Think About It

The Economy: How CNN Has Failed The People

CNN has been running a daily report titled, "#1 Issue-The Economy" and how it affects the people.  Their journalists and guests who speak on the subject offer hype, cliches, and the usual economic talk that never tells the true story of what is really taking place with the economy.

 

Republican administrations don't preside over an economy that is broad based, sustainable, and with even job creation.  CNN has failed to point that out and the reasons why.  They can not bring themselves to face the facts that Reagan-Bush and Bush-Cheney had/have no economic policy.  They had/have a policy of deficit spending and creating debt for the country and its people.  And until the people understand this and our fiscal house is put back in order as President Clinton did, the economy and the people will suffer.  CNN, its journalists, and its guests have failed the American people by not exploring what has happened to the economy on Reagan and Bush 41 and Bush 43's watches with the massive debt they have placed on this country and the economy. 

 

CNN is incapable of telling the people the facts concerning the economy and are also incapable of giving out accurate information during this primary season.  

Texas, Ohio, and Rhode Island: 3 Out of 4 Isn't So Bad

Senator Clinton's victory in the above states have set the stage for the final showdown for the Democratic nomination going into these final primaries. 

 

It was not only a great win for Senator Clinton, but a great win for the American people, because these victories proved talking about the issues and solutions were more important to the country than a message of change that has yet to be defined.  Senator Clinton has talked about the issues and what she would do if elected President since day one.  

 

Journalists and pundits on MSNBC, Fox News, and some on CNN were openly talking about Clinton dropping out the race after the primaries Tuesday night.  They did not even give her a chance and were openly supporting and pushing her opponent.  Mike Barnacle said on Morning Joe this past week that journalists should not be in the business of urging candidates to drop out.  Rather, they should stick to their jobs of reporting the news.  He is so right, but journalists as a whole will never change.  Just remember Yogi Berra's golden rule, " It ain't over till its over".

 

This has been a great Democratic race and there should be no rush to conclusion just because the Republican nominee is already chosen.  The people have a right to have their voice heard and when the general election rolls around, the Democratic nominee will be strong and prevail.

 

Lets see how television journalists handle the rest of the Democratic primaries.  I will be willing to bet their presentations will continue to be negative concerning Senator Clinton. 

Another Great Moment

I'm just starting to watch the 1st hour of the debate as I had a previous commitment which kept me from seeing the first half and this is another great, emotional moment.

A Touching Closing

When I hear people ask me why I support Sen. Hillary Clinton, I can (and usually do) give them a million and one answers.  But Sen. Clinton's closing statement at tonight's debate just about sums it all up---she cares:

1/21 Democratic Debate Analysis

Wow!---thats all I can say.  Watching last night's CNN Democratic debate felt like watching a high speed car crash---where you just know it's going to get uglier and uglier but you just can't turn away.  

The first half of the debate, in addition to housing the fireworks between Clinton and Obama, had some rather odd moments. For one, it seemed as if Obama had rehearsed lines that he was determined to get in on Clinton regardless of what the topic of the question was.  In the first ten minutes, Obama was asked a question about the economy, but instead of spending his one minute of time answering the question, he attacked Bill Clinton.  It was just plain weird to see a question on the economy turn into an attack on Bill Clinton, which of course drew a response from Clinton, and then one back again from Obama and so on. 

One thing I was shocked to see, and I say this from a completely unbiased point of view, was that Obama took the Clintons' bait. It was overtly obvious to anyone watching the past few days that Bill and Hillary wanted to distract Obama from the issues and get inside his head.  And to my surprise, Bill threw out the bait and Obama jumped on it.  It was unproductive for Obama last night, it terms of the more or less national race coming February 5, to attack Bill Clinton.  Obama has South Carolina locked up with its 50% + African American vote, but Super Tuesday is another story.  And by taking the Clintons' bait and attacking Hillary and Bill, rather than answering the questions, Obama was reduced to nothing more than a mere politician.  If I was Obama and I was put in his position, going up against the Clinton machine, I would have risen above the fray and tried to appear untouchable.  

