Toobin: "[I]f there is one public figure in America who has gotten better press over the years than John McCain, I don't know who it is"
SUMMARY: Asked on Imus in the Morning about "the press coverage of Senator Obama," CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin responded: "[I]f there is one public figure in America who has gotten better press over the years than John McCain, I don't know who it is."
On the July 23 edition of Imus in the Morning, host Don Imus asked CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin: "What do you make of this trip and the press coverage of Senator [Barack] Obama?" Toobin responded by noting complaints by Sen. John McCain's campaign that Obama has received more favorable treatment from the press than McCain has. Toobin said: "I don't really think ... the press coverage is much out of -- out of what you would expect, or it's all that outrageous. I mean, frankly, what ... I find kind of appalling is John McCain complaining about media bias. I mean, if there is one public figure in America who has gotten better press over the years than John McCain, I don't know who it is."
From the July 23 edition of ABC Radio Networks' Imus in the Morning:
IMUS: How are things over at CNN, which -- I, of course, hate CNN, but I like you. So -- and a few other people there, so --
TOOBIN: Well, it's -- it's just fine. You know, it's -- it's weird. It's kind of -- it's -- it's been kind of a lull since the end of the -- you know, those of us who talk about politics, it's -- it's sometimes a bit of a struggle to come up with stuff. You know, you can only speculate about the vice presidency so much, and the -- and, you know, I guess Obama's trip has been new, but -- but, you know, frankly since the end of the primaries, it -- it -- it's lost a little of its urgency, I think.
IMUS: What -- what do you make of this trip and the press coverage of Senator Obama?
TOOBIN: Well, I -- I don't really think there is -- the press coverage is much out of -- out of what you would expect, or -- or it's all that outrageous. I mean, frankly, what -- what -- what I find kind of appalling is John McCain complaining about media bias. I mean, if there is one public figure in America who has gotten better press over the years than John McCain, I don't know who it is. I mean, sure, Barack Obama is spending eight days in the Middle East and Europe, of course it's going to get a lot of publicity. I don't think that's any -- that's any reason for the press to apologize.
Maybe it is here in part because of the first part of Toobin's the comment.....that he doesn't think press coverage is all that outrageous or out of what we would expect.
There is acknowledgment that McCain has has better press coverage, but nothing is said about the 24/7 trashing of Sen. Obama. THAT has been outrageous and should not be what we expect of press coverage during a campaign.
Toobin said: "I don't really think ... the press coverage is much out of -- out of what you would expect, or it's all that outrageous. I mean, frankly, what ... I find kind of appalling is John McCain complaining about media bias. I mean, if there is one public figure in America who has gotten better press over the years than John McCain, I don't know who it is."
I might also add, that I think President Bush had more favorable press coverage than McCain.
The press and Swift Boaters trashed Kerry's military service, and Bush could do no wrong. Now they are attacking Obama for no military service, and we are being told McCain's military career is all that we need to concern ourselves with.
Once again, a letter to the editor in today's newspaper stated that the requirement for every candiate for president should be service in the military....something many on the right repeat in these posts. Where were these required "miltary service" supporters when the press trashed Kerry's service?
Toobin has a history of liberal bias. That makes his opinion on this topic pretty worthless.
The media is too busy slobbering all over BHO to even notice McCain.
I was thinking, just from my own observations, that grampy was really getting a free ride. But all of the compelling evidence presented by Noleft & Taz has me really reevaluating things.And by compelling evidence, I mean their unsupported wildly imaginative opinions.
I will admit that I did see a pretty good example of uneven coverage tonight on Hannity & Colmes.Sean-boy had a hard-hitting interview with McCain, and there was hardly a mention of Mccain, but plenty of tough questions about Obama, who was not there to defend himself.
The Maverick made a strong showing, not backing down from any controversial questions. Hannity, point blank, asked Grampy if candidates' spouses are fair game in the media.He even provided some examples of possible paraphrased statements that the media scum might use to attack one of the wives; Michelle Obama saying that she was never proud of America and that America was a downright mean country.
