In their year in review issue (dated December 31/January 7), Newsweek sums up its year in the snarky "Conventional Wisdom Watch" box. The box is utterly conventional in its liberal bias, slashing the Republicans in general at year's end:
George W. Bush (DOWN): Manages to stymie Dem Congress. But still has nothing to show for his seven years except no 9/11 sequel. Sad.
Dick Cheney (DOWN): Secretive, trigger-happy fossil-fuel lover is like banker Mr. Potter in "It’s a Wonderful Life." But without the happy ending.
Condi Rice (SIDEWAYS): Condi ‘08! On second thought, there’s a think tank somewhere with a corner office for you and a piano.
Karl Rove (DOWN): Bush’s brain goes from running the world to writing an occasional piece for NEWSWEEK. Now he can leak to himself!
Scooter Libby (DOWN): Cheney’s man convicted of perjury but scoots out of jail thanks to Bush. Let him do community service at Walter Reed.
Even the up arrows came with attacks on conservatives:
Robert Gates (UP): Father 41 knew best: Rummy’s successor at Defense is a fresh breath of sanity. No neocon job here.
The primary candidates are also spun negatively, even with an up arrow:
Rudy Giuliani (DOWN): More baggage than Santa’s sleigh sends him down the chimney in national polls. No fruitcake for Bernie this year.
Mitt Romney (SIDEWAYS): Olympic-class flip-flopper has Reagan’s hair but not his Teflon. One question he won’t answer: Boxers or briefs?
Mike Huckabee (UP): Old: "The Biggest Loser" is a novelty act. New: Attributes ascension to Jesus endorsement.
—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Newsweek... DOWN... AS
December 27, 2007 - 17:33 ET by bigtimerNewsweek...
DOWN...
AS in readers/subscriptions and in the trash....where it belongs.
Period.
Newsweak
December 27, 2007 - 17:34 ET by Chris NormanNewsweak
Chris... Pure
December 27, 2007 - 17:37 ET by bigtimerChris...
Pure tripe...plain and simple as that.
Their "snarkiness" has lost
December 27, 2007 - 17:51 ET by Chris NormanTheir "snarkiness" has lost it's bite. It's become tired and utterly predictable.
Cant wait to see how they
December 27, 2007 - 20:42 ET by general companyCant wait to see how they spin Benazir Bhutto assassination on the Bush adim. Even though they are more responsible then almost everyone - except the ones whom actually committed the murder. This trash is very dangerous. Gives the impression we do not respect our own elected officials, their for they should not as well. How can the USA lead by example with these bums as our spokesman?
"Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astonish the rest". Mark Twain
No Wyclef Jean call out
December 27, 2007 - 17:52 ET by balboaNo Wyclef Jean call out here? Tim, it's like you're not even trying...
Ron Paul smears U.S. on Your World with Cavuto
December 27, 2007 - 17:55 ET by Parker1227Commenting on Bhutto's assassination, Ron Paul again called for total U.S. isolationism, and described our foriegn policy as bribing evil people to be our puppets and then bombing them if they disobey.
Paul sounds like an extremist "truther" moron to me.
As the world gets smaller and the war with extremist Islamist fascists heats up again, Ron Paul calls for the U.S. to duck and cover and wants us to swallow the (mostly)Leftist lie that the only trouble which exists in the world is that which we create for ourselves.
The world would be partitioned into two zones - German Nazi and Chino-Soviet Communist if Ron Paul isolationism had informed American foreign policy in the 20th century.
Ron Paul should be booted off the debate circuit and shunned to community access cable.
Parker... Could not agree
December 27, 2007 - 18:02 ET by bigtimerParker...
Could not agree more...he just did the same thing on CNN.
Neutrality is another of his favorite words...can't we just talk, pass the sugar and all get along.
We would be in big trouble with him as President with the world the way it is now...big trouble.
Retreat for defeat should be his motto.
Amen, bt! Have you ever
December 27, 2007 - 18:21 ET by motherbeltAmen, bt!
Have you ever played with a toddler who thinks when he covers his eyes you can't see him?
I like that analogy better then the ostrich/head in sand.