Why Obama aggressively and persistently went after the Clintons, particularly Bill, is beyond my comprehension.  Does he not understand that he played right into the Clintons' hands last night?  This should be common sense for anyone, especially someone with the savvy of Obama---you don't attack Bill Clinton in a Democratic Primary race. It's just plain stupid.

And to make matters even worse for Obama last night, he was the one who started the entire fight, and trust me, it was a fight. Usually it's Hillary who makes a charge against her opponents and more or less starts the dialogue.  Last night it was Obama who appeared overly eager to throw the first punch.  But as Obama found out, Clinton can hit back pretty hard too.  After several minutes of back and forth bickering, Obama made a comment about Clinton and Wal-Mart.  Clinton, clearly having had enough, hit Obama back with the whole Rezco scandal, which does deserve more attention than it's gotten.  You could just tell by the look on Obama's face that he was not ready for that, and he was pretty much "well-behaved" for the rest of the debate.

  

Again, I'll say that those opening moments clearly rattled Obama.  The candidates were asked about a bill that came to the Senate that would put a cap on interest rates for credit cards at 30%.  Clinton voted for it, Obama against it.  Clinton made the charge that by not voting to put a cap on how high credit cards could charge a customer interest, Obama was playing right into the corporate lobbyists' hands. Obama then gave the most bizarre comeback of this campaign season: he voted against it because he though that 30% was too high.  John Edwards, who has mostly sided with Obama in previous debates, turned to Obama, with the a priceless look on his face, and simply asked Obama how the hell does it make sense that you vote against a 30% cap, which by default would allow a company to charge as much interest as they like, and then say it was because the cap was too high.  Isn't a 30% cap better than a 100% cap?  

Edwards also went after Obama over his liberal use of the "present" vote in the Illinois State Senate.  This is really telling, because as Edwards said, if you agree with a bill, you vote yes, if you don't, you vote no.  The present vote is nothing more than a cheap shot at political cover.  Instead of taking a stand on tough issues, Obama decided to straddle the middle.  As Edwards said, America needs a President who is not afraid to take tough positions; America needs a President who will stand up and fight for a progressive agenda.

The best and most substantive policy debate of the night came over the issue of healthcare.  From what I could tell, both Clinton and Edwards looked great defending true universal healthcare.  Democrats have wanted universal healthcare for over a decade, and it's appealing to many to hear Clinton and Edwards stand up firmly for it.  They both correctly pointed out that Obama's plan is not universal.  Every American will not be insured; in fact, an estimated 15 million or more would be left without healthcare coverage.  In 2008, with a Democratic Congress and Democratic President, universal healthcare can get passed.  It would be sad to pass up that opportunity, both in my mind and in the mind of many other Democrats.  

So who won the debate?  Clearly Edwards.  Not because he was particularly great last night, but because the spat between Clinton and Obama virtually cancelled each candidate out.  Unfortunately for Edwards, it's just too late for him to make a comeback.  So in that sense, when you realize that it's now a Clinton-Obama race, Clinton won the debate.  Obama played to the South Carolina base, and did well on that front.  But on the national scale, Clinton was the winner.  

Pollsters, Journalists, and Pundits...Oh My!

Pollsters in the past have generally been accurate in their political forecasts, so what happened in the New Hampshire Primary this past Tuesday?  The New York Times reported many pollsters and news organizations plunged into a post-mortem of how they did not see what was coming.

 

What happened was very simple.  The pollsters, journalists, and pundits were pushing Obama, especially after the Iowa caucuses.  Obama was their candidate and they went to great length to talk him up and great length to knock Clinton down.  The polls just prior to the New Hampshire primary showed Obama with a lead, a sure indication that something was wrong and the pollsters knew it but the game was on for Obama.  T.V. journalists were the worst.  Obama received most of their air time and then used their programs to knock Clinton.  The worst was Chris Matthews of MSNBC.  He attacked Clinton daily because she was campaigning and would not come on his show.  He really showed his ass.  The big baby could not get his way so he tried to get even.

