Archive for the ‘media’ Category

then you are either Andrew Sullivan or you paid no attention during the first half of 2009.

Don’t forget that the big story last year was how even comedians wouldn’t touch Obama. Stewart provided a very small tweak of his inaugural speech comparing it to Bush’s in Jan. In Feb the story was nothing is funny about Obama flash forward to May 15 when I post on Stewart hitting Obama by name saying:

Jon Stewart has now directly ridiculed president Obama by name. He has done it on a primary news source for the far left and for many young people who pay no attention, and not only that he has done it in a way that a person who has no idea about politics can understand.

People may not realize how big this is. Will this mean that other comics will now be willing to hit him? Will this give the imprimatur to other to speak up? Only time will tell, but the first time is always easiest.

In September Stewart hit the Acorn story and it stuck.

Hey MSM when John Stewart isn’t going to go along you’d better start worrying.

Don’t forget that CNN felt compelled to fact check SNL when they hit Obama once in OCTOBER!.

Do you realize if Jeffrey Immelt owned Comedy Central we still might not have anyone in the media saying boo to Barack Obama.

Memeorandum thread here

…nor have I given any attention to the Levi Johnston tell all book story. Ace describes it as shocking, balderdash Ace balderdash, it is no more shocking than the feeding frenzy over this video.

Why? Because both represent the fact that Sarah Palin represents hits and profit. Every time Sarah Palin is mentioned on a blog it produces hits, in a book it produces sales, on the TV it produces ratings.

True the media/left is desperate to discredit her in any way possible and this lamest of latest attempt would shame an actual adult if they didn’t understand or were paid based on the understanding that she is a ratings/sales machine for right and left and leftist “journalists” (or maybe in this case “journolists” gotta eat in a lean economy.

If this is the story that rises to the top of memeorandum (and warrants a Newsweek article, no wonder the whole mag is worth less than a double cheeseburger at Burger king) it is simply testimony affirming the inability of the left to cope with Sarah Palin on any level.

Simple abject fear. Since they can’t beat her at least they’ll get some hits off her.

There are so many memeorandum threads I don’t know which one to pick?

My suggestion? Skip em all!

Update: And remember the occasional positive side effect not withstanding Sullivan’s syndrome is spread by contact!

…at David Horowitz News Real Blog about the sudden invisibility of Shirley Sherrod and that’s this.

From what I’ve seen of Andrew Breitbart he is a great poker player, but looking closer and closer at the Sherrod case he might just be a chess player too.

You will recall he was very careful about the release of the ACORN tapes spacing them out and getting the media to fall into trap after trap until ACORN was a broken organization.

Also recall that Breitbart is a totally intergrated web person who worked regularly with Matt Drudge before venturing out on his own. He knows the web well, and that he had the initial video stuff months before he used it.

Is it reasonable to think that he would not have googled this woman? In just a few weeks enough info has come out about her that she has become radioactive. Can one assume that before his initial (and still ignored) column Brietbart or his assistants would have done the same research that others have done and been aware of the trap that the media was being setup for?

Breitbart Nailed the NAACP and the White house, but people forget, they are not his primary targets overall (although he does say in this case the NAACP was). The media is and always has been the wall that he has been chipping away at.

To what degree was this a media trap and with the deification and disappearance of Shirley Sherrod from that national conscience did he manage to make his media case after all?

What do you think?

During the Atlanta campaign W. T. Sherman used flanking maneuver after flanking maneuver to push Joe Johnson back through Georgia. The one exception was Kennesaw Mountain where his frontal assaults were repulsed. After that defeat, he went back to the flanking tactic that took To paraphrase Ken Burns from The Civil War “Sherman never admitted it was a mistake but never did it again”. Like Sherman in the early days of the campaign Sarah Palin made some mistakes dealing with the media, also like Sherman, she didn’t let those early defeats stop her demonstrating why she is invaluable to conservatives.

When the media attacks Palin doesn’t sit and take it, or play under their rules, she counterattacks:

Yesterday, PolitiFact.com fact-checked my statement about the coming $3.8 trillion Obama tax hike – the largest tax increase in history. They did such a bad job of it, however, that I feel compelled to fact-check the fact-checkers.

And because her primary method of counterattack is Facebook that means she can answer on her terms. Try and twist a soundbite out of that:

Unfortunately for PolitiFact, no such proposal exists. They admit as much, by the way, when they state that “There are no formal congressional proposals yet to keep the Bush tax cuts in place, so we don’t have precise estimates from official sources like the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.” That doesn’t stop them, though, from claiming I “confuse the issue” by “using numbers that assume all the tax cuts are going away. That is not the Democratic plan nor is it President Obama’s plan.”

Plan? What plan? There is no plan. All we have is smoke and mirrors based on an old Obama campaign pledge.

Defense? Never heard of it. It’s really something what a pol can do when the McCain Campaign isn’t managing how they respond. If only every republican was willing to fight back on their own terms.

Read the whole post it is devastating as is the challenge at the end:

PolitiFact doesn’t dispute the $3.8 trillion estimate of the cost of repeal of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. It admits that “Palin’s estimate of $3.8 trillion over 10 years is within a reasonable range, if you’re talking about all taxpayers.” And yet somehow it continues to argue that I’m wrong, based on a proposal it admits doesn’t exist which in turn is based on a phantom campaign pledge which Democrats have already broken anyway. I call that a “Pants on Fire” statement.

To prevent PolitiFact from making similar mistakes in future, it would be helpful if the White House and the Democratic Congressional leadership finally mustered the courage to table their plans to let the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire. Mr. President, publish your proposals, and we’ll duke it out. You can argue in favor of a multi-trillion dollar tax hike in an age of economic uncertainty and mass unemployment, and we’ll argue for fiscal sanity combined with serious spending cuts. I for one look forward to such a debate.

If sure the White House is dying to have that debate, I know congress wants that debate so badly that democrats are rethinking taxes.

How many Republicans do you know if the same spot would have played “Duck and Cover”? Now if the Poli”fact” (and yes after this I put the “fact” in quotes) is reported so must her response, and if it is NOT then the question becomes: Why?

What would we do without her?