On this evening's Hardball, Chris Matthews began his teaser for a segment about Sarah Palin's pending press interview and plans to field questions at a town hall by exclaiming "look who's talking" as an image of Palin [see screencap] appeared bearing the same graphic.
"Look who's talking" is of course the title of a 1989 hit movie in which the person doing the talking was . . . an infant.
Here at Newsbusters we are not surprised to see liberal bias in the media. In fact it is to be expected. But there are degrees of bias; typically falling somewhere in between the subtle undertones of contextually stretched reporting to the overtly blatant thrill up the leg sort.
But there is another type of bias that is so mean spirited and over the top that you have to wonder if we aren’t observing a nervous breakdown on a mass scale. It seems that many in the media are becoming unglued over the concept of a McCain-Palin ticket.
Hubris was indeed revealed in the ABC interview with Sarah Palin, and it wasn't coming from Sarah Palin, but Charlie Gibson. But there was more than Charlie's sneering condescending tone, looking down over the rim of his glasses like some snobby intellectual that bothered me. Twisting her words into a fabrication feeding the fear of theocracy was utterly insulting. It was especially insulting to claim that these were her "exact words" after being challenged on it. Watch this video excerpt from the interview to see the exchange.
GIBSON: You said recently, in your old church, “Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God.” Are we fighting a holy war?
PALIN: You know, I don’t know if that was my exact quote.
GIBSON: Exact words.
PALIN: But the reference there is a repeat of Abraham Lincoln’s words when he said — first, he suggested never presume to know what God’s will is, and I would never presume to know God’s will or to speak God’s words.
As Michael M. Bates earlier detailed, CNN’s Jessica Yellin filed a report from Anchorage, Alaska on Wednesday’s American Morning which cites a "non-partisan" organization whose official policy stance includes a pro-abortion position, and whose president used to work for NARAL. She also included a sound bite from a Palin critic who donated hundreds of dollars to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
Yellin’s report examined how the Alaska governor balances her government work with her family life. She included sound bites from Meg Stapleton, a former aide to Palin who was labeled on-screen as a "Palin campaign advisor" and Kristan Cole, a childhood friend of the governor. After a positive and short depiction of Palin’s life, Yellin cited how "Palin supporters insist her experience as a working mother means she'll represent American women."
The CNN correspondent then went to the critics of the governor’s record: "But some women's groups are critical. The non-partisan National Partnership for Women and Families gives Alaska a D-minus when it comes to its parental leave policy. For example, there's no guarantee of paid leave for new parents." Yellin followed this with a sound bite from Dr. Vicki Lovell of the Institute for Women’s Policy Research, who thought there's a contradiction there between Governor Palin's professed values about supporting families and then what we actually see in the state of Alaska, where there aren't adequate supports for families who are welcoming new infants."
What's in a name? Well, if you'll excuse my Shakespeare, what's in a name is a certain level of respect. And in the pursuit of straight news a person's name should be presented without sarcastic manipulation as well as with proper titles affixed. For instance, Hillary Clinton is properly either Mrs. Clinton or Senator Clinton. On the other hand, calling Hillary "Her Thighness" is not appropriate in a straight news story. It may be funny, of course, but it is not proper nor does it show the respect due the woman. (I know, I'm a killjoy) So, why does the New York Times and the L.A. Times both so often call Governor Sarah Palin Ms. all the time?
Could it be that they wish to subtly bestow as much disrespect as possible in their news stories on McCain's VP pick without going as far as calling her a name like the sarcastic jab "Her Thighness" might serve for Hillary? Could it be these supposedly serious news sources wish to attack Governor Palin and they don't think anyone will notice the slight of her marriage by the misuse of the title Ms.?
Topics in this show: Sarah Palin's attractiveness gets noticed, developers building giant ferris wheel in Baghdad, CBS's credibility in the toilet, Lindsay Lohan wants to meet Michael Phelps.
On Myspace? Be sure to visit our NewsBusted page and add us as a friend. You can also subscribe to our YouTube channel and help take back Web 2.0 for conservatism. We need your positive ratings to block whiney left-wingers who can't stand that the joke's on them for a change.
Want to try your hand at comedy? Send your one-liners to firstname.lastname@example.org. If we use them, we'll pay you $50.
On ABC’s Good Morning America on Saturday, co-anchor Bill Weir bristled with hostility during an interview with a McCain campaign spokesman about the choice of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as the Republican vice presidential candidate, suggesting she was unqualified and too conservative. At one point, Weir even suggested that by running for Vice President, the Governor would be jeopardizing her four-month old daughter, who has Down’s Syndrome.
