Hillary Clinton, victim of an unfair press? Bill certainly thinks so. Associated Press writer Philip Elliott reported: "Bill Clinton said Tuesday that if reporters covered the candidates' public records better, his wife's presidential bid would be far ahead of her rivals. During a campaign stop on behalf of his wife, New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, the former president said he can't understand why so much of the media coverage of the campaign ignores her experience—and, without naming him, the relative lack of experience of her closest Democratic rival, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama."
Press coverage aside, if this Democratic race was really about experience, wouldn’t Joe Biden and Chris Dodd be the two front-runners? It is amazing and shameless that the Clintons can complain that the 89-percent pro-Clinton press isn’t pro-Clinton enough, that if the press did their job correctly, Hillary would have an enormous lead, as if media professionalism was defined by how well the media elite realized and established for the public that she is just what the country desperately needs. Elliott continued with Bill’s mighty whine about the media being rude to his wife (as if he’s never been):
One percent of the press coverage was devoted to their record in public life. No wonder people think experience is irrelevant. A lot of the people covering the race think it is (irrelevant)," Clinton said to students at Keene State College.
Clinton referenced a study from the Project for Excellence in Journalism that indicated much of the coverage of the race is dominated by daily horse race reporting rather than about policy issues.
"Sixty-seven percent of the coverage is pure politics. That stuff has a half life of about 15 seconds. It won't matter tomorrow. It is very vulnerable to being slanted and rude. And it won't affect your life," Clinton said.
So Clinton isn’t being completely factless as well as tactless. This "Project for Excellence" is a group of liberals headed by Tom Rosenstiel, a former reporter for Newsweek and the Los Angeles Times, that consistently seems to find in its studies that Al Gore or John Kerry were being slighted. But this study doesn’t explicitly say Hillary is being denied the royal parade she deserves. It does say that the media is obsessed with the horse race, (and let’s not forget Hillary has been the head horse):
In all, 63% of the campaign stories focused on political and tactical aspects of the campaign. That is nearly four times the number of stories about the personal backgrounds of the candidates (17%) or the candidates’ ideas and policy proposals (15%). And just 1% of stories examined the candidates’ records or past public performance, the study found.
One percent seems low to me. Don't forget that the study sample isn't just the "objective" media, but conservative and liberal talk radio as well. (MRC's Rich Noyes broke it down when it came out.)
But it doesn't take rocket science to establish that the media are obsessed with the horse race. Part of that is the nature of the media's modus operandi: it deploys its staff to travel with the candidates. After hearing the same stump speech 67 times, reporters tune out on the substance and focus more on strategy and tactics. They're talking mostly to voters and to campaign strategists. To put more focus on the candidate's public records would be a laudable thing, but it should probably be handed to someone in the home office who isn't following a candidate around to every Moose lodge.
The most obnoxious part of the Clinton complaint is that a focus on Hillary's record would make her more appealing. First, what kind of vast experience gap does Hillary have on Obama? In the Senate, it's four years. Unless you count her time as First Lady, she has no other time in office. But the press in this campaign has implicitly acknowledged her time in that supposedly ceremonial office as governing experience. They've even spun her health-care fiasco as being a plus for her -- well, maybe it is in a Democratic primary (hey, it only lost both houses of Congress for 12 years). But to say she's been slighted on this front (worse than Dodd or Biden) is just shameless wife-flattering.
Does Bill Clinton really want the press to focus harder on the health-care fiasco, her 100-percent score with the abortion lobby, her near-perfect liberal voting record with Americans for Democratic Action, and her lifetime American Conservative Union score of nine percent? Many conservatives would appreciate a better look at her public record, too.
—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
December 5, 2007 - 06:29 ET by ThisnThatClinton does have a lot of experience -- making wrong judgements. In addition to her health care fiasco, there are other areas where she has proven to be totally wrong in her judgement:
Patreous - "Willing suspension of disbelief" in order to believe the General knew what he was talking about.
Billing Records - "I just don't know how these appeared in the White House living quarters -- really, I don't".
Monica - "Everything is caused by the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" against us. Of course, Bill has never lied, never went after the girls.
Others can put together a better list than mine, but it's pathetic that the AP can't list its own counterpoints, and instead simply pushes the crap spewing from the Clintons.
BTW, what's with the Hillary Rodham Clinton moniker? In the same paragraph I see Joe Biden and Chris Dodd. Why do we have to always see "Rodham". And is her middle name Rodham? I don't think so.
