Home add your blog Archives Search Book Reviews Forum Contact RSS FEED

This site is an rss/xml news reader containing our favorite feeds. All articles are the copyrighted material of the blogs that wrote them.

WSJ uncritically reported McCain's accusation
that Obama raised age issue, ignoring Obama's actual charge about negative campaigning

post from Media Matters for America on 09 May 2008 03:41:31 PM. © Media Matters for America

A May 9 Wall StreetJournal article about Sen.John McCain's presidential run reported: "A preview [of the generalelection] erupted yesterday when, in an interview on cable news, Sen. [Barack]Obama suggested Sen. McCain was 'losing his bearings.' McCainadviser Mark Salter quickly countered with an open memo to reporters. He calledit a 'not particularly clever way of raising John McCain's age as anissue.' " But the Journaldid not report the context in which Obama made the remark: He was discussing[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.mediamatters.org/~r/mediamatters/latest/~3/287027878/200805090004

Digg this

John McCain v. Barack Obama

post from Taylor Marsh on 09 May 2008 03:37:22 PM. © Taylor Marsh

BY TAYLOR MARSHThe general election has begun.Open thread.[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=27641

Digg this

Did Obama Win On Iraq No

post from TalkLeft on 09 May 2008 03:37:00 PM. © TalkLeft

Kevin Drum agrees with this:

[M]y guess is that if she had voted against the war Clinton would be the Democratic candidate. Given the closeness of the race, her inherent advantages going in, and that the war had to be a liability it's hard to imagine that she wouldn't have prevailed without the Iraq albatross.

If that were true, then it would be a great thing. But I think it is not. Consider the exit polling. In Iowa, Obama and Clinton won the same number of voters who said the economy was the biggest issue as said Iraq was the biggest issue. In Wisconsin, perhaps Obama's most important win, 45% of voters said the economy was the most important issue, and Obama carried them 57-41. He carried Iraq voters 60-39.

It would be nice if people chose Obama based on Iraq. That does not seem to have been the case.

By Big Tent Democrat

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/TalkleftThePoliticsOfCrime/~3/287030333/72673

Digg this

TX-Sen: Second Poll Puts Noriega Within 4 Points

post from MyDD on 09 May 2008 03:30:35 PM. © MyDD

We've been watching this race for over a year, but I have to admit, as much hope as I held out for Democrat Rick Noriega to really make a contest out of it, I never really expected it to get this close this soon. But following up on Rasmussen Reports[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/mydd/~3/287013042/6936

Digg this

Lynch and Kennedy Launch “Vote for
Change”

post from Kmareka.com on 09 May 2008 03:30:00 PM. © Kmareka.com

Voting and civic participation have never been more important. Barack Obama knows this, and so do our local leaders in the Democratic party. From the Obama Campaign:

TOMORROW: U.S. Rep. Patrick Kennedy and Attorney General Patrick Lynch to Launch ?Vote for Change? in Rhode Island
Providence, RI ? The Obama campaign announced today that Attorney General Patrick Lynch and U.S. Rep. Patrick Kennedy will launch the Rhode Island Vote for Change voter registration drive on Saturday, May 10th in Providence. Vote for Change is a 50-state voter registration and mobilization drive aimed at getting millions more Americans registered to vote and involved in the democratic process ahead of the November election.
Go to http://my.barackobama.com/voteforchange to find out more about the 101 Vote for Change kickoff events that will be held nationwide on May 10th.
WHO: U.S. Rep. Patrick Kennedy, Attorney General Patrick Lynch
WHAT: Vote for Change Kickoff Event
WHERE: Former Obama for America Office, 235 Westminster St, Providence
WHEN: Saturday, May 10, 2008, 10AM

Read The Full Article:
http://kmareka.com/?p=1823

Digg this

The Propaganda of Silence

post from Daily Kos on 09 May 2008 03:27:24 PM. © Daily Kos

Twenty days ago, David Barstow broke his story in The New York Times about the Pentagon’s use of network and cable military analysts to reinforce its talking points and present a favorable picture of happenings in Iraq. Ever since, the print and television media have delved into the scandal, prying out new details in interviews and document searches, and discussing the implications for democracy when the Department of Defense shapes the debate with the help of triple-dipping former employees who present themselves as objective observers of U.S. policy.