Some people think if we just let them know that we don't want to harm them, they will leave us alone.
They won't.
It has nothing to do with whether they feel threatened by us.
Ron Paul & assorted nuts
December 27, 2007 - 19:46 ET by acumenAnd wouldn't it be just like a spoiled little toddler from Texas to not get his way, take his ball and go start a new "independent" team made up of some former members of our team that simply want to play with the big shiny ball?
Of course the spoiled little toddler wouldn't care that such a move would result in both the old team and his new team getting beaten by some other spoiled brat with the big thighs that could not have won without our team seperating into two. No, it's not the teams that matter, it's the attention the toddler craves - and the longer, the better.
Swap out the big thighs for pasty thighs and that scenario might just sound familiar. My biggest nightmare in '08.
Hi acumen.... I know Paul
December 27, 2007 - 19:52 ET by bigtimerHi acumen....
I know Paul refused to completely rule out running as a third party on Russert's show but my feeling is he would take more looney leftists than he would from the right...of course it may depend who he gets to run with him too...
Well, I'm a hopin' anyway that it would take more from the left than the right.
You guys are in danger
December 27, 2007 - 20:10 ET by general companyOf having RP links pummled upon you. But be brave, Because NONE will even contain any info on your critisism of him, just a reply that suggest it does. Least thats all I ever got?
"Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astonish the rest". Mark Twain
general...
December 27, 2007 - 20:15 ET by Clear thinkerNo danger. We know how to laugh at the paulbots.
Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/
I know, and thankfull for it.
December 27, 2007 - 20:24 ET by general companyBecause if we lose this election it will because of RP. If he truely believes half of what he say's, he would throw his support behind the GOP nominee. He suggest he wont.
"Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astonish the rest". Mark Twain
I'm thinking he's shot
December 28, 2007 - 00:27 ET by CortillaenI'm thinking he's shot himself in the foot too many times on national security and the US as a world power to hold water with most republicans these days. Going for an independant run with someone even further left would hurt the dems more than the reps, in my opinion, and running with some no-name from the right would pull about the same number of "centrists" from both sides. To sum up my view, RP has become utterly irrelevant to this race.
Personally, I'm pulling for Thompson, but he just doesn't seem to be picking up steam.
www.rhjunior.com Great comics with a hefty dose of Christian and anti-nutjob goodness.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." -Miyamoto Musashi
C -
December 28, 2007 - 23:59 ET by Cape Conservative"Personally, I'm pulling for Thompson, but he just doesn't seem to be picking up steam."
Me, too. And the big question is, how do we know if he is "picking up steam" or not? The media are giving NO time or print space to either Thompson or Hunter. My guess is they know either of them would beat the pants off any Democrat in November.
From the Fred emails I receive, he's been traveling around the entire state of Iowa for the 3 weeks before the caucuses - I sure hope he is getting good feedback from the folks, but if he is, no msm is going to tell us. They want a Democratic win in November and will do ANY and EVERYTHING they can to cause that to happen.
bt and acumen, that is my
December 28, 2007 - 11:20 ET by motherbeltbt and acumen, that is my big nightmare, too...
That's why I hope that Republicans will rally around whoever the nominee is...because the alternative is, IMO, unthinkable.
If the Shahinshah went third party
December 28, 2007 - 02:10 ET by UnsaneActually, I suspect that Paul would attract some disaffected Dems who love his "whiny America" foreign policy if he went third party or independent.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Well said. Ron Paul is a
December 27, 2007 - 19:21 ET by Gary P JacksonWell said. Ron Paul is a fool. He would put our Nation in grave danger with the kind of policies he's pushing. Isolationism makes no sense in today's world.
Whether we want to or not, America, and Americans MUST be engaged with the world. It is in our best interest to be engaged. Ron Paul would directly lead to many world wide disasters, including attacks on the US!
MUST be engaged with the world
December 27, 2007 - 20:16 ET by general companyWhether we want to or not,
Not must, we all ready are? Buisiness is neck deep, would RP have them abandoned? Silly notion all the way around,
"Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astonish the rest". Mark Twain
The CW is all - or mostly
December 27, 2007 - 17:58 ET by SMGalbraithThe CW is all - or mostly - written by Jonathan Alter, right?
