Fallows on the Media on Hillary’s Lies vs. Palin’s
James Fallows is interested by the contrast between the mainstream media’s treatment of the Hillary Clinton “hail of Bosnian bullets” lie, and Palin’s “no thanks on those Bridge to Nowhere funds” lie: A controlled experiment.
Good stuff.
September 11th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
Good article.
C’mon shcb, I’m dying to hear your rationale for this one. Your silence is as deafening as the rest of the ww media so far.
September 12th, 2008 at 6:36 am
Be glad to. I’ve been reading on this a bit, I took a different tack on this, I have tried to avoid reading much of current articles. I have been mostly reading articles and editorials from Alaskan papers from that timeframe, both during the gubernatorial campaign and when the Gravina Island Bridge was canceled. as far as I can tell from the information I have looked at, Sarah Palin is lying when she says she was opposed to its construction. There, got that out of the way.
Now why is it being covered less than the Hillary episode. This is something we have talked about in the past. The media is lazy and people like pictures. Someone sitting in their office didn’t remember gunfire when they were with Hillary, they sent a memo, some poor intern had to watch hour after hour of film until they found that clip, the poor bastard got a pat on the back and a gift card to Applebee’s and the story was written, people had pictures and a good time was had by all.
This bridge is a different story.
September 12th, 2008 at 6:37 am
oops
September 12th, 2008 at 6:38 am
Be glad to. I’ve been reading on this a bit, I took a different tack on this, I have tried to avoid reading much of current articles. I have been mostly reading articles and editorials from Alaskan papers from that timeframe, both during the gubernatorial campaign and when the Gravina Island Bridge was canceled. as far as I can tell from the information I have looked at, Sarah Palin is lying when she says she was opposed to its construction. There, got that out of the way.
Now why is it being covered less than the Hillary episode. This is something we have talked about in the past. The media is lazy and people like pictures. Someone sitting in their office didn’t remember gunfire when they were with Hillary, they sent a memo, some poor intern had to watch hour after hour of film until they found that clip, the poor bastard got a pat on the back and a gift card to Applebee’s and the story was written, people had pictures and a good time was had by all.
This bridge is a different story.
That is about all the story there is if you want to keep it simple. There were several projects on that appropriation bill for lack of a better term, some of them needed, some not. There were other options on the table, sinking a tunnel, better ferries, etc. There were also construction of roads and such that would have to have been done with the other options. One article mentioned that the 200 odd million was just a down payment, the total cost was something like 1.3 billion. Then we get to local politics, it seems Alaska has several factions geographically, roads also seem to be a big deal to these people (constructions jobs?) there were 4 or 5 major projects in this bill with the bridge being one component of one of those projects. Of course the people in the area not affected by the bridge wanted that money for their projects… it seems Palin was for all of them, read that however you like.
Then we have the appropriation process, the money for road projects is given out in 5 year blocks so these projects had been approved while Palin as still hauling kids to hockey practice. Then there is the problem that you can’t just give the money back to the federal government, if you do you have to start the approval process over which will impact projects already started. Throw in this was a catchphrase issue for McCain, throw in Stevens, and you have a mess the press just doesn’t want to tackle.
If they do get around to it they will make the mistake of fixating on the fact that Palin didn’t give the money back when it was needed in New Orleans. The McCain camp will turn that around and say “she couldn’t give it back, see, this is something else we need to fix in Washington” even though there is probably a very good reason why it is set up this way. Contracts take time to be negotiated priorities need to be set etc. so we will screw up a working system because of an empty campaign promise.
And so it goes.
September 12th, 2008 at 6:39 am
that’s better, maybe Matt or JBC can clean that up
September 12th, 2008 at 8:09 am
I’ll just quote Lincoln Chaffee (R the only R to vote against the Iraq War resolution)… she’s a cocky wacko.
