NY Times article noted "caveat" about Obama, left out speaker's support for other Dems
A January 28 New York Times article by reporter Jodi Kantor included a quote by Ron Klain, former chief of staff to Vice President Al Gore, saying that Sen. Barack Obama's (D-IL) "style of leadership" might be better suited to running the Harvard Law Review, of which Obama was the first black president, than to "running a country." Specifically, the Times article stated:
"The things that make law school politics fractious are different from the things that make American politics fractious," said Ron Klain, who preceded Mr. Obama at the law review and later served as Vice President Al Gore 's chief of staff. Mr. Klain has watched the senator's rise.
"The interesting caveat," he said, "is that is a style of leadership more effective running a law review than running a country."
But the article did not note that Klain has reportedly signed on with Sen. Joseph R. Biden (D-DE) and said he would support Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) if Biden "chooses not to run." The Washington Post also reported that Klain is supporting Biden.
The current GOP Propaganda Sh*tstorm represents a classic strategy: divide and conquer. Their party has been so wounded by the blatant fascism of Bush's puppetmasters that it is the only chance they have to hold on to the White House in '08. Expect a slew of stories about all the sniping between Democrats this coming year. Much of it will be manufactured by the Right's Big Lie machine, and some of it will be true, but overblown. This smells like Karl Rove...could it be his new job?
I hope that the Dems have learned the unfortunate Swift Boating lessons. It would be great for Dems to stay on topic and ignore the lies, hoping the media does their job of actual reporting and fact finding. Since real reporting has proven to be too difficult for much of the media, the Dems need to fight against the lies, and even swing back hard at times.
Here's to hoping for a Liberal president, and a balanced congress to keep it sane. Al Gore, please consider bringing real science back to this country. Dick Cheney and Karl Rove, please consider how you will look in orange. King George, please consider running another gas company into the ground and allow the adults to turn the clock back eight years.
"King George...running another gas company"?
It seems to me that George W. Bush is probably better suited to running a gas station at an interstate highway exit... maybe even a truck stop, like the ones that sell all the junk about how much we love America. I can see it now... Presidential Truck Stop & Museum (video poker in the rear).
I wouldn't trust Bush to pump gas. Given his incompetence, he'd probably blow up the gas station.
The title of the NYT's article is:
In Law School, Obama Found Political Voice
The article deals solely with Barack Obama.
While I suppose the writer of this article could have included what MMFA considers a [ purposely devious?] omission...there was really no need to expound on Klain's life, opinions, or whom he might be supporting for President. The article was NOT about Klain so OTHER than his relationship to the SUBJECT MATTER which was Barack Obama & Law School, I don't see how this "ommision" could be interpreted as mis-information or bias.
Jeter, the beauty of this website is that there's always going to be something to write about. The Dems are being ignored, or they are being covered too much (media obsession), or they are being misrepresented, or unfairly attacked. Even when one Democrat is speaking about another Democrat it's conservative misinformation! You can't make it up. There will always be an angle to post threads.
Excellent observation Bruce
Some of the stuff highlighted here is just plain old nitpicking. There are plenty of [REAL] examples of mis-information and bias out there so when MMFA focuses on minor or questionable instances it tarnishes their mission somewhat.
Sometimes it seems like they believe that threads in QUANTITY rather than QUALITY strengthens their case of Conservative mis-information & bias. I think it does just the opposite.
IF you want people to take your examples of bias & mis-information seriously, then don't offer up the trivial, the petty, the insignificant or the non-existent.
This is a very simple case of pure misinformation---misinformation by-omission.The writer (Kantor) makes a point of telling us Klain's connection to Obama and to Gore, but omits telling us the very important fact that Klain is supporting an Obama opponent.Once the reader knows this vital fact, Klain's view changes from that of a neutral observer to that of a campaign rival and as a result the reader can then invoke the view-it-with-grain-of-salt aspect Klain's opinion requires. Whether the omission was deliberately or innocently, it was rightly pointed-out here, and kudos once again to Media Matters. This may seem like a little thing, but these little things can add up over the course of the next two years.
i haven't made my choice yet. he is taking a shot at obama. he is saying he does not have "the style of leadership" to run the country. as opposed to some of the dimwits who had such great "style"? and wouldn't we all love to have a beer with bush. that expression makes me puke. he is exactly the type of smug jerk i hate.
well,
we know who media matters is supporting for the democratic nomination! two words: obama.
damn, last week it was hillary.
