The News Media v. Obama III: John McCain Is a Two Faced Lying Dirty Trickster

[McCamy Taylor]

I. Killing You With Kindness



John McCain is in a bit of bind. He is a “character” candidate. That means he does not present himself as smart like Nixon. He does not claim to know how to fix the economy or get us out of Iraq or do much of anything except let his advisers run the show, the way that Ronald Reagan did. However, he promises to be a “maverick”, a “straight shooter”, a “truth talker”, a “good soldier”, an “honest man”, a “fair fighter”. He will never resort to fear politics, smear politics, divisive politics. He will never accept suitcases full of cash or plant a mole in his rival’s camp or use blackmail or dirty tricks, Cross his heart and hope to spend another five years in a box if he lies.

Since Republicans have to use these tricks to steal elections in the US, especially in times of recession and unpopular war, that means that McCain’s surrogates will have to do all these things---and then he will have to sternly rebuke them.

Example one: McCain campaign staffer gets “suspended” (we never find out for how long) for putting together a video montage of Rev. Wright, Obama, Michelle and Brother Malcolm (????). The video can still be seen on YouTube (link is in the article).

http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0308/McCain_aide_circulates_ObamaWright_video_is_suspended.html

Example two : McCain surrogate Cunningham introduces the Senator with a speech in which he calls Obama a "hack Chicago-style Daley politician” as well as using his middle name, something that the Washington Post declared a major faux pas over a year ago. McCain goes on after Cunningham has warmed up the crowd. Only later does he “disavow” his surrogate’s words---ironically drawing even more attention to them than they would have received otherwise. And, of course, McCain buffs up his own reputation as an “honorable man”. The press just loves McCain for his good sportsmanship. And now everybody gets to hear Obama referred to as a "hack Chicago-style Daley politician." over and over again, as the press pretends to share McCain’s outrage over Cunningham’s remark. How outrageous were those remarks? Here, let me play them for you in their entirety on prime time television.

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/02/mccain_apologizes_for_radio_ho.html


Note that this is the same way that the press has circulated the Drudge picture of Obama in African garb. The press pretended to believe that Hillary gave Drudge the photo so it reprinted the photo over and over again, pretending that it was promoting the story out of a sense of outrage that Hillary would use such a dirty trick and not because it wanted to sell America the image of the front running Democratic candidate wearing ethnic African gear.

Chris Matthews did the same thing in December when Clinton New Hampshire co-chair Shaheen mentioned Obama’s youthful drug experimentation. Tweety used this as an excuse for a full hour Hardball program in which he said things like “Do things really go better with coke?” and repeatedly asked guests Axelrod, Trippi and Penn about Obama’s drug use including wether he had shared or sold drugs. When Penn used the word “cocaine” twice as part of the general discussion, Matthews and a number of other MSNBC pundits including Fineman and Schuster then used this as an excuse for many future references to Obama and drugs---always in the context of How awful it is that Hillary wants to talk about Obama and how he used drugs when he was a young man.

I think you see where I am getting here. No one actually wants to be the one to smear Obama. That would look bad. Like the Man oppressing a member of a minority group. So instead, they pretend that they are championing Obama, standing up for him because someone else has oppressed him. And did you hear what awful things they said about him? Wait a sec and I will play the whole thing for you, right here on prime time TV. No, it's no problem.

The ultimate perversion of this game is when the press makes a smear against Obama---as with any one of a number of Drudge or Moonie allegations that he is Muslim which have been attributed to Hillary---and then the corporate media (which should ignore these smears as the delusions of the right wing propaganda press) gives them wide airplay on the grounds that they are criticizing Hillary for dirty campaign tricks

I point out this pattern, because it is one that we will see with increasing frequency now that Obama is the presumptive Democratic nominee. With the exception of FOX, Drudge and a few right wing radio hosts and pundits, the corporate media will be unwilling to attack him directly on most issues. Therefore, be on the look out for this variation of the media atrocity, the Killing You With Kindness media smear.

II. Surprise! The MSM Has Been Softening Up Obama for McCain for a Solid Year! With the Big Lie Obama is a Crooked Politician



Around the same time that McCain was selected by his Party’s elders to replace Rudi, (who failed the corporate media commander in chief test) I heard a rumor that the McCain campaign would attempt to portray Obama as just another Chicago-Daley style dirty politician.

