Just in case you were wondering what happened to Pravda reporters…
December 1st, 2007 at 09:45am Leo Pusateri
Or so it would seem through this story on the AP:
PORTSMOUTH, N.H. - When the hostages had been released and their alleged captor arrested, a regal-looking Hillary Rodham Clinton strolled out of her Washington home, the picture of calm in the face of crisis.
[SNIP]
It was a vintage example of a candidate taking a negative and turning it into a positive. And coming just six weeks before the presidential voting begins, the timing could hardly have been more beneficial to someone hoping to stave off a loss in the Iowa caucuses and secure a win in the New Hampshire primary.
[SNIP]
At the same time, the woman striving to move from former first lady to the first female president was eager to convey that she knew the traditional lines of command and control in a crisis, even if the events inside the storefront on North Main Street were far short of a world calamity.
“They were the professionals, they were in charge of this situation, whatever they asked me or my campaign to do is what we would do,” Clinton said.
Along with taking charge while giving the professionals free rein, Clinton offered up a third dimension to her crisis character: humanity. She said she felt “grave concern” when she first heard the news of the hostage-taking.
[SNIP]
“It affected me not only because they were my staff members and volunteers, but as a mother, it was just a horrible sense of bewilderment, confusion, outrage, frustration, anger, everything at the same time,” Clinton said.
It was a thawing moment for a stoic figure who once snapped that she opted for professional life instead of staying home to bake cookies.
She buttressed it with one final message. Clinton sought to use the sad moment as a national teaching opportunity, another skill often employed by presidents.
She paid tribute to the thousands of believers who set aside their lives every four years so they can propel presidential campaigns on little more than blood, sweat and tears.
“They believe in our future. They work around the clock. They are so committed to their cause, and I just want to commend every one of them from every campaign who really makes what is a sacrifice and a commitment,” Clinton said. “A lot of them postpone school, leave their families, move across the country, and I’m so grateful for them every single day, and I’m especially just relieved to have this situation end so peacefully without anyone being injured.
Class dismissed.
Class dismissed??
As in Sycophantic Reporting 101?
Err.., Glenn Johnson… Just wondering… did you smoke a cigarette after composing that piece?
h/t BRight and Early
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Kook Left
40 Comments
1. Gozer the Carpathian | December 1st, 2007 at 9:50 am
That’s quite the glowing article. I wonder if anyone else would get the same kind of write up? Let alone as long as that.
2. Right Voices » Blog&hellip | December 1st, 2007 at 10:38 am
[...] BFV asks another great question: “Err.., Glenn Johnson… Just wondering… did you smoke a cigarette after composing that piece?” Bookmark to: Tags: Hillary, Clinton, , Hostages, , Election, 2008, Donations, , Bundlers, , Chinatown, , Hannity, and, Colmes, , Glenn, Johnson,, Hillary, Clinton,, media, bias, , illegal, contributions, , Liberal, Media, , LA, Times, , NY, Post, , MSM [...]
3. Almiranta | December 1st, 2007 at 10:49 am
The cigarette comment was priceless.
Now what was that radical Liberal whine about the MSM not being biased?
If only Glenn could find it in himself to write anything even half so adoring about, say, a soldier in Iraq.
Hey. Glenn—Condoleeza Rice is traveling around the world, meeting with leaders of some very difficult nations, negotiating with people who are not inclined to negotiate, doing it with style and class and determination and great success—have you written about her? Oh, and by the way, the only woman in the country REALLY qualified to be President didn’t get to her current position on the coattails of her husband or any other man. And SHE is serving HER country, not demanding that it be the other way around.
Go for it, Glenn…..
4. John Nickelsen | December 1st, 2007 at 10:49 am
The question should be “what were you smoking when you wrote that piece?” Seriously, this bit of fluff shows the Clinton media machine at another low point — making good political press out of a tragic situation and taking advantage of a deranged person. I expected this.
5. Almiranta | December 1st, 2007 at 10:52 am
BTW, some of us speculated that this guy was a plant, to stir up sympathy for Hillary, to give her yet another chance to try to appear to be a victim, and to give her a chance to act “presidential”.
It’s a shame to be able to even consider that as a possiblity, but as one who realizes that history DOES repeat itself……
Hey, hours of nonstop publicity, no one hurt, the Hillster being able to act “regal”, and a handy little press release ready to hit the streets, disguised (as so many of those for the Left are..) as a ‘news story’.