Canary in the coal mine. When he isn't complaining about conservatives, then we need to worry.
SMG
.............
December 27, 2007 - 18:10 ET by gopsteveCome on! Is anyone surprised? I think only libs read these "old news" mags anymore to buffer their own views.
I feel bad for these NB guys who have to sit and watch/read the libpress be biased...you must go nuts. Part of me says "look we know they are biased." Of course, without the new medi, who knows what else the "msm" woul have gotten away with...
Reporters
December 28, 2007 - 11:13 ET by okiehawk44It is obvious when reading far left blogs that those folks are so unhappy and so angry that in an earlier time the only way to express their bile was to become a reporter, nightly news producer, etc. That is why the MSM is so biased and seems deranged -- but they do mold the message and determine the subject de jour so at present they are formidable.
What have you done for me lately?
December 27, 2007 - 18:13 ET by easygoerSo Bush "still has nothing to show for his seven years except no 9/11 sequel. Sad." What! Protecting the nation is the top priority of any president. It should also be the top priority for the other two branches of our gov't. What's truly sad is that a large portion of the US Congress, certain federal judges, and almost an entire major American political party have actively worked to undermine that priority. That the MSM does this is a given but these members of our gov't have taken an oath. Disgraceful
......
December 27, 2007 - 18:15 ET by gopsteveOK, read them again...now I am pi**ed.
"But still has nothing to show for his seven years except no 9/11 sequel. Sad."
says Time.
Is that some small "sad" wonder?! Who thought 7 yeras after 9/11 there wouldn't be another 9/11.
Yes, I have many disagreements with bush in many issues...I am actually going to write TIME for the first time ever...like it will even matter
"I am actually going to write TIME...like it will even matter "
December 27, 2007 - 18:19 ET by Chris NormanIt really won't matter unless you write Newsweek. :)
LOL!!!
December 27, 2007 - 18:31 ET by motherbeltLOL!!!
Seriously, though, the line should read:
There have been NO terrorist attacks on US soil, or on its bases or assets overseas since 9/11/01. Everything else is small potatoes.
Write them both
December 27, 2007 - 20:45 ET by general companyThey are both equally disgracful/bigoted toward our Country and it's representatives. Their are a few more, if you would like a list.
Copy and paste gets them done fast.
"Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astonish the rest". Mark Twain
gopsteve
December 27, 2007 - 18:21 ET by MrShyYES, fire and smoke came out of my eyes and ears after reading that, too !!!!
HOW F-ING DISGUSTING!
George W. Bush (DOWN): Manages to stymie Dem Congress. But still has
nothing to show for his seven years except no 9/11 sequel. Sad.
I'll say it again, with some extra exclamation points:
HOW F-ING DISGUSTING!!!
We bid a fond farewell to Professor Talking Points & Cheetos
They'd much see: "Terrorist
December 27, 2007 - 18:25 ET by Chris NormanThey'd much see: "Terrorist Attacks Here Escalate, but SCHIPS Fully Funded".
Chris
December 27, 2007 - 18:37 ET by MrShySo true!.... it's, like I said, f-ing disgusting. The disdain for this man from day one in January, 2001, for WHO KNOWS WHY (2000 election???? I mean, it was all a mess, and 1-in-a-million that votes come down to being seperated by a few hundred in a state.)
Something about Clinton's eight "glorious" years just tinted liberals glasses so much that they've completely lost it.
We bid a fond farewell to Professor Talking Points & Cheetos
Mr. Shy,The liberals' and
December 27, 2007 - 18:58 ET by Chris NormanMr. Shy,
The liberals' and media's priorities are so out of whack. They worry about Gitmo detainees' civil rights, privacy for terrorists to make their phone calls, and the environmental impact of a border fence. I suppose we shouldn't be surprised that they would think it's sad that Pres. Bush's "only" accomplishment was preventing more 9/11s. It really shows where there heads are, without having them go to a proctologist.