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
-
December 5, 2007 - 07:40 ET by dahliatraversRodham
It's her maiden name. She added it to her name because she wanted to show she is independent of her husband.
So typical of "Her
December 5, 2007 - 07:57 ET by midnight cowboySo typical of "Her Thighness".
She wants to show she is independent of her husband, but without him she wouldn't have lived 8 years in the white house, wouldn't be a US senator, and definately wouldn't be running for president. Without him, today she would most likey be doing the horizontal tango with Janet Reno while falsifying billing records for a shady law firm.
-
December 5, 2007 - 21:25 ET by dahliatraversShe wants to show she is independent of her husband, but without him she wouldn't have lived 8 years in the white house, wouldn't be a US senator, and definately wouldn't be running for president
Exactly. Some serious irony there.
If Bill Clinton thinks her
December 5, 2007 - 08:48 ET by motherbeltIf Bill Clinton thinks her experience is so wonderful, why didn't he bring up some specifics of her policy accomplishments? I'm sure there must be a whole list of them....
I don't think you can count the fact that she worked for some children's foundation (or any foundation, for that matter) as experience that qualifies her to be President. Or her experience at the Rose Law Firm. So he must be talking about her "experience" in the White House. What experience would that be? What policies did she implement, or even work on, besides health care? And when people cited her failure there, earlier in the campaign, didn't the former Prez claim that was actually HIS project and she was more or less a figurehead?
So what are all her great accomplishments? I think he should give a speech and lay them all out. After all, who knows them better than he?
Cry Babies
December 5, 2007 - 06:31 ET by NoMoreClintons"if reporters covered the candidates' public records better"
Hey BJ, you mean the records you won't release from your "presidential" library? Have there ever been two bigger hypocrites walking the face of the earth? Besides, can anyone think of one piece of legislation this evil woman is known for in her seven years in the senate?
Amazing.
It seems people have
December 5, 2007 - 09:42 ET by kgIt seems people have forgotten how much he whined while President. Remember
his tantrum while pounding the podium with his fist saying "NO, NO, NO, NO, NO".
They are both firm believers that if they repeat something enough, the people
will become convinced that it is so. Sadly, they are correct to some extent.
Weaker minds fall for this all the time.
People that are pro-Hillary typically believe the crap that comes from her
mouth. And her cackle appears when she lies.
Liars get defensive, loud and laugh when confronted. Liars always have an
excuse but never a reason. They lay blame on somebody else, never them self.
Liars hate confrontation and only want to spew their rhetoric. You
know....someone like Hillary.
The All-Night Blogger Strikes Again
December 5, 2007 - 06:34 ET by NoMoreClintonsTim, you insomniac internet goon . . . you're at it again!
Re: Goon
December 5, 2007 - 06:48 ET by Tim GrahamTake that, Nina Burleigh! Next I'll make her cringe by saying the Pledge of Allegiance in my pajamas.
You have to laugh! Is
December 5, 2007 - 09:43 ET by kathleenirishYou have to laugh! Is 'insomniac' a slur? Hahaha-that's the best the America-phobe can come up with? Is it in the league with 'sexaholic' or 'rapist', labels the presidential knee-padder wearer might recognize easily apply to her fearless leader, BJ?
I thought when I clicked on the link, I might actually see you in your pajamas, but instead, I get the far more jarring portrait of the beast.
Anyone who says they support the troops but not the mission is a liar.
I wonder...
December 5, 2007 - 07:06 ET by sarcasmoIs it slanted or rude for media-Democrats to repeatedly-inform a not-so-well-known and usually-smeared Republican candidate (who's looking-like he's going to raise the most money this quarter) that he "can't win" when candidates with lower holy-poll-numbers & much-le$$-loot don't ever get that sort of crapola? Just askin' -- in honor of what I assume will be the upcoming Ladbroke House sponsored "Behar & Stephanoupolos luxury tour of London"! Bet-away, boys and girls -- you've said yourself you "can't lose," and London bookies are known worldwide for their generous nature with money. ;)
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
NBers
December 5, 2007 - 07:25 ET by well99Maybe we can all chip in and send Bill a stack of crying towels.I would say send cheese to go with his whine but it would get soggy from all those tears.Considering how soft the media has been on Hillary on Hsu and other dubious contributions she has got off easy.She flip flops more then a fish out of water and Bill can stamp his foot and pout all he wants.It wont change things.
