Politico's Allen repeats RNC ad verbatim, doesn't report Obama response
SUMMARY: Politico's Mike Allen reported on the content of a Republican National Committee attack ad against Sen. Barack Obama, yet failed to report the Obama campaign's response. Blog posts about the ad at The Washington Post and The New York Times, meanwhile, noted the Obama campaign's response to it.
In a July 6 article that had been featured on the front page of the Politico website, writer Mike Allen reported on the content of a Republican National Committee attack ad against Sen. Barack Obama called "Balance," yet failed to report the Obama campaign's response. The article, which was originally posted at 10:55 a.m. ET on July 6, included the full transcript of the ad:
"Record gas prices, a climate in crisis. John McCain says solve it now. With a balanced plan -- alternative energy, conservation, suspending the gas tax AND more production here at home. He's pushing his own party to face climate change. But Barack Obama? For conservation, but he just says no to lower gas taxes. No to nuclear. No to more production. No new solutions. Barack Obama: Just the party line. The Republican National Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising."
The Obama campaign reportedly responded to the ad before Allen's article was first posted on Politico.com. In a post on The Washington Post blog The Fix dated 10:08 a.m. ET on July 6, washingtonpost.com's Chris Cillizza reported that Obama spokesperson Hari Sevugan responded to the ad with "[a] stunned skepticism," saying, "What we need to solve our energy crisis is an honest debate about the choices before us, not more attack ads that mislead voters about the facts."
The New York Times blog The Caucus reported Sevugan's full statement regarding the ad in a post dated 11:10 a.m. ET on July 6:
"What we need to solve our energy crisis is an honest debate about the choices before us, not more attack ads that mislead voters about the facts," said Hari Sevugan, a spokesman. "There's a real choice in this election between John McCain's promise to continue the Bush approach of trying to drill our way out of our energy crisis - which even he admits won't lower prices this summer - or Barack Obama's plan to provide meaningful short-term relief for our families and to make a historic investment in alternative energy development that will create millions of new jobs, keep the cost of energy affordable and secure our energy independence once and for all."
Moreover, Politico senior political writer Jonathan Martin reported the Obama campaign's response to the ad in a post at 12:00 p.m. on July 6 on his Politico.com blog, but as of this posting, Allen's article has not been updated.
From Politico.com:
From Allen's article:
An independent-expenditure arm of the Republican National Committee has begun a 10-day, $3 million ad campaign in swing states attacking Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) as "just the party line."
The 30-second ad, called "Balance," is read by a narrator and focuses on energy at a time when gas prices are the top issue on voters' minds.
The script: "Record gas prices, a climate in crisis. John McCain says solve it now. With a balanced plan -- alternative energy, conservation, suspending the gas tax AND more production here at home. He's pushing his own party to face climate change.
"But Barack Obama? For conservation, but he just says no to lower gas taxes. No to nuclear. No to more production. No new solutions. Barack Obama: Just the party line. The Republican National Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising."
The ad first aired during Saturday night baseball games, and is airing in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. It continues through July 15.
No it's not fair, at all. McCain has proposed more than just a gas tax holiday.
I
Oh yeah. I forgot about the even/odd day thing. I don't think I was driving yet but I do remember that now that you mention it.
I was engaged to my first wife when the odd-even rationing went into effect in 1974. I had even-numbered plates on my '62 Beetle - she had odd-numbered plates on her '67 Mustang. I was working in a factory where I had to be at work at 7AM - she was working in a department store where she didn't go in until 10. So when I needed gas and it was my day, we'd swap cars the night before. It's a good thing she knew how to drive a stick-shift car...
You're absolutley right. Market demand has set this price, and at $4 pr gallon (I paid $4.20 this morning!) the supply will be whatever it needs to be. If the tax didn't go to the gpv't, you can bet it would just be pocketed by the oil companies. Anyone who believes otherwise is a gullible fool.
That being said... In the short term, we DO need to do more drilling, (not necessarily in ANWR, but we do need more) AND we need more Nuclear power plants. (If all electricity was from Nuclear, we could have have TRUE 0-emission electric cars!) Ethanol is a joke and the whole idea should be scrapped. (Raising the price of CORN is a cruel a joke as rasing the price of OIL!) Take a look at the labels in the supermarket! Every single Box and Can contains either CORN SYRUP or CORN STARCH. Not to mention the famines that will caused (glabally) by rising grain prices. Definitely NOT the way to go. It's a dangerous joke. You'd be better off with Natural Gas and/or Hydrogen powered cars. (Again - esp if we had clean electricity (air pollution-wise) coming from Nuclear plants.)
And personally, I'd really like to hear more about Geothermal energy development. There's far more potential there (practially a perpetual motion machine) and fewer problems than with Solar or Wind power. But you don't hear nealy as much about it as with Solar or Wind, neither of which will EVER be able to genertate enough power to satisfy our needs unless every square inch of this counry is covered with solar panels and wind-mills.
Nice catch here by Media Matters...
No question about it: Allen practices the very lowest kind of journalism. This isn't a huge surprise, as he's disgraced himself many times in the past. Still, very important that Media Matters gets the word out on this guy.
This seems funny to me.
"Politico.com article contains complete transcript of RNC ad: fails to include response from Obama campaign"
At this exact moment, at the bottom of the Politico.com article in question, there are 143 responses to the article... 143 comments attached to it, the first 20 of which appear directly under the article, on the very same page (which differs from the comments that appear under MMFA's articles, which are HIDE until you click SHOW)
Several of those comments in the first 20 (I didn't bother looking at the other 123) are longer than the Politico.com article itself... alsmost every single one of the 20 comments that appear directly under the article, seem longer than the RNC ad itself...
"Politico.com article contains complete transcript of RNC ad: fails to include response from Obama campaign"
...but you and I can respond if we like. That seems funny to me.
Dear Senator Obama,
Please continue the PARTY LINE.
The other PARTYS' "LYIN" got us onto the mess we are in.
That is all.
I think this may have been a little inside joke on the part of Politico, reading an ad titled "Balance", and not including the response to it.
And why has nobody posted railing against the Fairness Doctrine yet? It's an item about somebody in the media presenting the Republican side with no "balance", that usually gets at least one conservative riled up enough to start telling imaginary people to stop pushing the FD.
What is it with politico?
They are acting as if McCain is ahead in the polls and Obama is in trouble.
I did hear they have a story this afternoon that Webb is refusing the VP ship, not exactly good news for Obama, maybe this is being reported everywhere else too.
"He's pushing his own party to face climate change."
RNC SUBTEXT: "...but we (RNC) aren't buying into that part." ;>)
It's also curious that the RNC neglects to mention one thing about record oil profits... <see...ExxonMobil>