AIPAC and the DLC are trying to set us up for a Clinton/Obama ticket. Both are pro-war, pro-Israel, anti-peace. Can't let a real liberal take the White House, you know....bad for the war crimes industry.
so are you suggesting that we elect an anti-israel candidate? no. you didn't mean that.
We need politicians that are aware of AIPAC's destructive influence on US regional policy and reject continued US support of Israeli war crimes on moral grounds. There are a few...Cynthia McKinney comes to mind. It was her own party that tried to remove her district out from under her because she spoke out against Israel's behaviour. Our subservient relationship with Israel is the core reason for 9/11 and for our illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq. Isreal is a nation built on the idea that one ethnicity is superior to all others and only that ethnicity has the right to political power and to true ownership of the land. It stinks of "Master Racism". I for one am disgusted that my tax dollars are used to fund such a regime. I want the US to withdraw all support, financial and political, from Israel, just as I do not wish us to support regimes like in Zimbabwe, Myanmar, or Turkmenistan. We need to put morality back into our government, and that starts by ending the control the Isreal lobby has over Washington DC. All they want from us is to join in their racism towards the arabs...and this is why our Middle Eastern policy creates so many corpses.
Sunday, January 28, 2007
This morning's "news" shows had as their scheduled guests...
On CBS's 'Face The Nation', Sen. Webb (D-VA), Sen. McConnell (Minority Leader), and Sen. Specter (Ranking member of the Judiciary Committee), discussing the plan for Iraq.
On ABC's 'This Week With George Stephanopoulos', Sen. Biden (Chairman of Foreign Relations) and Sen. Lugar (Ranking member of Foreign Relations) discussing proposals on Iraq.
On 'Fox News With Chris Wallace', Sen. Brownback ('08 presidential candidate) discussing Senate resolutions opposing additional troops in Iraq, and Sen. Lieberman (I-CT) discussing the relationship between the White House and the Democratic Congress.
On NBC's 'Meet The Press', Sen. Schumer (D-NY) and Sen. Vitter (R-LA).
'The Chris Matthews Show' has as it's scheduled topic "Guests discuss the stance of Congressional Republicans on the war".
The same NY Times online, in which appears the article that the above item cites, has also (under the Washington section)...
NEWS ANALYSIS: On Iran, Bush Faces Haunting Echoes Of Iraq (an article that gives us a pre-view of the administration's strategy to both persuade the American People for increased levels of Troops in Iraq, and at the same time fuel hostility against Iran, by misleading the American People into believing Iranians in Iraq are killing U.S. Troops there.. sounds like rove to me)
Also an article on the protest against Iraq in Washington D.C. (400,000 were estimated as participating), an article on Giuliani, one on Hillary in Iowa, something on "Bush Health Proposal", and from Saturday, articles titled 'Democrats Try to Increase Leverage Over Iraq Policy' and 'At Lawmakers' Retreat, G.O.P. Plots a Comeback' (by carl hulse).
A rather heavy sounding slate of "news" shows, and heavy topics being discussed on them, to have to sift through for misinformation... quite a challenge for anybody monitoring the "media" for misinformation.
MMFA has an item for Sunday, January 28, 2007... from the NY Times online that I mentioned above... not the "Iranians are killing U.S. Troops in Iraq" administration propaganda article, or the "Dems work on Iraq Policy" or "G.O.P. plots comeback" articles either...
The big article that caught MMFA's eye, among all the things of Sunday, January 28, 2007 that I've listed above, is of course something called 'In Law School, Obama Found Political Voice'...
...in which someone named Ron Klain, contrasting the responsibilities involved in running the Harvard Law Review (of which Mr. Klain has experience), and those of being President of the United States (Mr. Klain being the former chief of staff to Vice President Al Gore), makes this astounding and egregious comment:
"The things that make law school politics fractious are different from the things that make American politics fractious."
...followed by this:
"The interesting caveat [which means 'warning' or 'caution'... I needed to look it up to be sure] is that is a style of leadership [a style of leadership evidenced by Mr. Obama in running the Harvard Law Review... you need to read the entire article to appreciate what's being said here by Mr. Klain] that is a style of leadership more effective running a law review than running a country."
Now, I don't know exactly all that might have been said by those unimportant U.S. Senators mentioned above, on the unimportant topics on which they spoke, on those unimportant "news" shows this morning...
But I'm glad somebody at MMFA took the time to sift through it all, just to get this earth-shattering misinformation regarding Sen. Obama.
Or maybe I'm imagining it wrong... maybe the words of those other, less important Senators, on the less important topics they discussed, on those less important "news" shows... maybe their words weren't sifted through for misinformation by MMFA this morning...
...maybe MMFA went straight to the Obama article, and right away to sifting through it's every word...
...trying to pick gnat chit out of the pepper.
Great job M.K. and MMFA.
"Israel is the core reason for 9/11"
I believe right there.
Also, calling people names like "blog pimp" is no way to have respectful, robust debate.
"Our subservient relationship with Israel is the core reason for 9/11." - Redking
That statement is in accordance with what Osama bin Laden has said about 9/11. It's non-controversial to people who are informed enough to think beyond "they hate our freedoms."
Do you think changing what Redking said to "Jews responsible for 9/11" just so you can take a cheap shot about prejudice is "respectful, robust debate"?
I think the word "subservient" might be controversial.
Good point, Bruce. Whether we're subservient or not is up for debate, I guess, but our support of Israel was indeed a primary reason for 9/11 if we believe what al Qaeda says about it.
This article is one of the best I have read on the subject of Israeli influence on US foreign policy...
Here's a snippet:
The Israel Lobby
By John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt
"For the past several decades, and especially since the Six-Day War in 1967, the centrepiece of US Middle Eastern policy has been its relationship with Israel. The combination of unwavering support for Israel and the related effort to spread ‘democracy’ throughout the region has inflamed Arab and Islamic opinion and jeopardised not only US security but that of much of the rest of the world. This situation has no equal in American political history. Why has the US been willing to set aside its own security and that of many of its allies in order to advance the interests of another state? One might assume that the bond between the two countries was based on shared strategic interests or compelling moral imperatives, but neither explanation can account for the remarkable level of material and diplomatic support that the US provides."
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html
Even former Senators have called Washington DC "Israeli-occupied territory". AIPAC is the largest lobby group in DC, even bigger than AARP. They control the flow of information to Congress, heavily support campaigns favourable to their cause, viciously attack those who disagree. They are the only lobby to act as agents for a foreign government and have been caught spying several times. No other lobby group has as many former members in positions within the Executive Branch. Perle and Wolfowitz and Feith all had high positions in the Defense Department in the run-up to this war crime, all came from AIPAC. Perle was even once caught passing secrets to the Israeli Embassy in the 1970s. The Israel lobby maintains a huge PR operation inside the US, including media watchdog groups like the ADL, who don't attack anti-semitism per se, but scream that any time valid criticism of Israel appears in the US media.
I for one do not enjoy the fact that our Federal government is so cajoled and bribed and controlled in policy by a foreign country. You can't have independence when you call another nation Master. And as the vote in the House on the resolution supporting the recent Israel massacre of Lebanese civilians shows ( a resolution written by AIPAC ), only 8 of our so-called representatives were willing to say "No" to the slaughter. 410 voted to support the precision bombing of civilians in what can only be termed as a show of racist support.
redking what explains the violence in lebanon right now? israel is not there.
According to the Lebanese, it's because of a corrupt government and US pressure to turn the Lebanese Army against Hezbollah. Read this:
http://www.counterpunch.org/schuh01232007.html
it's actually hezbollah trying to overturn the elected government of lebanon. and israel withdrew when the united nations promised that they would bring hezbollah under control. obviously didn't happen.
If you had read that article, you would have seen that the people are rioting because the World Bank has demanded massive price hikes in essential goods in exchange for giving Lebanon money. PNAC member, ex-AIPAC agent, and known anti-moslem bigot and war criminal Paul Wolfowitz runs the World Bank at this moment. Hezbollah is part of the elected government of Lebanon and has a right to protest the corruption. And Isreal had no right to be in Lebanon in the first place, what with all the civilians it was intentionally killing.
I think we know who's side you're on. AIPAC will not reward you for your loyalty, they're turning our country into a racist torture state and are stealing your rights to do it. Keep kissing up to Israel, we Americans need that jackboot on on necks. Thanks for helping enslave us.
aipac will not reward me? you have a little touch of paranoia my friend.
I said Israel, not jews...there's a difference. Israel is a country with a racist agenda, jews are just members of a religion/ethnicity. There's a liberal minority in Israel that hold the same views as I, that Israel and Judaism are not best served by far-right-wing supremacists and that peace will only occur when that supremacism is laid to rest and the Israelis retreat behind their own borders and stop this senseless and cruel persecution of arabs. As an American, and especially as a Pennsylvanian, I am not pleased that my nation and state are participating in that supremacist ideology. I would no more support Zionism than I would support the KKK. It's the same ideology, but with different targets.
MEFIRST, you got it right. I think folks are a little upset at Obama because he threatens the establishment all the way around the block. I don't want more of the same mess and neither does anyone else. Isn't there some language in the law that deals specifically with slander and misinformation?
Well,
No Northern Democratic Liberal has taken the WH since JFK. Remember Dukakis, and Kerry, most recently . So now WE have Hillary amd Obama, one if nominated will represent some 28 years of continous Bush-Clinton rule. Hell why don't we just declare ourselves a family -ruled-dynasty Republic held in bondage by lineage, " Didn't we fight a Revolution about such matters? And a very eloquent JR Senator who prior to appearing on the National scene was an Illinois legislator. DEMS, You are being set up for defeat at the hand of the MSM and bogus polling.
Al Gore is the elected but uninaugurated President of the United States. You know it and I know it. Hell, EVERYBODY KNOWS IT!!!!!!!
See, this is what I am saying. Obama was a long shot, and the odds were stacked againts him when he went for the Senate. But he won. I don't want another family dynasty controlling the WH, it's time for some fresh blood. No more nut jobs, no more Republicant or Republicant Lite, no more unqualified idiots. That leaves Obama, he needs to win.
"Obama was a long shot, and the odds were stacked againts him when he went for the Senate."
By what stretch of the imagination do you maintain that Obama was long-shot for his Senatorial election? He was initilally positioned to go up against Republican Jack Ryan who was forced to remove his candidacy after newspaper releases stated that he brought his wife to 'swinger' sex clubs.
The Illinois Republican Party then hand -picked right wing Christian fascist Nut -Job Allan Keyes from Maryland to o be its out-of-state candidate. Alan Keyes tried to be the GOP presidential candidate in 1996 and 2000 (he was third in Illinois, receiving nine percent of the votes), and tried twice to be the Senator for his home state of Maryland (in 1988 and 1992, losing both times). He also held several government positions during the Reagan presidential years, chief among them ambassador to the United Nations Economic and Social Council between 1983 and 1985 and was host of a of a syndicated radio show in the 1990s and of a television show in MSNBC in 2002.
Obama was a shoe -in despite the fact that s significant majority of Illinois Democrats didn't even know who he was.
http://chicago.about.com/od/government/a/07050_keyes.htm
He may have appeal but please don't confuse his 'rock star' MSM labeling as one who is tried and tested for the highest position in the land. He doesn't have a prayer with Southern and Western swing vote states, That's just the way it is, folks.
AIPAC is just trying to ensure the Dems run candidates that will threaten Iran, and their lapdog media are to give us the bait-n-switch con about them being liberals.
How do you know that he won't have a prayer in the Southern and Western states? You mean that all Southerners and all Westerners think the same way? Did you actually go door to door and talk to these people? Or is your basis a perceived historical trend? What, you think people can't change their minds about what is good for them? And after all that has happened to us, you don't think that the public has thought about what to do next time?
Maybe what you said is your opinion and you are entitled to it. But ALL people do not think like you. And ALL regions of the country do not think like you. People are not stupid, they want change. And we are now going into an era where the status quo will not be acceptable. Because of what has happened we all are now studying the issues, looking for the truth and getting a better understanding of the game, a game I might add that has gone ignored for too long. Ignorance, someone once said, is bliss. Not anymore; ignorance will get you killed. Ignorance is the lack of information. We as a country do not have a lack of information, we have a lack of wisdom. The outrage of all of us is that we are all here, seeing the outcome of ridiculous and reckless domestic and foreign policy that got generated and promoted under a cloud of secrecy. We have all suffered under partisan and corrupted politics. We ALL have, including the demographic you talked about. We ALL are in the same boat and we ALL need a new Commander. Traditions will not rule the day anymore, for if the traditional thinking worked, we would not be where we are right now.
First of all. Your heartfelt response is greatly appreciated. I have been posting on these threads for some 2 1/2 years and as many can attest have spared nothing in my condemnation of the current administration. But, 'Politics is War 'and I have watched a Democratic Party become enfeebled and serve as a lapdog for the Bush NeoFascists who if not reigned in soon by an emboldened Congress may well ignite WW3.
