In the age of Daniel Pearl, who does a leading MSMer refer to as a "throat cutter"?

The essence of Howard Fineman's Newsweek column about the demise of Mitt Romney's campaign is the glorification of authenticity, and Romney's perceived lack of it. Ironic, then, that Fineman would resort to one of the oldest, and least authentic, journalistic dodges: suggest the worst about someone, then slyly slink away. To wit [emphasis added]:

[M]aybe the campaign revealed what his closest friends never imagined him to be. They thought he was a decent classy guy. But maybe he really is a soulless throat-cutter who would do and say anything to win.

I note that there are quite a few McCain supporters here (over 352 enthusiastically support in the poll)

Can you tell me why i as a conservative should vote for John McCain (of McCain-Kennedy and McCain-Fiengold fame)?  I understand what he has said recently but it does not jive with what he has done, why should i believe him?

And please no flood posts a la Pop-Tech i really want a discussion not a link war

Imagine campaign events happening in 22 states at the same time, and that at such contests, two liberals, two conservatives, and one moderate candidate are vying for the public's votes.

You would expect the words "liberal" and "conservative" to be equally interspersed in media coverage of these events if indeed press outlets were impartial, right?

Well, count MSNBC out of this logical calculus, for on Tuesday evening, the unabashedly left-leaning cable news network actually used the word "conservative" tens times as much as "liberal."

In fact, the actual tally for these descriptives during MSNBC's Super Tuesday primary coverage was (h/t NBer Gary Hall):

Appearing on Tucker Carlson's show a few days ago, Hillary fan Lanny Davis observed that Tucker's is "about the only show on MSNBC that consistently allows a Clinton perspective to be expressed." But maybe not so much when, as this evening, David Shuster is the guest host. Employing one of the more graphic metaphors to be heard about a Clinton from the MSM, Shuster tonight claimed that Chelsea Clinton is being "pimped out" by her mother's campaign.

The jumping off point was a clip in which three members of The View mentioned having been called by Chelsea on behalf of her mother. Shuster's guests were Dem pundit Bill Press and columnist Bob Franken.

View video here.

Brian Maloney at Radio Equalizer has a shocking story to tell. On her Air America radio show on Super Tuesday, Randi Rhodes ran a commercial parody in which Mitt Romney supporters suggest they're going to go on a "killing rampage" if John McCain wins. He has audio, and the transcript:

ANNOUNCER: The following is a paid advertisement from Republicans for Mitt Romney, or mass suicide. If John McCain is the Republican Presidential nominee, it will destroy the Republican Party. We’re Romney supporters and we know. Cause, if you vote for John McCain, we’re going to go on a killing rampage. Hey, better dead then moderate.

REPUBLICAN CHARACTER VOICE: "Look, I for one don’t want to die in a hail of gun fire from crazed Mitt Romney supporters, but it’s better then nominating a man who opposed the Bush tax cuts. Hell, John McCain spent years in a North Vietnamese prison. A prison? That doesn’t make him a hero. That makes him an ex-con.

So
how is our government treating us? In some instances, I'd say pretty
good. With the selection of General Petraeus as the commander in Iraq,
the President has given a godsend to the people who believe we are
really in a war against Islamo-fascism. Those who don't must have
plenty of Mideast sand in their teeth from burying their heads. There
can be no doubt that there have been multiple mistakes since the
invasion of Iraq. It's easy to run any efforts of war by looking at
yesterday. Those
who conduct a war do not have that luxury. Requirements and necessities
change on a daily and sometimes an hourly basis. There is no doubt that
military casualties are down. Civilian casualties are down. Suicide
bombings are down. Roadside bombings are down. Security is up and
people are truly beginning to go back to a semblance of normalcy. There
have even been some concrete steps taken by the Iraqi Parliament.

This question is only for those who said prior to Super Tuesday that they would never vote for John McCain.

Were you hoping no one would call your bluff, were you really just blowing off steam, or do you remain serious about it?

I'm just asking because I never say stuff I don't mean but I've learned over the years that a lot of people do.

Philip Shenon, investigative reporter for the New York Times, has written a book on the 9-11 Commission and talked about it with Fresh Air host Terry Gross on National Public Radio Monday. Judging by Shenon's past willingness to heap all of the blame for 9-11 on the then eight-month old Bush administration (as opposed to the eight years of Clinton that preceded it), it's no surprise he praised Clinton's former National Security Advisor, the disgraced Sandy Berger, who got caught and convicted for shoving copies of classified documents into his socks.

Is ABC "View" co-host Joy Behar so far out of the political mainstream that she has a skewed sense of what entails a "liberal" and a "conservative?" The same woman who called Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama "very moderate" on the February 7 show, John McCain has "been very conservative in all his policies." Apparently anyone who does not march lockstep with NARAL is an arch-conservative, as Behar explained that McCain is "so conservative because he’s against choice."

Very conservative in all of his policies? John McCain’s 2006 rating with the American Conservative Union was 65. While he certainly votes for the conservative position more often than not, he has far from a solid conservative record. The Club for Growth assailed McCain’s vote against the 2001 tax cuts and his class warfare reasoning for opposing it.

In ackowledgment of what he says is the Republican Party's counting on "fear and loathing of Hillary Clinton" to bring together Conservatives and Establishment Republicans behind now presumptive Party nominee John McCain (now that Mitt Romney has suspended his effort), Rush Limbaugh this afternoon announced that he is considering raising coin to assist her in her attempt to win the Democratic nomination over Illinois Senator Barack Obama.