Correct Chris. It is a
December 27, 2007 - 19:04 ET by bassndudeCorrect Chris. It is a shame, really, that the only way to get their attention is to fly a jumbo jet into their offices. They are so far removed from reality they border on insane.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
"...that the only way to get
December 27, 2007 - 19:07 ET by Chris Norman"...that the only way to get their attention is to fly a jumbo jet into their offices."
bass,
And their attention lasts, oh, about thirty days, apparently.
Bass & Chris
December 27, 2007 - 19:50 ET by MrShyBassndude, that was perfectly said. Yeah, again, "disgusting" is the only pure word that comes to mind with these blinded-by-hate fools, with the shortest attention spans and memory.
Also, Lame Cherry just wrote:
If I was reading this correct, this was Newsweek and not Time.......home of gazillionaire twin Mort Zuckerman to Bloomberg's metrosexual of New York.
Talk about ingratitude in slamming Bush for no 9 11 repeat as there is a good chance if 9 11 had happened in Kansas City, those people probably would have just bled........but when it is bloodthirsty liberal New York, wars get started we are still in.
I live in NYC, and the nation was frightened to death, and waiting for the next one. This became "the calling of our day", as Bush eloquently put it, and naturally it shot right up to the primary item on our president's agenda, to rid the world of this evil. He has, in the 6-plus years since, SUCCEEDED.
It was at the top of the list -- for EVERYONE -- and he's nailed it. He has protected our country AND fought terrorism and backwards rogue states in the M.E. who harbor or assist in harboring it. All the while, boosting the economy after the double blows of the dot.com crash and horrific planes-in-buildings crashes.
Just disgusting, to say all he's done is prevent a sequal to 9/11.
We bid a fond farewell to Professor Talking Points & Cheetos
Interestingly enough, it
December 28, 2007 - 00:37 ET by CortillaenInterestingly enough, it seems Bush will be leaving his successor with Iraq in good shape and improving, so it'll be their war to lose. Of course, if Clintinator (see http://www.daybydayc... ) gets its way, lose it we shall.
www.rhjunior.com Great comics with a hefty dose of Christian and anti-nutjob goodness.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." -Miyamoto Musashi
NW wouldn't know danger
December 28, 2007 - 08:15 ET by Six String SpiffNW wouldn't know danger unless a tank was parked on one of their bicycle paths. Stupid fools. They are the enemy within and should all be in jail for fraud. Either that or just admit that they are on the DNC payroll. sheesh
Islamic Religious Services Will Be Held at the Firing Range At 0800 Daily.
Chris, that is because their
December 28, 2007 - 02:22 ET by Sonny LykosChris, that is because their #1 goal is to get the Democrats controlling everything. From there they and the Dems can begin the transition to socialism.
They are vicious, sharp, devious, consistent - and winning.
#@$% Double Post
December 27, 2007 - 18:57 ET by Chris Norman#@$% Double Post
These are not terrorists.
December 27, 2007 - 18:40 ET by NL207These are not terrorists. They are Islamic Fundamentalists. Their object is not to terrify you or anyone else. Their ultimate goal is the establishment of a Global Caliphate and conversion of the world to Islam by force.
Incidentally, terror is
December 28, 2007 - 00:39 ET by CortillaenIncidentally, terror is their primary method of implementing said conversion (you know, the terror that comes from death threats?), so "terrorists" happens to be a very accurate label for them.
www.rhjunior.com Great comics with a hefty dose of Christian and anti-nutjob goodness.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." -Miyamoto Musashi
Putin got an up
December 27, 2007 - 19:17 ET by MidAmericaPutin got an up arrow for pumping lots of oil and managing to cut back on democracy. (?????)
Isn't drilling for oil a bad thing? We aren't supposed to do it. And don't they say Bush is bad and accuse him of ignoring the Constitution?
Zuckerman Suckerman
December 27, 2007 - 19:29 ET by Lame CherryIf I was reading this correct, this was Newsweek and not Time.......home of gazillionaire twin Mort Zuckerman to Bloomberg's metrosexual of New York.
Talk about ingratitude in slamming Bush for no 9 11 repeat as there is a good chance if 9 11 had happened in Kansas City, those people probably would have just bled........but when it is bloodthirsty liberal New York, wars get started we are still in.