Riiiiiiiiiiiight. In some parallel dimension.

In our dimension, what we’ve got isn’t a flurry of follow-up reports but rather one of the key elements of propaganda: killing a story by ignoring it.

The media typically employ their pervasive power to reinforce the dominant ideology through repeated exposure to every element of their biased agenda. But silence should not be underrated. It provides a marvelous tool of control when accompanied by the never-ending distractions and distortions of infotainment.

No surprise whatsoever that the network and cable stations who hired these ex-military analysts without disclosing to audiences their conflicts of interest or other biases have been – let us be generous – reluctant to acknowledge their role in passing along exaggerations and outright lies to Americans in the run-up to the war and its bloody, treasury-sucking aftermath. They have a big stake in silence.

On the other hand, it might be thought that editorialists of major print outlets which didn't pay for the free-lance "expertise" of the Pentagon’s domestic propaganda brigade would be eager to write something excoriating. Or that print reporters would be digging into the documents on the subject that the Pentagon has dumped at this Web site. Alas, such modest aggressiveness is also confined to that other dimension.

Just how silent the media have been has been examined by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (TV News Blackout on Pentagon Pundits) and the Pew Project for Excellence in Journalism (Media Passes on Times Pentagon Piece). In the first week after Barstow’s story appeared, Pew found two stories about it in other media, both of them on PBS. Since then, there have been a handful of others.

Only in wwwLand and among a few in Congress has the story been given any significant attention. Senator John Kerry urged a "thorough investigation" by the Government Accountability Office, as he noted here at Daily Kos in Investigate the Pentagon Pundit Program. Senator Russ Feingold also wrote the GAO. Michigan Senator Carl Levin has written to Defense Secretary Robert Gates. Connecticut Rep. Rosa DeLauro wrote to news executives at the broadcast and cable networks asking them to explain what criteria they use for hiring military analysts. Only ABC and CNN responded. She and 40 other congresspersons have asked the Pentagon’s Inspector General to conduct a probe. She joined with Michigan Rep. John Dingell and others requesting the Federal Communications Commission look into the matter:

"While we deem the DoD’s policy unethical and perhaps illegal, we also question whether the analysts and the networks are potentially equally culpable pursuant to the sponsorship identification requirements in the Communications Act of 1934 and the rules of the Federal Communications Commission," the letter stated.

"When seemingly objective television commentators are in fact highly motivated to promote the agenda of a government agency, a gross violation of the public trust occurs," it continued. "The American people should never be subject to a covert propaganda campaign but rather should be clearly notified of who is sponsoring what they are watching."

About all this too, megamedia silence.

It’s not as if there hasn’t been anything fresh to report. Media Matters, which has followed the story since it broke, actually spent some time perusing those documents the Pentagon posted. For those who claim there was nothing nefarious about the domestic propaganda program, that it was merely a program of courtesy briefings to ensure that the military analysts were up to speed on what was really happening with regards to Iraq, Media Matters found this audio-taped exchange of ass-kissing and subversion from an April 18, 2006, Pentagon meeting with several analysts, then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and General Peter Pace, who was then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff:

UNIDENTIFIED 1: I'm an old intel guy, and I can sum all of this up, unfortunately, with one word. And that is "psyops." Now, most people, when they hear that, they think, "Oh my God --

RUMSFELD: Yeah.

UNIDENTIFIED 1: -- "they're trying to brainwash [inaudible]."

RUMSFELD: "What are you, some kind of nut? You don't believe in the Constitution?"