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/chafee_palin/2008/09/11/129835.html
(note rightwing media link. see? fair n balanced, ;-)
The right wing media hates Clinton (both Bill and Hill) and would love a pitbull smeared with lipstick in all the wrong places (try smearing it on the front end next time boys). Just so long as the pitbull savages and smears ‘the left’. There are no lies too blatant, no smear too low for the McBush campaign to hurl against their opponents. I hope Obama wins to put an end to Atwater/Rove slime style campaigns, but I know the idiots in America eat this crap up (and ask for thirds).
September 12th, 2008 at 9:38 am
shcb,
Pleased to read a humble and forthright opinion / analysis from you on this item. Plus you’ve explored the details further than I, so I won’t challenge you on this.
One thing confuses me though, and that is the consistency of your opinion here with all your other posts chastising the mainstream media as elitist and liberal leaning. Seems to me that if America did indeed have an “elitist” “liberal biased” media then they would have no qualms in front-paging a picture of Sarah Palin’s smiling face holding up a pro “bridge to nowhere” T-shirt or other simple example of her pro-bridge stance. Even if they had to resort to an editorial cartoon for the cover. That can be better than a picture, and almost as easy. Where there is a will there is a way; and in this case I see no willingness to cover this story in a meaningful way. Plus I feel that “the media is lazy” to be a wholly inadequate explanation.
It will be interesting to read Fallow’s follow up article after this “controlled experiment” has time to run its course.
September 12th, 2008 at 11:53 am
I just call ’em as I see ‘em. As to the press, it could be as simple as hurricanes are more fun than a politician exaggerating their involvement in an obscure pork deal that never happened anyway. Yes that is spun, that is how the press knows it will be spun. I also don’t think the press thinks there is as big a story here as you guys do. You are all very partisan, don’t take it personal, you just are. I hear callers on Rosen’s show just want to skewer a Democrat for one thing or another because it is the worst thing ever, what ever the Democrat did, the world as we know it will end unless the politician is at least executed it not burned at the stake. Rosen has to explain to them that they are the only people in the country that think this is that big of deal.
In fact if I were the Democrats I wouldn’t bring it up in the debates, this issue has too many quirks and ways out for McCain and Palin. The best they can do is run an ad every now and then to keep it in back of people’s minds without getting them confused. And just take whatever advantage that gives them, Democrats aren’t going to win with this one issue.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Spin it any way you like shcb, but she was for the bridge to nowhere before she was against it. She kept the $245 million or so.
She asked for $22 million in earmarks for her small town of 5 to 6k and, like every R pol, left them deeply in debt to the tune of something like $27 million. She asked for DNA testing of seals and earmarks to study the mating habits of crabs. Not that science is bad, but earmarks to fund science? No. Funnel the money to the NSF or other orgs and let them dole it out instead of graft, cronyism and corruption (thy name is Rethuglican).
She’s a corrupt know nothing small town firebreather, but that doesn’t qualify her to be President. End of story, lets get back to the issues.
Also, does anyone else get a tiny shiver of disgust that callers to Macho Mike want Dems “skewered” or “at the very least executed, if not burned at the stake”? Forgive me, but if this is your take on political discourse, then you have absolutely no right to bitch about me using strong language. Stop listening to hate radio, please. Stop making death threats part of your political discourse, please.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
They are just expressions, like kill two birds with one stone. No one on Rosen’s show has ever asked for the death of politician. God you’re a pain in the ass.
September 12th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
an expression like, say “lipstick on a pig”?
here are your words:
And my point still stands: rwnjs use a daily lexicon of violent, kill em all rhetoric that infects and corrodes your souls with violence, hatred and revulsion for the Other, any Other. Please show me just once – once – where I have used similar killemall!!! rhetoric about Rs… you can’t. Just like your bullsh!t rwnj talking point that I said the Iraq War was lost (Harry Reid said that afaik)
It is sweet that you are all into playing nice before the election. Really. But if McBush wins you’ll go back to the same old hate filled rhetoric (tho you are less full of that crap than say TV or leftymcfrootloop).
