Goldberg falsely attacks NY Times Obama coverage
SUMMARY: In yet another instance of mangling the facts to show purported media favoritism toward then-presidential candidate Barack Obama, Bernard Goldberg writes in his new book: "Finally, in the last month of the campaign, the [New York] Times returned to the Obama-Ayers story, but only after McCain and (mostly) Palin began making it an issue on the campaign trail." In fact, in what was reported as the "first time" Gov. Sarah Palin raised Obama's connection to William Ayers, Palin actually cited the October 4, 2008, New York Times story to which Goldberg refers.
In yet another instance of mangling the facts to show purported media favoritism toward then-presidential candidate Barack Obama, Bernard Goldberg writes in his new book: "Finally, in the last month of the campaign, the [New York] Times returned to the Obama-Ayers story, but only after McCain and (mostly) Palin began making it an issue on the campaign trail." In fact, in what ABC News' Imtiyaz Delawala reported was the "first time" Gov. Sarah Palin raised Obama's connection to former Weather Underground member William Ayers, Palin actually cited the October 4, 2008, New York Times story to which Goldberg refers. Indeed, a Media Matters for America search* of the Nexis database found no reports of Palin mentioning Obama's connection to Ayers prior to the publication of the October 4 Times article.
In an October 4 entry on ABCNews.com's Political Radar blog, Delawala reported:
Republican vice presidential nominee Gov. Sarah Palin unleashed a new attack on Sen. Barack Obama, accusing him of "palling around with terrorists" for his association with former 1960s radical William Ayers. The Obama campaign immediately denounced the attack as "shameless" and "offensive."
At a private fundraiser in Englewood, Colo., this morning, and later at a rally in Carson, Calif., this afternoon, Palin for the first time raised Obama's connection to Ayers, one of the founding members of the Weather Underground, a '60s radical group that took credit for bombing attacks around the country, including explosions set off at the Pentagon and U.S. Capitol.
"Our opponent, though, is someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect, imperfect enough that he's palling around with terrorists who would target their own country," Palin told supporters at a $1,000-a-plate fundraiser in Englewood. "Americans need to know this."
Palin cited a front-page article in today's New York Times that explored the ties between Obama and Ayers. Obama had served on a charity board with Ayers in Chicago during the mid-90s, and Ayers was present at an organizing meeting in 1995 to kick off Obama's first election campaign for the Illinois State Senate.
"There has been a lot of interest in what I read, and what I read lately well, was reading my copy of today's New York Times and I was really interested to read about Barack's friends from Chicago," Palin said. "OK, now I get to bring this up not to pick a fight, but it was there in the New York Times, so we're gonna talk about it.
"And it turns out one of Barack's earliest supporters is a man who according to the New York Times, and are they ever wrong, according to the New York Times was a domestic terrorist and part of a group of that, quote, pushed a campaign of bombings that would target the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol," Palin continued. "Wow. These are the same guys who think patriotism is paying higher taxes. This is not a man who sees America as I see America, OK?"
From Page 101 of Goldberg's A Slobbering Love Affair: The True (and Pathetic) Story of the Torrid Romance Between Barack Obama and the Mainstream Media (Regnery), which Media Matters obtained in advance of its January 26 publication date:
Finally, in the last month of the campaign, the Times returned to the Obama-Ayers story, but only after McCain and (mostly) Palin began making it an issue on the campaign trail. And what did the Times investigation uncover? That Obama and Ayers did not have a "close" relationship and that their paths merely "crossed" while they worked in Chicago.
*Nexis searches in News, All (English, Full Text) from all dates before October 6, 2008, for
- Palin w/25 Ayers
- Palin w/25 terrorist
- Palin w/100 bomb!
SARAH PALIN: "There has been a lot of interest in what I read, and what I read lately well, was reading my copy of today's New York Times and..."
Sarah remembered the article vivdly because it was the first time she had ever actually held a copy of the New York Times in her hands. She remembered how the ink from the smudged newsprint had darkened her fingers...ink from the real New York Times! They would write about her, too, she thought...loosening the top button of her new tailored wool jacket so that anyone looking closely would glimpse the lace that adorned her new bra. And it made her feel like a city girl.
See, Goldberg here says that they RETURNED to the story. Why did they even need to return to said story in the first place? I mean, it was covered ad nauseum before Palin ever brought it up, and there was really no story there in the first place. He's acting as if nobody ever talked about this before Palin/McCain did, which is so incorrect, it hurts.
I read somewhere that at least eight or nine news agencies investigated the Bill Ayers connection...actually did legitimate investigative journalism, talking to people who were there, looking at minutes of meetings, etc. They all came back and said there was no evidence that Ayers and Obama were close. Even some Republican board members who served with both men were offended by the nature of the accusations. Just because Sean Hannity made it part of his ad nauseum litany of Barack Obama's alleged sins was no reason to keep the non-story alive simply for the benefit of perpetuating slanderous right wing campaign myths.
I love it when they (still) say that Barack Obama was not scrutinized when he was under a microscope for almost two years. They trashed him because he was from Chicago. Obama swam with the sharks in Chicago and the best they could come up with was that he belonged to a church whose pastor was goof-ball; he served on a board with Bill Ayers; and he bought a piece of land from Tony Rezco's wife, with otherwise no evidence of any unethical, illegal or immoral. When does it stop so we get along with the business of our country?