UNIDENTIFIED 2: Well, he is.
[laughter]

UNIDENTIFIED 1: Some have characterized [inaudible]. But I would also disagree with you, sir, respectfully. You are absolutely brilliant in front of the camera. And anybody --

RUMSFELD: It's by acting. Because I don't spend any time --

UNIDENTIFIED 1: It doesn't matter. The point is that you are. And I think most of us would agree with that. And --

RUMSFELD: But I -- but -- but --

UNIDENTIFIED 1: -- to take the offensive is -- because many of us go on every day. We don't agree with everything the administration does, maybe with some of your decisions and -- but we get beat up on television sometimes when we go on and we are debating, and then we take the -- and we're all thick-skinned, or we wouldn't continue to do this.

RUMSFELD: Mm-hmm.

UNIDENTIFIED 1: But we would love -- I would personally love -- and I think I speak for most of the gentlemen here at the table -- for you to take the offensive, to just go out there and just crush these people so that when we go on, we're -- forgive me -- we're parroting, but it's what has to be said. It's what we believe in, or we would not be saying it.
[crosstalk]

UNIDENTIFIED 1: And we'd love to be following our leader, as indeed you are. You are the leader. You are our guy.

The Pentagon wouldn’t say who those unidentifieds were, but it gave Media Matters a list of confirmed participants at the meeting. Among them were Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney, military analyst for Fox News who recently suggested using terrorism against Iran.

On Wednesday at its Web site, Media Matters asked the media: "Have you hosted on air the person who told Rumsfeld at the meeting with military analysts: 'You are the leader. You are our guy'?

In that other dimension, they might have gotten an answer. But in that dimension, they wouldn't have had to ask the question.

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.dailykos.com/~r/dailykos/index/~3/287013062/7431

Digg this

Price Check: Baghdad Neighborhoods

post from IraqSlogger.com on 09 May 2008 03:25:37 PM. © IraqSlogger.com

Auto fuel (ID/liter) 26-Apr 3-May Percent change Baghdad al-Jadida 600 600 Sadr City 500 600 20.0% Karrada 800 700 -12.5% Kadhimiya 700 700 Mansour 800 700 -12.5% Ghazaliya 700 700 Sha'b 650 700 7.7% Hay al-'Amil 700 700 Harthiya 700 700 Black market prices of auto fuel fluctuated considerably in several of the nine Baghdad neighborhoods where Slogger sources track prices of key commodities.

Read The Full Article:
http://www.iraqslogger.com/index.php/post/5788

Digg this

Superdelegate Profile: Colorado DNC Member Debbie
Marquez

It's been a while since we've had a chance to introduce you to a superdelegate. Today it is our pleasure to profile Colorado DNC member Debbie Marquez who is an Obama supporter.

How long have you been a member of the DNC and how were you elected?

I have served as a DNC member since 2004 when I was elected for a four-year term at the Colorado State Convention. I am running for re-election this year - www.debbiemarquez.com. The delegates at the state convention in Colorado Springs on May 17th will have an opportunity to vote for three DNC committee members and I would appreciate their support. I am eager to have another four years to continue the work with the Hispanic DNC caucus and as a progressive voice at the DNC.

How do you feel about the existence of superdelegates and what do you say to our readers who think that the process is undemocratic.

I have faith that my DNC colleagues will abide by the voter preference in their states, which should result in the pledged delegate leader receiving the unpledged votes proportionately. So the outcome will not be to overturn the primary results. There are a few that are firmly committed to their candidate opposite their state or district results, but for the most part, the DNC members are voting with the people. Whether or not it?s an undemocratic process, I say, wait and see. I trust that the super delegates will abide by the will of the people in the end. And by the way, we are really not super! We're just regular people who are volunteering to serve to make the Democratic Party the best party it can be.

Are you doing any behind the scene work with he DNCC or Host Committee to prepare for the convention?

I am actively involved in the Hispanic Caucus convention committee where we are planning our caucus business meetings and a special event. I am currently working with the DNCC tech people to have our caucus agenda and information posted on the DNCC web page. We are hopeful that they will be able to offer our caucus and others a web presence to showcase the work done by the caucuses and the informative nature of the caucus meetings and to highlight the entire Hispanic delegation.

Can you tell me a few words about why you chose to endorse Obama?

Senator Obama has been a favorite of mine for some time. I remember when he first came to my attention as a candidate for US Senate. The blogosphere was all abuzz about the Illinois candidate with the funny name. Then hearing him speak in Boston at the 2004 convention ? it was a Wow! Moment. I realized he was a very special person. I have been waiting for an inspiring candidate like Senator Obama for a long time. Why do I feel he is the best candidate? Change. Hope.Progress. "If we understand Obama's approach as a means, and not the limit of what he understands about American politics, it has great promise as a theory of change, probably greater promise than either "work for it" or "demand it," although we'll need a large dose of hard work and an engaged social movement as well." - by Mark Schmitt, American Prospect, Dec. 2007 http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_theory_of_change_primary

How many conventions have you attended. What's your most memorable convention experience?

I was a delegate for VP Al Gore to LA in 2000. I attended the convention in Boston in 2004, not as a delegate, but as a DNC-elect member. Our term began and we are sworn in after the convention. It was my first meeting as a DNC member.

My most memorable moment in Boston was hearing Senator Obama speak. But I also love to attend the issue forums and encourage everyone to watch for them during convention week. It is so special to hear from leaders we usually only see on television. Many of the forums are open to the public and everything from health care to ending the war will be discussed.

How excited our you that Colorado is hosting the convention?

I am so excited!! It is a great opportunity to showcase our home state! I love my state, our culture, our traditions, our people. As with many SW Latino families, mine is from New Mexico and our 8 generations go back to the Spanish explorers to the 'new world'. I am very proud and excited for our state. The excitement generated by the Presidential candidates along with the national convention in Denver has generated an interest for Colorado Democrats never seen before. I can't wait to get past the state conventions, where my focus has been on re-election and nominating Senator Obama. Then I can focus on the DNCC and get out with the voters throughout the state.
How long have you been visiting Democratic Convention Watch and how did you first hear about us?

I learned of your wonderful web site from a story written at SquareState.Net, where I blog frequently. It has been a great service you are providing to the world and I thank you and your entire team for the work being done.

Thanks Debbie... we'll see you in August!

Read The Full Article:
http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/05/superdelegate-profile-colorado-dnc.html

Digg this

Tea Leaf Reading

One of Hillary's most prominent independent backers -- the American Leadership Project -- is not spending any money on Tuesday's West Virginia primary. There's an ostensible reason for it: Hillary has a commanding lead in the polls, and Obama has all but[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Talking-Points-Memo/~3/287043850/194249.php

Digg this

DNC Calls on McCain Campaign to Release Cindy
McCain's Tax Returns

post from BuzzFlash.org - Progressive News and Commentary with an Attitude | Fight Ignorance: Read BuzzFlash on 09 May 2008 03:02:04 PM. © BuzzFlash.org - Progressive News and Commentary with an Attitude | Fight Ignorance: Read BuzzFlash

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ALERT

Washington, DC - On the Today Show this morning, Cindy McCain defended the McCain campaign's decision to withhold her tax returns, saying they would never make her tax returns public -- not even if she becomes First Lady. [See it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXDV2kZX_MU] Despite the accountability Americans expect from their elected officials and McCain's own calls for openness and transparency in government, John McCain has only released two years of his tax returns. No nominee from either party since Ronald Reagan in 1980 has disclosed that little information.

By failing to release Cindy McCain's returns, the McCain campaign is raising serious concerns about his own credibility, about how McCain's position as a U.S. Senator may have benefited John and Cindy McCain's business ventures, and about how McCain's political career has benefited from her personal wealth.Bookmark/Search this post with: buzzflash | delicious | digg digg | technorati Technorati Tags: Alerts DNC John McCain Cindy McCain tax returns disclosure First Lady Hensley beer distributor