See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #101
   On July 28th, 2008 at 4:09 pm, nyk said:

   Um you do realize that those media outlets have been rougher on Obama.

   I saw that earlier today. I actually was curious about the group that conducted the study (CMPA) too, so I dug a little and found this:

   The media watchdog group Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) has challenged CMPA’s non-partisan claim, based on the argument that much of its funding has come from conservative sources, and that its founder, Dr. S. Robert Lichter, once held a chair in mass communications at the American Enterprise Institute and was a FOX News contributor.

   Just kind of interesting, I thought. Not a source I’d expect to be forthcoming with these findings.

   Obama and Company are banking on people’s stupidity and his cult of celebrity personality to carry him to the White House. Unfortunately, the odds are in his favor. Just try talking to one of the millions of people with their noses buried in People or Us about Obama’s relationship with Jeremiah Wright or Bill Ayers, his foreign policy flubs on Iran or his flip-flops on the surge, and you’ll see what I mean.

   I actually consistently find out about tabloid/lightweight coverage of Obama here, on this site. Since no one I knows reads People (I don’t know how it stays in business) or watches Access Hollywood, I’d guess they’re voting for him…because they actually AGREE WITH HIS POLICIES. What’s more, they’re aware of the egregious (to quote) “foreign policy flubs”…made by McCain. I understand this may be a difficult notion to struggle with when your political opinions are diametrically opposed to his (and all kidding aside, it’s the same frustrated and disbelieving feeling I and everyone I know felt in 2000 and, even more so, in 2004) but people support candidates they’re on the same page with. Maybe you sincerely believe that the people who support Obama are wholly uninformed, but that isn’t true. They just…well, disagree with you politically. A lot.

2. #102
   On July 28th, 2008 at 4:10 pm, Scooter36 said:

   Sono, if Obama starts a couple of wars under false pretenses and the economy tanks on his watch, you can go right ahead and work for his impeachment like you are for GW’s, thats assuming you aren’t a hypocrite (doubtful).

   quit your whining Atheling

3. #103
   On July 28th, 2008 at 4:11 pm, atheling said:

   LOL, scooter, you use that word “whining” a lot.

   I think you really don’t know what it means, do you?

   Now go back and oil that skateboard.

4. #104
   On July 28th, 2008 at 4:13 pm, ArizonaNeanderthal said:

   On July 28th, 2008 at 3:23 pm, lgm said:
   BlameAmericaLast (#81) and BarryF (#85): Most highly educated people support Obama, not all.

   I have heard that; I do not believe it. I am sure a study can be found to prove it.I am sure a study can be found to prove we descended from alien seed (lgm) and another to prove Al Gore invented the internet.
   Now if lgm were to factor out the degrees in Ethnic Studies, Political Science, Gender Studies, Basket Weaving and all sorts of other BS degrees his minority MOST would be smaller yet. Yes lgm you may only consider people who can read and write and put on clean underwear more than once a week.

   Back in the late sixties one of the news magazines ran an article on how a study proved most returning Viet Nam vets were druggies. When challenged they backed off yesterday. Seems Liberals lied about studies even back then. I have a study that proved it. (o;

   —
   Allah be Praised
   Allie OOP OOP 2

5. #105
   On July 28th, 2008 at 4:22 pm, BlameAmericaLast said:

   BlameAmericaLast (#81) and BarryF (#85): Most highly educated people support Obama, not all. Sean Hannity is a journalist who supports McCain. You two are college graduates who support McCain.

   Really? Where did you get those “facts”?

6. #106
   On July 28th, 2008 at 4:22 pm, Concerned Citizen said:

   On July 28th, 2008 at 2:34 pm, sonofdy said:
   TOS, you can believe the media about the media or you can follow the money, your choice.

   He’ll believe the media because that’s what the tv tells him to do.

7. #107
   On July 28th, 2008 at 4:27 pm, sonofdy said:

   if Obama starts a couple of wars under false pretenses and the economy tanks on his watch

   I will wait for nothing. If elected I will start on day one to get him impeached.