So I am not hedging my bets. Any newcomer to the National Stage with just 2 years in the Senate and propelled to such national promininence in such a short timeframe naturally will cause me to pause a bit. The facts are there, call it an historical trend or whatever, It is undeniable that no Northern Liberal Democrat has won the White House for some 4 1/2 decades. As for my assessment of the Western and Southern states, I stand by such assertions NOT because of a preconceived notion of what people think or whether as you point out, they are willing to change. As for now, I don't see the numbers. It may appear callous, disingenuous or whatever, BUT it in my opinion such a prognosis is undeniable.
As Joe Friday stated, "Just the facts, Mam".
Thanks for the response. At this point it is too soon to tell what is going to happen, but since we all are following the patterns carefully, one thing is for certain; anything can happen.
I do know this though, the Republican Party at this point and time is finished. The Democrats will go the same way if they do not do what is necessary for the good of the nation. People are fed up with having to choose the lesser of two evils. The overall tone across the country is going towards those who are centerists. Any tendencies towards extremism to the right or to the left are not going to be tolerated. If candidates cannot prove that they have a proper balance when it comes to handling things, then they will not make it in.
The item, by M.K., cites Mr. Klain's "caveat" that Sen. Obama's "style of leadership" might be better suited to running the Harvard Law Review, than to "running a country."
Which seems a little mysterious, at least as it's presented here, without any explanation at all as to just what that "style of leadership" is.
And you'd have to read the entire NY Times piece, by Jodi Kantor, to have the mystery cleared up, and understand what Mr. Obama's "style of leadership" is... according to the article that is, and even then, concerning only Mr. Obama's leadership of the Harvard Law Review.
And so why is this comment by Mr. Klain being cited here at all?
Because it is considered a "smear" of some sort, by Mr. Klain against Sen. Obama?
The item (made thankfully brief by M.K.) then informs us...
"...the [NY Times] article did not note that Klain has reportedly signed on with Sen. Joseph R. Biden (D-DE) and said he would support Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) if Biden "chooses not to run."
And so why is this being noted?
Because it is considered that Mr. Klain has "smeared" Sen. Obama, on behalf of either the campaigns of Mr. Biden or Mrs. Clinton?
I wish I knew... it truly reads that way, I don't see how it can be read any other way.
On just Friday, MMFA (byline B.J.L.) ran an item titled 'CNN, NBC blame Obama "opponents" for smears advanced by media', the Summary of which contains this:
...Anderson Cooper, David Gregory, and Soledad O'Brien have all asked Sen. Barack Obama about smears leveled against him, purportedly by his political "opponents" or "enemies." But in each case, they did not name any of these "opponents."
And so they neglected to do their homework, A.C. and D.G. and S.O. did, by not mentioning by name what "opponents" might be behind the "smears"... but this Sunday, M.K. here at MMFA has outshined them all.
By accompanying the "smear" (of a "style of leadership" more suited to the Harvard Law Review than to the presidency) with the "opponents" on behalf of whom this "smear" is advanced (Sen. Biden and/or Sen. Clinton, by way of Mr. Klain, who seems to be sitting on the fence between the two campaigns, according to M.K.), we now have a marked improvement on the citation of Friday.
What was then 'CNN, NBC blame Obama "opponents" for smears advanced by media' (but neglected to name the sources of the "smears") now becomes:
'MMFA and M.K. blame Obama "opponents" for smears advanced by media' (namely, the media of the NY Times and Jodi Kantor... and goes the extra mile, by identifying the "opponents" as well: Sen. Biden and/or Sen. Clinton, by way of Mr. Klain)
Again, super job M.K. and MMFA... where CNN and NBC (and A.C. and D.G. and S.O.) dropped the ball and got cited here, you guys picked it up and advanced it to the goal...
...of identifying the "opponents" behind the "smear".
Bush’s “style of non-leadership” has transformed our nation from a Democracy into a Republican’t Dictatorship style of non-leadership. The absolute worst President of all time.
Sen. Barack Obama's (D-IL) "style of leadership" is 2 million time better than Bush.
Cartoon Character Daffy Duck’s “style of leadership” is 1 million times better than Bush.
I can't agree with what you guys are saying about Israel. I think the main reason the Israelis and Palestinians are killing each other is that other Arabs get involved, who want to get rid of the Jews, feeling that it's their land. Why would the Israelis be any worse than the Palestenians? Because they have bigger guns? The muslims put their rocket launchpads near beaches to make it more likely the beaches will get hit--it's not that simple.
As for presidents, my favorite ticket would be Gore/Vilsack, although I'd go for Vilsack/Obama (Not that I can vote in US elections, but I'd still root for them). But then, pretty much everything is better than what we've got now.