Mort Zuckerman, who Rush Limbaugh once said, "I met him at a party and he was saying the most strange things.........I didn't know if he was baiting me or saying things he believed"........likes his "Jewishness" to ward off racist labels, but in terming Condi Rice is only fit for a corner office with a lounge type singer Southern Baptist piano to wail out tunes on.........is PURE RACIST.
I move for the Department of Justice to indict Mort Zuckerman on hate crime speech.
I may not agree with Condi Rice, but she has hammered together another worthless "peace" in the Mideast which has no thanks. She deserves the Nobel Prize for making murderers behave at least for one last time before war breaks out.
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
"She deserves the Nobel Prize":( way before Gore)
December 27, 2007 - 20:40 ET by general companyI may not agree with Condi Rice, but she has hammered together another worthless "peace" in the Mideast which has no thanks.
So true,
"Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astonish the rest". Mark Twain
Liberals Love Sequels
December 27, 2007 - 20:03 ET by Junk Science Skeptic"Bush has nothing to show for his seven years except no 9/11 sequel. Sad."
C'mon, we all know how much the libs love sequels. They didn't have enough fun shooting innocent citizens at Ruby Ridge, so they had to follow up with Waco, Oklahoma City and the Gonzalez home in Miami. And let's not forget WTC 1.0, they had to follow that blockbuster up with sequels on the USS Cole, a few embassies in Africa, and leaving WTC 2.0 in W's lap after a 2 month Gore insurgency in the White House.
And their sequels aren't limited to affairs of the international variety, after all there was Jennifer, Monica . . .
Thompson/Giuliani 2008
Bush has nothing to show
December 27, 2007 - 20:52 ET by MidAmericaBush has nothing to show for his seven years except no 9/11 sequel. Sad."
Ruby Ridge,Waco, OK City bombing, USS Cole bombing, African Embassy bombings, WTC bombing, Elian Gonzolez, African genocide, corporations 'cooking the books', Bosnia conflict (no exit strategy), failed ME peace talks, North Korean nuclear plants, lost control of congress, Military barracks in Saudi Arabia bombed, Olympic Park bombing, Clinton lied under oath and while looking America 'in the eye', Whitewater, Travel Office firings, etc., etc., etc.
You got to give Clinton credit for being able to sweep that much stuff under the rug.
NEWSWEAK
December 27, 2007 - 21:24 ET by pbthinkerWho reads this tripe? Apparently, less and less are delving into the realm of liberal based media these days. With just a little thought, all of their arrows could be reversed and show a truthful representation of the way most Americans feel about the individuals in question. Without picking it apart piecemeal, just a couple of notes:
BUSH - Up. Pushed for the surge and it appears to be working. His economic decisions have the American ecomomy running smoothly, even with the present problems with mortgages.
Just imagine if this economy was going, the way it is, and Clinton was President, you wouldn't be able to keep the good news off the front pages of the MSM.
Oh well, it's outfits, like Newsweak, that keep sites like this going. Talk about guaranteed employment!!!
Democrats: Specializing in "high tech lynching" since 1987.
Newsweek is still around???
December 28, 2007 - 01:45 ET by rbosqueNewsweek is still around???
Confession time
December 28, 2007 - 02:07 ET by UnsaneA decade ago,I was naive enough to subscribe to Newsweak. I thought then as I do now that their "CW" section was perhaps the dumbest thing in the magazine. Worse, they tried in one article to make it into some high-minded thing that it simply isn't.
When their printing presses go silent, you won't see me weeping for them. Gimme The Economist (among other sources I read) any day.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Lessee.
December 28, 2007 - 02:25 ET by SeptemberTim, are you sure that was Newsweek in which you came across this juvenility or a copy of Captain Underpants?
Right on BT
December 28, 2007 - 07:44 ET by Six String SpiffLOL! That just made my morning. So true. So true. They better straighten out or else their already tiny little magazine will be forced into a 'pocket edition' Bwaahahahahahahah! fools...
Islamic Religious Services Will Be Held at the Firing Range At 0800 Daily.