They have a big head start. Even though Rudi was supposed to be the man to beat and Hillary was supposed to be the presumptive Democratic nominee, the Rove dirty tricks operation leaves nothing to chance. If a Dem has a perceived strength—like honesty and integrity---Rove and his people will attack it.

Howard Fineman of MSNBC, who is almost certainly in on his network’s attempt to steer the election in McCain’s favor (see my journal about the “Junta” at GE/NBC) wrote this Obama hit piece way back in December, 2007.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22315080/

But consider these facts. His political roots were planted on the South Side of Chicago. The Daley Family backs him. His top advisor is the mustachioed David “The Ax” Axelrod, one of the toughest touts in the business. His campaign was reborn on Oct. 30 in Philadelphia, when he and John Edwards joined forces to label Hillary Clinton – in almost so many words – a corrupt liar. And in just the last few days, Obama has launched a tough direct-mail assault against her health care plan, also accusing Edwards of having done nothing in the Senate in the name of political reform.
So much for Mr. Nice Guy.

By December, it was clear that the corporate media was not going to tolerate Rudi, who had sold his soul to News Corp.The other media players were not about to let the FCC give Murdoch all the marbles. That left McCain as the GOP’s best hope---so Fineman knew what he was doing when he attempted to portray Obama as a corrupt politician. This would contrast nicely with the straight talking, honest living maverick that NBC planned to sell the country, in exchange for plenty of lucrative contracts from the Pentagon for GE.

But it does not begin in December. Big Lies take a long time to form roots in the nation’s consciousness.

Big Lie: Obama is a (dirty, cheating) Crooked (Chicago style) Politician
As usual, I am grateful to Media Matters for recording these media lies in one place. Everything that follows (with the exception of a few links provided for clarification like the Village Voice article) is a lie or distortion fabricated to add to a narrative that benefits the Republican nominee. This is no mere matter of selective reporting. This is the news media showing its true colors as a big fat liar .

From Feb. 2006 Matthews cheers as McCain attacks Obama:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200602080001

MATTHEWS: Did he, well, welsh on the deal?
McCAIN: Say that again.
MATTHEWS: Did he welsh on the deal? Did he double-cross you by going partisan after promising to go bipartisan with you, senator?
McCAIN: You know, I'm sorry, it's garbled, Chris, you're going to have to try to repair it, because I'm, you're, you're garbled.

There goes two faced McCain again. Letting his surrogates do the dirty work for him. At least Rudi would have done his own knee capping.

Next year, in January 2007 Dick Morris lied in a story in The Hill and claimed that Obama voted against Campaign reform in order to create the impression that he was a dirty, cheating politician. Here is Media Matters’ synopsis of the MSM outlets that repeated his lie. These include The Washington Times and U.S. News and World Reports

http://mediamatters.org/items/200701180007

Note that in the earliest days of the effort to soften up Obama, much of the distorting and lying was confined to right wing or conservative publications. This occurred at the same time that the mainstream media was giving him largely positive press. Even some conservative pundits were praising him as Wayne Barrett writes at the Village Voice .

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0811,374100,374100,2.html

This is a very elaborate web of lies, designed to increase Obama’s prestige within the Democratic Party, while creating a sense of unease within the general populous, which will have a greater exposure to the right wing sites than Democrats will. As I have written elsewhere, Republicans have a long history of interfering in Democratic primaries for strategic reasons, and they often follow the lead of party elders to deciding which candidate is “weaker”. That is the purpose of the conservative punditries’ praise, which Democrats should always take with an enormous grain of salt. When Ann Coulter says that she will be voting for Hillary, conservative voters do not take this at face value. They know that this is code.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200703010011
Fox News’ John Gibson cites this story
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=431908&in_page_id=1770
To call Obama a liar when writing about his father. ‘Nuff said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/07/us/politics/07obama.html?ei=5090&en=12e0f2ca4a772e5c&ex=1330923600&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=print
March 7, 2007 The NYT all but call’s Obama a crook over the issue of some stock his investor bought and then sold for him.
Media Matters notes that the TV news tries to make a mountain out of the molehill.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200703070008

Citing a March 7 New York Times article reporting that Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) "bought more than $50,000 worth of stock in two speculative companies whose major investors included some of his biggest political donors," MSNBC News Live anchor Contessa Brewer suggested that the story represented Obama's "first real scandal." Neither Brewer nor her guest, Newsweek senior White House correspondent Richard Wolffe, noted that the Times reported that "there is no evidence that any of actions ended up benefiting either company during the roughly eight months that he owned the stocks," though Wolffe did question whether the story qualified as a "scandal."