Deja ve all over again…
6. Casper | December 1st, 2007 at 11:03 am
“Oh, and by the way, the only woman in the country REALLY qualified to be President didn’t get to her current position on the coattails of her husband or any other man.”
I would hate to think she is the ONLY WOMAN in the country really qualified to be president. Eighty million women in this country over thirty five and that’s all we have?
7. Ricorun | December 1st, 2007 at 11:25 am
I hope the AP distributed barf bags with that story.
8. Kahn | December 1st, 2007 at 11:42 am
Casper, so - name some names.
9. Kahn | December 1st, 2007 at 12:09 pm
The coordinated effort by CNN / NYT to influence the Republican debate and to use it to smear Republicans that so many posters here have defended has ripped away ANY claim at a fair and unbiased mainstream press.
While ostensibly only CNN, the Clinton campaign, and the New York Times were involved, the complete failure of any real condemnation by any other news source shows implicit approval.
There IS liberal bias. There is ACTIVE propaganda and anti-conservative reporting. Democrats have subverted the First Amendment. Joe Goebbels would be proud of you.
10. UrbanGrounds » Blog&hellip | December 1st, 2007 at 12:24 pm
[...] Pusateri at Blogs for Victory: Err.., Glenn Johnson… Just wondering… did you smoke a cigarette after composing that [...]
11. Casper | December 1st, 2007 at 1:00 pm
“Casper, so - name some names.”
Will there’s Rudy Giuliani. Sorry, that’s not right, he just likes to dress up like a woman. LOL
Actually, I didn’t say I had any names, but you would think that in a country like ours there would have to some.
“There IS liberal bias. There is ACTIVE propaganda and anti-conservative reporting.”
Of course there is. There always has been. There is also a lot of conservative bias. There is active propaganda and anti-liberal reporting as well.
12. MagicalPat | December 1st, 2007 at 1:23 pm
but as a mother…
She would never play gender politics would she?
13. phnx | December 1st, 2007 at 1:48 pm
“as a mother, it was just a horrible sense of bewilderment, confusion, outrage, frustration, anger, everything at the same time,” Clinton said.
She may have been appealing to the women’s vote with this statement, but as a veteran I find this to be a scary statement from someone who wants to be the Commander and Chief.
If she is bewildered and confused when some middle aged drunk threatens a few campaign workers, what is she going to feel like or do when there is an international crisis requiring decisive action. The last thing we need if we are under attack is a leader who is bewildered and confused.
14. hermie | December 1st, 2007 at 1:58 pm
Exactly what official powers did she have as a US Senator, to wield over the duly-recognized local law enforcement authorities?
How as a US Senator from NY, could she manage to give orders to the NH police?
This looks more like a partnership between an opportunistic politician getting in the way of professional law enforcement, and a fawning MSM who can’t bear to admit their bias.
15. Kahn | December 1st, 2007 at 5:08 pm
Thanks Casper - I knew that naming qualified women would be hard. Personally, I’d like to see Condi Rice run. So, I named the one that was implied above.
Oh, so there is conservative bias also? Which of the following is conservative?
CNN-
CBS-
ABC-
NBC-
MSNBC-
PBS-
NPR-
I don’t think Fox is either, but will allow that it is for the sake of argument.
Liberal bias even permeates the search engines. Google, Yahoo, and others are run by liberals and push the liberal agenda. This particularly is an insidious and dangerous challenge to our democracy.
16. Kahn | December 1st, 2007 at 5:36 pm
Oh, forgot CNBC. Here is one of their reporters apologizing for calling President Bush a monkey. Yep, no bias there.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b88_1196526130&p=1
17. Casper | December 1st, 2007 at 5:49 pm
“Oh, so there is conservative bias also? Which of the following is conservative?”
Are those the only ones I get to pick from?
How about the Washington Times, New York Sun, The Wall Street Journal, and talk radio in general to name a few.
18. MrGone | December 1st, 2007 at 5:50 pm
BLAH!!
19. Kahn | December 1st, 2007 at 5:56 pm
Washington Times? Small circulation compared to the Washington Post
New York Sun? Compared to the New York Times?
