Here's something you don't see every day: a liberal, female editor of a leading liberal online magazine stating with cameras rolling that most press members "Hate, hate Hillary Clinton."
Yet, that's exactly what occurred Sunday morning when Salon's editor-in-chief Joan Walsh spoke some truths about the media's love affair with Democrat presidential candidate Barack Obama, as well as their disdain for the former first lady (video embedded right).
Also surprising was Walsh's view of liberal assertions that the Rev. John Hagee is as big an issue for Sen. John McCain's candidacy as Rev. Jeremiah Wright is for Obama's.
But, before we get there, here were Walsh's comments about media bias during this campaign:
I was struck when I got to Iowa and New Hampshire in January by how our media colleagues were just swooning over Barack Obama. That is not too strong a word. They were swooning. I was at a speech, I remember it, I will write about it some day, in Manchester, and every, the biggest names in our business were there, and they were, they could repeat some of his speech lines to one another. It was like a Bruce Springsteen concert where the fans sing along. And, you know, I respected it to some extent. He's a towering political figure. Of our generation, he's probably the best politician, he's inspiring. And, reporters, white reporters, black reporters, reporters of every race, we want to get beyond racism in America. So, he was, he was inspiring, I understood it, they're humans, they responded. The downside though is that they hate, hate Hillary Clinton, most of them. Hate is not too strong a word.
Fascinating. Yet, maybe more so, especially given Frank Rich's column in the New York Times Sunday, were Walsh's not so liberal views concerning Hagee's connection to McCain:
It is a different relationship. Hagee deserves a lot of criticism. But, you know, he's gotten it. McCain deserves more criticism for embracing Hagee and going after his endorsement, but he is not his pastor. So, I really don't think it's comparable.
Wow. I've had my run-ins with Walsh before, but I must say I found her candor and impartiality this morning to be quite refreshing.
Brava.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Obama -- Wright
May 4, 2008 - 11:09 ET by allanfThe difficulty some liberals have with analogies always amazes me. Supposedly liberals lead the way on the SAT.
Reverend Wright's message is one of despair and anger. His talks are full of venom and vitriol. What makes him relevant to the campaign is the close twenty year mentoring relationship he has had with Obama.
Obama also knows Farakhan and has been endorsed by Farrakhan. If you want a closer anology it is
McCain- Hagee = Obama -Farrakhan
The more Democrats harp on this matter, the more attention it brings to the Obama -Wright matter. Didn't they get the marching orders issued to Susan Malveaux by Mrs. Obama. It is time to move on press.
Hagee has made some unfortunate statements. But I see no signs that his message is wrapped in the kind of anger which characterizes Reverent Wright.
McCain- Hagee = Obama
May 4, 2008 - 16:13 ET by stratmanAgree.
There is question as to whether McCain knew of the inflammatory theological anti-Catholic rhetoric of Hagee. There is no doubt that Obama knew of Farrankhan's theological, racial and political inflammatory rhetoric.
While the media reports Obama has denounced Farrankhan, Obama refused several times during the February 26 MSNBC Democratic primary debate to flatly, succintly reject Farrankhan's support. The obviousness of Obama's slipperyness was so blatant that even "NBC News political director Chuck Todd criticized Obama's statements, at one point asking, "Why didn't Obama simply say he rejected Farrakhan's support?"
During the February debate, Obama states he see's no difference between "denouncing and rejecting". I guess, then, Obama didn't just denounce the alledged racist thoughts of his grandmother, he rejected her as well? Yep, no difference in the meanings of the words.
What about Obama's trite phrase "Don't tell me words have no meaning"?
Additionally, it has not gone unnoticed how Obama has dealt with many of these issues until recently. Obama has sent out his staff to deal with embarrasing issues instead of facing potentially unsympathetic questioners and the possibillity of stumbling with unscripted answers. Another thing we can say for sure about Obama, he sure knows how to "delegate".
Obama "denounces" or "rejects" individuals well after he has knowledge of impropriety, and only if the Public has been alerted about his colleagues, mentors and friends positions. It is his fear of losing power that forces him to recant or denounce, and only after initial tap dancing around the issue.
Obama's "Change" sounds like old fashioned political hucksterism to me.
RRAM Tough!
Liberals
May 4, 2008 - 11:01 ET by iveseenitallA "liberal" "journalist" telling the truth about her colleagues. So rare, it makes news. Sad.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
Nothing like
May 4, 2008 - 11:02 ET by docbtelling the truth to a unwilling audience....That took guts!
of course
May 4, 2008 - 11:09 ET by candanceLiberals complain about religious endorsements for Republicans every election. According to them, James Dobson and Franklin Graham are equally dangerous because they're pro life. This is where all the "pandering to the hard right" comes from.
Getting an official endorsement from a famous minister = being best friends with a local minister.
candance, Frank Rich, in
May 4, 2008 - 11:26 ET by motherbeltcandance, Frank Rich, in the NYT this AM, said McCain "could've" found out what Hagee's views were. Apparently that's just as bad as Obama knowing Wright's views for 20 years.