Oh come on, it never stops. You know that. They don't care about anything but winning. It never occurs to them that they might be losing because they're cheating.
Irony, Every buddy please slow down a tiny bit. I'm still waiting for that Whitewater thing to come down. Can someone update the Travelgate thingee for me? Can't worry about 2009 stuff. The Repubs/Conserves are still murking around the muddy waters of the 1990's and prior to that.. Hopefully, they will catch-up with the rest of the sane world before 2012.
Bernie, did President Obama name Ayers to his cabinet yet? Mr. Seannie the Sissyboy said he would do it. Oh well, back to Whitewater...P.S. Will they never learn??
Agreed! I'm still waiting for a detailed second by second account of an incidence of infidelity committed by Clinton. It must take millions of dollars to investigate and be the SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT THING EVER in politics! Hmm..? Wha.. What? There is a report out? It DID cost taxpayers millions? It lays bare the soul of every democrat EVER? All right- gotta go get me that!
And, once that's out of the way, maybe they'll finally get around to that report about how intelligence was used/misused in the selling of the Iraq War.
Yeah, I'm holding my breath for that one.
"Palin actually cited the October 4, 2008, New York Times story to which Goldberg refers."
Look, in the "Republican Land Behind the Looking Glass" citing a newspaper story means you spoke before it was published.
This Goldberg book continues to be a gold mine of entertainment for me. But seriously, when you omit a story about McCain to highlight a story about Obama, and then you rearrange the order in which people said things AND cut out the part where someone says, "Others are saying...", and then twist the fabric of space-time again as he's done here, all in order to prove that there was a pro-Obama bias, doesn't that mean there wasn't a real pro-Obama bias? I mean, if there was ample evidence of such a bias, why would Goldberg include these three ridiculous examples?
Because real research is hard and just making crap up is simple AND cost-effective!
OK good point.
Yes it is all right there in the paper. The NY times was quoting Palin. So Palin says, speaking of the Ayers association, "we're gonna" bring it up because the NY Times has already covered the Obama Ayers connection. Can this woman at least use high school level grammer when she talks. Never mind the other inane things she said that Goldburg quoted, but "Going to" is not all that difficult to say. How nice that this guy reminds us of Palin and her campaign ability. I hear Republicans are really looking forward to her next national run again. Amazing! I can hardly wait.
At least she can get the words out without a teleprompter unlike....uh..um...aaahhh....Barack Obama.
....uh..um...aaahhh....?
The sign of a thoughtful person who chooses his words carefully. Don't you think this is really pretty silly...even juvenile? Particularly to compare an empty-headed, self-promoting diva like Sarah Palin to anyone of any substance? Apparently you didn't watch any of Sarah Palin's interviews. I know, they were painful to watch.
I swear in every interview I saw her in, there was a hand behind her doing up and down motions like a puppeteer and making her say all of Rove's talking points.
"Mavericks...!" "White flag of surrender...!" "This great country of ours...!" Etc., etc., etc.
It always struck me that Palin was given a list of buzz words and cliches and instructed to repeat them as many times as she could. She was like a child who had been spoon fed a simplistic summary of events and positions for memorization, of which she otherwise had no discernable understanding, so that could repeat them over and over again. Can you imagine how dangerous it would have been for this woman to sit a heartbeat away from the Oval Office?
I just pray to Allah that she stays in Alaska. I lived there for 7 years and 'those people' (not in a racist or any -ist way, it's just that most alaskans are, well, a little different than your average bear) are so rabidly in love with her without knowing a darn thing about her policies. All they care about is that another Mall-Wart opened on her watch and that OBVIOUSLY means things are better in the Valley. Listening to her speak has really opened my eyes to the fact that some people REEEEALLLLLLY should not be in office where they have power over people and policies.
Of course it's silly and grossly juvenile. These are the benchmarks of the vacuous, slack-jawed Dupes who sit mesmerized in front of Fox Newtwisters Channel and allow the bilge to drown them mentally. The poster obviously runs off to cheer and vote against his/her own interests. Hannutsy and Limbaughloney and the rest of the ultra-right lunatics love characters like Cheney2012, who keep their wealth growing.
So can the crazy cat lady on the Simpsons.
Sort of like someone who couldn't answer the simple question of, "What newspapers do you read or magazines?"
Palin: I'll get back to you on that one Katie!
At LEAST she is not the VEEP. And that is PRESIDENT OBAMA to you Dicky.
See, the difference is that Obama is thinking about what he's going to say next. Simple Sarah just goes on automatic and plugs in pre-programmed talking points to fill the gaps. Just try to diagram some of her sentences.... it's like doing advanced Calculus.
It is a talent, I'll admit.... to talk fluently without really saying anything. Simple Sarah must have learned it when rehearsing her Beauty Pageant answers.
Is that all you've got, MMFA? Is that all you've got?:)
Amazing. President Numbnuts Bush got a virtual eight-year free ride from the MSM, and these douchebags are still whining about the "Liberal Media"?
GMAFB
Goldberg is a tool. I read some of his 1st book, Bias and it was pretty lame. Just anecdotal evidence that because a majority of reporters (NOT editors, publishers, and major shareholders) belonged to the Democratic party, the mainstream media is automatically biased. What a crock.
Of course, there was no mention of Rupert Murdoch, the Pulliam family, the Quayle family, the Gannett group, Clear Channel, etc etc