September 12th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
Good thing you never watched the Bugs Bunny Road Runner show, we would be reading how you threw a piano out the window thinking the guy it landed on would get up and stagger around with stars above his head.
September 12th, 2008 at 4:54 pm
you aren’t making sense
“skewer a Democrat” is a common expression like “lipstick on a pig”?
“at least executed if not burned at the stake” is a common expression like “go fuck yourself”?
you stated you hear folks call in and say the stuff I just listed above. I doubt anyone uses your quoted phrases as common expressions (other than Dick Cheney and of course “lipstick on a pig” which as Obama pointed out was about McCain’s economic plans and campaign in general. And if you want to take it out of context, Palin would be the lipstick.
Put a fork in it, your done. ;-)
September 12th, 2008 at 4:58 pm
…you’re done (whups)
September 13th, 2008 at 6:59 am
I’m an original :-) but yes Skewer and burn at the stake are common phrases. I can’t believe you are so violent as to want to skewer me with a fork, i’m outraged! :-)
September 13th, 2008 at 8:34 am
sweet geezuz you are so stupid, you can’t even get your pronouns right!
“it” is not a he or she (assuming you aren’t a hermaphrodite, tho…)
btw since I had already put the phrases into quotes, I ran them past the google.
results:
“skewer a Democrat” 7 hits
“at least executed if not burned at the stake” zero hits – none, nada, zilch
“lipstick on a pig” 273,000 hits
“go fuck yourself” 1,110,000 hits
and just for good measure
“stick a fork in it” 172,000 hits
It does not change the fact that rwnjs use a lexicon – a word which here means vocabulary – of violent imagery and genocidal hatred. I understand you may have trouble with facts when your party is based on lies, but words matter, facts matter, reality matters. oh, right except in crazy base land…
September 13th, 2008 at 10:36 am
That was certainly an interesting exchange.
September 13th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
yes, facts must be such curiously foreign ideas to rwnjs
fact: you use language that implies impaling, executing or incinerating human beings that you disagree with (please point out even once where I have used such disgusting violent psychopathic language) and claim these are common expressions
fact: a quick analysis of the phrases in question leads to no doubt that your phrases are not common expressions (also try the urban dictionary)
fact: you bring up bugs bunny as some sort of bizarro world defense… some nonsensical tangent that has nothing to do with my point about the rwnj language of hate, harm and homicide. You are a tool.
need I say more?
September 13th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
nope, I’m a real son of a bitch.
September 14th, 2008 at 2:42 pm
you haven’t refuted a single thing I’ve said
owned
you aren’t a rootin tootin sombitch, you are a tool (and not a particularly bright one at that)
September 14th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
what would I refute, you are absolutely correct.
September 15th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Major US Companies that have filed for bankruptcy (note the years):
-Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (2008) $639 billion
-WorldCom Inc. (2002) $104 billion
-Enron Corp. (2001) $63 billion
-Conseco Inc. (2002) $61 billion
-Texaco Inc. (1987) $36 billion
-Financial Corp. of America (1988) $34 billion
-Refco Inc. (2005) $33 billion
-Global Crossing Ltd. (2002) $30 billion
-Pacific Gas and Electric Co. (2001) $29 billion
-UAL Corp. (2002) $25 billion
-Delta Air Lines Inc. (2005) $22 billion
-Adelphia Communications (2002) $21 billion
-MCorp. (1989) $20 billion
-Mirant Corp. (2003) $19 billion
-Delphi Corp. (2005) $17 billion
Coincidence…?
September 15th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
NL are u sure you meant to post that here?
shcb was just admitting that the rwnj lexicon of violent language, of hate, homicide and horror is indeed a fact. Thinking of imPaling, or executing or burning at the stake are just common phrases that don’t mean much of anything in rwnj world (crazy base-land). Its their way of saying howdy!
Nice.
Anyone who doesn’t believe in the divinity of imPalin is a
“socialist baby killing maggot”
And everybody knows maggots aren’t human so threatening em with “skewering” “execution if not burning at the stake” and the lot are just their way of furthering polite discourse.