 

CNN, on the night of the returns, had William Bennett and Ralph Reed on to offer commentary.  Those two neocons represent the worst in politics, but there they were for all Americans to see.  CNN has no shame.  That shows just how far T.V. will go to try and intimidate the people.  T.V. journalists represent the worse when it comes to broadcasting the facts.  They are the same ones who promoted the Iraq War  and the WMD that we now know did not exist.  And they were the ones hyping war with Iran until the recent NIE report came.

 

The best thing for people to do is tune the cable news networks out and just watch the 30 minute evening news of ABC, CBS ,and NBC.  Shows like Meet the Press and Face the Nation are copying off the cable news networks and are also pushing their favorite candidates.  Their questions tell the real story. 

 

Many pollsters and journalists undermine America and its people with their outright lies.  Once they pick out their favorite, they gear their questions to flatter that person.  They really are a sad bunch.  They remind me a lot of Bush---they have no character or ethics, and they are determined to continue to mislead the people and the country. 

Hillary Still Strong

The media, as of late, has been really hitting Sen. Clinton hard and presenting only one side of a very complex story.  But I'm not into the game of "blame it all on the media".  Rather, I like to look for facts, and quite frankly, the facts show that Hillary is still a very strong candidate, both nationally and in the early states.  The media has been highly critical of the Clinton campaign, focusing on what they want you to think is a huge, sudden downfall for her in the polls.  The polls that show Hillary looking strong are all but forgotten.  So here is the most up to date polling available and, as you'll see, Hillary isn't in all that bad of shape after all.

First, let's take a look at the national race.  The two national polls that keep being shown over and over again on CNN and MSNBC are the two that show Obama very close to Hillary.  A Hotline poll from 12/10-14 has Obama trailing Clinton by just 5 points, while a Zogby poll has Obama just 8 points behind.  But here are the polls that aren't getting play, mainly because they don't make for as interesting of a story.  The very latest poll from Fox (12/18-19) has Clinton with a staggering 29 point lead over Obama.  An ABC poll from earlier this month has Clinton with a 30 point lead.  A NBC poll conducted just this past week has Clinton with a 24 point lead.  As you can see, Clinton's national lead is still strong.  Her peak was 30 points over Obama back in October.  Still, despite what the media would have you think, that lead is still very much in place.

Next up is Iowa.  Just today I heard talk on CNN and MSNBC about how dangerous Clinton is to coming in a distant third in Iowa and how horrible she is doing there.  Here is a fact: the last 3 out of 4 polls from Iowa have Clinton in the lead.  The American Research Group and Rasmussen give Clinton a 4 point lead.  CNN gives her a 2 point lead (interesting how CNN doesn't even report on their own poll).  Real Clear Politics, a great website that averages recent polling, indicates that Obama and Clinton are tied in Iowa with 28.3% each.  Does Clinton have Iowa locked-up?  Of course not.  But she is certainly doing better than the media lets out.

Another poll which has been given a ton of airplay today is the USA Today/Gallup poll from New Hampshire which shows Clinton and Obama tied.  What the media fails to mention is another poll which was conducted during the same time frame as the Gallup poll and gives Clinton a 14 point lead.  The latest CNN and Fox polls give her a 12 and 9 point lead respectively.  Real Clear Politics averages that Clinton has a 6.2 point lead; certainly not great, but far from horrible.

Clinton may not be at her peak, but no one realistically expected that she would be right now.  It is a historical fact that the closer to the primaries a Presidential election gets, particularly on the Democratic side, the more the race tightens.  Again, my point in writing this is not to attack the media, but rather to get the other side of the story out there.  It seems that over the last few months the MSM has turned violently against Clinton and is doing everything possible to pump up Barack Obama.  But facts are facts.  This is a very close race, but Clinton is still the frontrunner and is either winning or tying for first when you average the most recent data.   

Can't People Take A Joke?

