McCain Wanted to Head Off Subprime Mess

The Maverick Conservative reminds us Sen. McCain tried to do something to head off the current mortgage mess and tells us who tried to stop him. Can you spell "Senator Obama?"

MC's post's titled; "McCain Proven Right: Federal Housing Regulatory Reform Act of 2005."

It begins - - -

Barack "World" Obama and Christopher Dodd (he of involvement with Countrywide mortgage, eventually absorbed by Bank of America before it could go under) were the two politicians who received the MOST money from Fannie Maeand Freddie Mac as those "government sponsored entities, as those entities lobbied Congress to BLOCK reform efforts. (I think Sen. Kerry was #1 on the list. - - JinC)

Meanwhile, John McCain co-sponsored the Federal Housing Enterprise REgulatory Reform Act of 2005. That act was BLOCKED by Democrats, along with some of the "goold old boy" Republicans that Palin fought in Alaska.

What's more, McCain PREDICTED the present mortgage problem He made a speech in the Congressional record talking aobuut the accounting fraud at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (fraud committed mainly by Democrats).

Not only that, McCain said he was "concerned" about the magnitude of teh role played by these government sponsored entities in our mortgage market, when they were obviously not being vigourously regulated.

As on Iraq, it is McCain who proved RIGHT on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and Obama who is on the side of the people who BLOCKED reform. ...

There's more to the post; you can read it all here.

Comments:

Dems say the GOP is the party of "big business." I'm OK with big businesses that play by the rultes. Most of them create jobs and wealth.

I don't like government special interests that set things up so that Clinton appointed heads of Freddie and Fannie walk away from the messs with hundreds of millions of taxpayer money in their pockets and time to serve now as Obama advisors.


Hat tip: BN

No Churchill Series - Sept. 16, 2008

Folks,


The work load is heavy. plus I'm traveling and don't have easy Net access.

So there'll be no post today.

I'm sorry about that, but I'll be back tomorrow.

Thanks for your understanding.

John

McClatchy Implosion Continues

Kevin Gregory at McClatchy Watch reports - - -

McClatchy announced Tuesday it has cut its quarterly dividend by half and says it will make additional reductions of roughly ten percent of its work force.

Separately McClatchy announced an additional cost restructuring to reduce its workforce by about 10%, or approximately 1,150 full-time equivalent employee positions (FTE's) as the company manages through today's difficult advertising downturn and positions itself for future success in an increasingly competitive environment.

McClatchy said roughly half of the staff reductions are coming through voluntary programs and managed attrition. The company expects to achieve savings of $100 million over the next four quarters, excluding severance costs of approximately $20 million, from the staff reductions along with other savings initiatives. This represents a savings of more than 6% of total cash expenses based on cash expenses over the last 12 months. ...

*********************************

Comments:

There’s more to Kevin’s report including the numbers on major declines in McClatchy’s August 2008 year over year advertising and consolidated revenues as well as a listing of McClatchy newspapers offering buyouts in the past two months.

JinC Regulars know the liberal/leftist Raleigh News & Observer is on the buyout list.

They also know a few things are up at McClatchy: anti-Palin stories and pro-Obama stories.

I continue to say it and feel it: Regret for all the hard-working non-journalists at McClatchy's newspapers and all those papers' reporters and editors who "report the news straight."

Give Kevin’s post a look here.

Obama and his Fannie & Freddie cronies

A reader at Instapundit says:

I would put together a commercial that said…

James A. Johnson - former Fannie Mae CEO and Obama Advisor

Just cost you billions in taxes

Franklin Raines – former Fannie Mae CEO and Obama Advisor

Just cost you billions in taxes

Barack Obama – If we can’t afford his advisors, how can we afford him?

Great idea for an ad.

Could the McCain people work in a reference to convicted felon and Obama advisor Tony Rezko?

Has anyone calculated how much taxpayer money Rezko pocketed?

Maybe Team Obama could do the numbers so they could be sure they're Wright.

Oops! What was I thinking of?

"God damn America" and "KKK-America."

Yes, that's it!

That and Obama wants us to trust him because his judgment is so good.

The Mess Dems Made

Here’s a safe bet in a troubled market: Rep. Charlie Rangal, the convicted felons Tony Rezko and Kwame Fitzpartick, and Sen. Chris Dodd, all staunch Obama supporters, were also staunch supporters, along with Obama, of the policies and laws that led to the current financial mess markets are now working through.

Now excerpts from Investor’s Business Daily with comments below the star line.

IBD starts out reminding us - - -

… [It] was the Clinton administration, obsessed with multiculturalism, that dictated where mortgage lenders could lend, and originally helped create the market for the high-risk subprime loans now infecting like a retrovirus the balance sheets of many of Wall Street's most revered institutions.

Tough new regulations forced lenders into high-risk areas where they had no choice but to lower lending standards to make the loans that sound business practices had previously guarded against making.

It was either that or face stiff government penalties.

The untold story in this whole national crisis is that President Clinton put on steroids the Community Redevelopment Act, a well-intended Carter-era law designed to encourage minority homeownership. And in so doing, he helped create the market for the risky subprime loans that he and Democrats now decry as not only greedy but "predatory."

Yes, the market was fueled by greed and overleveraging in the secondary market for subprimes, vis-a-vis mortgaged-backed securities traded on Wall Street.

But the seed was planted in the '90s by Clinton and his social engineers. They were the political catalyst behind this slow-motion financial train wreck. (emphasis added)

And it was the Clinton administration that mismanaged the quasi-governmental agencies that over the decades have come to manage the real estate market in America.
As soon as Clinton crony Franklin Delano Raines took the helm in 1999 at Fannie Mae, for example, he used it as his personal piggy bank, looting it for a total of almost $100 million in compensation by the time he left in early 2005 under an ethical cloud.

Other Clinton cronies, including Janet Reno aide Jamie Gorelick, padded their pockets to the tune of another $75 million.

Raines was accused of overstating earnings and shifting losses so he and other senior executives could earn big bonuses.

In the end, Fannie had to pay a record $400 million civil fine for SEC and other violations, while also agreeing as part of a settlement to make changes in its accounting procedures and ways of managing risk.

But it was too little, too late.

Raines had reportedly steered Fannie Mae business to subprime giant Countrywide Financial, which was saved from bankruptcy by Bank of America.

At the same time, the Clinton administration was pushing Fannie and her brother Freddie Mac to buy more mortgages from low-income households.

The Clinton-era corruption, combined with unprecedented catering to affordable-housing lobbyists , resulted in today's nationalization of both Fannie and Freddie, a move that is expected to cost taxpayers tens of billions of dollars.

And the worst is far from over. By the time it is, we'll all be paying for Clinton's social experiment, one that Obama hopes to trump with a whole new round of meddling in the housing and jobs markets.

In fact, the social experiment Obama has planned could dwarf both the Great Society and New Deal in size and scope.

There's a political root cause to this mess that we ignore at our peril. If we blame the wrong culprits, we'll learn the wrong lessons. And taxpayers will be on the hook for even larger bailouts down the road. …

While government arguably has a role in helping low-income folks buy a home, Clinton went overboard by strong-arming lenders with tougher and tougher regulations, which only led to lenders taking on hundreds of billions in subprime bilge.

Market failure? Hardly. Once again, this crisis has government's fingerprints all over it.

The entire Investor's Business Daily editorial is here.

*******************************************************
Comments:

The person who sent me the link to the Investor's Business Daily editorial knows a thing or two about business.

He commented:

The editorial presents some good arguments that over regulation and cronyism during the Clinton years were the main causes for the recent problems with banks and other financial institutions.The Obama campaign continues to incorrectly blame Bush's policies for these problems and everything else that goes wrong.

Note in particular the reference to Jamie Gorelick's being paid lots of money while she was at Fannie Mae. As you know Gorelick was a member of Clinton's administration and is the lead attorney for Duke in the civil suits brought by the lacrosse players.

In my opinion, more government regulation is not necessarily the right solution to our country's current financial problems --- that would be an example of the cure being worse than the disease.

Why would anyone support Obama’s “more government” policy.

Because Obama’s cronies such as Rengal and Dodd will be the ones “fixing things” with help, of course, from people like former Clinton Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick.

That would be very good for President Obama and the “community leaders” who are shelling out millions to put him in The White House.

But it wouldn't be good for America.

