Peter Wehner explores some of the vitriol leveled at ABC and the two moderators of the last Democrat debate and doesn’t like the double standard at play:
And what did Stephanopoulos and Gibson do to earn this scorn? Why, they asked Barack Obama some probing questions, including one about his past relationships with the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Jr. and a former leader of the Weather Underground, William Ayers.
Consider this thought experiment: Assume that a conservative candidate for the GOP nomination spent two decades at a church whose senior pastor was a white supremacist who uttered ugly racial (as well as anti-American) epithets from the pulpit. Assume, too, that this minister wasn’t just the candidate’s pastor but also a close friend, the man who married the candidate and his wife, baptized his two daughters, and inspired the title of his best-selling book.
In addition, assume that this GOP candidate, in preparing for his entry into politics, attended an early organizing meeting at the home of a man who, years before, was involved in blowing up multiple abortion clinics and today was unrepentant, stating his wish that he had bombed even more clinics. And let’s say that the GOP candidate’s press spokesman described the relationship between the two men as “friendly.”
Do you think that if those moderating a debate asked the GOP candidate about these relationships for the first time, after 22 previous debates had been held, that other journalists would become apoplectic at the moderators for merely asking about the relationships? Not only would there be a near-universal consensus that those questions should be asked; there would be a moral urgency in pressing for answers. We would, I predict, be seeing an unprecedented media “feeding frenzy.”
The truth is that a close relationship with a white supremacist pastor and a friendly relationship with an abortion clinic bomber would, by themselves, torpedo a conservative candidate running for president. There is an enormous double standard at play here, one rooted in the fawning regard many journalists have for Barack Obama. They have a deep, even emotional, investment in his candidacy. And, as we are seeing, they will turn on anyone, even their colleagues, who dare raise appropriate and searching questions–the kind journalists are supposed to ask. The reaction to Stephanopoulos and Gibson is a revealing and depressing glimpse into the state of modern journalism.
When the nominee is finally picked and the general debates start up….will any of the MSM talking heads dare to ask these kind of character questions of Obama?
See author page
Looks like I was late to the fray MataHarley and things have kind of died down here…
But, no doubt it’ll pick up in another thread soon enough.
If we’re ordering shots; make mine a Vodka Gimlet.
Now, what shall we toast to? The good old Cold War days when NATO was a functional alliance?
I am not Blaming our military for not finishing the job in Afghanistan… I am Blaming BUSH for taking his eye off the ball!!! namely going after until he had Bin Laden… That was a HUGE mistake on Bushes part! Saying we did exactly what the DNC wanted and the rest of country wanted by putting in a UN international support… that would have been fine AFTER getting Bin Laden…
but NO BUSH wanted to invade Iraq… Someone here suggested that Iraq is a bipartison war. I’m sorry but it’s not.. I hold BUSH accountable for plotting how he would convince (LIE to) congress it was necessary. And for the whole BOTCHED war.
Machiavelli.
Apparently your brand of christianity is better than others… (not) excuuuuuuuuuse me for pointing that out!!!!
Obama was lead to christ by Rev. Wright….
It’s just this simple:
“The truth is that a close relationship with a white supremacist pastor and a friendly relationship with an abortion clinic bomber would, by themselves, torpedo a conservative candidate running for president. There is an enormous double standard at play here, one rooted in the fawning regard many journalists have for Barack Obama. They have a deep, even emotional, investment in his candidacy.”
My gawd, look at how the press has tried to create and exaggerate relationships re Sen McCain and his quasi alleged lobbyist affair. Somehow or another that deserves being looked into, and Sen Obama’s relationships to a racist anti-Americans/Al Queda sympathizing “reverend” and to known terrorists doesn’t warrant a question? Gosh, I’m sorry…I bet that sounded…
…”bitter”
at least I’m not out of bounds in the assertion:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120891044439036617.html?mod=rss_opinion_main
sky55110 wrote:
sky, how did Bush lie to congress? What did he say that was a lie?
Did bin Laden escape, or did we let him get away by Bush “taking his eye off the ball”?
Based on your 5AM post today (4/23), Skye55110, it’s obvious you have not bothered to read the UNMOVIC report I provided the link for above.
I suggest you read that. Rapidly followed by the Iraq Perspective Study/Pentagon IV report (the READ THE FULL REPORT HERE link found at the top of this ABC news story)…
…and when you’re done – and ONLY when you’re done – THEN get back to us about those “lies” you parrot from DNC talking points. Until you have that data under your belt, your comments are really nothing more than emotional venting. Understandable with your son in the line of fire. But I’m sure he’d better appreciate an informed Mom.
And right on, Wordsmith… INRE Bin Laden’s escape. They called for a truce during Tora Bora, where Bin Ladin used the quiet to steal into the night, back into Pakistan to a convenient hole in the wall located in the tribal militants back yard.
If anyone dropped the ball, it was those who not only think we should negotiate with militants, but actually buy into their truces… which are nothing more than a “regroup” moment for further warfare.
Can anyway say “what’s up in Palestine, Jimmah??”
What lies??? is your memory that short??? “Saddam has and is building WMD’s”,
and SATURDAY SNEAK…BUSH LIES…Trailers Of Mass Destruction, Part Two…”You remember when [Secretary of State] Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons….They’re illegal. They’re against the United Nations resolutions, and we’ve so far discovered two.* And we’ll find more weapons as time goes on, But for those who say we haven’t found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they’re wrong. We found them.” (italics ours) –WP, “Bush: ‘We Found’ Banned Weapons. President Cites Trailers in Iraq as Proof, ” May 31, 2003
and here is the war monger himself Cheny
“We believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.”
—Vice President Dick Cheney on NBC’s Meet the Press, March 16, 2003
Then Rummy:
“I don’t believe anyone that I know in the administration ever said that Iraq had nuclear weapons.”
—Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, at a hearing of the Senate’s appropriations subcommittee on defense, May 14, 2003
want more???
Wordsmith…. hopefully we were not stupid enough to let him get away…. I am not accusing the Bush of that… I am accusing him of rushing over to Iraq when he did not have to.. and without thinking through what the consequences in the region would be. Mainly Iran… Bush will go down as the worst foreign policy president in decades…
and for your view pleasure:
I see you still do alot of cyber talking, but no reading, Skye55110. You’ve now officially moved to my auto-eject list, skipping your posts as an utter waste of valuable time.
Ooops, I spoke too soon it would seem.
MataHarley, if we’re still ordering drinks; better make my Vodka Gimlet a double.
Sky…
Ad hominem attacks do not advance your argument. However, given BHO’s 10 point drubbing in Pennsylvania, I can understand how you might be “bitter” about it.
However, you err in assessing my post; my point was that my family and I would show better judgment than BHO has; and he’s the one who thinks he should be President.
I “hope” that makes things clear to you. But, since it appears nothing is going to “change” your fervor for BHO, I’m not going to waste time with the religious argument.
We may be the last hangers-on for the “double standard” thread, Mach… but the bar’s always open for you. And on the reaming saloon denizens from me.
Doubles it is… Patience, dealing with the overwhelmingly under’informed, *alway* requires adult beverages to recharge the batteries. But when the under’informed refuse to read anything more than headlines, it may also require a keg chaser!
I am not bitter about the numbers at all…. he came up from 25 points behind… with only a net gain of 10-12 delegates for Hillary. She is not going to catch up. Get ready BHO will be YOUR next President…
Senator Obama was reportedly named after his father, Barack Hussein Obama, Sr.
The Senator’s first name, Barack, is a Swahili name that has its origins in the Arabic language. The original Arabic root of the name (B-R-K) means “blessed.” In Arabic, the root word is used in many other phrases to denote blessings and to describe people who are blessed:
Mabruk! = “Congratulations!”
Barakallah feek = “May God bless you”
Barakah = blessings from God (feminine version of the name)
Senator Obama’s middle name is Hussein, which was his grandfather’s first name. The name, of Arabic origin, means “good” or “handsome one.” It is common in Muslim cultures for children (both boys and girls) to have a middle name which directly connects them to their father or grandfather.
Senator Obama’s surname is not uncommon among the Luo tribe, one of the three largest ethnic groups in Kenya.