The March 7 edition of ABC News' political newsletter, The Note, led with the Times' Obama story, calling it a "front page investigative must-read." According to The Note, one of the "bad signs for Team Obama" is that even though Obama lost $13,000 in the stock deal, "Whitewater lost money too." Absent from The Note's discussion of the potential effect of the Times story on Obama was any acknowledgement that that the several multimillion-dollar investigations into the Clinton-era Whitewater real-estate "scandal" found no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of the Clintons.

Eventually the Washington Post CNN and the The Chicago Tribune would join in on this story, hyped as Obama’s “first scandal”. (Keep in mind that no one ever talks about Keating 5 and that according to one source in Arizona it is a topic that you are not even supposed to bring up in McCain’s presence).

http://mediamatters.org/items/200704100014
April 2007, from Roll Call about a photo of Axelrod and Obama in the Senator’s office.

See, Chicago-based Axelrod is Obama's chief political and media adviser, and the photo was shot in the Senator's Capitol Hill office. Obama, well, he's the guy running for the Democratic presidential nomination as a reformer and a political "outsider." And Congressional ethics rules forbid the use of federal office space for political and campaign activity.
Not that the photo is evidence of any wrongdoing, mind you. Ken Gross, an election law expert, said that while ethics rules are very specific that fundraising activities using federal resources is a no-no, there is no law per se that prohibits talking shop.

Oh, the innuendo.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200704100025
MSNBC gives free publicity in April 2007 to a list of 10 “lies” that the RNC claims that Obama has told. After suggesting that Obama really did lie about speaking Indonesian and about a picture, the shows hosts go on to say

ROBACH: And Lynn, obviously there's -- it's not surprising to know that Republicans are attacking a potential Democratic candidate, but it is pretty early. Can we infer from that early fear? Or is this just setting a media narrative?
SWEET: Both. You're right on both counts. I think it's softening up the front-runner. That's the compliment you get when you're -- you know, when you're on top.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200704250011
April, 2007

On the April 24 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume, chief Washington correspondent Jim Angle claimed that an April 23 Chicago Sun-Times article "alleged Obama did legal work for Rezko that enabled him to get $43 million in government funding to rehab 15 buildings." In fact, the Sun-Times reported that while Obama worked at the law firm that helped Rezko's company, Rezmar, secure the government funding, his role in the Rezmar deals is "unclear," and that Obama's campaign said Obama worked only five hours on Rezmar-related deals. "Senator Obama did not directly represent Mr. Rezko or his firms," according to an email from Obama's staff that the Sun-Times quoted. "He did represent on a very limited basis ventures in which Mr. Rezko's entities participated along with others."
Angle also reported: "Rezko's the same man whose wife bought the lot next door to Obama's house on the same day the senator bought his home, then later sold half that lot to Obama for 1/3 its original value." A December 17, 2006, Washington Post article, however, cited an Obama spokesman in reporting that Obama purchased one-sixth of Rezko's lot and paid Rezko more than double its appraised value because "Obama considered it fair to pay one-sixth of the original price for one-sixth of the lot."

http://mediamatters.org/items/200706140007
June, 2007
The Chicago Sun-Times wrote about an allegation that Obama wrote a letter as a political favor for Rezko, which contradicted a statement Obama had made later. The article included Obama’s rebuttal and explanation. A number of TV news media outlets presented the accusations without Obama’s version of the story.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200706150006
June, 2007
Tucker Carlson lies that Rezko bought Obama a house.

FERGUSON: Well, I think they realize that once Obama stops Hillary, we're going to wish that Hillary will turn around and stop Obama, once we get to know him. You know, this thing -- and we are just getting to know him, that's part of the point of this Times story and why it's so interesting. And it shows why there hasn't really been a serious presidential candidate from Illinois since 1956, Adlai Stevenson. Illinois politics is uniquely corrupt, and anybody who succeeds in it is going to sooner or later wind up in bed with a man like this Rezko fellow. Pols in Illinois keep guys like him around to help with the real estate deal here, maybe to give their cousin a job, or fill up a board seat there. You know, this is -- you can't get away from this in Illinois politics, and nobody has, and sure enough, Barack Obama's one of them.