Speaker Pelosi and Chairman Rangel

Remember way back during the 2006 congressional campaign Democrats were telling everyone they wanted to "clean up the sleaze and corruption in Congress?"

So they got the power to do that when they elected Nancy Pelosi Speaker.

Now she can't even get the Chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, that walking mountain of sleaze and corruption Charlie Rangel, to even temporarily give up his chairmanship.

And all those House Democrats who wanted honesty in Congress are saying nothing.

There's a great opportunity for Congressional Republicans if they'll demand both Sen. Ted Stevens and Rep. Rangal step down from their chairmanships.

The Raleigh N&O without its mask (Post 1)

The McClatchy Company’s Raleigh News & Observer describes itself as “fair and accurate.” It’s senior editors frequently tell readers the N&O adhers to the highest standards of journalism.

The N&O's public editor, Ted Vaden, “the reader’s watchdog,” is an enthusiastic N&O fan who often praises the paper's journalistic ethics which he likens to his own.

If you’re a frequent reader here, however, you know that since 2005 I’ve been documenting the N&O often shoddy, false, politically biased and racially inflammatory news reporting.

The N&O’s deliberately fraudulent and racially inflammatory coverage of the Duke Hoax and frame-up attempt in spring 2006 and its efforts since to cover that up exemplify the kind of “journalism” the N&O frequently provides readers.

But most readers aren’t aware of that. They buy into the N&O's “fair & accurate” meme and Vaden’s Sunday columns assuring them their reading a great paper.

It’s too bad those trusting N&O readers weren’t spending time at G. D. Gearino’s eponymous blog lately.

Here’s some of what they would have learned - - - -

On Sept. 5 Gearino, a career journalist and author who spent many years at the N&O as business editor and a columnist, posted: “The curtain pulled aside.” It included the following - - -

It’s common for a top editor at the N&O to send out an inter-office note most days celebrating the high points of that morning’s paper (as well as occasionally pointing out a lapse). Among the staff, those notes prompt a daily exercise in something very close to Kremlinology, as they are pondered and studied for clues as to which way the management wind blows.

Below is the note that was distributed to the staff yesterday, reprinted here as I received it. I will make no comment, lest I sway your judgment on what it reveals about the people who oversee the most influential newspaper in the state. But feel free to share your thoughts.

A few comments on some good work in today’s paper:

–A lively front page that gave our readers plenty to talk about.

Has the political right truly turned the corner and will cease to demonize opponents on so-called moral issues, or are we witnessing the boldest, most cynical, most hypocritical political spin in modern history? What is one to make of John McCain’s greeting at the Twin Cities airport yesterday of America’s most famous baby mama with a warm hug, and the apparent attaboy pat on the shoulder for the self-described “f***ing redneck” baby daddy? Are we now celebrating teenagers’ raging hormones?

The claims department feature (see 8a) is a great reader service. I would like to see more scrutiny of the “facts” in Sarah Palin’s speech last night.

Now to our local politicians….Is Kenn Gardner just an inept liar or a man so greedy that he doesn’t care whether we think he’s an inept liar as long as he gets paid?

–A newsy and entertaining Triangle&Co. front.

I’d bet that Barry Saunders is hearing a lot of amens this morning as well as feeling a lot of hate. Good. A columnist should stir ‘em up. Much of America may have forgotten, but the black community has a very long memory of Republicans demonizing black unwed moms. The black wire–radio and a growing black blogesphere–is crackling this morning with wicked “Juno” jokes. In general, black bloggers (wearerespectablenegroes.blogspot.com. A warning to the easily offended, the name is a big clue) are having a great time with the GOP show in Minneapolis.

–Lots of interesting people stories in the sports section about college athletes and the pros. For those following tennis’ sibling rivalry, Serena has gained a slight lead by beating older sister Venus in the U.S. Open quarterfinals.

–Good, timely story–and an inviting headline (Life over breasts)– on the Life, etc. cover
_____________________________________

Folks, Gearino’s post drew many comments on the thread which I encourage you to read as well as the comments on the threads of two Gearino follow-up posts I’ll link to further along in this post.

As for the ill-informed, disgustingly partisan email for a senior N&O editor, the paper made no comment in response to Gearino at his blog, at its own Editor’s Blog, or in its print edition.

On Sept. 11 Gearino posted: "Author, author." It included the following:

Let me clear up something: The internal memo sent out to the news staff of the Raleigh News & Observer, which I wrote about last week, was not authored by N&O editor John Drescher. Its author was Linda Williams, the senior editor for news. (I was one who misidentified Drescher as the author. I subsequently put an error alart and correction at my post and sent Drescher an email apologizing for my error. - - JinC)

It may come as a relief to some that an internal document so openly and unmistakably contemptuous of a major political party (the GOP, as if I have to tell you) wasn’t written by the top guy. If so, your sense of relief is misplaced. The N&O’s hierarchy has flattened a bit in recent years, but Williams could reasonably be said to be the No. 2 person in the newsroom. Don’t be deluded about this: The memo accurately and fairly reflects the attitudes of many of the newsroom’s managers and staff members. And I say that with the absolute confidence that comes with having read similar daily in-house memos for the 14 years I spent at the N&O.(emphasis added)...
_____________________________


Again, folks, there was nothing in response from the N&O although a number of readers were commenting about the matter at the Editors’ Blog.

On Sept. 15 Gearino posted: “This just gets better (and sadder).”

What follows here is the complete text of an email message I got from News & Observer senior editor Linda Williams, in the wake of two posts last week that brought into question the N&O’s public stance of non-partisanship. (You can see those previous posts here and here.) I publish Williams’ email at her urging, as you’ll see, and exactly as it was received.

What a sanctimonious, phony gasbag you are. Your recent posts are certainly revealing of your own utter lack of integrity. I recall an e-mail I received from you once in which you were praising me for a comment I made which you interpreted as being anti-liberal. I also recall that you sent that message to several people here at the paper.

Now you have seized upon a short commentary I made on how some of readers might discuss stories on our front page because of their own experiences to puff up your skinny little chest in outrage. Your interpretation was wrong then and it’s wrong now. But why the double standard?

I can only conclude that like so many of your ilk who cowardly rail from the safety of your keyboards that you have concluded that perpetuating the big lie is more lucrative.

I have absolutely no doubt that my professional integrity would hold up to any serious scrutiny of how I do my job. You’re shown during a series of inaccurate posts recently that you have no integrity, professional or otherwise.

Whether you choose to share this with your readers in its entirety will also shed light on your character.

( Folks, if you don't know the N&O, editor Williams ranting missives to the N&O's newsroom staff and Gearino may surprise you. My only surprise, and I suspect the only surprise of JinC Regulars and other intelligent people familiar with Williams and the N&O's newsroom "culture” is that the ranting missives were put in writing. - - JinC)

If it’s possible for something to be simultaneously both laughable and disheartening, this qualifies. It’s amusing because one rarely sees such unprofessionalism and over-the-top personal invective on display. (I’m considering having new business cards printed announcing my services as a “sanctimonious phony gasbag.”) It’s also funny to see someone who supervises a roomful of people sitting at computer monitors churning out copy by the minute express disgust with those who “rail from the safety of your keyboards.” You don’t encounter that kind of irony-laden cluelessness every day. . . .

But for all the amusement, it’s disheartening to realize that one of the top people at the state’s most influential newspaper doesn’t appear capable of forming a streamlined, logical response to an issue — much less understanding what actually unfolded last week.

The “interpretation” of Williams’ memo — which I printed without attaching any thoughts of my own about it, and also without identifying its author — came from other people who left comments on my site. Unanimously, they saw it for what it was: An unvarnished bit of snidely partisan opinion. The second post identified Williams as the author only because some readers had mistakenly concluded that the offending memo had been written by N&O editor John Drescher.
________________________________

Folks, I'll be back saying more about all this tomorrow. Right now I just hope, if you're not already familiar with them, you follow the links to Gearino's posts and threads on which a number of journalists as well as thoughtful readers have commented.

Thanks to Gearino and others you have a chance to see the Raleigh N&O without its mask.

Previous post:

Raleigh N&O editor's blatantly partisan email (updated)

The Churchill Series – Sept. 15, 2008

(One of a series of weekday posts about the life of Winston S. Churchill.)

Here are recollections of Sir Fitzroy Maclean, a British diplomat why held a number of posts during the 1930s and 40s. I’ll add a few words at the end.