The media has gone crazy in recent days over a statement that the Clinton campaign released about Barack Obama wanting to be President even when he was in kindergarten. In all seriousness, can people not recognize a joke when they see one? Have we really become so stiff that when a campaign makes a joke, we can't just laugh at it and move on, but rather spin it into something its not? Aren't there more important things for the media to cover than this? After watching yesterday and today's lineup on CNN and MSNBC, that statement made by the Clinton campaign has gotten more analysis and air time than the intelligence report saying that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons.

In all honesty, you don't even have to be a Clinton supporter to admit that there is something wrong with that. Since when has a joke become more important than actual hard news? Is that what America and its media is coming to---where a joke has to be spun into some sort of scandalous controversy? Criticize Sen. Clinton on her policies as much as you want; thats fair game, but stop spinning every little thing that comes out her mouth into a scandal. And that doesn't just go for Sen. Clinton, that goes for any candidate. The American people have a right to know the truth about a candidate and what he or she says. Today, however, thats not happening because the media is just looking for a big story. And when they don't have a big story, or at least don't think they have one, they make one up. Thats exactly what they did here and this isn't the first time. It has happened to other candidates too and its time to stop.

11/15 Debate: Hillary "Turns up the Heat"

I just finished watching tonight's Democratic Presidential Debate on CNN and I must say I was very impressed with Sen. Clinton. I commented after the last debate in Philly that there was no clear winner. Well tonight, there was definitely a clear winner. Like her or not, Sen. Hillary Clinton won the debate hands down.

What is interesting to note is that most of the sparks in the debate took place in the first 15 minutes or so. Right from the start, Obama and Edwards went after Clinton, but unlike previous debates, Clinton responded. Clinton's forceful responses were spot on and she super-effectively made the case that she is the most qualified candidate to be President. I also find it interesting that after Clinton responded to her attackers, both Edwards and Obama left her alone for the remainder of the debate; she essentially shut them up.

Clinton's best response came when she was asked about playing "the gender card". Clinton correctly responded by saying that her opponents were not ganging up on her because she was is a woman, but rather because she is ahead. Another fact that will play to Clinton's favor is that she answered every question directly. No one can accuse her of parsing her answers or trying to get around the question. If anything, Obama had problems answering the questions directly; he himself got tripped up on the immigration question that Hillary messed up on in the last debate.

In the past few weeks, Obama has really grown as a candidate. He got a huge boost coming out of the last debate, but he completely failed to capitalize on that momentum tonight. Obama completely lost tonight. He indeed had one of his worst debate performances.

It would not surprise me if Hillary regains her strength and Obama loses his. Tonight was a complete win for the Clinton campaign and really a huge loss for everyone else involved. You could tell this by the crowd reaction. At the start of the debate, the audience was evenly split between Hillary, Edwards, and Obama. By the end of the night, the crowd loudly booed anything Obama or Edwards said negatively about Clinton. Clinton had managed to win over about 90% of the Las Vegas audience by the end of the night. And possibly the most important thing of all, Clinton looked the most presidential and she succeeded in presenting herself as the strongest, toughest, and most experienced candidate in the race.

As many of you know, I typically rank the candidates in the order in which I think they scored, but tonight there is simply no need for that. Sen. Clinton is the solid #1 winner. There is no reason to rank anyone else, because frankly, Clinton was in a totally different league then everyone else tonight.

With that being said, if you saw the debate and have any thoughts, please share them. I want to know what you think.

New study shows Clinton appealing to Democrats more and more

In research conducted by CNN, Democrats say that Hillary Clinton is the most experienced with 59%, followed by John Edwards at 11%, and Barack Obama with 9%. When asked who the strongest leader was, Democrats again chose Clinton with 47%, with her rivals Obama and Edwards, scoring 22% and 13% respectively. Clinton also polled ahead, with 46%, when Democrats were asked who is most qualified to be commander-in-chief. Obama followed with 15% and Edwards with 13%. When Democrats were asked who is the candidate for change, 40% said Clinton, 27% said Obama, and Edwards came in third with 13%. When asked who is the most honest candidate, Clinton came out again the winner with 28%, followed closely by Obama at 24%, and Edwards with 19%. When asked who is the best choice to defeat a Republican and lead the Democrats to a victory in '08, Clinton won by a landslide 55%, way ahead of the 19% for Obama and the 12% Edwards received. She also scored the highest when democrats were asked whether Clinton could beat the GOP, 72% say she definitely can, while only 57% feel the same about Obama.