I wonder if bill is aware
December 5, 2007 - 07:41 ET by MidAmericaI wonder if bill is aware that this election is not only bringing hillary down to earth but is dragging him down to the level of a mere mortal also.
Truth hurts, isn't it Billy
December 5, 2007 - 07:48 ET by Senior ChiefTruth hurts, isn't it Billy boy?! Or are you playing victimhood again? Mind you, only a few-tiny-mini of Hillary's real background is being uncovered so far by your friendly leftoid media and you're whining. Gracious! Wait until the real uncovering gets underway of your precious wife's experience, you might cringe if you don't know it yet. Right...
This is nothing new; Bill
December 5, 2007 - 08:59 ET by motherbeltThis is nothing new; Bill Clinton's always been a whiner. The supposed "tough guys" always are. I lived in MN when Jesse (the Body) Ventura was governor, and you never heard a bigger crybaby about the disrepect he got from the press. He started calling himself Jesse the Mind when he got elected; I used to call him Jesse the Whine. He and Clinton could go head to head on that.
Frankly, I think Bill is doing damage control (with his wife.) There's been talk lately about whether he is hurting or helping her campaign, and is he building up himself instead of her. So this is his way of saying "See, honey, I'm out here fighting for YOU!"
I agree, Tim, they should bring it all out. OK, Mr. President, bring it on. But let's talk about all of it; not jut the parts you want. No fair bringing out the "old news" line when you don't like where the scrutiny goes.
Remember the old saying: "Be careful what you wish for; you just might get it."
Jesse Ventura
December 5, 2007 - 11:33 ET by candanceJason Lewis still includes in his show opener the line where Ventura got mad at him and said "he calls himself Minnesota's Mr. Right." Lewis wears that like a badge of honor!
WON'T IT BE FUN WHEN THAT
December 5, 2007 - 12:01 ET by TOEWON'T IT BE FUN WHEN THAT PIMP IS BACK IN THE WHITEHOUSE !
Shrillary and Willy take
December 5, 2007 - 08:52 ET by BeowulfShrillary and Willy take Democrat Leftiphobia to the far extreme. What they both not only want, but DEMAND, is 100% coverage on Shrillary to the exclusion of all the other candidates, and of that 100% coverage, it will all consist only of information released or approved by the Clinton War-Machine..., I mean campaign. This has lately become the norm for the lefties on virtually every issue - silence any dissenting or opposing opinion so only their view or position is heard. The Clintonistas epitomize this concept. Let's see how the other candidates, as well as the LSM themselves, feel having their own tactic thrown back into their teeth...
The Closed Mind Erects Strong Barriers
Does it ever occur to these
December 5, 2007 - 09:23 ET by CJK51Does it ever occur to these people that maybe, just maybe, people just don't like Hillary? I know, that's such an unfathomable idea to entertain, but it is a slight possibility. I had nearly forgotten just how obnoxious the former president is.
And is it just me, or do the spouses of the Democrat candidates seem to get more airtime and ink than the actual candidates?
Personally, I love it that
December 5, 2007 - 10:12 ET by motherbeltPersonally, I love it that he's out there whining...the more we see and hear of him, hopefully the more people will think "do we really want to go back to those days?"
Whatever one doesn't like about President Bush, it has to be said that he doesn't go out there and whine. Republicans get mad at him sometimes because he doesn't go out and whine about how "unfair" it is. He just keeps doing his job without all the self-serving tripe about "doing the job the American people hired me to do." He assumes we're smart enough to see that without his belaboring the fact.
So keep it up, Mr. former President. You're digging a deeper hole for your wife (or is that your subconscious intention?).
As for
And is it just me, or do the spouses of the Democrat candidates seem to get more airtime and ink than the actual candidates?
I think they get a lot more than they used to. Partially because the men don't want to beat up on HRC so they send their wives out to do it. Partly because we live in a "People" magazine culture, where the "personal" side of candidates is very important.
Wives of CEO's now Qualify as Replacements for Hubbies
December 5, 2007 - 09:26 ET by JayTeeDo the Wives of CEO's automatically Qualify as "Replacement" CEO's when their hubby steps down ?
I think not.....as for the 1% coverage on Hillary's Experience, that really sounds about right, that's all the MSM coverage time it would take to itemize Hillary's experience.