The Wall Street Journal has been shown to have liberal reporting and a conservative op-ed section, you miss on that for poor research.
Talk Radio is blatantly biased. Yes. BUT, it purports tb that way and is for entertainment. It does not hide behind a lie. The liberal press lies about who they are and what they are doing. You think Rush doesn’t say he’s a conservative?
20. Kahn | December 1st, 2007 at 6:01 pm
MrGone, get that sausage out of your mouth and maybe we could understand you. No! don’t put it there! Yuk.
21. Casper | December 1st, 2007 at 6:16 pm
Kahn,
You asked for some examples, I gave you some. It’s all about perception anyway. Media Matters (I know very liberal) often goes after The New York Times and Washington Post for their conservative bias on various stories. The only point I was trying to make was that all media has bias, and that both sides have there outlets. That’s the main reason I don’t get all of my information from a single source or a single side.
22. Kahn | December 1st, 2007 at 6:20 pm
Actually, I didn’t ask for examples. I asked you to pick from a list. Mr. Teacher, you misread another question.
There are SOME conservative newspapers. But that industry is even more liberal than the broadcast media.
You know, I hope you are a better teacher that a debater. You actually defend a coordinated scam by CNN and the New York Times? Two organizations who claim to be and are held up to be neutral?
Really - stop embarrassing yourself. You purport to be one of the more moderate liberal posters, but you refuse to call a spade a spade just as strongly as the kookiest.
23. Gozer the Carpathian | December 1st, 2007 at 7:43 pm
Seriously it’d be nice if the media outlets would just admit to their bias and be done with it. Talk radio admits it’s biased and it has an ever growing audience. So obviously stating your bias doesn’t directly hurt your ratings.
Just admit you have a bias, there’s nothing wrong with that. We ALL have biases in how we talk about things, why wouldn’t “reporters?” Full disclosure my friends, it’s not just for Buisness news. :D
24. Casper | December 1st, 2007 at 9:11 pm
“Actually, I didn’t ask for examples. I asked you to pick from a list. Mr. Teacher, you misread another question.”
You might want to check the other post before accusing me of misreading another question.
Where did I defend CNN and The New York Times? I haven’t even mentioned CNN.
As for your list. I’ll take your word on ABC, CBS, and NBC. I haven’t watched a network newscast for at list 10 years.
As for the rest
MSNBC: left leaning except Scarbough and Carlson.
CNN: left leaning except Beck and Dobbs.
PBS and NPR: I don’t watch. I’ll take your word for it.
Now back to my original comment.
“There is also a lot of conservative bias. There is active propaganda and anti-liberal reporting as well.”
I never stated that there is more conservative bias, or even the same, only that there is conservative bias in the media. You have admitted as much.
“You know, I hope you are a better teacher that a debater. ”
First, I considered this more of a discussion than a debate. If you want a debate, please let me know at the start next time so we can set some perimeters.
Oh, and BTW, I AM a damn good teacher.
25. Kahn | December 1st, 2007 at 9:11 pm
Gozer, yes. I agree with that.
Since the current crop of Democrats refuse to deal with Fox News because they say its biased, wouldn’t it be acceptable (using their own standards) to kick every liberal reporter out of the White House? We didn’t invent their standard, but we should be able to apply it equally if they can.
26. Casper | December 1st, 2007 at 11:02 pm
“Since the current crop of Democrats refuse to deal with Fox News because they say its biased, wouldn’t it be acceptable (using their own standards) to kick every liberal reporter out of the White House?”
It would if the president only represented the Republican party. However, I was under the impression that he represents the entire country.
27. Kahn | December 1st, 2007 at 11:04 pm
And the people running for President are running to represent the entire country - right?
28. Casper | December 1st, 2007 at 11:19 pm
“And the people running for President are running to represent the entire country - right?”
Yes, I think the Democrats should debate on FOX. Surprised?
29. Kahn | December 1st, 2007 at 11:21 pm
Cool.
But now that CNN has been found in a conspiracy to subvert the process with the New York Times, it would be OK to kick them out. Wouldn’t it?
30. Casper | December 1st, 2007 at 11:26 pm
“But now that CNN has been found in a conspiracy to subvert the process with the New York Times, it would be OK to kick them out. Wouldn’t it?”
Please provide more details on this conspiracy.