8. #108
   On July 28th, 2008 at 4:30 pm, DBNinKY said:

   LGM said, trying in vain to convince himself that B. Hussein Obama actually has a chance in this fall’s election:
   

   He has a happy family (unlike Reagan).

   Funny, I don’t remember any of the Reagans having the initials “L.G.M.” I mean, unless he is a member of the Reagan family how would he know if they were happy or not?

   Oh, now I get it. Apparently LGM’s into trashy, dime store novels and read that poorly researched, numb-skulled piece of garbage about Nancy Reagan that came out a few years ago. Keep reading those classics, lgm!

9. #109
   On July 28th, 2008 at 4:36 pm, TheOtherSide said:

   On July 28th, 2008 at 3:49 pm, abstractmind said:

   TOS,
   If i approach the data from a neutral point, and just simply go by the numbers, it would appear that there is a rather large bias from the media in that direction. I find it hard to believe that someone who normally makes a good argument to brush off the numbers as not being convincing enough to frame an argument on this one. I would encourage you to open up a little more, re-read the numbers, and see it from that angle.

   So by the numbers am I also to deduce that Fox is more to the left than CNN:

   Fox: $40,573 to Dems / $0 to Reps
   Fox News/Fox News Channel: $1,280 / $0

   CNN: $2,286 / $1,250

   Just because journalist donate to one-side or the other does not mean that can’t do their job objectively and professionally. I’m a liberal, but I don’t put a liberal bias into the work which I do…I’ve watched numerous sporing events where the sportscaster was a former member of on of the teams, yet he was able to be objected. It’s called professionalism. I’ll take what comes of their mouths, more than what comes out of their wallets.

10. #110
    On July 28th, 2008 at 4:38 pm, DBNinKY said:

    Now if lgm were to factor out the degrees in Ethnic Studies, Political Science, Gender Studies, Basket Weaving and all sorts of other BS degrees his minority MOST would be smaller yet.

    Too true, A.N! I think all those liberal arts majors are misinterpreting the terminology on their degrees and are taking it literally in terms of their voting. The poor things!

11. #111
    On July 28th, 2008 at 4:54 pm, nyk said:

    I mean, unless he is a member of the Reagan family how would he know if they were happy or not? Oh, now I get it. Apparently LGM’s into trashy, dime store novels and read that poorly researched, numb-skulled piece of garbage about Nancy Reagan that came out a few years ago. Keep reading those classics, lgm!

    This is really not that important, but since you bring it up: Patti and Ron Reagan are the ones who insist their family was unhappy. Publicly. And quite often, actually.

    Just sayin’.

12. #112
    On July 28th, 2008 at 4:57 pm, sonofdy said:

    So obama is for using his family to score political points AFTER he said they couldn’t be used to score political points.

13. #113
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:01 pm, JT said:

    nyk,

    CMPA’s non-partisan claim. Is just that a claim. I wouldn’t trust it over what I’ve actually seen with my own eyes.

    As far as flubs… Obama is the pro.

    Most Obama supporters are woefully uninformed, because they are spoon fed talking points by the MSM. They don’t know how dangerous a man with 143 days of experience, and incubated by the corrupt Chicago machine, will be as president.

    2000 was Gore’s to win, he just screwed it up. He didn’t use Clinton. He tried to distance himself from the Clinton problems. The right use of Clinton would have put him over the top. He didn’t run a good race, it was his to lose.

    2004 Kerry was a poor choice of nominee. Big time flip flopper, fragged himself in the ass, couldn’t do anything w/o running a poll first. He was just a dope.

    Bush was beatable. He’s not true to conservative values. He’ll be good on the war, then bad on immigration.

    Obama is Kerry w/o the govt experience. He is scary bad. He believes in nothing and everything at the same time. Whatever the polls say he’ll do, he has no core values. He’ll ruin healthcare. He ruin the military. He create more government, while anyone with a brain can see we need less government.

    Obama is the affirmative action candidate. He’s not qualified. Period.