An obviously concerned Grampy stated, very forcefully, that, No, these things should not be brought up.There was no need to go further and discuss McCain's wife and her potential problems. The Maverick made it clear that he did NOT want to discuss the wives. Just as soon as Hannity was finished smearing Michelle Obama.
Hannity didn't let up, firing another hardball at our seasoned citizen hero, regarding one of the most controversial associations in this election cycle;
Unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers! Less macho & mavericky types may have flinched at this question. Not Grampy. He set his jaw, and stared right back at the tenacious ,semi-retarded "journalist" with the lists. Grampy didn't dodge, he didn't weave, he didn't change the subject or deflect, he answered the question, confidently and concisely. NO! he did not approve of Bill Ayers.
I think I left the room at that point, so the rest is speculation. I think that Hannity replayed his interview with McCain, using a stop watch to determine how many seconds were devoted to Mccain and to Obama. He then followed up with a segment on the disproportionate media coverage of the candidates, suporting it with the immediately preceding interview.*
* dramatization. May not have happened.
The media is too busy slobbering all over BHO to even notice McCain.
Several times a day, every day for several months John McCain have been criticizing Senator Barack Obama for not having visited Iraq since 2006 — Team McCain even has a daily count-down that shows Obama has not been in Iraq for 900 days.
LOL
Be careful what you wish for........YOU JUST MIGHT GET IT!
Look, if the press didn't pay all of this attention, where would you get your talking points other than the ones made up in the minds of the Cons?
What is the big deal? This moaning sounds like sibling rivalry to me.(Consult Savage for diagnosis). Everybody will get their fair share. Really, if I need fairness, I'll travel to the Czeckoslovakian border abutting Iraq and Pakistan and shout from the highest mountain that "I'm mad as hell and I'm running for President."
Sorry, wrong thread.
But even though Toobin's on our side this time, look at the "analysis" displayed here. It's the same fumbling emptiness that pundits always display. Is there the slightest bit of expertise in his comments? If your next door neighbor were thrust into that world full-time, wouldn't their "insights" be just as good?
The whole profession is a desert. Get your news from the internet instead; that way you can filter out the crap.
If your next door neighbor were thrust into that world full-time, wouldn't their "insights" be just as good?
Yep, it would. I think all these guys have the job out of sheer luck. Pretty much any person off the street could to the same job, with about 30 minutes of "education".
Oh and...
You know, it's -- it's weird. It's kind of -- it's -- it's been kind of a lull since the end of the -- you know, those of us who talk about politics, it's -- it's sometimes a bit of a struggle to come up with stuff. You know, you can only speculate about the vice presidency so much, and the -- and, you know, I guess Obama's trip has been new, but -- but, you know, frankly since the end of the primaries, it -- it -- it's lost a little of its urgency, I think.
Yeah, because heaven knows you can't talk about ACTUAL politics, only about the meta-politics. It would be awful for example to take a critical look at both candidates position on health care insurance. Much more fun to see if Obama has done any fist bumps lately.
These guys are a joke.
-- These guys are a joke...any person off the street could to the same job, with about 30 minutes of "education". -- fawltylogic
I'll give you a fist bump on that one...you nailed it.
With few exceptions, these guys/gals reporting is worthless. Evidence? NYTimes announces an 82% drop in profits and Gannet a 36% drop in profits. Cable viewership has stalled out...except for the election year bump because the majority of viewers are only their to get their daily dose of red meat...left or right...not an informative look at the news and issues.
-- it's sometimes a bit of a struggle to come up with stuff -- Toobin
Struggle? Stuff? Talk about an unintended but true look at the souls of the media. Reporting today is mostly just a giant reach around for the out of touch media. I'll echo your comment "what a joke"!!
Yah, a small population thinks all CAPS is the way to go. An other set believes that they'll turn into a small gurkin if lower case appears in their posts.
Compared to some quirks that appear here, its fairly normal.
!-]
Earth to Press: Wall to wall horse race and he said she said coverage is not the real news. How about in depth stories on health care? How about covering the middle class crunch? Labor issues, effect of trade policies on jobs? Indepth stories on the environment, and alternative fuel production?