RP defense
December 28, 2007 - 16:30 ET by MaximusBraveheartI heard Ron Paul on Sunday's Meet the Press. Your attacks on his "isolationism" are not fair.
He said if an attack was proven to be by a nation, Congress could authorize a war if they wish. That is w/i their power vs. the President.
He is not isolationist, just against interference in other nations business. He was saying if an Islamic country started building bases here and telling us what to do, how would YOU feel about it. As a Christian, I would not be too happy to say the least. He is just saying to be rational and logical.
We don't need to be all over the world which obviously costs a fortune.
You just need to push a button (from here) to get back for something... that is perhaps even better deterrent! IE we don't mess w/ ground troops. F-with us & you will get something special delivered in a shiny metal tube. All that $ saved could go into building better infrastructure & reduced taxation for a much better economy.
Ron Paul is a nut
December 28, 2007 - 16:44 ET by RJThat's naive on so many levels. You Paulites engage in what is known as the "magical thinking" of children.
For example Paul also recently said that all Lincoln had to do, instead of fighting the Civil War was to declare the end of slavery. Some deep thinking going on there.
And your claims that we "just have to push a button', "we don't mess with ground troops", and "delivered in a shiny metal tube" show a colossal naivete on the realities of effective warfare. Boots on the ground wins wars. Clinton showed the futility of surgical strikes when he took out that aspirin factory in his attempt to take out a terrorist leader.
Speaking of terrorism, just how do you rely primarily on delivering your "shiny metal tubes" when their forces melt back into the hills or jungles?
RP defense
December 28, 2007 - 18:06 ET by MaximusBraveheartDemeaning attacks don’t stop common sense. I was all for the war but now I have changed and I do like Paul’s point of view. Changed me 180 degrees on that issue. I am all for a smaller, Constitutional government. I did not like his war position until I listened and considered it objectively. Others can change too if you and the MSM allow people to hear the truth instead of insulting misleading swipes at what he is trying to get across.
What he was saying on the Civil war; that it would be cheaper to do just that (change the law) and to compensate (buy) the slaves much cheaper than the death of xxx,xxx number of people. What is the cost of rebuilding all those cities and the military expenditure? It is true that other major countries got rid of slavery via using education/PR and then changes in the law. How is that child’s fantasy?
The money spent, cities ruined, hosts of people dead; how much is that worth? Much more than the cost of the slaves that some average farmers where able to come up with. Buying people off would have been cheaper he is saying. Force is not the best first choice until other means have been tried. Again not a stupid idea; just the opposite, a smart idea to ponder.
On the warfare issue… well it seems to have worked in Libya. We did not send in ground troops to get ensnared in their trap. Seems pretty darn smart to smack some fear in them if it is deserved. Let them retreat into their own jungle or whatever environment. As long as they are incapacitated that is the point of warfare. Not to kill per se but to remove the threat. How is this childish?
He does not want to get rid of the Army. Just not have them camped out in everyone’s backyard. That is bad PR. Like I was saying how would you like Islamic armies camped out here.
This is not logical? Basic psychology. Time to start thinking smarter and he seems to be open to considering taboo things. As they say "Google Ron Paul," then once you have listened, consider it for a while.
Maximus, your shallow thinking invites scoffing replies
December 29, 2007 - 14:41 ET by RJI can't help it if you believe they demean you or Paul.
It's absurd, and childish fantasy, to think the South would have agreed to the purchase of their slaves. Unlike other countries, they had an extreme economic dependence on slave labor. As a result, rather than accept change, they seceded from the Union and attacked the North. Force wasn't Lincoln's "first choice", it was the South's.
Dilpomacy? Certainly, wherever possible. But with clear-eyed realism, Mr. Chamberlain.
However, you childishly ignore that the idea of guerilla warefare is to strike and disappear. They rightfully laugh at "shiny metal tubes."
Here's a shocker for you isolationists. Where our armys are camped, those nations want the presence for the stability it brings. That's even true in Iraq, and pulling out of that country would immediatelyh destabilize the region.
So, yes, Ron Paul and his Paulites engage in Magical Thinking.