NYT EXPOSED! ECHOES CLINTON STATEMENT ONCE ATTACKED!

Shocking, New York Times has lost a bit more credibility in my mind, if it ever had any.

In a world of hypocrites, Bob Herbert of the New York Times is one of the most transparent.

Last year in a FOX interview with Major Garrett on January 7, 2008 Hillary Clinton said:

“I would point to the fact that that Dr. King’s dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, when he was able to get through Congress something that President Kennedy was hopeful to do, the President before had not even tried, but it took a president to get it done. That dream became a reality, the power of that dream became a real in people’s lives because we had a president who said we are going to do it, and actually got it accomplished.”

The New York Times and other media outlets responded by helping the Obama campaign twist these statements and others to successfully portray the Clintons as racists. Bob Herbert wrote in the Times on January 12, 2008: “And there was Mrs. Clinton telling the country we don’t need ‘false hopes,’ and taking cheap shots at, of all people, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.”

Now, over one year later, Herbert wrote on January 19, 2009:

“Johnson’s contributions to the betterment of American life were nothing short of monumental. For blacks, he opened the door to the American mainstream with a herculean effort that resulted in the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. He followed up that bit of mastery with the Voting Rights Act of 1965…Without Lyndon Johnson, Barack Obama and so many others would have traveled a much more circumscribed path. I wish Johnson could be there, his commitment to civil rights so publicly vindicated, his eyes no doubt misting as the oath of office is administered.”

Oh really? So was Herbert, the Times, and the rest of the media wrong last year for castigating Mrs. Clinton when she acknowledged Johnson’s indelible role in the civil rights movement? Incredibly, Herbert does not even acknowledge Mrs. Clintons sentiments from last year, which appalled him.

If Herbert were a person of integrity, he would write a column apologizing to Mrs. Clinton. I don’t know how so-called ‘journalists’ sleep at night knowing how they wrongly tried to assassinate the Clintons’ character with abuse of the race card, but I do know why New York Times stock is now worth less than a roll of toilet paper.

Reposted from DONE (Democrats Over Nominating Elitists) article One Year Later, NY Times Echoes Hillary’s Once “Racist” MLK/LBJ Quote 

WebBlog Awards Endorsements

The Confluence: http://2008.weblogawards.org/polls/best-liberal-blog/

No Quarter: http://2008.weblogawards.org/polls/best-political-coverage/

Uppity Woman: http://2008.weblogawards.org/polls/best-new-blog/

The Washington Note: http://2008.weblogawards.org/polls/best-very-large-blog/

Nice Deb: http://2008.weblogawards.org/polls/best-small-blog/

Hot Air: http://2008.weblogawards.org/polls/best-blog/

Deadenders: http://2008.weblogawards.org/polls/best-hidden-gem/

Welcome, Geraldine Ferraro, to PUMA!

OK not quite, but this is what she did say when asked about sexist coverage on Sarah Palin on ABC:

You know that, that, was a complaint that we heard from a lot of women. But to be quite frank, it wasn’t Hillary who was complaining. It was us. It was, it was me and several others. In fact if you take a look at the Hillary Clinton voters, there are some people there who are called PUMA….Those are the women who turned around and said that the sexism in the press was so bad during the primaries and they’re furious at the DNC, the Democratic National Committee, Howard Dean, and Barack Obama for not speaking up against this. And they say there’s this double standard. If racist — if the media had approached Barack Obama in a racist way, everybody would have been screaming and rightly so. With Hillary, not so. And one of the things I mentioned earler when I was on, on GMA, was I said, you know, there was a guy sitting there with a sign saying “iron my shirts.” Why didn’t the media report that? Does that not indicate that there is sexism in this country? [Actually, quite a few media outlets picked it up.]

Had somebody been there with a sign for Barack Obama that said shine my shoes, would there not have been a reporting of that? No double standard. No double standard. And there are those PUMA people are those people who say “we’re not going to vote for Barack Obama. We’re going to vote for John McCain. Or we’re going to write in Hillary, or what we’re going to do is we’re not going to do anything on the top line.” Those, some of those people, maybe John McCain will pick up. But, you know, it is, it is a very bad place to be. And I have to tell you, even Governor Palin thinks that’s whining. A lot of those PUMA people and I will be watching very carefully to make sure that you treat her just like anybody else. Go to her, her qualifications, go to her experience. Go to whatever you want to. But make sure it’s done on a basis where she’s treated like a guy by the media. No sexism. Because we’ll be looking.

So didn’t say that she is PUMA, but she is puting herself in the same catagory in one area. Then we remember that she said about Obama being “terribly sexist” and that she might not vote for him.

Hillary for VP?

A friend in the PUMA movement sent this, apparantly seriously:

We have received information from sources high in the Democratic Party that , in a total desperation move, Hillary Rodham Clinton will replace the hapless Joe Biden as V-P candidate on the Obama ticket. I will send out more information on this in several minutes. Hillary Clinton has said that Barack Obama is not qualified to be Commander-in-Chief. He hasn’t grown any more qualified presumably in the past few weeks. As the saying goes, “It took a Republican to have the Obama Dems name a woman to the ticket.”

Is it true? I don’t know.

If Obama does this, I agree,  it would show desperation.

This story was broke by Camp2008VictoryA, but I broke the MoveOn.org part.

Update: If this adds any credibility to the rumor, the MoveOn.org adds running on facebook have changed to giving away “Obama” stickers, from the “Obama/Biden” stickers. This could really be true, cheers to the second blog that posted on this!

Media Bias: Proof

The LA Times Online reports that according to a new report from Investors Business Daily journalists have given a total of $225,563 to Democrats, and $16,298 to Republicans. The Investors Business Daily also reported that 235 journalists have given to democrats, while only 20 have given to republicans. Thats pretty sorry, we need our press rooms to be bi-partisan; not weighted by better than 11:1 against the Republicans. Keep this in mind when you discuss media bias. If John McCain loses to Barack Obama its because this. Evidently there was something similar going on against Senator Clinton. Of course the LA Times is the king of media bias, or at least a top contender against NBC and NYT, I’m surprised that they would let their online people publish an article like that. But they did end it with a little biting statement for their 20 conservative colleagues:

Those same donation figures could also be used to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Republican journalists are a whole lot stingier than their liberal colleagues.

Wait a second, the figures were that 235 journalists donated 225,563 dollars to democrats, while 20 donated 16,298 to republicans. That means the average democratic journalists’ donation was approximately $960, while the average republican journalists’ donation was was approximately $815. Is that really a lot stingier? Frankly its more than the average person will give, so I guess the average person is “stingy”. Maybe its because its hard for those 20 republicans to get promoted when their outnumbered 11:2 by their liberal colleagues, so their pay checks are lower? So again LA Times tried to create a false impression that the liberal ones somehow are more passionate for their cause. At least they got right that the journalists that donate to democrats are liberal not moderate, the democrats aren’t centrist anymore.