How about a story on who owns media and how it affects coverage? Huh?
Mary, I think I saw the Article which covers these issues...It was by the A-Team of American journalists...Rush, Seannie, Billo and Savage...these are the cliffnotes version of their stories...
HEALTH CARE--Where's the beef we all have it. Don't see any health care problems in our homes. Rush writes "Hey the rehab where I stayed was nice, everyone should try it."
MIDDLE CLASS CRUNCH----We thought Nestle's only had regular Crunch. Savage reports "I prefer holistic chocolate, you putz."
LABOR ISSUES----If women can't handle it, don't get pregnant. Ms.Mickey Malkin was a contributer to this piece since she is now unknown.
TRADE POLICIES ON JOBS----Nobody cares about a job, they just want "handouts" Savage writes.
INDEPTH STORIES ON THE ENVIRONMENT----Billo wrote, "Do we have to go to the center of the earth for that?" Billo wanted to lead the way because of his toughness after eating a a black restaurant.
ALTERNATIVE FUEL PRODUCTION---Guess we'll all have to start using Preimum on our new SUV's. Seannie states, "Mine is prettier than Rushs'".
WHO OWNS THE MEDIA----The public already knows that we do. Besides, it is none of their business. WE own the radio waves, Let them watch cable...lower tier only.
AFFECTS COVERAGE---Hey, we'll tell you what we are told you should think. Remember, we get the big bucks. And we are the REAL journalists.
Mary, the entire stories can be found at
HTTP//Weknowitallfortherightprice@WMDS////mushroomcloud
-- An analysis of federal records shows that the amount of money journalists contributed...$225,563 going to Democrats, only $16,298 to Republicans.
Searches for other newsroom categories (reporters, correspondents, news editors, anchors, newspaper editors and publishers) produces 311 donors to Democrats to 30 donors to Republicans...$279,266 went to Dems, $20,709 to Republicans.
The contributions of individuals who reported being employed by major media organizations...$315,533 to Democrats and $22,656 to Republicans. -- Investors Business Daily
Conservative media?
But...but...what about Murdoch and the other evil corporate moguls dictating the story lines to their reporters...save your breath and fingers.
While I don't doubt some of that goes on...the evidence points out that members of the media are overwhelmingly liberal...and as pointed out here time after time...they're dishonest...and don't hesitate to insert their personal biases into their reporting.
Conservative media? Not hardly!
Lotta people on the demobandwagon this year. Industrialists, the military,middle america. Where were they priviously?
Credit for bring up information on media people beyond the reporters.
Still see no evidence of the hammer lock of neocn ideology loosening in the MSM's output. Show me a few examples of a liberal meme carrying the day in the media. I don't think it'd be to hard here to find 10 examples going the other way.
Heard 75% of us think that the "Don't ask, don't tell policy", should be punked. I'd be hearing about this alot if we had a liberal media. So far MSM is silent on this and so many other issues that impact our lives in important and liberally relevent ways.
Give me a break. You WITH people are barking up the worng tree here.
1) It reinforces the points that MMFA has been making along. Why shoul dMMFA highlight these comments? It's called "I TOLD YOU SO!"
2) It offers further support against the now ridiculous myth of liberal media bias. Again, it's calles "I TOLD YOU SO."
There is nothing wrong with sighting an outside source that agress with your points. It the same thing with Olbermann's stuff. It called "YAY! THERE'S SOMEONE OUT THERE WHO GETS IT!!!"
Nothing wrong with these. The WITH's should be answered with WAYH's!
I am no fan of the right however their claim that the media is biased against them appears credible. I would like to see more of a discussion of the real issues. I have heard nothing bad about Obama which concerns me as much as all the bad I hear about McCain. Are we hiding something? No one is as great as we are led to believe Obama is. I do not trust any politician, right or left, When I hear not criticism of Obama it leads me to believe we are all a bunch of sheep. I listed on the other side a lot and hear them criticize the hek out of McCain.
Carl