[I served for almost three years as] Secretary of Embassy to Moscow, returning to London in the early summer of 1939 to take up an appointment at the Foreign Office. I hadn't been back long when I received an invitation to have lunch with Mr. Churchill at Chartwell, his home in the country. He wanted to hear about the Russians. War had by now come even nearer, and I found him more frustrated than ever by our own government's policy of appeasement.

He asked me whether I thought the Russians would come in on our side. This was in the summer of 1939. 1 replied that I was quite certain that they would not. In fact they were much more likely to come in on the other side.

At this Winston exploded. It was a large luncheon party and all at once I found myself a target for the full flood of Churchillian eloquence. If I couldn't count on Russian support, he said, and when, thanks to my fecklessness, we were totally unprepared for war ourselves, would I please tell him why I had guaranteed Poland and Rumania.

Why was I so calmly sending thousands of British boys to certain death in what was clearly a lost cause?

At 28 1 was even less articulate than I am now and it was an altogether alarming experience, but I was quite determined not to be blamed for a policy of which I disapproved every bit as strongly as he did, and with a formulation of which I had nothing whatever to do.

When I could get a word in edgewise, which was not easy, I replied that I had not been responsible for guaranteeing Poland or indeed Rumania, and had no wish whatever to send any British soldiers to their death.

But with the best,will in the world I didn't think that Marshal Stalin was likely to do something which he quite clearly regarded as contrary to his interest. "In that case," Winston replied ((why in heaven's name . . ." and off he went again.

I was thankful when luncheon came to an end and Mrs. Churchill took me for a walk in the garden.

When he said goodbye to me later, in the afternoon, Winston said he was sorry he'd been so explosive but he was desperately worried and frustrated at the way things were going. I said so was 1.

A month later, in gloomy confirmation of what I told him, came news of the Soviet-German pact, immediately followed by the outbreak of war.

The next time I met Winston was that same winter. By then he'd become First Lord of the Admiralty and I was asked to supper at Admiralty House, a prestigious 18th century building full of memories of British naval greatness. He looked 20 years younger. All his frustrations had disappeared at the prospect of action.

"Here," said Mrs. Churchill, "is Fitzroy. Do you remember how rude you were to him last time you saw him? What's more, he was right and you were absolutely wrong."

At which Winston gave a characteristic grunt and went off to run the war at sea, while Mrs. Churchill and I went off to the theatre together to see Vic Oliver, their new son-in-law.

Mrs. Churchill was one of the sweetest and most remarkable women I ever met, and all those years a marvelous wife to Winston, soothing him or bullying him as necessary and standing by him through thick and thin. …

Maclean’s entire recollections can be found here hosted by the Churchill Centre.

Maclean gives us a good sense of what the Churchill temper could be like; and how fortunate he was to have in Clementine a wife who admired and wanted him to succeed, and knew that standing up to him was in his best interests

Why Feminists Hate Sarah Palin

Cathy Young in today’s WSJ - - --

Left-wing feminists have a hard time dealing with strong, successful conservative women in politics such as Margaret Thatcher. Sarah Palin seems to have truly unhinged more than a few, eliciting a stream of vicious, often misogynist invective.

On Salon.com last week, Cintra Wilson branded her a "Christian Stepford Wife" and a "Republican blow-up doll." Wendy Doniger, religion professor at the University of Chicago Divinity School, added on the Washington Post blog2, "Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."

You'd think that, whether or not they agree with her politics, feminists would at least applaud Mrs. Palin as a living example of one of their core principles: a woman's right to have a career and a family.

Yet some feminists unabashedly suggest that her decision to seek the vice presidency makes her a bad and selfish mother. Others argue that she is bad for working mothers because she's just too good at having it all.

In the Boston Globe on Friday3, columnist Ellen Goodman frets that Mrs. Palin is a "supermom" whose supporters "think a woman can have it all as long as she can do it all . . . by herself."
In fact, Sarah Palin is doing it with the help of her husband Todd, who is currently on leave from his job as an oil worker.

But Ms. Goodman's problem is that "she doesn't need anything from anyone outside the family. She isn't lobbying for, say, maternity leave, equal pay, or universal pre-K."

This also galls Katherine Marsh, writing in the latest issue of The New Republic4. Mrs. Palin admits to having "an incredible support system -- a husband with flexible jobs rather than a competing career . . . and a host of nearby grandparents, aunts, and uncles."

Yet, Ms. Marsh charges, she does not endorse government policies to help less-advantaged working mothers -- for instance, by promoting day-care centers. …

The rest of Young’s column’s here.

Comments:

Many feminists are not only smearing Gov. Palin’s character, they’re misrepresenting her position on a number of public issues and government services.

But who’s surprised any longer by that. It’s all been happening since Sen. McCain selected her to be his VP running-mate.

BTW - Remember when Margaret Thatcher began her rise in Britain, the left and some on the right there dismissed her as “just a greengrocer’s daughter?”

McClatchy's Obama Tank Corp Rocks

A journalist friend alerts me to the liberal/leftist McClatchy News' five most read stories as of a while ago.



1. Hundreds gather for anti-Palin rally in downtown Anchorage


2. Out of bounds! Palin confuses Iraq with al Qaida


3. What's the truth about Sarah Palin, sportswoman?


4. Critics: Under Palin, Wasilla charged rape victims for exam


5. No wonder Gibson was confused by Palin's answer on global warming


With all the journalists in Alaska now looking for dirt on Gov. Palin, I'm surprised only hundreds showed up for the anti-Palin rally. Were any of those at the rally besides journalists some of the old-line political hacks Palin fired?

So Gibson's "confused by Palin's answer on glabal warming."

Gee, he got the God question (exact words) wrong and he got the Bush doctrine question wrong even after Palin tried to steer him right.

Now the global warming question!

In any case, who's surprised McClatchy's hosting Palin-bashing stories, some of which are "nothings" and some of which have been debunked?

And when will McClatchy tell us why Sen. Obama "never heard" Rev. Wright's racist, anti-American sermons and contributed tens of thousands of dollars to support Wright?

Inside the Dems War Room - A paroday

Hat tip: JA

NYT’s Dowd today: more self-parody

There’s a joke about NY Times columnist Maureen Down being such a lightweight she’s next in line to succeed Pinch Sulzberger as Times publisher.

The follow-up: “That must be why she writes those columns that seem like she’s trying to convince everyone she knows more than Paul Krugman and Tom Friedman combined.” (That's not hard. - - JinC)

I thought of those one-liners today when I read Dowd’s column from “Anchorage” which Dowd let readers know is geographically proximate to Russia before telling them:

The proximity of the country from which William Seward bartered to buy Alaska for $7 million — Seward’s icebox — is so illuminating that I suddenly realize that we would commit a grave error by overestimating Russia’s economic strength.

After all, it represents only 2.8 percent of the world’s G.D.P., even though its gross domestic product has ballooned from $200 billion in 1999 to $1.7 trillion this year.

That all sounds like something that came from a Web site with a title like: A 1001 facts about Alaska and Russia for your term paper.

Dowd goes on to misrepresent Palin on a number of issue and spout the knee=jerk lines smearing Gov. Palin.

I guess she’s going the extra mile to prove she’s ready to step in when Pinch is finally pushed out.

Dowd’s entire column’s here.

When you read the NY Times editorials

The Anything for Obama NY Times' editorial board is in full-throated cry trashing Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin. The Times'editors would have us believe the two are by turns dumb, dishonest and dangerous

So what else has the Times editorial board been doing for its readers?

Well, not too long ago it urged them to elect Eliot Spitzer Governor of New York. There was nothing new about the Times' enthusiatic support for Spitzer. It had supported him editorially for years.

Then Democrat Spitzer got caught in a prostitution scandal and had to resign his office.

There was also former New Jersey Democratic Governor Jim McGreevey, forced to resign his office when he got caught up in a sex scandal, part of which involved McGreevey's using taxpayer money meant for terrorist protection activities to give his gay lover a high-paying, basically no-show job.

The Times was a big supporter of McGreevey.

On the other hand, the Times thundered its opposition to the judicial appointments of Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samual Alito.

Neither man, according to the Times, was fit to hold the positions of public trust to which President Bush appointed them subject to the Senate's consent.

I wish the Times wasn't so loud and nasty in its editorial attacks on McCain and Palin. (I also wish there were fewer attacks on them in the Times' "news columns.")

But as someone planning to vote the McCain-Palin ticket, at least I can take the Times' opposition to them as a reassuring sign.

And, hey, that's without ever recalling the Times' consistant ridicule and denuncitation of President Reagan.

Washington Post distorts Palin; then rewrites without telling readers

The other day I posted Not for the first time Washington Post distorts Palin. Now I want to tell you what happened after that. It doesn’t reflect well on WaPo’s Anything for Obama journalists.

Here’s my original post followed below the double star line by what happened next.

Bill Kristol at Weekly Standard Blog with my comments below the star line -

Kristol begins - - -

Here are the headline and the first two paragraphs from an article posted online that apparently will be on the front page of Friday’s Washington Post:

“Palin Links Iraq to 9/11, A View Discarded by Bush"

By Anne E. Kornblut Washington Post Staff Writer

Friday, September 12, 2008; A01

FORT WAINWRIGHT, Alaska, Sept. 11 -- Gov. Sarah Palin linked the war in Iraq with the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, telling an Iraq-bound brigade of soldiers that included her son that they would "defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans."

The idea that Iraq shared responsibility with al-Qaeda for the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, once promoted by Bush administration officials, has since been rejected even by the president himself. On any other day, Palin's statement would almost certainly have drawn a sharp rebuke from Democrats, but both parties had declared a halt to partisan activities to mark Thursday's anniversary.” . . .

Kristol continues - - -

Kornblut’s interpretation of what Palin said is either stupid or malicious.

Palin is evidently saying that American soldiers are going to Iraq to defend innocent Iraqis from al Qaeda in Iraq, a group that is related to al Qaeda, which did plan and carry out the Sept. 11 attacks.

It makes no sense for Kornblut to claim that Palin is arguing here that Saddam Hussein’s regime carried out 9/11—obviously Palin isn’t saying that our soldiers are now going over to Iraq to fight Saddam’s regime.

Palin isn’t linking Saddam to 9/11. She’s linking al Qaeda in Iraq to al Qaeda....

The rest of Kristol’s post is here.

**************************************************
Comments:

Folks, are any of you surprised at what Kristol reports WaPo do any of you not know most in WaPo’s newsroom, in in the tank for Obama and Kornblut is about as objective a reporter as Matt Cooper, Joe Klein and Elizabeth Bumiller.

So who’s surprised Kronblut and WaPo’s editors teamed up on something like what Kristol notes?

Kornblut and many in WaPo “newsroom” are as deep in the tank for Sen. Obama as Andrew Sullivan, Maureen Dowd and former Chicago journalist David Axelrod.

You all may be interested to read the following from one of those Q&A with “our top reporters” MSM newspapers host at their Web sites. It’s from Sept. 3. The “questioner” prattles about “Palin's own relentless cuts of any program that might possibly provide the slightest help to unwed teenage mothers.”

That of course is false and was debunked on day one when the MSM “smear Palin” crowd put it out there.

But notice that Obama supporter Kornblut says nothing to correct the “questioner“ error.

Why do you think that is?

Is WaPo and Obama’s Kornblut, as Kristol asks, “either stupid or malicious?”

Here's the relevant part of WaPo’s Sept. 3 Q&A which it tells readers is meant to “inform them.”

Arlington, Va.: I have two questions. First, why are we not hearing more about the hypocrisy inherent in Gov. Palin's stance on her daughter's pregnancy juxtaposed against the Republicans' (and Palin's own) relentless cuts of any program that might possibly provide the slightest help to unwed teenage mothers? Second, what's your take on a potential vice-presidential debate? I hardly watch any broadcast TV, but if there is going to be a vice presidential debate I'll be glued to the set just to see what Joe Biden does to Palin. My sense is it won't be a pretty sight.

washingtonpost.com: The Trail: Palin Slashed Funding for Teen Moms (washingtonpost.com, Sept. 2)

Anne E. Kornblut: Good questions, both. I think the point you raise about Palin's approach to programs for teen funding is one we addressed in today's paper-- Paul Kane, my colleague, has a good story on it. I'll see if I can find the link.

Obviously that's the kind of policy issue that is now relevant, and on the table, in a way that she will have to answer.

And on the VP debate. You and me both. It'll be a real sight to behold.

***************************************************************

***************************************************************

Case Western Reserve School of Law Professor Jonathan Adler tells us what happened next in a post at Volokh Conspiracy: THE POST "GETS A REWRITE (BUT DOESN'T TELL ITS READERS)"

On Friday, the Washington Post ran this story about Gov. Sarah Palin's speech before a brigade of soldiers bound for Iraq -- at least, that link is to the story that is on the Post's web page.

But this is not the story as it originally appeared.

As Bill Kristol notes here, the second paragraph of the story was rewritten -- and an entire sentence replaced -- to fix a gross error that dramatically distorted what Palin had said.

Most egregiously, there is no indication on the web-version of the story that it was corrected, not even a note at the end of the piece.

Whatever one thinks of the Post's reporting here, it should at least acknowledge that it changed the story's text to fix an error.

If we bloggers are expected to disclose substantive revisions to our blog posts, shouldn't the MSM be held to the same standard?

(end of Adler's post)

JinC commenting again:

You read what WaPo did and you’ve got to wonder who those 20 or so percent of the population are who pollsters tell us have a lot of trust in MSM newspapers.

Maybe they’re the Democratic base.

Be sure to follow Adler’s link to Kristol’s post which Bill updated, laying out so clearly WaPo’s slight of hand cover-up for one of its Obama reporter-supporters.

McCain will carry N. C. by at least 10 points comments

I want to respond to comments on the thread of last Wednesday’s post: McCain will carry N. C. by at least 10 points.

But first an update on poll results published after my post.

At Realclearpolitics.com (this page) you see results for and links to three polls of N.C. presidential voter preference. All three polls have McCanin ahead. ( +3, +4, and +17).

Now part or all of thread comments are in italics; my responses are in plain.

Anon @ 3:15 - -

John, I would agree with your assessment and the 10 point estimate.

I would expect BHO to mostly pull out as the election tightens. He needs to spend his money in VA, NM, NV and other states that might be in play for a red-to-blue switch.


Sen. Obama has so much money that, even if it’s clear by say mid-October , he doesn’t have a chance here, he’s likely to continue spending money in N.C. to, among other things, help Dem candidates further down the ballot.

If he had a realistic crack at NC, he would already be looking at a 400+ vote Electoral College win anyway.

I agree.

The more interesting issue is the impact for [Democratic Gubernatorial candidate Beverly] Perdue and [Senatorial candidate Kay ] Hagan. They don't exactly want to hang around with The One if he comes to NC, but they would love to see him do well so they can get some down-ticket benefit.

Again, I agree

Anon @ 11:41 - -

My thoughts are you put up a great post and I can't wait to read more.

I appreciate your nice words.

I’ll have a second post up within a day or two. It will explain why I think Obama’s friend, terrorist Will Ayers, and Obama’s pastor and mentor of almost 20 years, the racist, anti-American Jeremiah Wright, will hurt Obama in N. C. more than in many other states.

I’ll also suggest how I think the GOP can help voters understand how enormously revealing Obama’s relationships with those two men is.

NeCle - -

John, if the 10% point margin is correct, then that should ensure that Ms. Dole trounces the Greensboro liberal. Ms. Hagan will be a reliable constituent of Senator Reid and vote the party line every time, guaranteed.

IMO you’ve put your finger on the most powerful argument Sen. Dole’s supporters can use: don’t send the liberal Hagen to Washington to work with all the other liberals already there.

Since she’s a sitting, Senator Dole needs to make the case for what she’s done and will continue to do. She can mention Hagen’s a liberal, but Dole needs to low-key that.

For Dole’s supporters, however, “Hagen’s a liberal like John Edwards turned out to be and she’ll vote with Sens. Reid and Kerry’ ought to be the default line.

As I said in my first post, one of the principal reasons Obama will lose N.C. is that Tar Heel voters – most of them anyway – don’t like to send liberals to Washington.

Thank you all for your comments.

Sitemeter's massive bungle delays blogging

Many bloggers, me included, have depended on Sitemeter for statistics and other services.

Sitemeter decided to go for “new and improved.” Last evening it began a “migration” which has confused, frustrated and impaired the work of many bloggers.

I’ve spent about 6 hours last night and this morning trying to set my services straight. Things still aren’t right.

Blogging has been delayed.

Ann Althouse says of Sitemeter:

This is the worst non-improvement of a website I've ever seen. "Seen" is an exaggeration. I feel like I can't even can't see the new charts. It is ugly and unreadable. The statistics were once so clear and sharply presented, featuring the information that was most useful to the blogger.

I was willing to pay $30 a month for the premium service. Now, premium service is only $6.95 a month, but I'll probably drop it, because I never want to lay eyes on that horrible website again.

You get the idea.

I’m hearing the same and worse from other bloggers.

According to one Sitemeter “apparently they never saw fit to get one real fan to sit down and try to use it. Anyone would have told them it was a huge screw-up.”

I wonder whether Sitemeter are the same people who made Obama's "Can't send an email" ad.

Posting schedule, comments, and Ike

Folks,

I'm traveling today and part of tomorrow.

Blogging resumes tomorrow, Sunday, at 11 AM.

I've printed out the comments I've received this week online and will respond to many of them in my first post tomorrow.

I'll also be posting tomorrow on Gibson's self-righteous, ambush interview of Gov. Palin; the Raleigh N&O's Anything for Obama "reporting" of the interview; and some of the latest on the Duke Hoax, frame-up attempt and ongoing cover-up of same.

And more.

I hope those of you in areas hit by Ike stay safe. You are in the thoughts and prayers of millions of us.

We'll also be looking for ways we can help. I'll be posting on that in the coming days.

I'll see you all tomorrow morning.

John

Here's Obama's "Can't send an email" attack ad

We're told by Sen. Obama's legions of MSM reporter-supporters he's brilliant.

They also tell us he's put together a brilliant campaign team, a sign of his brilliant executive ability and judgment.

So why in heavens' name did Obama and his team put out an attack ad that mocks Sen. McCain for not sending emails when its well-known it's painful for McCain to use a keyboard because of the injuries caused by the torture he endured while a POW?

How could they not have known what's in this post: Obama's mocking of McCain's POW disability?

Here's Obama's mocking ad.

The Churchill Series – Sept. 12, 2008

(One of a series of weekday posts on the life of Winston S. Churchill.)

Today is the 100th Anniversary of the marriage of Winston Spencer Churchill, age 33, and Clementine Ogilvy Hozier, age 23.

The wedding took place on a Saturday at 2 PM at Saint Margaret’s Church, Westminster.

The usually tardy groom arrived with his best man, Lord Hugh Cecil, twenty minutes early to cheers from the large crowds gathered in front of the church and Parliament Square.

Inside the church he greeted guests and took his seat on a front pew along with Cecil and his friend and future Prime Minister Lloyd George.

At two minutes past two the usually prompt Clementine had not yet arrived. But a minute or two later cheers could be heard outside St. Margaret’s and a few minutes after that the bride entered the church.

What follows is from Jack Fishman’s My Dearling Clemtine: The Story of Lady Churchill, something of a potboiler, but accurate on the wedding:

The church was decorated with palms and chrysanthemums and arum lilies. The chancel and altar were wrapped in white flowers, chrysanthemums and camellias in a setting of green.

The bride, a picture of white in her satin dress and veil of Brussels net, carried a white bouquet of lilies and myrtle and a prayer book bound in white kid. On her head was a simple coronet of orange blossoms. ...

The brides only jewelry was a pair of diamond earrings – a gift from the groom.

… The clergy came down t the chancel. As his bride approached, Winston put out his hand and shook hers warmly.

The ceremony began.

[The groom’s profession of vows was audible throughout the church; the bride’s could barely be heard.

Bishop Welldon, who’d been Headmaster at Harrow when Winston was a student there, was preached the wedding sermon.]

Bishop Welldon uttered prophetic words, “The sun shines on your union today.
“Allow me to remind you how much you may be to each other in the coming days, in the sunny hours and in the somber hours.

“There must be in a statesman’s life many times when he depends on the love, insight, penetrating sympathy, and devotion of his wife.

"The influence which the wives of our statesmen have exercised for good on their husbands’ lives is an unwritten chapter of English history too sacred perhaps to be written in full.

“May your lives prove a blessing, each to the other, and both to the world”

A large reception followed that ceremony. The wedding cake was five feet tall and the champagne flowed.

The bride and groom stayed only a brief while before departing for Paddington Station from whence they traveled to Blenheim Palace, Winston’s birthplace where just a month before he’d proposed to Clementine. The following day they left Blenheim to begin their honeymoon.

By the standards of their class and time, the Churchill’s honeymoon in Italy (the lake district and Venice) was very brief. It lasted just a few weeks because, as Clementine explained to friends, Winston had to be “back in London on October 4 to resume his Parliamentary duties.”

And so Winston and Clementine began their fifty-six years of married lives which would “prove a blessing, each to the other, and both to the world”

I hope you all have wonderful weekends.

John

Afterword: It’s a pity most people pass by St. Margaret’s Church which is just a few yards from Westminster Abbey. The church has many historic associations besides the Churchill wedding. Oliver Cromwell worshiped there and Sir Walter Raleigh is buried beneath its alter, to name just two. It’s a beautiful church. You can read more about it here.

Five Presidents, ABC's Gibson & Gov. Palin on God

The video below has clips of former Presidents FDR, HST, IKE, JFK, and Reagan, Alaska's Gov. Palin and a supremely self-important, badgering network news anchor talking about God and America.

Please give the video a look if you care about America and worry about where the academic left and the liberal/leftist media are dragging it.

Then I hope you'll pass on links to friends.

BTW - When ABC anchor Charles Gibson insists he's quoting Palin's "exact words," he's wrong.




Hat tip: AC

Obama's mocking of McCain's POW disability

The Associated Press, one of Sen. Obama's most powerful Tank Corps news organizations, reported today:

John McCain is mocked as an out-of-touch, out-of-date computer illiterate in a television commercial out Friday from Barack Obama as the Democrat begins his sharpest barrage yet on McCain's long Washington career.

The new fighting spirit comes as McCain has been gaining in the polls and some Democrats have been expressing concern the Obama campaign has not been aggressive enough. Obama's campaign says the escalation will involve advertising and pushes made by the candidate, running mate Joe Biden and other surrogates across the country.

"Today is the first day of the rest of the campaign," Obama campaign manager David Plouffe says in a campaign strategy memo. "We will respond with speed and ferocity to John McCain's attacks and we will take the fight to him, but we will do it on the big issues that matter to the American people. …

"Our economy wouldn't survive without the Internet, and cyber-security continues to represent one our most serious national security threats," [Obama spokesman Dan] Pfeiffer said. "It's extraordinary that someone who wants to be our president and our commander in chief doesn't know how to send an e-mail." (emphasis added)

McCain has said he relies on his wife and staff to work the computer for him and that he doesn't use e-mail. …

Plouffe and Pfeiffer, frequently praised for their political acumen by Obama reporter-supporters, are expected to hold key White House positions when he ascends to his Presidency in January ’09.

Meanwhile, NRO’s Jonah Goldberg reports on this latest Obama attack ad:

Yep. The day after 9/11, as part of its "get tough" makeover, the Obama campaign is mocking John McCain for not using a computer, without caring why he doesn't use a computer. . . .

[]I guess it depends on what [Obama means] by "extraordinary." The reason [McCain] doesn't send email is that he can't use a keyboard because of the relentless beatings he received from the Viet Cong in service to our country.

From the Boston Globe (March 4, 2000):

…McCain gets emotional at the mention of military families needing food stamps or veterans lacking health care. The outrage comes from inside: McCain's severe war injuries prevent him from combing his hair, typing on a keyboard, or tying his shoes.

Friends marvel at McCain's encyclopedic knowledge of sports. He's an avid fan - Ted Williams is his hero - but he can't raise his arm above his shoulder to throw a baseball. …

Sen. Obama and his team can put out a scurrilous attack ad mocking Sen. McCain for his POW disability.

But no sensible person will believe McCain’s POW disability means he’s somehow less qualified to be President than The One.

What could Obama, Plouffe, Pfeiffer and others have been thinking when they made such a scurrilous ad?

Sure, it will go down just fine with most of MSM and millions of liberals and leftists.

But decent Americans are sure to be disgusted by this latest example of what we can expect from President Obama when he governs what his wife calls this “downright mean country.”

The AP’s report of Obama’s disgusting attack ad is here; Goldberg’s reporting is here.

Hat tip: Instapundit

Was WaPo’s Kurtz paying attention?

The Washington Post's media columnist Howard Kurtz begins his comments on last night's Gibson-Palin interview:

Anyone who said that Charlie Gibson might go easy on Sarah Palin might want to quickly delete those comments.

What the ABC newsman conducted yesterday was a serious, professional interview that went right at the heart of what we want and need to know about the governor: Could she be president? Does she understand the nuances of international affairs? Does she have a world view? He was all business, respectful but persistent. . . .

Did she believe the Iraq war is a task from God? When Palin demurred, Gibson said those were her "exact words." No fancy footwork, no long-winded setups, no gotchas.(emphasis added)

Just a solid, straight-ahead interview. ...

Kurtz's Gibson-gushing drew a response from U of Tennessee Law Prof and blogger Glenn Reynolds:

One that -- as everybody who pays attention by now knows -- got those "exact words" wrong. A "gotcha" based on a false report from the AP.

Is this what passes for solid professionalism in big media today? Actually, it seems like it is. …

Reynolds also asks: "SO is Howard Kurtz related to Charlie Gibson?"

Kurtz's column's here; Reynolds' post's here.

They must break Sarah Palin

Charles Krauthammer begins his column today:

The Democrats are in a panic. In a presidential race that is impossible to lose, they are behind. Obama devotees are frantically giving advice. Tom Friedman tells him to "start slamming down some phones." Camille Paglia suggests, "be boring!" (What about bringing back Michelle Obama to tell us again America's "a downright mean country?" - - JinC)

Meanwhile, a posse of Democratic lawyers, mainstream reporters, lefty bloggers and various other Obamaphiles are scouring the vast tundra of Alaska for something, anything, to bring down Sarah Palin: her daughter's pregnancy, her ex-brother-in-law problem, her $60 per diem, and now her religion. (CNN reports -- news flash! -- that she apparently has never spoken in tongues.) Not since Henry II asked if no one would rid him of his turbulent priest, have so many so urgently volunteered for duty.

The current gang of Dems and media volunteers “for duty” are not unlike Henry's knights who so willing stabbed Thomas Becket in the back because he threatened Henry’s throne.

Obama’s courtiers know they must break Sarah Palin or very likely lose the election.

So we see the angry, energized, “tell any lie; promote any smear” attempts to assassinate her character and destroy her public career.

Krauthammer's entire column's here.

Hat tip: BN

Not for the first time WaPo distorts Palin

Bill Kristol at Weekly Standard Blog with my comments below the star line -

Kristol begins - - -

Here are the headline and the first two paragraphs from an article posted online that apparently will be on the front page of Friday’s Washington Post:

“Palin Links Iraq to 9/11, A View Discarded by Bush"

By Anne E. Kornblut Washington Post Staff Writer

Friday, September 12, 2008; A01

FORT WAINWRIGHT, Alaska, Sept. 11 -- Gov. Sarah Palin linked the war in Iraq with the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, telling an Iraq-bound brigade of soldiers that included her son that they would "defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans."

The idea that Iraq shared responsibility with al-Qaeda for the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, once promoted by Bush administration officials, has since been rejected even by the president himself. On any other day, Palin's statement would almost certainly have drawn a sharp rebuke from Democrats, but both parties had declared a halt to partisan activities to mark Thursday's anniversary.” . . .

Kristol continues - - -

Kornblut’s interpretation of what Palin said is either stupid or malicious.

Palin is evidently saying that American soldiers are going to Iraq to defend innocent Iraqis from al Qaeda in Iraq, a group that is related to al Qaeda, which did plan and carry out the Sept. 11 attacks.

It makes no sense for Kornblut to claim that Palin is arguing here that Saddam Hussein’s regime carried out 9/11—obviously Palin isn’t saying that our soldiers are now going over to Iraq to fight Saddam’s regime.

Palin isn’t linking Saddam to 9/11. She’s linking al Qaeda in Iraq to al Qaeda....

The rest of Kristol’s post is here.

**************************************************
Comments:

Folks, are any of you surprised at what Kristol reports WaPo do any of you not know most in WaPo’s newsroom, in in the tank for Obama and Kornblut is about as objective a reporter as Matt Cooper, Joe Klein and Elizabeth Bumiller.

So who’s surprised Kronblut and WaPo’s editors teamed up on something like what Kristol notes?

Kornblut and many in WaPo “newsroom” are as deep in the tank for Sen. Obama as Andrew Sullivan, Maureen Dowd and former Chicago journalist David Axelrod.

You all may be interested to read the following from one of those Q&A with “our top reporters” MSM newspapers host at their Web sites. It’s from Sept. 3. The “questioner” prattles about “Palin's own relentless cuts of any program that might possibly provide the slightest help to unwed teenage mothers.”

That of course is false and was debunked on day one when the MSM “smear Palin” crowd put it out there.

But notice that Obama supporter Kornblut says nothing to correct the “questioner“ error.

Why do you think that is?

Is WaPo and Obama’s Kornblut, as Kristol asks, “either stupid or malicious?”

Here's the relevant part of WaPo’s Sept. 3 Q&A which it tells readers is meant to “inform them.”

Arlington, Va.: I have two questions. First, why are we not hearing more about the hypocrisy inherent in Gov. Palin's stance on her daughter's pregnancy juxtaposed against the Republicans' (and Palin's own) relentless cuts of any program that might possibly provide the slightest help to unwed teenage mothers? Second, what's your take on a potential vice-presidential debate? I hardly watch any broadcast TV, but if there is going to be a vice presidential debate I'll be glued to the set just to see what Joe Biden does to Palin. My sense is it won't be a pretty sight.

washingtonpost.com: The Trail: Palin Slashed Funding for Teen Moms (washingtonpost.com, Sept. 2)

Anne E. Kornblut: Good questions, both. I think the point you raise about Palin's approach to programs for teen funding is one we addressed in today's paper-- Paul Kane, my colleague, has a good story on it. I'll see if I can find the link.

Obviously that's the kind of policy issue that is now relevant, and on the table, in a way that she will have to answer.

And on the VP debate. You and me both. It'll be a real sight to behold.

The Churchill Series – Sept. 11, 2008

(One of a series of weekday posts on the life of Winston S. Churchill.)

Sept. 12, 2008 is the 100th Anniversary of the wedding of Winston Churchill and Clementine Hozier. It was an extraordinary and loving marriage that lasted 56 years until Winston’s death in January 1965.

Churchill historian Paul Addison tells us a good deal about their marriage in his gracefully written, extremely interesting review of Speaking for Themselves: The Personal Letters of Winston and Clementine Churchill, edited by the Churchill’s daughter Mary Soames, herself a graceful, informative writer.

Addison begins - - -

In the fifty-six years of their married life Winston and Clementine Churchill were often apart. Winston was never content for long unless he was off in search of action and adventure, but Clementine too was affected by wanderlust. Sometimes it was she who set off for distant parts, leaving Winston at home.

In 1935 she sailed away for a three-month cruise to the Far East aboard Rosaura, a yacht belonging to Lord Moyne. VE-Day found her in Moscow at the end of a tour of the Soviet Union.

Whenever they were separated, Winston and Clemmie exchanged long letters, supplemented by occasional notes and telegrams. Hence this remarkable edition of 800 exchanges out of some 2000 written between them, which opens with a letter from Mr. Winston Churchill to Miss Clementine Hozier on 16 April 1908, and closes with a note from Clemmie to Winston on 18 April 1964. . . .

It was, of course, a marriage of its time. In the wedding ceremony Clemmie promised to love, honour and obey. A capable and intelligent woman and a strong supporter of female suffrage, she sacrificed much of her own potential for a husband who never sought to disguise his egotism or his absorption in the masculine world of politics. For him, marriage and family life were one facet of a crowded existence; for her they were a vocation.

Yet the marriage worked for a simple reason, tenderly and movingly expressed in the letters of both partners. Winston and Clemmie married for love and the passing of time served only to strengthen the bonds between them. . . .
_____________________________________________________

Addison’s entire review, hosted by the Churchill Centre, is here.

I hope you all give it a read.

Politico’s blames ABC for latest Palin smear

Sen. Obama’s MSM Tank Corps launched multiple attacks against Gov. Sarah Palin tonight in response to fact-based, thoughtful comments Palin made during an ABC interview with Charles Gibson.

Palin drew heavy fire from Obama's Tankers for her comments concerning Russia’s aggressive moves in Eastern Europe and America's NATO obligations.

Without waiting for a full transcript of the Gibson-Palin interview, Obama’s most aggressive units attacked.

But their intelligence was either very faulty or they misunderstood what little intelligence they had.

That question's still in dispute.

What's not in dispute is that many of Obama's MSM Tank Corps units misdirected their attack.

As a result, they soon came under fire themselves from informed forces who'd seized control of the Gibson-Palin interview transcript and began to exploit their advantage.

Faced with withering facts refuting their specious claims, all but Obama's Kos and other such units are in full retreat as of 23:00 ET tonight.

But they’re expected to regroup by morning and take up new positions among “friendly populations” – NPR, the AP, Brian Williams, Chris Matthews, CNN, The Nation, MoveOn.org – from where they’ll launch fierce new smears.

Meanwhile, fighting has broken out among Obama’s forces with his left flank Politico now claiming tonight's defeat was ABC’s fault.

Under the headline:

Palin hawkish on Russia

Politico’s blame-shifting continues with:

This isn't the headline the McCain camp wanted out of Palin's interview: Possible war with Russia.

And here's the tease [headline]at ABC News' website now Politico tells us:

"EXCLUSIVE: GOV. SARAH PALIN WARNS WAR MAY BE NECESSARY IF RUSSIA INVADES ANOTHER COUNTRY."

With that Politico is letting you know it now has an interview transcript it didn't have when it posted its earlier in the evening Palin-bashing.

So none of that earlier in the evening Palin-bashing was Politico's fault, right?

ABC is responsible: “That’s [ABC’s] tease.”

Politico continues with “not us, blame ABC”:

According to the ABC transcript, Palin seems simply to be restating the U.S. obligation under Article Five of the NATO treaty, in the context of a question about her support for Georgia's entry into NATO, something Obama also supports. (emphasis added)

When asked by Gibson if under the NATO treaty, the U.S. would have to go to war if Russia again invaded Georgia, Palin responded: "Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help.

"And we've got to keep an eye on Russia. For Russia to have exerted such pressure in terms of invading a smaller democratic country, unprovoked, is unacceptable," she told ABC News' Charles Gibson.

Now, folks, in case you thought the latest Palin smear was Politico’s fault, Politico wants you to know its not.

I don't believe that.

I think what happened is MSM Obama Tankers were cocked and eager to fire at Sarah Palin.

So eager they fired when there was no cause to.

But since Politico wants to explain itself and blame ABC, let's stand back and let Politico have the last word tonight.

I'll be back on this story tomorrow with what ABC is saying.

What follows is all from Politico:

Here's some of the interview transcript, which doesn't include that exchange. .

» Continue reading Palin hawkish on Russia

ABC News' Charles Gibson has three interviews with Vice Presidential candidate Governor Sarah Palin on September 11 and September 12. The first interview took place today. The interview will air on “World News with Charles Gibson” at 6:30PM EST tonight.

The second interview will take place after tonight's "World News." That interview will appear first on "Nightline" at 11:35PM EST this evening and on "Good Morning America" Friday morning at 7AM EST.

A third interview will take place Friday and will air on "World News" and "20/20" at 10PM EST.

In each case, ABC News will push the fresh content from each of these interviews as soon as possible. We will continue to send updated links as the interviews air.

Any media usage please credit ABC News.(emphasis added)
_________________________________________

The rest of Politico’s climbdown’s here.

Media reporter warns McCain

Boston Phoenix media reporter Adam Reilly is warning Sen. John McCain he’d better be nice to the media or reporters and editors will strike out at him and possibly cost the McCain-Palin ticket the election.

Extracts from Reilly followed by my comments below the star line

Reilly says - - -

…The RNC also featured McCain’s formal, foolhardy declaration of war on the press — the same press, by the way, that made him a political superstar. Now the press seems inclined to fire back.

And if this dynamic continues over the next two months — and the election is as close as everyone expects it to be — it could be the factor that makes Obama president. …

Right now, McCain’s gambit [attacking the media] looks brilliant — witness the aforementioned post-convention bump. The prediction here, though, is that, come Election Day, he’s going to rue his decision.

Why? Now that the Democratic and Republican pep rallies are over, the candidates desperately need the press’s assistance to get their message out.

But now that McCain has given the press the finger, most members of the media will be a lot less inclined to do anything that aids his campaign.

Some of them may actually respond by leveling direct, aggressive challenges at the McCain-Palin ticket. …

Elsewhere, however, the pushback will probably be more subtle — manifesting itself, for example, in which stories get reported and which stories get prominent play.

Case in point: as of this writing, the following articles were the first-, third-, fourth-, and fifth-most-viewed on the Web site of McClatchy’s Washington, DC, bureau: “McCain’s history of hot temper raises concerns”; “Palin used state funds for trip to speak at her former church”; “Here’s the story about Palin’s book-banning try as mayor”; “Campaign saying little about Sarah Palin’s religious faith.”

It’s also likely that McCain’s gambit will make the press less inclined to follow his campaign’s talking points on Obama and Joe Biden, Obama’s running mate. ….

Reilly offers a lot more like what you’ve just read. It’s all here.

********************************************************

Comments:

Reilly leaves no doubt that as far as he’s concerned a prime qualification for the presidency is proper deference to the media; proper deference being don’t dare call attention to the transparent partisanship of Obama’s MSM Tank Corps.

If McCain gets uppity and criticizes The One’s media disciples, very bad things will happen. McCain won’t be able to get his message out and certain kinds of stories attacking him and his running mate will appear.

Who knew MSMers were so petty, spiteful, and arrogant?

The best one-liner McCain’s gotten off in the campaign came when he was asked whether he’d watched news coverage of Sen. Obama’s visit to Paris.

“Yes, I did,” McCain answered. “I saw all those people cheering and waving, and that was just the American press corps.”

Message to Reilly: Thanks for helping expose that big MSM fib about “we’re all objective professionals here.”

A Rev. Wright reminder

Sept. 11 is a very appropirate day to recall Sen. Obama's friend, mentor and pastor of almost 20 years Rev. Jeremiah Wright's vicious racism and anti-Americanism, including his hate-rant from the pulpit on the Sunday following the Sept. 11 attacks.

You'll find a number of what many Democrats dismissively call Wright's "snippets" here , including the one where with obvious righteous satisfaction Wright says Sept. 11 was "America's chickens coming home to roost."

Law profs $$ campaign contributions

http://rightcoast.typepad.com/rightcoast/2008/09/one-party-campu.html

Paul Caron, at TaxProf Blog, tabulates the political contributions by law professors this year.

Overall, 92.7 percent of the contributions went to Democrats. But for presidential candidates, it was a little less evenly split than that: 94.7 percent to Barack Obama, 5.3 percent to John McCain.

The breakdown in political contributions by professors at various law schools includes:

• Harvard: 100% ($23,632) to Democrats, 0% to Republicans
• Chicago: 100% ($14,158) to Democrats, 0% to Republicans
• Michigan: 100% ($11,653) to Democrats, 0% to Republicans
• Stanford: 100% ($8,900) to Democrats, 0% to Republicans
• Texas: 100% ($6,107) to Democrats, 0% to Republicans
• UC-Berkeley: 100% ($4,850) to Democrats, 0% to Republicans
• Pennsylvania: 100% ($2,711) to Democrats, 0% to Republicans

That's better than Stalin, Khrushchev, or Brezhnev ever did in Soviet election results.

***************************************************

Folks, anyone surprised?

Hat tip: AC

September 11 Remembrance

Lorie Byrd at Wizbang posts "Never Forget" which begins with words President Bush’s addressed to the nation that first Septemeber 11:

"The pictures of airplanes flying into buildings, fires burning, huge structures collapsing, have filled us with disbelief, terrible sadness, and a quiet, unyielding anger. These acts of mass murder were intended to frighten our nation into chaos and retreat.”

“ But they have failed; our country is strong. A great people has been moved to defend a great nation. Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America. These acts shattered steel, but they cannot dent the steel of American resolve."

Lorie then offers some personal reflections including this:

I was watching the Today Show and saw the second plane hit the tower in real time. I remember shock, disbelief, and sadness, but most of all a vulnerability that did not exist on September 10. That feeling stayed with me for quite some time. I had felt it to a much lesser extent when the WTC was bombed years earlier, but 9/11/01 was, obviously, on a level never before seen in our nation's history.

When I heard the announcement that the Pentagon had been hit as well, and then saw video of the gaping hole, my only thought was "we have been attacked and we are at war."

Lorie ends her post with wise, proud thoughts from humor columnist Dave Barry:

"The people who did this to us are monsters; the people who cheered them have hate-sickened minds. One reason they can cheer is that they know we would never do to them what their heroes did to us, even though we could, a thousand times worse."

“They know that when we hunt down the monsters, we will try hard not to harm the innocent. Those are the handcuffs we willingly wear, because for all our flaws, we are a decent people."

The extracts from Lorie’s post say much better than I could what I want to share with you today.

So I’ll leave off saying anything else except “Never Forget!”

Lorie’s entire post's here.

Blackfive has a link roundup as does Michelle Malkin whose post also includes results (with graphs) of a multi-nation poll which asked respondents who was responsible for September 11.

Mudville Gazette has powerful and painful photos of the Twin Towers under attack that remind us why we should "Never Forget!"

The Churchill Series – Sept. 10, 2008

(One of a series of weekday posts about the life of Winston S. Churchill.)

Between May 10, the day Churchill became Prime Minister, and June 27, 1940, the date of the letter below, the Germans overran the Allies in the West and drove the British Expeditionary Force off the continent; France signed an armistice with Germany; Britain’s supply lines in the Atlantic were coming under intense U-boat attack; many were predicting England would soon be invaded; and the “smart people” were predicting Germany would soon crush Britain and force it to plead for terms.

It was in those circumstances that Clementine wrote Winston the following letter.

The French sentence you’ll read can be translated as “You rule a soul only by calm.”

The letter is presented here as punctuated in the copy found on pg. 665 in Martin Gilbert’s Churchill: A Life (Henry Holt, 1991). I’ve added a few paragraph breaks for readers’ ease.

June 27, 1940

My Darling,

I hope you will forgive me if I tell you something that I feel you ought to know.

One of the men in your entourage ( a devoted friend) has been to me & told me that there is a danger of your being generally disliked by your colleagues & subordinates because of your rough sarcastic & overbearing manner –

It seems your Private Secretaries have agreed to behave like schoolboys & “take what’s coming to them” & then escape out of your presence shrugging their shoulders. Higher up, if an idea is suggested (say at a conference) you are supposed to be so contemptuous that presently no ideas, good or bad, will be forthcoming.

I was astonished & upset because in all these years I have been accustomed to all those who have worked with & under you, loving you – I said this & I was told “No doubt it’s the strain” –

My Darling Winston – I must confess that I have noticed a deterioration in your manner; & you are not so kind as you used to be.

It is for you to give the Orders & if they are bungled – except for the King the Archbishop of Canterbury & the Speaker you can sack anyone & everyone. Therefore with this terrific power you must combine urbanity, kindness and if possible Olympic calm. You used to quote: - “On ne regne sur les ames que par le calme’ –

I cannot bear that those who serve the Country & yourself should not love you as well as admire and respect you –

Besides you won’t get the best results by irascibility & rudeness. They will breed either dislike or a slave mentality – (Rebellion in War Time being out of the question!)

Please forgive your loving devoted & watchful

Clemmie

I wrote this at Chequers last Sunday, tore it up, but here it is now.

Winston’s pet names for Clementine were “Cat” and “Kit.” She ended the letter with a sketch of a cat.

They say a friend is someone who tells you what you need to hear; not what you want to hear.

Every time I read that letter it reminds me that Hitler was facing two very formidable Churchills.

ABC’s Palin broadcasts plans

The AP reported a few minutes ago:

Charles Gibson's interviews with Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin will form the basis of a special prime-time edition of "20/20" Friday, ABC said Wednesday.

Gibson is traveling to Fairbanks and Wasilla, Alaska, for the first TV interviews with Palin since she was selected as John McCain's running mate.

The first excerpts of the talks will be shown on "World News" Thursday [,Sept. 11.]

Gibson is having three separate interviews with Palin, ABC said. Parts of the interviews will be spread around other ABC news programs, including "Nightline" and "Good Morning America."

The prime-time special, at 10 p.m. EDT, will also include a bio of Palin by ABC's Kate Snow and a round-table discussion on the presidential race moderated by George Stephanopoulos. . . .

The rest of the AP’s story’s here.

Comments:

We’re going to get a lot of “tease” in the next 24 hours about the various ABC broadcasts.

The “meat” will come in the Friday PM programs.

Those programs will “set the table” for the Sunday morning talk shows.

I think Gov. Palin will do well Friday night.

Easy prediction: Between Friday when Palin will make a mostly favorable impression as a likeable, able and informed governor and Sunday’s talk shows, the Dems’ and MSM’s Obama’s Tank Corps’ attacks on her will rise to new levels of intensity.

They know if they can destroy Palin, they’ll win the election.

Worst Palin smear yet. How low can Dems go?

Just when you think the Dems can’t stoop any lower in their campaign to destroy the reputation and public career of Alaska’s Gov. Sarah Palin, along comes a smear worse than the one before.

This now from Politico - - -

South Carolina Democratic chairwoman Carol Fowler sharply attacked Sarah Palin today, saying John McCain had chosen a running mate "whose primary qualification seems to be that she hasn’t had an abortion.”

Palin is an opponent of abortion rights and gave birth to her fifth child, Trig, earlier this year after finding out during her pregnancy that the baby had Down syndrome.

Fowler told my colleague Alex Burns in an interview that the selection of an opponent of abortion rights would not boost McCain among many women.

“Among Democratic women and even among independent women, I don’t think it helped him,” she said.

Told of McCain's boost in the new ABC/Washington Post among white women following the Palin pick, Fowler said: "Just anecdotally, I believe that those white women are Republican women anyway."

*****************************************************

You can’t make it up, can you?

My previous post dealt with one of Obama’s media flacks, Newsweek’s Eleanor Clift, who was worried the Dems’ were too “high-mind[ed].”

Here’s a real worry every American concerned with fair treatment of political candidates ought to have: We’ve not seen the worst yet of what the Dems are going to throw at Palin.

Newsweek’s Clift must be feeling better

Just a month ago, Newsweek’s Eleanor Clift, one of the most reliable of the media’s Reliable Dems for Obama, was worried.

Democrats might hurt their election chances because – well, because Sen. Obama and the Dems just brim with “high-mindedness,”Ms. Clift fretted.

This from her Aug. 15 column:

… [Emory University psychology professor Drew Westen] credits Obama with wanting to run a different kind of campaign but says that Democrats have it in their DNA to avoid confrontation and then rationalize their aversion to negative attacks as high-mindedness.

The Obama team, by failing to fully exploit McCain's vulnerabilities--that he's not really a straight talker, that he's four more years of Bush--has unwittingly allowed their candidate to become the sole focus of the campaign.

"Because Obama is so bent on running a positive campaign, the campaign is about him. There's been no real effort to define McCain to the American people," [says Westen.] …

Clift and professor Westen needn’t have worried for today we read in the Newsport News Free Press:

Democrat Barack Obama lambasted Republican John McCain's campaign for "lies, phony outrage and Swift Boat politics" at Granby high School on Wednesday in response to the latest brouhaha on the campaign trail

McCain's campaign seized on a comment Obama made at a town hall meeting Tuesday in Lebanon, when Obama said, "you can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig" in describing McCain's economic strategy. …

And yesterday from the WSJ’s John Fund post “The Hunt for Sarah October:”

Democrats understand Sarah Palin is a formidable political force who has upset the Obama victory plan. The latest Washington Post/ABC Poll shows John McCain taking a 12-point lead over Barack Obama among white women, a reversal of Mr. Obama's eight-point lead last month.

It's no surprise, then, that Democrats have airdropped a mini-army of 30 lawyers, investigators and opposition researchers into Anchorage, the state capital Juneau and Mrs. Palin's hometown of Wasilla to dig into her record and background. My sources report the first wave arrived in Anchorage less than 24 hours after John McCain selected her on August 29. …

Professor Westen may be a little pained right now and busy revising his “Obama is so bent on running a positive campaign” lecture.

But Eleanor Clift must be feeling better and expecting Obama's poll numbers to rise.

Clift’s column’s here; the Free Press story’s here; and the WSJ’s Fund’s post’s here.