What gives? I thought that Arkansas was the center of all corruption in the known universe. Now it is Chicago? When did this cataclysmic shift occur, and why weren't we notified until now?

I can not even begin to list all the news media’s lies and distortions about Rezko. I believe they are setting this up to be Obama’s Whitewater in case he gets elected. Whatever he does, he must not appoint a special prosecutor.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/29/AR2007112902229_pf.html
John Solomon writes about a Democratic politician and money. Need I say more?



Big Lie: Obama Uses Dirty Tricks Against His Opponents

As the news media began to ratchet up its smear campaigns against Edwards and Hillary, it also began to increase its lies and innuendos about the Obama campaign being a “typical Chicago-Daley” style organization that was resorting to dirty tricks against its opponents.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200701240008
Jan. 2007. Watch O’Reilly predict that Obama, using Soros money, will attack Hillary using surrogates. Remember that a number of Republican women support the Hillary Clinton campaign. Propaganda like this is designed to make Obama look like a bully in order to alienate women in the general election. The Republican nominee, whoever it is, will act like a perfect gentleman.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/07/18/politics/main3071703.shtml
CBS claims that Obama made snide remarks about Edwards being a phony on the issue of poverty.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200708220002
http://mediamatters.org/items/200708220010
http://mediamatters.org/items/200708220011
Media Matters describes the way that multiple media outlets including the NYTs abridged Michelle’s remarks to 'Our view is that if you can't run your own house, you certainly can't run the White House,' Mrs. Obama said.” This created the impression that she was resorting to dirty tricks campaigning against Hillary by referring to Monica, creating tension between the Obama and Clinton camps. Note the way that TV pundits appear to be cheering Michelle on as if they are watching a prize fight.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/sweet/635462,CST-NWS-sweet05.article
Obama is accused of being hypocritical in demanding to see Hillary’s papers. The paper says that there is a lack of transparency in his campaign (Remember, these are the distorted and unfounded media reports)

http://mediamatters.org/items/200711160006
Obama was asked a question about something he never said during a live debate with Hillary present.

CNN Debate Suzanne MALVEAUX: I'd like to throw that to Senator Obama. Senator Obama, you said in a TV interview just this past weekend you didn't believe that Senator Clinton was able to unite this country. Why do you believe she can't?

( Camera cut to Hillary’s face looking peeved as the question was asked)
Of course, Obama never said any such thing.

http://thepage.time.com/2008/02/19/would-be-first-lady-on-would-be-first-lady-action/
“Would-Be-First-Lady on Would-Be-First-Lady Action” The title says it all. When the primary is a Monster Truck rally, why should we be surprised if the general election is framed as a wrestling match?

This may be the very worst (and potentially most damaging) of the right wing’s smears in the category of Obama is a Corrupt Politician. This story has appeared in the MSM in a very few outlets so far. In the U.S. in Harpers link below. In the UK in the Times and the Telegraph .
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2007/11/hbc-90001616
Basically, we are told that two of the three Democratic presidential campaigns in South Carolina tried to peddle the story that Hillary was having a lesbian affair with an aid. This rumor was started by Michael Mustow of the Village Voice which has since thrown its support for Obama. The story has been all over the right wing bloggo-sphere in the US and at least one poster at DailyKos recently suggested using it to attack Hillary (to general boos). The implication of the Harper’s story is that out of Edwards, Richardson, and Obama, at least two of these three tried to use Hillary is having a Lesbian Affair with a Muslim Aid rumor dirty tricks to score votes in a Bible Belt state. And we all know who expected to come out ahead in South Carolina.
I have been thinking about this story. Look at the sources. Will Folks---former press secretary to a Republican governor, current political consultant---his testimony might as well come from the RNC.”Rod Shealy, a top GOP consultant”, the same. The article is entitled “Not Just Republicans Spreading Rumors About Hillary’s Lesbian Affair” but in fact it is just Republicans spreading rumors—about Hillary being a Lesbian and about Obama and Edwards using the lowest form of dirty tricks.