Hagee and Wright
May 4, 2008 - 11:37 ET by allanfCan someone tell me how Hagee, who has made a few controversial statements is comparable to Reverent Wright?
Wright's message is full of anger and despair. It drips with hatred and teaches people to be victims instead of leaders.
allant
May 4, 2008 - 13:45 ET by DelsaSimple. They are the left!
America hating
May 4, 2008 - 15:56 ET by Jerry MackComparing Hagee to the America hating Wright provides cover for those that do not believe Wright had any influence on Obama. In their shallow minds they cancel each other. Go figure!
This is the dirty little secret
May 4, 2008 - 11:24 ET by Delsaand is the main reason Obama will get the nomination nod.
A huge group of Democrats, MSM included, cannot stand the thought of the Clinton's in the White House again.
Democrats do not mind if the Clintons remain in the sweatshop of money raising but to have them back in a leadership position is not going to be allowed.
Add the folks on the left to the rest of America who can't stand the Clinton's, and you have a huge looser in the fall.
I don't think that's a
May 4, 2008 - 11:31 ET by motherbeltI don't think that's a secret, Delsa: not for the Democrats. That's why they "purged" Terry McAuliffe; they didn't want a Clinton hack running the DNC. For the press, I think they've always felt that way and it's been revealing itself little by little since a few months after Clinton announced. They just kind of drifted until the Obama phenomenon took hold, giving them someone they could really root for.
Motherbelt
May 4, 2008 - 13:43 ET by DelsaDirty little secret for the American Voting Public.
Spoken only in back rooms, with the lights out, in democrat circles.
The secret is only a secret to the outside World.
Wouldn't it be great if
May 4, 2008 - 11:42 ET by ThisnThatWouldn't it be great if Clinton stole the Dim nomination? A whole generation of MSM-types rooting for the GOP-nominee [note I did not say Republican]!
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
A COUPLE OF THINGS...
May 4, 2008 - 17:14 ET by danybhoyFirst things first, there is a huge difference between the McCain/Hagge connection & the Obama/Wright connection. Hagge, who I had never heard of untill this election cycle, is sort of like Dobson or Robertson in terms of endorsing a candidate, it's a Christian conservative variation of a union endorsment. I'm not a big a fan religious endorsments in the political arena, but there are many who do vote on strict moral lines. It's their right to decide to the way they do. Obama sat in Wright's church for 20 years, he has no excuses.
As for Wright & black liberation theology, I have heard the arguement that what Wright is doing is the same as what Farrakhan is doing, except the vehicle is Islam, not Christianity. The ultimate message is the same, a black nationalist, anti-white, anti-semitic, & usually anti-American viewpoint is being preached. Might explain why these 2 guys get along so well, also might explain why the Nation Of Islam is providing Wright with his security.
The last point goes to the title about the MSM not liking Hillary. I heard Jim Quinn (of the Pittsburgh radio show Quinn & Rose) mention that if the MSM thinks it can get what it wants with Obama, that they would dump the Clintons. There really is nothing different about what Obama & Hillary are pushing politically, but if the MSM can rid itself of the Clintons, who have not been too nice to them over the last 2 decades, they would dump them. That appears to have happened, & not just at MSNBC.
What is funny, or sad, depending how you look at this, is that George W Bush has been a good guy with the MSM, way too good in my opinion. They hated the guy for no reason other then he exists, I believe that shows the true colors of the MSM, & I won't forget that. The MSM was exposed for biased jerks that they are, many have damaged themselves more then they know, & have lost my trust. I suspect that I'm not alone with that thought.
"Some of us are wise, some of us are otherwise" Mark Levin
If not for Obama, hate for Hillary would be hard to find..
May 4, 2008 - 18:34 ET by Gary HallIf not for Obama, this hate for Hillary would be hard to find..
If not for Obama -"our media colleagues were just swooning over Barack Obama. That is not too strong a word. They were swooning" - I suspect neither Walsh, nor the hundreds of other almost daily little hints from her MSM liberal "media colleagues" would be caught dead talking about Hillary (or Bill Clinton) in any variation of these terms of hate, put-off, mistrust, or simply tired of them language.
In other words, all of this is possible only because the media prefers a newer and more liberal liberal candidate. Take Obama out of the picture, and their loyal swooning for Hillary will be a constant and as fresh and as a baby's behind. Their distrust and hate for any conservative candidate will remain unchanged, in any event.
Walsh used the word
May 4, 2008 - 19:35 ET by bigtimerWalsh used the word hate...I can't believe the truth is finally coming out about the strangle-hold of the Clinton Machine, mostly ALL Hillary who had put this all in motion for years... starting with her years full mode in the WH behind the scenes, if anyone kept up with her, she did a masterful job, I sure didn't realize the hatred they had for her and how fast they would give her a swift kick until Obama made such progress....then it was simply delicious to watch the msm give her the heave-ho, one by one, on all the networks when she was losing big time, poor leftists, they have received exactly what they have deserved IMHO...and it has been hilarious to watch.
Going to be fun to watch afterwards too with the press...if Hillary makes it somehow.
Back-stabbing hypocrites all.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill