A very believable moment in Game Change, HBO’s derogatory movie portrayal of Sarah Palin in the 2008 campaign. In a scene at a hotel bar in Phoenix on election eve, McCain-Palin senior campaign strategist Steve Schmidt, played by Woody Harrelson, tells campaign manager Rick Davis and senior adviser/speechwriter Mark Salter the state of John McCain’s mood:
He’s the most depressed I’ve seen him in the entire campaign. I can’t get him to stop watching MSNBC, which only makes him more miserable.
Isn’t that a common malady from watching MSNBC? Video below:
As NewsBusters reported last Wednesday, the stars and executives involved in the production of HBO's Sarah Palin-bashing film "Game Change" have given $200,000 to Democrats and liberal causes in recent years whilst donating absolutely nothing to Republicans.
Now we learn from a Men's Journal interview with "Game Change" star Woody Harrelson that what members of the GOP say makes him "weep for humanity" (MJ questions in bold, Harrelson's answers in regular print, serious vulgarity warning):
Barbara Walters gave Joy Behar a well-deserved dressing down on ABC's The View Monday.
After the liberal comedian said Sarah Palin "was completely unprepared for the [vice presidential] job as are a lot of the candidates right now that we’re watching in some of those debates,” Walters responded by providing her co-host the legislative and executive experience of the remaining Republicans in the race (video follows with transcribed highlights and commentary):
As NewsBusters reported Sunday, despite his failure as the McCain-Palin campaign’s senior adviser, and his subsequent backstabbing of the candidates he represented, HBO’s “Game Change” made him the hero of its Palin-bashing film that premiered Saturday.
The crew on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, with Schmidt as its guest, continued with this pathetic idol worship Monday (video follows with transcribed highlights and commentary):
Now that HBO's Sarah Palin-bashing film "Game Change" has premiered, it is fascinating to note that its two heroes are the very advisers who not only were responsible for the worst presidential campaign in decades, but also ended up backstabbing the candidates they represented.
This probably won't surprise anyone, but it should be noted for the record: As of 3:45 p.m. today, almost 72 hours after the related story broke, the Associated Press has not reported on new revelations about the clear influence radical, racist professor Derrick Bell had on now-President Barack Obama 20 years ago -- so influential that Obama "routinely assigned works by Bell as required reading" in his University of Chicago law classes. The AP has also not told its subscribing outlets and news consumers about how many of its colleagues in the press withheld information on the relationship between the two during the 2008 presidential election campaign. A search on Bell's name (not in quotes) at the AP's main site returns nothing relevant, even though it has been shown that Obama told a Harvard audience that people should "[O]pen your hearts and open your minds to the words of Prof. Derrick Bell."
However, there has been no shortage of coverage at the AP and elsewhere of what Mitt Romney did with his dog 29 years ago. But of course, the dog story is far more relevant to Mitt Romney's governing philosophy than Obama's love of a professor whose core life contention revolves around insurmountable white racism (/sarc). The AP's cover-up treatment of Bell has been consistent, as seen in the first three paragraphs of its brief write-up after the professor's death in October 2011 (bold is mine):
Although Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) kept true to his word that he wasn't going to watch HBO's Sarah Palin-bashing film "Game Change" which premiered Saturday evening, he did have some harsh words about it on Fox News Sunday.
"It's based on a book that's completely biased and with unattributed quotes," McCain said before taking issue with the depiction of him as a vulgar man that asked his campaign manager to find him a female running mate (video follows with transcript and commentary):
As NewsBusters has been reporting, Obama-loving media members have almost been orgasmic in their adoration for HBO's new Sarah Palin-bashing film "Game Change."
Firmly on the bandwagon is Chris Matthews who on the syndicated program bearing his name this weekend actually said that Woody Harrelson's performance as McCain campaign manager Steve Schmidt is "the role of the century" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
Those who have seen HBO’s Game Change come away with a more sympathetic view of Sarah Palin, Time magazine’s Mark Halperin, co-author of the book on which HBO based its production set to air Saturday night, contended Wednesday night on CNN. Erin Burnett interviewed Halperin and co-author John Heilemann and Halperin told Burnett:
We’ve seen a few screenings with people and uniformly – every screening we’ve attended – people who came in, didn’t like Sarah Palin, weren’t fans of Sarah Palin, almost every one of them has said to us afterwards, “you know what, I now understand what she went through more, I have more sympathy for her, I have more appreciation for what she accomplished.”