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
RUDE BILL
December 5, 2007 - 09:36 ET by HG AbrahamsonThis AH keeps finding new ways to offend me. For this serial rapist to describe anyone, or any thing, for that matter, as being "rude" blows my mind. He is the poster child for rude (and crude). When I was a young man we used to describe bums like bubba as the kind of guy who would screw a snake if he could find someone to hold the head. That's Rude.
Difference of opinion is what makes a horse race.
No doubt: Bill's been
December 5, 2007 - 09:45 ET by kathleenirishNo doubt: Bill's been there, done that.
Anyone who says they support the troops but not the mission is a liar.
Right, HG
December 5, 2007 - 10:02 ET by iveseenitallRight,HG. Bill Clinton is the poster boy for "rude". He has brought consummate disrespect for the office of the presidency . This is a rude, crude, disgusting individual who should have been given the boot long ago. Instead, we now have his wife riding his coatttails. It's ironic--how else would a do nothing senator with such little experience leading anything have gotten this far in the presidential race? For so many reasons, "No more Clintons" should be America's mantra.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
Wait Just a Gosh Darn Minute
December 5, 2007 - 10:04 ET by V the KBill says "if reporters covered the candidates' public records better, his wife's presidential bid would be far ahead of her rivals."
Well, maybe they could cover her record better if eight years of it wasn't sealed in a vault at the Clinton Presidential Library and the National Archives and hidden from public scrutiny ... by Order of Bill Clinton.
What a blowhard!
December 5, 2007 - 10:04 ET by tbbaxterPoor Bill, he really need to suck it up. Oh, I'm sorry, that's the intern's job, isn't it?
Bax, Job description??
December 5, 2007 - 12:50 ET by PSPCplI wonder where that was covered in her job description. Do you think it was under "Office Morale"?
Clintons aren't evil...
December 5, 2007 - 10:16 ET by Six String SpiffGuys, can we please stop saying the Clintons are EVIL? Let's leave that adjective to the people who really deserve it. Like Mahmoud and the like. The Clintons are narcissistic, arrogant, liars. However, they have not called for people to be killed. Let's leave the DU talk to the DUmmies.
*Puts on flame retardant suit*
Islamic Religious Services Will Be Held at the Firing Range At 0800 Daily.
Communism
December 5, 2007 - 10:55 ET by iveseenitallCommunism is evil
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
Iveseenitall
December 5, 2007 - 13:02 ET by Six String SpiffCommunism by definition (to me anyway) is not evil, it just isn't possible to maintain a healthy country because there are WAY too many oxygen thieves on this planet to live that way. Hence the crumbling of virtually ALL countries that practice it. I believe it is a nice thing to WANT everybody to help each other out, but realistically it is impossible. Ok, I'll stop being philosophical now :-). Yes communism is inherently bad.
Communism is good.
December 6, 2007 - 12:15 ET by BeowulfCommunism is good. COMMUNISTS are bad. The theory of communism is an idyllic society where everyone shares the benefits of society as a whole, and works equally for the benefit of that society. Unfortunately, the theory doesn't factor in the human element. We will always have the corrupt to take whatever advantage they can along with the natural born "haves" and "have-nots". In the military, they're called the sick, lame, and lazy...
The Closed Mind Erects Strong Barriers
Exorcism may be needed
December 5, 2007 - 13:26 ET by celatorSSS: "Guys, can we please stop saying the Clintons are EVIL."
"However, they have not called for people to be killed."
I actually do believe they are evil (or at the very least seriously deranged, as well as the other adjectives you listed). I am not convinced they haven't been at least a third party behind some of the many, many deaths and murders of people around them in the past 30 years. I hope I am wrong.
On the other hand, there's nothing so evil about the Clintons that a good exorcism couldn't take care of. It would take at least a priest with the rank of Bishop or Cardinal to perform it.
Hillary's Public Records?
December 5, 2007 - 12:07 ET by candanceWhat public records?
The healthcare plan that was shot down quicker than a SCUD over Tel Aviv?
The appointment for Secretary of Education who turned out to be a member of the Communist Party and the Clintons said they didn't know?
Her service in a private law firm that stumbled her into Whitewater?
Her vote in favor of invading Iraq?
The way she blamed the GOP for Bill having sex with an intern?
Tell us BJ, what exactly has she done in the sphere of government service that has been positive?
*crickets*
Thought so.