Remember how the New York Times went apoplectic over last December's NIE estimate that brashly claimed that Iran had suspended their intent to manufacture nuclear arms? It was a front pager and formed the basis of claims that we had illegitimately targeted Iran for rhetorical attacks by many people who opposed the Bush Administration's entire foreign policy regime. Well, as the New York Sun said on the 7th, "what a difference two months make." It appears that the original NIE report was too hasty in its claims that Iran was innocent as the driven snow. So, here's the question: Will the NYT gives us a front page story apologizing for their alarmism?

Yeah. I didn't think so.

On December 3rd, the NYT led its front page, "News Analysis" article with this startling statement:

From the AP moments ago (video of FNC's Bill Kristol predicting this two days ago available here courtesy our friend Johnny $):

John McCain effectively sealed the Republican presidential nomination on Thursday as chief rival Mitt Romney suspended his faltering presidential campaign.

"If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention, I would forestall the launch of a national campaign and make it more likely that Senator Clinton or Obama would win. And in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign, be a part of aiding a surrender to terror," Romney will say at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington.

Here's a belated item for your media-bias talking points: after rummaging through the media coverage of the typically large March for Life on Tuesday, January 22, I have the following scorecard:

-- ABC, CBS, and NBC had absolutely nothing on the March, and absolutely nothing on the 35th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade. Put the word "abortion" into Nexis and you get a black hole for that day, and the next day.

-- By contrast, Fox News Channel at least had a fair-and-balanced report on the March (complete with abortion advocates like Vicki Saporta of the National Abortion Federation) on Tuesday night's Special Report with Brit Hume.  

-- National Public Radio offered several segments on the Roe anniversary, but no mention of the March for Life  (with the asterisk that news breaks on the hour are not loaded into Nexis.)

 Editors at CosmoGirl would do well to remember that when they point at somebody else, three fingers are pointing back at them.   

The popular teen magazine tackled the question "What is Sexy?" in the March 2008 issue, bemoaning the increased amount of sexual imagery being thrown at young girls but failing to acknowledge its own contribution to the problem. 

Writer Marina Khidekel pointed out that girls are exposed to sexual imagery at younger ages than ever before, citing the popular Bratz dolls and the fact that "stores such as Limited Too sell lingerie like push-up bras and skimpy low-rise underwear for pre-teens." 

Khidekel also rightly lamented that TV shows "with smart female lead characters (like "Gilmore Girls" and "Veronica Mars") are being cancelled, while shows that survive (like "America's Top Model" and "The Hills") focus mainly on girls' appearance and hookups."   When girls are bombarded with the message that appearance is the only thing that matters, Khidekel notes, they start to feel that it's their "sexual power - not [their] talent, brains or ambition - that counts most." 

Really, it's not sexual power that counts the most?  Because that's the opposite message portrayed by the rest of the issue. 

Yesterday my colleague Noel Sheppard noted that some Anglican bishops are urging their flocks to go "carbon" free during Lent. Along the same eco-insanity line, Chicago Tribune's religion blogger Manya Brachear submitted a post on Tuesday wondering if there's a "moral obligation" that Catholic priests have to urge their parishioners to go "fishless" or vegetarian on Fridays given concerns about mercury contamination:

Roman Catholic bishops once urged parishioners to observe meatless Fridays as a year-round act of penance. Since Vatican II, bishops have upheld meatless Fridays only during Lent, the 40 days leading up to Easter. The only exception is fish, prompting an annual run on seafood markets and a slew of fish fries in place of church potlucks.

But the dangers of eating tuna and swordfish, which scientists say is loaded with mercury, might be more flagellation than bishops had in mind. With Lent beginning Wednesday, should clergy encourage their flock to give up certain kinds of fish or go vegetarian?

[...]

Should it be against the law to disagree with an as yet unproven scientific theory?

A Canadian scientist and high-profile television personality thinks so, and has called for the jailing of political leaders that ignore the junk science behind the anthropogenic global warming myth.

It appears the witch hunt has moved from calling non-believers "deniers" to the burning phase, which is comically ironic if you think about it long enough.

While you search for the not so subtle pun, Canada's National Post reported Thursday (h/t NBer landshark, emphasis added throughout):

On Thursday's "Good Morning America," ABC reporter Cynthia McFadden suggested that the aging, liberal singer Cher might want to think about running for office. After discussing the performer's new Las Vegas show, McFadden asked Cher about politics.

Explaining why she's pro-Hillary Clinton and not supporting Barack Obama, the performer segued into discussing the "saint" known as Jimmy Carter and how "all he talked about was what he wanted to do for this country. And because of his inexperience, they cut him off at the knees." McFadden's response to this glowing assessment of the one term president was to assert, "Maybe you should run for office."

Today's starter: Anyone going to CPAC? If so, be sure and visit the various MRC functions which include:

• An 11:30 book signing today for Brent Bozell's book "Whitewash"
• The official MRC booth where you can meet our staff as well as get some nice swag
• The NB presence at "Bloggers' Row." Managing editor Ken Shepherd and myself will be in and out throughout the conference
• A 12:00pm panel Saturday on web politics at which MRC will present our new Eyeblast video hosting service

With Joe Scarborough away, the mice did play during the opening segment of today's Morning Joe . . .

WILLIE GEIST [facetiously]: David, I know how you like to speak for Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and the rest of that group.

MIKA BRZEZINSKI: He's going to the [CPAC] convention.

GEIST: You're the voice of that community, but can you make sense out of this? Are they willing, the conservatives, the Limbaughs, the Hannitys of the world, to concede the election, to not have John McCain be president, to take Hillary Clinton over them, just to take a principled stand?

View video here.