Access to the controversial video released of President Barack Obama embracing a radical professor was prevented by two groups funded by left-wing donor George Soros. The two – WGBH and Harvard University – were granted more than $3.5 million was granted to WGBH and Harvard by Soros’s Open Society Foundations since 2000.
The late Andrew Breitbart’s websites posted the edited version of this video on March 7 and appeared on “Hannity” that evening to discuss it. Breitbart.com Editor in Chief Joel Pollack told Hannity that WGBH refused to respond to inquiries about the video in question. In a video played from Harvard Law Professor Charles Ogletree’s class, he told the students, “of course we hid this through the 2008 campaign.” If the video was not incendiary, why did he feel the need to hide it from the voters?
Days before HBO's anti-Republican propaganda film "Game Change" premieres, it has been revealed that the top stars and executives involved in the movie have given $200,000 to Democrats and liberal causes over the years.
By contrast, according to the Hollywood Reporter, they've given exactly nothing to Republicans:
New York Times media reporter Brian Stelter on Monday defended Hollywood and the new HBO movie "Game Change," a hit job on the 2008 vice presidential campaign of Sarah Palin based on the book by liberal reporters John Heilemann and Mark Halperin. In "Rogue, Rube or G.O.P. Star: Portraying Palin," Stelter defended Hollywood from "conspiracy theories" that the movie is meant "to undermine a future run for president by Ms. Palin" (as if Hollywood liberals wouldn't love to have it accomplish just that).
Stelter also vigorously defended the movie-makers choice to focus solely on Palin at the expense of the portions of the book devoted to the bloody Democratic primary tussle between Democrats Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. But it doesn't take a conspiracy theorist to realize that overwhelmingly liberal and Democratic movie-makers would prefer the "Palin is an ignoramus" parts, rather than the parts that might have made Hillary and Obama look petty.
In today's "Don't Bring a Knife to a Gunfight" segment, ABC's George Stephanopoulos on Sunday once again failed miserably in a battle of wits with Newt Gingrich.
After the This Week host claimed past experience has shown long primary battles "[mean] that party loses in the general election," the former Speaker of the House marvelously responded, "George, I'll be glad to swap history credentials with you" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
A week from tonight (Saturday, March 11) HBO will debut Game Change, which promos
strongly suggest will present a disparaging portrait of Sarah Palin, but Thursday night on the Tonight Show, during a segment with actress Julianne Moore who plays Palin, Jay Leno contended the movie “humanizes” Palin and is not “some kind of slash and burn job.”
“Whether a Republican or a Democrat,” Leno urged, “don’t watch it for the politics. It’s just a human piece. I think it kind of humanizes Sarah Palin. I thought it was really, really good.” He soon added: “I highly recommend it. If you’re an ardent Republican and you think this is some kind of slash and burn job, it’s not. It’s really what a campaign does to a person.”
It wouldn't take more than a nanosecond for the establishment press and TV talking heads to rip into any white political candidate -- Democrat or Republican -- who carved out a web site devoted to "Whites for Candidate X."
About a week ago, President Obama, with his powers of incumbency in tow, decided to revive something he created back in 2007: "African-Americans for Obama." And, as seen in the Obama video which appears at the site and in what appears to be a new twist, the Obama campaign is driving a Mack through the alleged wall of separation between church and state by finding so-called "congregation captains" to maximize African-American support on his behalf. As would unfortunately be expected, the press has not covered campaign's move; A Google News search on "African Americans for Obama" (in quotes) returns only 17 results, only four of which are arguably mainstream media items.
Liberal presidential historian Douglas Brinkley said Monday, "Bill Clinton’s really become a folk figure in America."