14. #114
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:01 pm, mistressjustice said:

    On July 28th, 2008 at 2:55 pm, lgm said:
    “
    

    Bias” toward Obama goes with education level. People with graduate school degrees (like most journalists) who follow the news (like most journalists) favor Obama by a wide margin.

    Good point LGM.

15. #115
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:02 pm, JT said:

    nyk,

    Patti and Ron needed to grow up.

16. #116
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:04 pm, JT said:

    The Reagan other two children were fine.

17. #117
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:06 pm, JT said:

    I’ve lived through Jimmy Carter. I don’t want to do it again.

18. #118
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:07 pm, sonofdy said:

    Bias” toward Obama goes with education level. People with graduate school degrees (like most journalists) who follow the news (like most journalists) favor Obama by a wide margin.

    Good point LGM.

    No, actualy it is a really bad point because as LGM himself admited, college professors are clueless outside thier fields and he has no data to back up the statement anyway.

19. #119
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:12 pm, mistressjustice said:

    If elected I will start on day one to get him impeached.

    Grounds?

    What grounds do you see coming? Who will be the the Denny K of the elephants, pathetically trying the impeachment game over and over and over?
    How about representative Dan Burton? Senator Larry Craig?

    Speaking of predictions, I’m sure that Michelle Malkin, Rush, Schnitt and Hannity already have their voter fraud articles written as a template. They will polish them up, and publish them the morning after Obama’s victory. )) BDS will have nothing on the 8yrs of ODS, we’ll have to deal with down the road. It’s gonna get ugly.

20. #120
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:14 pm, atheling said:

    Ya know, Woodrow Wilson was a college professor. Academic.

    And he was one of the most egregious violators of the First Amendment in our history. Read Liberal Fascism to find out what his administration did.

    Ivory tower elites make the worst leaders.

    BTW, JT, another reason why Kerry lost was because he was a sourpuss. Who wanted to vote for Lurch?

21. #121
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:17 pm, JT said:

    When Dennis Miller said that Kerry could always go back to his side job on Easter Island, I fell off the couch.

22. #122
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:19 pm, FirstSkirt said:

    LGM’s comments about people with college educations being more enlightened, struck me as condescending, patronizing, and elitist. This is exactly the way the vast majority of liberals think. Anyone without initials after their name is a dumb jerk. LGM, please do the right thing, and just shut up!!

23. #123
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:24 pm, sonofdy said:

    misstressjustice:Grounds?

    What grounds do you see coming? Who will be the the Denny K of the elephants, pathetically trying the impeachment game over and over and over?

    I will do exactly what you guys did to bush. If he wins I will will show him no respect in or out of uniform because marxists like him deserve none.

24. #124
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:28 pm, TheOtherSide said:

    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:24 pm, sonofdy said:
    I will do exactly what you guys did to bush.

    Did we start on day one to get him impeached?

    On July 28th, 2008 at 4:27 pm, sonofdy said:
    If elected I will start on day one to get him impeached.

25. #125
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:29 pm, Stillwaiting said:

    Even the Daily Show and the Colbert Report recognize and acknowledge the bias displayed by the media towards Obama. To claim the bias is related to education level is to admit the bias exists–which means the MSM is NOT doing its job.

26. #126
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:34 pm, atheling said:

    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:17 pm, JT said:

    When Dennis Miller said that Kerry could always go back to his side job on Easter Island, I fell off the couch

    ROFL!!!

27. #127
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:35 pm, sonofdy said:

    Did we start on day one to get him impeached?

    Yes.

28. #128
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:38 pm, TheOtherSide said:

    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:35 pm, sonofdy said:

    Did we start on day one to get him impeached?

    Yes.

    This must be the type of revisionist history you tried to pass by Wikipedia.

29. #129
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:42 pm, alaskangrizzly said:

    Speaking of predictions, I’m sure that Michelle Malkin, Rush, Schnitt and Hannity already have their voter fraud articles written as a template. They will polish them up, and publish them the morning after Obama’s victory.

    Ummm, earth to the foolish. ACORN ring a bell? Convictions on voter fraud? Helloooo?

    ACORN – real voter fraud by Democrats that is still occurring on a nearly weekly basis (and being covered quite well on this blog).
    Hanging chads in Florida – fake voter fraud where moonbats to this day claim Bush “stole” the presidency.

    P.S. My brothers and sisters, and their spouses all have graduate degrees in science and medicine and vote… conservative. I know it’s a shocker for you that people actually want to follow the Constitution and want smaller government, less taxes and pork, financial responsibilty, and less people sucking off the government teat.

30. #130
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:43 pm, spackle said:

    Yet another reason to re-think the right to vote for certain individuals. I think voters should have to take a written test every four years on current events and certain American history that would weed out the idiots. It is win win. Those who fail? Gone. Those to lazy to take the test? Gone.

31. #131
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:45 pm, sonofdy said:

    This must be the type of revisionist history you tried to pass by Wikipedia.

    http://www.mywire.com/pubs/uExpress/2001/01/18/561765?extID=10051
    http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/2001/01/21/2001-01-21_bush_pledges_a_united_u_s__p.html
    http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/2001/01/21/2001-01-21_scores_of_protesters_jeer__c.html
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/02/12/antidubya_protest_organised_via_net/
    http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-79490669.html

    Do your own leg work from now on.

32. #132
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:46 pm, lgm said:

    FirstSkirt said (#121):

    LGM’s comments about people with college educations being more enlightened, …

    LGM did not say this. People with more education tend to support Obama (most, not all). People with more awareness tend to support Obama (most, not all).

    Even rich people in Connecticut with much to lose from Obama tax hikes are starting to support Obama. Bush has lowered their taxes but his economic mismanagement has made them poorer.

33. #133
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:47 pm, sonofdy said:

    And yes I did spam a wikipedia page. in 2007, get over yourself tos and stop pretending like you won something, because so far today you are scoring about a zero.

34. #134
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:49 pm, mistressjustice said:

    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:19 pm, FirstSkirt said:

    F.S.
    I think LGM is just reporting on polls showing that people who have achieved the highest level of eduation are voting Democratic, and for Obama in particular. I don’t pretend to read his mind, but I don’t see it as a condescending slam. In the primaries, more highly “educated” people voted for Obama over Hillary. It just the facts, for better or worse. The media is generally pretty educated.

    Of course I’m not talking about college dropouts like Rush and Hannity. (Harmless cheapshot, don’t take it personal).

35. #135
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:55 pm, atheling said:

    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:46 pm, lgm said:

    People with more awareness tend to support Obama (most, not all).

    “Awareness”? How about “awareness” of your banality?

    Buehler? Buehler? Buehler?

36. #136
    On July 28th, 2008 at 6:00 pm, mistressjustice said:

    Stage 1- Claim voter fraud and try to litigate the election results.

    Stage 2- Try for an unprecedent pre-inaugural recall election.

    Stage 3- Blame McCain

    Stage 4- Blame the media.

    Stage 5- Blame McCain.
    It’s gonna get ugly.

    .S. My brothers and sisters, and their spouses all have graduate degrees in science and medicine and vote… conservative. I know it’s a shocker for you that people actually want to follow the Constitution and want smaller government, less taxes and pork, financial responsibilty, and less people sucking off the government teat.

    What do you want a cookie??? Congrats on your educated family, if a congrats is what you are waiting for.

    Dude it’s not an exact science, and of course there are exceptions. I’m just talking about voting trends. It doesn’t mean that ALL of you McCain supporters and conservatives in general ride the short, yellow bus. Which reminds me, dakine, brah, dakine. Relax.

37. #137
    On July 28th, 2008 at 6:00 pm, TheOtherSide said:

    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:47 pm, sonofdy said:
    stop pretending like you won something, because so far today you are scoring about a zero

    It’s not about trying to win anything. It about exposing the truth. And yes part of that truth is that you are a hatemonger, espousing the rhetoric and falsehoods perpetuated by theright-wing punditry. Why do you have so much anger?

38. #138
    On July 28th, 2008 at 6:02 pm, atheling said:

    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:49 pm,
    

    mistressjustice said:
    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:19 pm,

    I think LGM is just reporting on polls showing that people who have achieved the highest level of eduation are voting Democratic, and for Obama in particular. I don’t pretend to read his mind, but I don’t see it as a condescending slam. In the primaries, more highly “educated” people voted for Obama over Hillary. It just the facts, for better or worse. The media is generally pretty educated.

    I think the stats just indicate that “education” these days means nothing. Actually, it means libtard brainwashing.

    What is an “education”, pray tell? Might it mean to be in possession of facts? If so, why is it that my neighbor’s college-graduate-with-honors daughter can’t locate New Zealand on a globe? Why can’t an honors high school student of 16 years tell me who John Adams was?

    Why is it that a high school teacher walks into a bookstore, glances up to see a framed photo of a bombed out bookstore, with the caption: “Under Siege: London, 1940-1945″, and asks, “What happened?”

    Yeah. Really well educated. Educated IDIOTS.

    But I bet they have good “self esteem”. /sarc

39. #139
    On July 28th, 2008 at 6:03 pm, simcoe said:

    Gag me with a spoon!

    I’m curious about who’s running the show for this political dufus?

    I’m against everything he stands for, but I’m also a bit impressed by how he’s being presented. While at the same time a bit concerned that those with too much air up there and live in, like, a fantasy world may actually carry the day against intelligent thought.

    Perhaps he should select Paris Hilton or Brittney for VP.

40. #140
    On July 28th, 2008 at 6:10 pm, DBNinKY said:

    NYK said: “…Patti and Ron Reagan are the ones who insist their family was unhappy.”

    With all deference to President and Mrs. Reagan and their parenting skills, I don’t believe a thing Patti and Ron, JR say about their family. Michael Reagan has contradicted a lot of what those two claim was an unhappy family, and he’s a reliable source not out to make a buck “spilling the beans.”.

    Hollywood/famous families are notorious for writing tell-alls on one another, whether true or not, so I’ve come to discount them as unfounded.

    For example, I use to believe Christina “Mommie Dearest” Crawford was being honest about her alleged battles with Mom Joan Crawford but now that Christina’s also adopted sibilings are denouncing such claims with a book of their own, I’m less than convinced.

41. #141
    On July 28th, 2008 at 6:11 pm, mistressjustice said:

    The magazine cover is a beautiful family photo. It’s a very well-done shot. Kudos to the photographer and editor.

42. #142
    On July 28th, 2008 at 6:19 pm, John Ansell said:

    mistressjustice #139, I agree, it must have taken the editor days to touch up that pic to make them look good. Days, I’m telling ya.

43. #143
    On July 28th, 2008 at 6:25 pm, Ron Rockstar said:

    On July 28th, 2008 at 6:00 pm, TheOtherSide said:……..Why do you have so much anger?

    Probably because you come here just to argue. You are kind of like, the ex-wife to humanity. You’re not a good troll, or at least a fun troll. I also believe your real career is Googlologist. I’m not impressed.

44. #144
    On July 28th, 2008 at 6:29 pm, atheling said:

    On July 28th, 2008 at 6:25 pm, Ron Rockstar said:

    On July 28th, 2008 at 6:00 pm, TheOtherSide said:……..Why do you have so much anger?

    Probably because you come here just to argue. You are kind of like, the ex-wife to humanity. You’re not a good troll, or at least a fun troll. I also believe your real career is Googlologist. I’m not impressed

    LOL, thanks for the laugh, Ron. I have to say that your comments always crack me up. Witty!

45. #145
    On July 28th, 2008 at 6:36 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    They did everything but pick their noses for the cameras to show their Real People bona fides.

    It’s a trick I use to introduce myself to strangers. They never want to shake hands though.

46. #146
    On July 28th, 2008 at 6:38 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    One big difference between Brangelina and BaracoChelle. Brangelina have adopted African orphans, and have a mixed race family…

47. #147
    On July 28th, 2008 at 6:38 pm, Ron Rockstar said:

    I ignore the flies as long as I can, atheling. Then I just have to start swattin.

48. #148
    On July 28th, 2008 at 7:37 pm, John Ansell said:

    Wow Ron Rockstar, what did a fly ever do to you to make you insult them so much?

49. #149
    On July 28th, 2008 at 8:26 pm, CO2 Producer said:

    Good post, Michelle. Not because you cite a People Magazine article, but because you called out our “dumbed-down, celebrity-obsessed culture.” I wish more people would talk about our dumb culture more often.

    Too many people are rude, petty, selfish, and ignorant. Moving my car’s gear stick out of “PARK” confirms this to me every day. Not everyone is this way (or maybe we all are to different degrees), but the problems appear more prevalent now than they were when I was younger. This age of technology probably has something to do with my perception, though.

    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:46 pm, lgm said:

    FirstSkirt said (#121):
    LGM’s comments about people with college educations being more enlightened, …

    LGM did not say this.

    CO2 Producer thinks that he should start referring to himself in the third person.

    Sorry, CO2 couldn’t resist.

    Yep. That family portrait’s going to look good on the Oval Office desk. Better yet, just rip the cover off and stick it in a frame. That’ll look great. “My fellow Americans…”

50. #150
    On July 28th, 2008 at 8:38 pm, CO2 Producer said:

    I just noticed the man-mother in the upper right corner of the cover next to Michelle O.

    Rich.

51. #151
    On July 28th, 2008 at 10:55 pm, JT said:

    On July 28th, 2008 at 6:11 pm, mistressjustice said:

    The magazine cover is a beautiful family photo. It’s a very well-done shot. Kudos to the photographer and editor.

    Meet the elitists. They are better and smarter than you. Why… because they say so.

    Yack!

    How you “educated” people can vote for someone this unqualified baffles the intelligent independent thinker like me.

    Oh I know he’s black. Automatically qualified after 143 days, in which he did nothing. Color is an automatic qualifier. He’s no Jackie Robinson (I’d vote for Jackie), he’s Nipsy Russell.

52. #152
    On July 29th, 2008 at 12:27 am, Dimsdale said:

    On July 28th, 2008 at 1:45 pm, TheOtherSide said:

    On July 28th, 2008 at 1:43 pm, WestCoastCoconut said:
    Thanks to CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, and UNIVISION!!!

    Um you do realize that those media outlets have been rougher on Obama.

    and..

    On July 28th, 2008 at 2:46 pm, TheOtherSide said:

    On July 28th, 2008 at 2:34 pm, WestCoastCoconut said:

    Is this include all the controversy he has generated during the primary? or just the last month?

    The article claims that the study was done from June 8 to June 21.

    From the referenced article by UPI:

    The researchers found that most statements by anchors and reporters were neutral, but when opinions were expressed 28 percent of statements about Obama were positive while 72 percent were negative. The study indicated opinions about McCain were 43 percent positive and 57 percent negative.

    I guess my objection comes from the fact that reporters and anchors are expressing any opinion at all. If they want to opine, they should write some commentary on the editorial page.
    Robert Lichter, the director of the Center for Media and Public Affairs, has been a preferred source of data among conservatives, the Times said.

    “This information should blow away this silly assumption that more coverage is always better coverage,” he told the newspaper.

    The study is based on an analysis of content beginning June 8, the day after New York Sen. Hillary Clinton conceded the race for the Democratic nomination to Obama, and ending June 21, as Obama embarked on a trip to the Middle East, Afghanistan and several European capitals.

    So much for UPI accuracy. Obama went abroad in July, if I recall correctly. Now the actual end date for the study is in question. Why is this important? It is unclear what effect Hillary supporters in the press will have on the study results.

    On July 28th, 2008 at 2:55 pm, lgm said:

    “Bias” toward Obama goes with education level and how informed you are. McCain leads among people without high school diplomas who don’t know what continent Iraq is in. People with graduate school degrees (like most journalists) who follow the news (like most journalists) favor Obama by a wide margin.

    Well, if the journalists are liberals, it hardly matters that they have higher degrees. I have a Ph.D., and I find even the most cursory of examinations of Obama’s qualifications, and an objective parsing of his speeches (both teleprompted and not) and interviews both indicate that his qualifications are virtually non existent. He has no executive experience. Not much senatorial experience either. He is running on a smile. Older and wiser people see this and tend towards McCain.

    McCain may not be my first choice either, but he has a track record that can be examined and used to predict his future performance (like it or not). Obama does not. He is a cipher.

    What makes the People coverage dangerous to Republicans is that the Republican strategy is to paint Obama as somehow weird “not like us”. Except for his enormous talent and ambition, he is like us. He has a happy family (unlike Reagan).

    Ambition, yes, but what is your evidence for “enormous talent?” I believe that the Republicans are using his inexperience to criticize him, not his “not like us” (are you saying black?) qualities. Everyone is too afraid of being labeled a racist to criticize him on much else than his experience or lack thereof.

    On July 28th, 2008 at 4:09 pm, nyk said:

    I actually consistently find out about tabloid/lightweight coverage of Obama here, on this site. Since no one I knows reads People (I don’t know how it stays in business) or watches Access Hollywood, I’d guess they’re voting for him…because they actually AGREE WITH HIS POLICIES. What’s more, they’re aware of the egregious (to quote) “foreign policy flubs”…made by McCain. I understand this may be a difficult notion to struggle with when your political opinions are diametrically opposed to his (and all kidding aside, it’s the same frustrated and disbelieving feeling I and everyone I know felt in 2000 and, even more so, in 2004) but people support candidates they’re on the same page with. Maybe you sincerely believe that the people who support Obama are wholly uninformed, but that isn’t true. They just…well, disagree with you politically. A lot.

    The remark about “Since no one I knows reads People (I don’t know how it stays in business) or watches Access Hollywood, I’d guess they’re voting for him…because they actually AGREE WITH HIS POLICIES” is humorous. It kind of parallels the Pauline Kael quote where she could not understand how Nixon won, because “nobody I know voted for him.”

    I fully expect a little less than half of the country to vote for Obama simply because he is a Democrat. Likewise for McCain. I doubt a very high percentage has the slightest clue what his policies are other than “hope and change” which may be enough for many.

    The more serious problem comes from their stated awareness of “egregious foreign policy flubs”…made by McCain. Are they likewise aware of Obama’s considerably more egregious (and sometimes outright dangerous) foreign policy flubs and gaffes? Probably not, because these “unread” tabloids don’t report them, or do so minimally. It has already been demonstrated that Obama gets considerably more coverage than McCain (see Howard Kurtz), and given the political predilection of the press, the preponderance is positive for him. Sure, they are shamed into occasionally being critical of Obama, but the impression is generally more positive for Obama, by either commission or omission.

    TOS points out (top of this comment) the only study I have heard of that states that the press is being harder on Obama. I noted that the dates of the study are in question, so the influence of “burned” Hillary voters in the press ranks has to be considered.

    On July 28th, 2008 at 4:36 pm, TheOtherSide said:

    On July 28th, 2008 at 3:49 pm, abstractmind said:

    So by the numbers am I also to deduce that Fox is more to the left than CNN:

    Fox: $40,573 to Dems / $0 to Reps
    Fox News/Fox News Channel: $1,280 / $0

    CNN: $2,286 / $1,250

    Wouldn’t that be a kicker!

    Just because journalist donate to one-side or the other does not mean that can’t do their job objectively and professionally. I’m a liberal, but I don’t put a liberal bias into the work which I do…I’ve watched numerous sporing events where the sportscaster was a former member of on of the teams, yet he was able to be objected. It’s called professionalism. I’ll take what comes of their mouths, more than what comes out of their wallets.

    Well, it depends on what you do. If you have anything to do with relating the activities/policies etc. of politician to the public, then it might be a factor that colors your reporting. If you are a carpenter, it probably won’t be an issue.

