlets' really applies anymore) won't take in order to try to ding the president? Here was the Post headline for the article about the flap surrounding the low-flying government plane that spooked New Yorkers on Monday:
OBAMA PLANE PHOTO OP STARTLES NEW YORKERS
According to the Post, or at least the Post headline, Obama was at the center of the aviation controversy. Except that the Post conceded:
President Obama was in Washington at the time, but the low-flying 747 circling the Statue of Liberty was one of the planes used as Air Force One, sources said.
Plus, the article reported that it was Department of Defense officials who okay'd the ill-advised fly-by for a photo op. So, Obama wasn't in the plane and the military took responsibility for granting the plane final permission. But according to the Post headline, it was an "Obama Plane Photo Op." Because apparently at the Post, Air Force One is now referred to as "Obama Plane" if it's involved in any sort of controversy.
Good to know.
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
The Friday Rush: A series of conflicts
Contrary to media hype, Sarah Palin is very unpopular
Well, that was done for Drudge & Malkin. They linked it all day yesterday.
I found it reminiscint of the time that the press tried, tried & tried soooo hard to link Blago's scandal to Obama before the inauguration.
Remember that? That was Obama's problem, too, just like this was "Obama's Plane". This one is kind of funny, tho.
The president owns his own airplane? I thought that was McGrampa?
Is the New York Post still printing? How many millions does Rupert have to lose?