Participating in an oftentimes hysterical Hardball segment about how the former President will help Barack Obama get reelected, Brinkley added, "He’s more like Babe Ruth or Buffalo Bill than a politician" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
The prospect of Sarah Palin as the Republican vice presidential nominee in 2008 was “pretty terrifying” to actress Julianne Moore, who plays Palin in HBO’s upcoming Game Change movie about the 2008 campaign, but not because she feared Palin’s policies. Instead, the self-described “longtime liberal” dreaded Palin might allow the GOP ticket to win: “I really felt like, ‘Oh my gosh, the Republicans might have this election’” since “she was so electrifying.”
In Tuesday’s “Yeas and Nays” column in the Washington Examiner, Nikki Schwab relayed Moore’s comments expressed in an interview for the upcoming March issue of Capitol File magazine.
Fresh off her rousing keynote address to the Conservative Political Action Conference Saturday, former Alaska governor Sarah Palin sat down with Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday.
When her host brought up the soon to be released HBO film "Game Change" about amongst other things her travails during the 2008 presidential campaign and suggested they watch a video clip, Palin cutely asked, "Must we?" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
As NewsBusters has been reporting, NBC's Matt Lauer had an interview with President Obama on Super Bowl Sunday that was as soft as cream cheese that's been sitting in the sun for hours.
One such sickeningly squishy moment was when the Today show host let his guest get away with claiming he "ran an affirmative campaign" in 2008 without negative attack ads (video follows with transcript and commentary):
Morning Joe viewers Wednesday were treated to a truly marvelous demonstration of the media's hypocritical double standard concerning negative campaign ads.
As host Joe Scarborough told Donny Deutsch, despite Barack Obama in 2008 running more negative ads "than any other candidate in history...the mainstream media, every network, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, they all covered for him. Nobody wrote that story because they all wanted him to win" (video follows with transcribed highlights and commentary):
After Rick Perry ended his presidential bid on Thursday, the Associated Press's Chris Tomlinson opened his dispatch about the announcement thusly: "Gov. Rick Perry dropped out of the presidential race on Thursday, endorsed his old friend Newt Gingrich and returned home to Texas, where the failed White House candidate has three years left to serve as the chief executive."
Based on much of his prior reportage, Tomlinson appears have a particular animus towards the Texas Governor. But tagging GOP presidential candidates or their candidacies as "failed" is not an aberration at the AP, while the wire service's omission of such tags on wildly unsuccessful Democratic candidates pointedly betrays the presence of obvious bias.
CNN's John King explained after the final South Carolina debate that he started by asking Newt about his "open marriage" because it seemed like the "elephant in the room." Former Bush aide Ari Fleischer dissented and said the economy is always the number one story, not just the political insider's hot story. So let's ask: when CNN hosted a Democratic debate in South Carolina on January 21, 2008, did they lead with a hot scandal or a personal peccadillo? Nope. They started with the economy.
It was the tenth anniversary of the Monica Lewinsky story breaking, and the debate stood out when Hillary slashed Obama on his relationship with shady financier Tony Rezko. But Monica and Clinton's impeachment never came up. CNN's Joe Johns led off by asking Hillary Clinton about just how generous her "stimulus" would be:
In the annals of fawning coverage of scandal-plagued Democrats, Michael Biesecker's Saturday morning report on John Edwards's illness and its effect on his upcoming trail on campaign finance violations surely must be among the worst.
Biesecker missed at least a half-dozen natural opportunities to tag Edwards as a Democrat, finally doing so in cryptic fashion in his 15th of 17 paragraphs. He didn't identify Edwards as the 2004 vice-presidential candidate until that same paragraph, and in doing so named who was at the top of the GOP ticket (George W. Bush) without naming who was at the top of the Dems' (John Kerry). The AP reporter threw obsequious virtual kisses at a man who betrayed his terminally ill wife while omitting two clearly relevant recent reports, one from an outlet which has scooped the look-the-other-way establishment press time after time in this sad, four-year saga. Here are several paragraphs from Biescecker's blather (some of the many clear opportunities to tag Edwards as a Dem and examples of over-the-top fawning are bolded):