    It is the very professionalism of the press that is in question. The average “uninvolved until November” joe probably thinks that if it is reported or printed, it must be true (tabloids included to some degree. We all know that is not true, no matter which side of the aisle you align yourself with. The most egregious example: the Rather document fabrication about Bush, i.e. the “fake but accurate” TANG documentation.

    On July 28th, 2008 at 5:46 pm, lgm said:

    FirstSkirt said (#121):

    LGM’s comments about people with college educations being more enlightened, …

    LGM did not say this. People with more education tend to support Obama (most, not all). People with more awareness tend to support Obama (most, not all).

    “Awareness?” How do you explain that without being labeled an elitist?

    Even rich people in Connecticut with much to lose from Obama tax hikes are starting to support Obama. Bush has lowered their taxes but his economic mismanagement has made them poorer.

    Actually, people in CT are poorer due to hideous tax policies put in place by the liberal legislature in this bluest of states. To wit: the highest gas taxes in the country. It is driving people (workers) out of the state. Why would these rich people you speak of support a man that promises to make them less wealthy in the long run (the economy goes up and down regardless of who is in office)?

53. #153
    On July 29th, 2008 at 12:30 am, Dimsdale said:

    TOS:

    Here is a thought: double blind reporting!

54. #154
    On July 29th, 2008 at 8:57 am, misterbee241 said:

    Obama and Company are banking on people’s stupidity and his cult of celebrity personality to carry him to the White House.

    It worked for Clinton – twice. The only thing those idiots care about is “change” like that young airhead I overheard on a plane last week. A 20 year old artist. Any surprise she’s a liberal?

55. #155
    On July 29th, 2008 at 10:57 am, FirstSkirt said:

    Mistress Justice #133: You display your liberal bias by defending the despicable remarks of LGM. You claim he (she/it?) is just reporting what polls say. What polls? Define them. Just because you don’t see his comments as condescending doesn’t mean they aren’t. Show me the link on your statement about how “highly educated” people voted for Hussein O in the primaries. You claimed this as fact–and if your link is from the Washington Post or the New York Times, then credibility goes right out the window! Also, you sleazy comment about Rush and Hannity is contemptible for someone who claims to be among the intellectual elite (Obama supporters). Just spare me….your selfserving jabs at two people who have achieved professional success in publishing and broadcasting is childish. Here in Colorado, Colo Univ. doesn’t have a single conservative faculty member, so don’t you tell me that “highly educated” people are more aware of the issues–many of them only know what their liberal and sometimes Marxist professors tell them.

56. #156
    On July 29th, 2008 at 12:08 pm, JT said:

    Well I know Johns soliciting prostitution prefer Obama. Here are some mug shots.

    Johns for Obama

57. #157
    On July 29th, 2008 at 12:20 pm, Ilovemycountry said:

    The only question is: will Obama ruin America the way Tiger Woods ruined golf? Seems like he scares conservatives the way Tiger scared Fuzzy Zoeller.

58. #158
    On July 29th, 2008 at 2:12 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    People with graduate school degrees (like most journalists)…

    We’re talking Meteorology degrees? Didn’t most of them start as weathergirls? (After the Miss Whatever contest)

    PS – I have a graduate degree…and “We are the change we’ve been waiting for” sounds like grammer school, not Harvard.

59. #159
    On July 29th, 2008 at 2:14 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    I’m pretty sure Dumpster Muffin is for Obama. You should take her to lunch lgm, she’s probably right up your tree….

60. #160
    On July 29th, 2008 at 2:17 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    will Obama ruin America the way Tiger Woods ruined golf?

    My question, will Obama ruin America the way OJ ruined Bruno Magli shoes?

61. #161
    On July 29th, 2008 at 6:35 pm, ptg said:

    Angelina Jolie’s dad, Jon Voight, is not fan of Barack Obama.

62. #162
    On July 30th, 2008 at 5:12 pm, Bob in Myrtle Beach said:

    I wouldn’t be surprized a bit to see a Obama cartoon character show up on a Saturday Morning cartoon show.