Clinton is indeed in a very good place right now. With her support on a consistent rise, it may only be a short time before some of the other contenders must drop out of the race. The most interesting finding of the poll is that democrats feel Hillary is the candidate of change over Obama, who has been running as the change candidate. Obama has spent so much time casting himself as the candidate of change, one would have to have expected Obama would win that category. The fact that he didn't demonstrates something I've touched on before: you have to be change itself, not just talk about change. Actions speak louder than words, and at this point, it seems Obama's rhetoric can only take him so far.

The battle for prime time: a Review of cable opinions shows

The top 3 cable news channels all have their pluses and their downs. Then there is Fox News, or as Keith Olberman and myself like to say, Faux Noise. Here is my reviews of their prime time opinion shows and the network overall.

-CNN: CNN itself doesn't really have an "opinion" show, but rather shows that have guests who talk their opinion. Their best program has to be the Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer. Its features quick segments on the top news stories of the day while also featuring segments where political experts such as Carville, Huffington, Crowley, and more give their views on the hottest political news. Lou Dobbs is a terribly boring host. To be honest I could never watch his show for more than 5 minutes. Speaking of boring, Larry King needs to retire. His show brings nothing to CNN. While his interviews used to be sharp and crisp, he rarely follows up on anything his guests say and to top it all off, he rarely remembers their name. Then is Anderson Cooper. While an okay host, again he just doesn't add any spice to the mix. His monotone voice and needless stories just aren't what today's audience needs. CNN is like the CBS evening news, obviously catering to the older, traditional crowd.

-Headline Prime: Well there are really only two opinion shows on Headline Prime. Glen Beck is a bumbling right-wing idiot who sucks up to the base of his party like no one else's business. I'm surprised he hasn't been offered a contract by Faux Noise. His fear tactics are right in line with those of the GOP, in fact, a few months ago he and his guests talked about this current Iraq/Iran conflict causing the end of the world if we aren't careful. Than there's Nancy "Good Night Friend" Grace. What can I say about her? Comedy, pure comedy. Good for a laugh. Especially her frequent guest Susan "I rhyme everything I say" Moss. I would assume these two shows appeal to crazies.

-Speaking of crazy, we have Faux Noise. To be honest its kind of hard for me to review them based on opinions, because there is no opinion with them. Its "I'm right, you're wrong". Its right-wing bias taken to the extreme. And the kind of Faux Noise...the "Worst Person in the World" himself, Bill O. I really don't know how people watch this and make this the #1 "news" channel.

-Then there is the fastest growing news channel, MSNBC, my personal favorite. It has opinion shows, yet has diverse opinions. Tucker Carlson provides the conservative view. Chris Matthews provides the moderate view, and Keith Olberman gives his liberal opinions. Its a good mix and not to mention there is even further diversified opinions within the shows. Tucker usually features one republican and one democrat on the panel. Hardball with Chris Matthews has the daily Hardball Debate between a democrat and republican, similar to the crossfire days, and Countdown with Keith Olberman usually has all moderate guests, some leaning right, others leaning left. And then we have Dan Abrams, the male Nancy Grace. Easily MSNBC's worst show, they should give Allison Stewart or David Shuster their own show in that slot.

So the verdict:
1) MSNBC for its diverse opinions and sharp, energetic, and passionate commentators.
2) CNN by default. Not as bad as the following two, and if you like more calm, traditional shows, then CNN is for you.
3) Headline Prime's Glen Beck is enough to make this network go sour quickly, add in Nancy Grace and you have a network
thats would finish last on this countdown if I didn't have to rank Faux Noise.
4) Faux Noise, the reason should be clear.