No wonder the Clinton and Obama camps are at each other’s throats. Divide and Conquer are the GOP’s favorite tools. While sensible Democrats know this, it must be easy to forget this fact during a campaign. Therefore, when Bob Novak publicly accuses Hillary of having dirt on Obama in the middle of the Iowa campaign, Obama does the inexcusable and publicly denounces Hillary as a dirty trickster---costing her votes in Iowa, where dirty tricks are one thing the voters can not tolerate. When Hillary supporters read in Harpers and in the Times UK that Obama supporters are spreading rumors about their candidate being a Lesbian and then they see the numbers in South Carolina, they see red—and vow to fight on at all cost.

As I show in my series “The Press v. Hillary” the news media has spent a lot of time portraying Clinton as a scheming bitch who will do anything to win----cheat, lie, scheme, murder. They have been doing the same thing to Obama, just more subtly. Every time he has responded to a Drudge or Moonie story about “Hillary gave us this photo” or “Hillary said Obama is a Muslim” by lashing out at Hillary, Hillary’s supporters have considered this cold, calculated dirty tricksterism, without considering the possibility that it might represent a lack of experience with the dark side of right wing political CREEPY tricks. Obama has never competed in a race in which Karl Rove took a personal interest. I am not sure that Axelrod has either. By the time this primary is over, both of them should be well acquainted with the enemies’ methods.



I have already discussed the way that the right wing media has crafted Big Lies about Obama’s lack of patriotism, his Muslim origins and his political extremism in the second part of this series. These lies lay the groundwork for John McCain’s campaign to introduce their candidate as an All American, fair minded 100% Christian apple pie munching war hero. And McCain’s old age can be transformed into an asset called experience .

You thought Hillary introduced inexperience into the campaign? Au contraire. The corporate media has been working on the Big Lie Obama is NOT Experienced for a long time now. They latch onto things that the candidate’s say, like Hillary talking about experience, because they fit neatly into Big Lies that are already in the works. That is why issues of substance like economic stimulus packages never get discussed—they do not feed any Big Lies.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200611220002
11-2006 After Obama gave a speech on Iraq, multiple CNN pundits predicted that no one would trust him on the war due to his lack of experience.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200612200003
Dick Morris claimed on Fox that Obama had never introduced a bill 12-2006

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0407/3522.html
When Obama allowed a German ambassador to attend a political event,

A Republican strategist working on the 2008 presidential race differed. The strategist, who declined to be named out of concern for the campaign, called it “a glaring sign of inexperience that he would showcase support from a foreign diplomat.”

http://mediamatters.org/items/200704240006

In discussing the upcoming Democratic presidential debate on the April 24 edition of MSNBC Live, anchor Peter Alexander claimed that "the conventional wisdom on Barack Obama is that he's a great speaker, a terrific orator, but hasn't really been all that specific about policy," and asked Washington Post staff writer Chris Cillizza: "Is his performance likely to be the most scrutinized? Does he have the most to win or lose, perhaps?" Neither Alexander nor Cillizza noted that Obama gave a detailed foreign policy speech the previous day and offered an energy policy proposal on April 20.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200704270001

On the April 26 edition of NBC's Today, during a segment highlighting Sen. Barack Obama's (D-IL) recent "surge" in the polls, chief foreign correspondent Andrea Mitchell said: "Experts say so far Obama has been long on charisma but short on substance." Mitchell then showed clips from two recent appearances by Obama, including an April 23 speech to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs in which he declared, "I still believe that America is the last, best hope on Earth." Following the clips of Obama's statements, a clip of NBC News political director Chuck Todd aired in which Todd asserted: "The public's going to be expecting him to start filling in the blanks, start being for specifics. So far, he's been for an idea of a candidate, but he hasn't been for specific things." However, Mitchell selectively quoted from that April 23 speech to make the claim that Obama's words were "vague" when, in fact, his remarks included many specifics regarding his proposals.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200707120006
On FOX Bill Kristol says neither Hillary nor Obama has passed legislation

http://mediamatters.org/items/200801090009
Limbaugh says you won’t find a Senate bill with Obama’s name on it.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200801110003
Cal Thomas also claims there is no legislation with Obama’s name on it.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200801160014

Summary: Newsweek chief political correspondent Howard Fineman falsely claimed during MSNBC's coverage following the January 15 Democratic presidential candidates debate in Las Vegas that Sen. Barack Obama "admitt that he can't manage his way out of a paper bag while he's running for president of the United States."

http://mediamatters.org/items/200802290002

On the February 28 edition of MSNBC Live, while purporting to assess "who is right" in what anchor Contessa Brewer called a "rapid-fire exchange over Al Qaeda in Iraq" between Sens. Barack Obama and John McCain, MSNBC military analyst Jack Jacobs asserted, "Obama doesn't know what he's talking about," and stated, "I think it would be useful if he found out what was actually going on." But in supporting his claims, Jacobs misquoted what Obama said about Al Qaeda in Iraq during the February 26 Democratic presidential debate, falsely claiming that Obama said: "I think if there's Al Qaeda in Iraq, we'll go in -- we'll go back in there." In fact, what Obama said during the debate was, "if Al Qaeda is forming a base in Iraq, then we will have to act in a way that secures the American homeland and our interests abroad. So that is true, I think, not just in Iraq, but that's true in other places. That's part of my argument with respect to Pakistan." At no point did he say, as Jacobs -- and McCain himself -- suggested, that Al Qaeda does not currently have a presence in Iraq.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200803040006

Summary: On Fox News, Frank Luntz told a focus group regarding Sen. Barack Obama: "But let's face it. He doesn't have foreign policy experience. He hasn't run a government, he hasn't run a business. Doesn't that concern you?"

Note that GE/MNBC/Newsweek/NBC, aka the Pentagon’s News Network has joined the right wing news media is promoting the Big Lie that Obama is NOT Experienced . They plan to use this to old man John McCain’s advantage this fall. Since Republican’s hate Hillary much more than they do Obama, the opinion of someone like Jack Jacobs is going to have a lot more weight with them than Clinton.


That concludes my three part (so far) journal about the ongoing news media attack against the Democratic Primary. The big fat liars (and dupes and self aggrandizing artistes) of the press corp have done a heckofa job of dividing and conquering this party. John Edwards, showing the good sense one would expect from a plaintiff’s attorney, got out of the race before they could do irreparable damage to his character. Hillary, with her fighting Irish blood, with probably end up like the victims of British imperialism of Yeats’ famous poem---

http://www.angelfire.com/in/pdutta/easter1916.html

Easter 1916
W. B. Yeats
I have met them at close of day
Coming with vivid faces
From counter or desk among grey
Eighteenth-century houses.
I have passed with a nod of the head
Or polite meaningless words,
Or have lingered awhile and said
Polite meaningless words,
And thought before I had done
Of a mocking tale or a gibe
To please a companion
Around the fire at the club,
Being certain that they and I
But lived where motley is worn:
All changed, changed utterly:
A terrible beauty is born.

That woman's days were spent
In ignorant good will,
Her nights in argument
Until her voice grew shrill.
What voice more sweet than hers
When young and beautiful,
She rode to harriers?
This man had kept a school
And rode our winged horse.
This other his helper and friend
Was coming into his force;
He might have won fame in the end,
So sensitive his nature seemed,
So daring and sweet his thought.
This other man I had dreamed
A drunken, vain-glorious lout.
He had done most bitter wrong
To some who are near my heart,
Yet I number him in the song;
He, too, has resigned his part
In the casual comedy;
He, too, has been changed in his turn,
Transformed utterly:
A terrible beauty is born.

Hearts with one purpose alone
Through summer and winter, seem
Enchanted to a stone
To trouble the living stream.
The horse that comes from the road,
The rider, the birds that range
From cloud to tumbling cloud,
Minute by minute change.
A shadow of cloud on the stream
Changes minute by minute;
A horse-hoof slides on the brim;
And a horse plashes within it
Where long-legged moor-hens dive
And hens to moor-cocks call.
Minute by minute they live:
The stone's in the midst of all.

Too long a sacrifice
Can make a stone of the heart.
O when may it suffice?
That is heaven's part, our part
To murmur name upon name,
As a mother names her child
When sleep at last has come
On limbs that had run wild.
What is it but nightfall?
No, no, not night but death.
Was it needless death after all?
For England may keep faith
For all that is done and said.
We know their dream; enough
To know they dreamed and are dead.
And what if excess of love
Bewildered them till they died?
I write it out in a verse --
MacDonagh and MacBride
And Connolly and Pearse
Now and in time to be,
Wherever green is worn,
Are changed, changed utterly:
A terrible beauty is born.

A terrible, beautiful name, to be spoken of as a sacrifice, but “Too long a sacrifice can make a stone of the heart O when may it suffice?”

Obama is going to win this fall, no matter what Karl Rove does. However, it is going to be an ugly battle, and the press will try to paint his win as a loss and their lies as truths, as they plot and scheme for 2012.

I hope to God that once he is in office, the Obama FCC and the Democratic Congress have the balls to tear apart the media conglomerates that have turned the art of journalism in America into one great big propaganda racket. However, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The MSM will offer President Obama all the power he could ever want through its loving, positive depiction of his message and goals---if he just agrees to a nice game of I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine.

[AX10]

1. kick

[Jim Sagle]

2. Actually they won't. They didn't do it for Clinton and they won't do it for Obama.

Even the telecommunications act signed by Clinton was not enough to sway the media in his favor. Their story is that Dems suck and Pugs rawk, and they're sticking to it.

[McCamy Taylor]

3. Yeah, but with Clinton do not forget Linda Tripp and Bush Sr.'s vendetta.

The Bush cabal intended all along to make the Clintons' pay for what they did to the Bush Dynasty. A few very powerful interests combined with the health insurance industry to create the conspiracy that hounded them.

In Obama's case, he starts out pretty clean. As long as he does not prosecute Dumbya, the Bush family will like him just fine.

And big business in this country has been more than willing to work with both sides of the aisle. Gore Vidal and Noam Chomsky are both correct when they say that our two party system is actually one party which represents the same money interests just with different voting bases. Unless we ever get full franchise, we will always be controlled by those with the money.

[charakter]

4. But if Hillary protests about the media...she's just whining!

Oh, the hypocrisy.

[McCamy Taylor]

5. That is why I have hopes for Obama. So far he is pretty good at calling them out.

That takes a real talent.

Like here

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0207/2711.html

Barack Obama used his first news conference after announcing his run for president to accuse the media of ignoring his substantive record and falsely depicting him as a lightweight.

"The problem's not that the info's not out there," he said of his record on policy issues. "The problem is that that's not what you guys have been reporting on. You've been reporting on how I look in a swimsuit."

Obama's peevish comment reflected an ambivalent relationship with the national media, rooted in his transformation from an obscure Chicago politician into a bona fide celebrity over just 2 1/2 years. Obama has been the subject of almost entirely favorable coverage from the national media, and his aides acknowledge that he's parlayed that new profile into his presidential campaign. But Obama also espouses a new brand of politics aimed at transcending the celebrity obsessions and superficiality promoted by modern 24-hour news cycles.

If he can out talk the press,he has it made.

[McCamy Taylor]

6. Here we go again. This attorney-client privilege story stinks of a MSM attempt to get Bill's penis

in the news in a round about way.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5268170&mesg_id=5268170

The corporate media will pretend they are talking about some lawyer that worked for the Clintons and now works for Obama who is facing questions of whether he is violating attorney client privilege, but the real issue is that he defended Clinton in front of Congress during the Impeachment.

Hillary supporters do not go there. Obama supporters do not go there. It is probably too late anyway. I am willing to bet that someone in the RNC has already filed a complaint with a law board so that the press can report on it and start a big round of talking about the famed Clinton penis. They have been wanting to do this ever since Hillary decided to run.

[brindis_desala]

7. Good work. Note that McCain is given a total free ride.

meanwhile Democrats get emotional and self-destruct. Judas! Liar! Racist!
We need to GROW UP. This fight ain't gonna be pretty.

[The Wizard]

8. As long as those who own the media

are in the tank for Republicans, honest news reporting is "off the table." The media owners hold compensatory power over those whose paychecks they sign. Every Republican mouth piece is programmed to repeat Karl Rove's talking points. Their lively hoods are reliant on lying for cash.
There are a few who refuse to presstitute themselves, but by and large they the exceptions to the Zeitgeist.
The Republican Party has a strangle hold on the news, just as the Communist Party did in the Soviet Union.
Always use the term Republican Party in the same context with communist totalitarians; there really is no difference.

[Jakes Progress]

9. Good Post.

Thank you McCamy. Nobody here does it better.