Candance, She Provided a definition
December 5, 2007 - 12:57 ET by PSPCplShe has defined in no uncertain terms what it means to be a political prostitute. She married a male (can't call him a man) and helped create and maintain an image that allowed him to become President. She was rewarded for her "work" with a seat in the US Senate. it is called a "quid pro quo". Given what she did to get that, she is a political prostitute. Some would drop the adjective.
Clinton Tantrums
December 5, 2007 - 12:46 ET by PSPCplEveryone must remember that the Clintons are Communists. They may prefer the term "Progressives", but a rose by any other name is still a rose. They were grew up with and were used to the near total control the Democrats/Communists exercised over the willing MSM. Through the willing MSM, the Dems controlled the flow of "news" to the masses. This monopoly began to break while they were in the Whitehouse, but they still controlled a great deal of the MSM and the flow of "news" to the masses.
The loss of control of the flow of "news" has increased in two ways. First, the Fox News Channel, conservative talk radio, and the Internet, have created a counterpoint and counterflow to the MSM. Second, the American populace isn't as dumb as the Clintons think they are: look at the declining numbers of people buying newspapers and listening to the evening "news" presented by ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, and NPR.
The Clintons are not used to their inability to control the the flow of "news" (notice I didn't say MSM). They have used (and still are) a very heavy-hand in their approach to their control of the MSM (and there are signs the resentment over this is growing). They are very unforgiving towards anyone they feel has stepped out of line (ask Chris Matthews).
What you are seeing is the equivalent of a pair of four year old throwing tantrums because they aren't getting their way. If Obama and crew would grow a set of onions, this could be one of the most entertaining primaries in a long time.
Interesting tid bit about Billy
December 5, 2007 - 21:28 ET by celator"Everyone must remember that the Clintons are Communists."
There's an interesting chapter in Billy's background that hasn't been sufficiently covered. In 1968 Billy was awarded an Rhodes Scholarship to study at Oxford University through some serious string pulling by his mentor, the late Sen Fullbright, D Ark. Interestingly, while he attended some of his classes at Oxford, he was never awaded a degree.
While at Oxford, he made several trips to the Soviet Union to participate in anti-American demonstrations (re the Vietnam Conflict). He participated in intensive workshops sponsored by the KBG. The precise content of these workshops is not known, but one can imagine.
As an added little tidbit, when the leaders of the Free World gathered for the 50th Anniversary in Normandy in 1994 to honor the events of D-Day, one prominent world leader was not there. President Bill Clinton was in Moscow. Check the record.
Clintons are Communists
December 5, 2007 - 23:42 ET by candanceEveryone must remember that the Clintons are Communists.
That depends on how you define "are." If are means were, that statement is correct. But if are means are, your statement is false.
You really must be careful in how you make judgements about these things.
Maybe that has something to do with media being skeptical of the Clintons now...
Yes.. true
December 6, 2007 - 13:37 ET by celatorYes, this is true. The Clintons easily slither between the "was" and the "are", so that forecasting their "will be" gets lost in the shuffle. They really are clever. I'm still researching what the meaning of "is" is. ;+}
"Maybe that has something to do with media being skeptical of the Clintons now..."
I think you are onto comething.
Hillary's "Experience"
December 5, 2007 - 13:48 ET by fitzfongSeems to me that Hillary's only "experience" is getting conned by Heads of State...first by her husband, then allegedly by George W. Bush. That should give the country great confidence when facing down the likes of Putin, Ahmadinezhad and Hugo Rodham Chavez in a Clinton Administration.
Typical Billy: stating the
December 5, 2007 - 14:35 ET by mattmTypical Billy: stating the exact opposite of the truth.
Just like Old Times
December 5, 2007 - 14:44 ET by candanceI know lefties get tired of us giggling at BJ denying the Monica affair but it's just so darn funny. And what's even funnier is that they still defend him.
Any time a Republican is having a bad day, all the need do is watch that video and it'll put a smile on their face.
They're Blinded By Lust
December 5, 2007 - 17:52 ET by Del DolemonteIf any Republican President had sexually exploited an intern in the workplace, and then asked her to lie under oath about it, the Dems, especially NOW, would demand that he be taken out and shot.
Double standard, you say? In spades. Orwell was right-some ARE more equal than others.
}}---> You're confused Delmonte
December 5, 2007 - 21:34 ET by Cool ArrowThe discussion was about "Heads of State", not a "State of Head."