Weir confronted McCain political director Mike DuHaime: “Adding to the brutality of a national campaign, the Palin family also has an infant with special needs. What leads you, the Senator, and the Governor to believe that one won't affect the other in the next couple of months?” When DuHaime offered a general answer about Palin’s “incredible life story,” an obviously irritated Weir jumped in, exclaiming “She has an infant -- she has an infant with special needs. Will that affect her campaigning?”
Just a few moments later, that line of questioning was quickly criticized by ABC’s Cokie Roberts as sexist. Without mentioning Weir, Roberts said questions “about who’s taking care of the children...traditionally has very much angered women voters when women candidates are asked those questions and male candidates never are.”
Mainstream news anchors covering the Democratic National Convention are getting more impatient by the day as the McCain campaign broadcasts ads using Hillary Clinton's own words against Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama.
MSNBC anchorman Keith Olbermann was visibly annoyed not only with the Democrats' lack of counter-punches to the McCain campaign but also angry at the McCain campaign for "stealing" Hillary Clinton's primary campaign ads for the GOP senator's current ad campaign.
When Al Hunt of Bloomsburg News (a longtime Washington fixture of the Wall Street Journal) wore an orange blazer on Monday night's Charlie Rose show on PBS, I wondered if it was just a subliminal ad for Creamsicles. But perhaps he was just signaling his early support for Hillary Clinton's orange pantsuit on Tuesday night.
I think we can rule out that they're both fans of the NewsBusters color scheme.
An ABC affiliate in Kansas City, Missouri, is reporting that a printing company in Lenexa, Kansas, has already started creating bumper stickers promoting "Obama Bayh '08":
After weeks of speculation and days of intense rumors, the answer to who Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama would name as his running mate may have come down to a bumper sticker printed in Lenexa.
KMBC's Micheal Mahoney reported that the company, which specializes in political literature, has been printing Obama-Bayh material.
Everybody see the Saddleback Civil Forum last Saturday night? Well, we all know the candidates went separate for their interviews with Pastor Rick Warren. And even better, Pastor Warren asked them identical questions. But, we didn't really get a good comparison of answers to the same question because we had to wait 45 more minutes after Obama's answer to hear McCain's answer. Well, here's some good news for you!
Un-be-liev-a-ble. Jesus would be O.K. with abortion. Not only that, Jesus's position on abortion would be even "more radical" than Barack Obama's! That was the wild, and patently false, assertion from Barack Obama supporter Dr. Marc Lamont Hill, a guest on Wednesday's The O'Reilly Factor on FNC (8/13/08). (Dr. Hill appears regularly on the program.)
Dr. Hill, an Assistant Professor of Urban Education and American Studies at Temple University and self-described "hip-hop intellectual," was defending Senator Obama's unwavering history of championing the right to terminating unborn humans through all nine months of pregnancy.
Dr. Hill reveals a mind-blowing ignorance of first-century Jewish and Christian teaching. That Hill would air such a preposterous assertion on a national television program is brazen, to say the least.
First-century Jews were unequivocally anti-abortion. (Note to Dr. Hill: Jesus of Nazareth was Jewish.) For example:
Jackson City Councilman Kenneth Stokes said he wants to propose a city ordinance that takes away pawn shop’s ability to sell guns.
“There’s too much violence in the city of Jackson,” Stokes said today. “I asked the young folks, where are they getting their guns and they say the pawn shops. I asked the older people where are they getting their guns and they say the pawn shops. We need to do something to make our city safe again.”
Of course Mr. Stokes doesn't realize that he cannot lawfully do this. And he doesn't realize that restricting a purchase in the city limits will not prevent criminals from getting guns in neighboring suburbs. And he doesn't understand that preventing lawful citizens from purchasing guns to protect their families and homes is what will keep the murdering thugs in his city. When criminals know that gun purchases are prohibited by law-abiding residents, they will choose to remain in that area and continue their criminal activities.
After the Supreme Court decided that a resident of Washington D.C. has a Constitutional right to own a firearm for self-defense in the home, Senator Dianne Feinstein of California stated: "I believe the people of this great country will be less safe because of it." 1
The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence is one of the country's leading gun control organizations. Brady's President Paul Helmke had this to say after the Supreme Court decision: "Our fight to enact sensible gun laws will be undiminished by the Supreme Court's decision in the Heller case." 2
But what exactly qualifies as "sensible," according to Helmke? And is there any way to determine whether reduced restrictions on gun ownership makes us less safe?
For many years, the Brady Campaign has released an annual "report card," grading each state on its level of "sensible" gun laws. States with higher grades (e.g. "A") were obviously more "sensible," according to Brady; states rated "F" were apparently considered "non-sensible." 3