Kick who out?
31. Kahn | December 1st, 2007 at 11:45 pm
How stupid are you? You’re a teacher?
The conspiracy to subvert the Republican primary process through coordinated liberal plants, fake focus groups, and immediate follow up (pre-planned) articles in the Times? Shouldn’t that disqualify them from White House press status? They seem to be acting (CNN and the NYT) as extended operatives of the Clinton campaign. Shouldn’t they lose their press credentials based upon that?
32. Casper | December 2nd, 2007 at 12:28 am
Kahn,
“How stupid are you? You’re a teacher?”
Actually, yes I am (a teacher that is). I have 130 students spread over 6 classes which means about 520 papers to grade a week. I also sponsor two clubs involving another 30 to 40 students three afternoons a week. I made nine phone calls home to parents this week (all positive), spent four hours in meetings and ate lunch with my students twice. My wife and I spent one night and one day babysitting our grandkids this week and I follow two professional sports teams. And that doesn’t include church, and the two books, five newspapers, six blogs and three magazines I try to keep up with. Oh, and my wife and I just sent a couple of packages to our soldiers in Iraq.
SORRY IF I MISSED THIS CONSPIRACY.
Ok, now that I’ve vented I have two final points.
One, if I have missed this story, it’s because I”ve been busy, not because I’m stupid. After I’ve had a chance to research it I will get back to you.
Two, If it sounds like I’m complaining , I’m not. I truly love my job and my life. I wouldn’t chance anything.
33. vlad335 | December 2nd, 2007 at 12:31 am
Wow!
It is sad that this is what passes for journalism today. This is not a DNC press release it is from the AP!
I love the response, “There is also a lot of conservative bias too.” Haha! What a compelling argument you present!
The Clinton’s know their Dummies well. I wonder how it feels to be a lapdog? A mindless automaton ready to do their every bidding.
I’m reminded of a discussion I had years ago with a respectable older woman that I worked with who honestly tried to convince me that a BJ wasn’t really sex!
I also remember posting on a message board discussing the Sandy Berger affair with some libs. Basically, reason and accountability went right out the window with them. The amount of spin was downright shameful and embarrassing and I gave up on that board for good.
For some reason I will never understand, Libs are compelled to move the goalposts at will and defend the indefensable when it comes down to the Clintons.
To all the democrats reading this. Can you guess who will be the dem nominee for 2008? Try real hard…. Do you think that the person who wrote the AP “news story” and all his cohorts will sit by idle while another candidate wrests a lead over her?
34. Kahn | December 2nd, 2007 at 1:55 am
Whatever Casper.
35. Dittohead4Life | December 2nd, 2007 at 11:18 am
BTW, some of us speculated that this guy was a plant,
Almiranta, Hitlery’s first act, upon coronation, will be to pardon this guy.
Of course there is. There always has been. There is also a lot of conservative bias. There is active propaganda and anti-liberal reporting as well.
Casspur, give us some examples of what you call propaganda, please. And if you cite non-news, talk radio outlets, you expose yourself for the phony I insist you are.
I think Khan’s point is that the liberal bias in the DBDM is far greater than whatever scant bias you can come up with, without citing Limbaugh, Hannity, and Ingraham–non-journalists who provide commentary on the news of the day. Unlike Blitzer, Matthews, Olberman, Couric, Williams, and other kook libs who claim to be journalists.
Go ahead, Casspurr, give us some examples. For every valid example you give of conservative bias, we can come up with five or more examples of kook lefty bias.
But go ahead, teach–insist that the bias is equal. Lemming…
36. js | December 2nd, 2007 at 1:21 pm
about billary clinton….
this is a woman who knew her husband had muliple counts of infidelity and had been accosted for sexual harrassment over a dozen times before they ever campaigned for the Oval Office, and she hid it, right along with billy, from the amercian people
what makes anyone think this woman is “Presidential” material?
as far as that goes, why did she go to court to hide White House records that would reveal what she really did while her husband was President?
who can trust this woman, she is a con artist, pure and simple, a liar from the ‘git-go!!
37. Almiranta | December 2nd, 2007 at 1:49 pm
If Hillary does get the nomination, there will be a flood of dirt coming out about her, true information about her and her shenanigans going back about 30 years or so. She will not have Clinton’s charm to get her out of the mess she will be in, and she certainly doesn’t have any.
Dick Morris said that Hillary and some who helped her and Bill put together his TV speech in which he admitted to the Monica thing, bit his lip, cried, and begged for forgiveness, watched the performance, and when it was over she turned to her buddies and said “THAT will teach them to f___ with us!”
This side of her has been well hidden by her handlers but it will come out more and more as she is personally challenged in a head-to-head campaign with a Republican candidate. None of it will matter to the hard-core Hillarists, but the moderates will become more and more disenchanted as the disguise slips, day by day, and vicious Socialist woman-bashing coattail-riding Hillary shows through.
She does not tolerare being challenged, and she does not handle it well. We will probably have plenty of opportunity to see just how she would deal with a difficult foreign leader—hysterical cackling to hide her anger won’t really cut it.
As for bias, we need to remember, when we talk about “bias” in talk radio—-THESE PEOPLE DO NOT PRETEND TO BE MERELY REPORTING THE NEWS.
Sorry about shouting, there, but it has to be said loudly and clearly.
Each and every “news” outlet mentioned pretends to standards of journalism, pretends to be delivering hard news.
Talk radio hosts do not do this. They discuss news, clearly and openly from their own point of view, offering clearly identified OPINIONS.
The difference between Dan Rather stating, IN A NEWCAST, that he has proof of misconduct when Bush was in the ANG, and some openly identified talk show host COMMENTING on the story, giving his openly identified OPINION from his openly identified position is so vast, I don’t understand how anyone can miss it.
Yet so many manage to do so.
So, going back to NEWS, of the national TV outlets, Fox is the only one I know of which presents the news no matter which side it might benefit. They tell us when soldiers die, but the also tell us when the death count goes down, and they also tell us what good is happening in Iraq, a subject studiously avoided by the other TV outlets. They interview Iraqis who don’t like America, but they also talk with those who love us—-you don’t see that on SEE B S, or the other network or cable “news” shows
How many entertainment shows come out and support conservative positions? “Brothers and Sisters” has a couple of token Republicans, who are routinely chastized for their positions and who NEVER make fun of Liberals, in a show where it is just fine to trash conservatives at any time, even when it does nothing to advance the plot. “ER” has a character who whined, at a support group for families with loved ones in Iraq, that the president “lied to get us into the war” and then whined because they asked her not to come back—yet no one has ever supported the president or the war or even the validity of the conservative movement while disagreeing with it.
Even NCIS had an episode last week where a man, in obvious stunned disbelief, challenged a Marine investigator, “You don’t SUPPORT this war, do you??!!??!!” and the Marine dodged the issue, saying “I support the TROOPS”. Pure Hollywood, pure crap, but what there is out there.
I could go on and on and on. “Boston Legal” has a token Republican who is a boorish buffoon, and even when they have a plot in which some conservative position is supposedly defended, it is done is such a way as to make it indefensible.
Name one, just ONE, show in which the liberal Left is not promoted. I can name one—so far, till some Lefty writer gets in a dig. “The Unit” has tap danced around a couple of Lefty sacred cows, but so far has not sold out.
It is EVERYWHERE, Casper. Everywhere.
38. Casper | December 2nd, 2007 at 7:11 pm
Dittohead4Life,
“But go ahead, teach–insist that the bias is equal. Lemming…:”
Where did I say it was equal? I only said there was bias on both sides. Are you saying there isn’t?
Almiranta,
I’ll take your word for it since I don’t watch any of the shows you mentioned. And if you want to believe FOX isn’t biased, go for it. As I said from the start, all news outlets have bias.
Part of the problem with having a discussion like this we are all filtering what we see with our own biases. In other words, we see what we want to see.
Considering that our president has such a low approval rating right now, I would agree with you that there is more leftwing bias than rightwing bias at this point.
39. Blogs For Victory »&hellip | December 2nd, 2007 at 7:15 pm
[...] Hillary handled the situation.” I’m sure I don’t need to remind you about the ridiculous puff piece written by Glen Johnson for the AP, but clearly much of the discussion reflects sentiments implied by that [...]
40. Law Enforcement Action In&hellip | February 24th, 2008 at 4:08 am
Who Is Responsible For or Enforce The Law
In any state, a government has three functions. These are the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary.