American Glob

Because after all, that strategy worked out really well for Martha Coakley, didn’t it?

The Boston Herald reports…

A worried White House is poised to pull out all the stops in Gov. Deval Patrick’s heated gubernatorial bid – viewed as an early litmus test of whether disenchanted voters are ready to give President Obama’s message of hope and change four more years – or the heave-ho.

A Vineyard-bound Obama and his team already are discussing fall fund-raising appearances with Patrick’s camp and churning out campaign ads while David Axlerod – campaign guru for both Patrick and Obama – chats with Patrick “fairly regularly,” said one source close to the Obama administration.

“If the governor loses, it’s really bad for the president,” a Democratic insider close to the White House said yesterday, pointing out Obama already lost a seemingly sure U.S. Senate seat to Republican upstart Scott Brown.

A quick review of the similarities between Misters Obama and Patrick…

1. Both used David Axelrod as a campaign manager.

2. Meaningless campaign slogan for Deval Patrick: Together We Can.

3. Meaningless campaign slogan for Barack Obama: Yes We Can.

Oh and in case you forgot, their stump speeches were eerily familiar.

UPDATE: Weasel Zippers links. Thanks!

The Democratic Governors Association has its panties in a bunch because Rupert Murdoch’s company News Corp. gave one million dollars to the Republican Governors Association. CNN reports…

With the knowledge that Fox News’ parent company recently cut a $1 million check to the Republican Governors Association, the leader of the Democratic Governors Association is calling on the cable news network to run a “formal disclaimer” when it covers gubernatorial races. “I request that you add a formal disclaimer to your news coverage any time any of your programs cover governors or gubernatorial races between now and Election Day,” DGA executive director Nathan Daschle wrote in the letter to Roger Ailes.

My reaction in two words: SO WHAT?

As I’m sure the Democratic Governors Association is aware, so called “objective journalists” donated more money to Barack Obama than John McCain in the 2008 presidential election by a ratio greater than 10 to 1…

An analysis of federal election records shows that the amount of money journalists contributed so far this election cycle favors Democrats by a 15:1 margin over Republicans, with $225,563 going to Democrats, only $16,298 to Republicans .

235 journalists donated to Democrats, just 20 gave to Republicans — a margin greater than 10:1. An even greater disparity, 20:1, exists between the number of journalists who donated to Barack Obama and John McCain.

Searches for other newsroom categories (reporters, correspondents, news editors, anchors, newspaper editors and publishers) produces 311 donors to Democrats to 30 donors to Republicans, a ratio of just over 10:1. In terms of money, $279,266 went to Dems, $20,709 to Republicans, a 14:1 ratio.

By those standards, maybe the news network truly in need of a disclaimer is every single one except FOX News.

Talk about an inconvenient truth.

Read more at Memeorandum.

Unless you were planning to vote for Obama in 2008, you might have wondered if some members of the liberal media were actively trying to destroy Sarah Palin on a personal and political level from the moment John McCain announced her as his running mate.

Guess what… You were right.

In the hours after Sen. John McCain announced his choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate in the last presidential race, members of an online forum called Journolist struggled to make sense of the pick. Many of them were liberal reporters, and in some cases their comments reflected a journalist’s instinct to figure out the meaning of a story.

But in many other exchanges, the Journolisters clearly had another, more partisan goal in mind: to formulate the most effective talking points in order to defeat Palin and McCain and help elect Barack Obama president. The tone was more campaign headquarters than newsroom.

The conversation began with a debate over how best to attack Sarah Palin. “Honestly, this pick reeks of desperation,” wrote Michael Cohen of the New America Foundation in the minutes after the news became public. “How can anyone logically argue that Sarah Pallin [sic], a one-term governor of Alaska, is qualified to be President of the United States? Train wreck, thy name is Sarah Pallin.”

Not a wise argument, responded Jonathan Stein, a reporter for Mother Jones. If McCain were asked about Palin’s inexperience, he could simply point to then candidate Barack Obama’s similarly thin resume. “Q: Sen. McCain, given Gov. Palin’s paltry experience, how is she qualified to be commander in chief?,” Stein asked hypothetically. “A: Well, she has much experience as the Democratic nominee.”

“What a joke,” added Jeffrey Toobin of the New Yorker. “I always thought that some part of McCain doesn’t want to be president, and this choice proves my point.  Welcome back, Admiral Stockdale.”

Daniel Levy of the Century Foundation noted that Obama’s “non-official campaign” would need to work hard to discredit Palin. “This seems to me like an occasion when the non-official campaign has a big role to play in defining Palin, shaping the terms of the conversation and saying things that the official [Obama] campaign shouldn’t say – very hard-hitting stuff, including some of the things that people have been noting here – scare people about having this woefully inexperienced, no foreign policy/national security/right-wing christia wing-nut a heartbeat away …… bang away at McCain’s age making this unusually significant …. I think people should be replicating some of the not-so-pleasant viral email campaigns that were used against [Obama].”

Ryan Donmoyer, a reporter for Bloomberg News who was covering the campaign, sent a quick thought that Palin’s choice not to have an abortion when she unexpectedly became pregnant at age 44 would likely boost her image because it was a heartwarming story.

“Her decision to keep the Down’s baby is going to be a hugely emotional story that appeals to a vast swath of America, I think,” Donmoyer wrote.

Politico reporter Ben Adler, now an editor at Newsweek, replied, “but doesn’t leaving sad baby without its mother while she campaigns weaken that family values argument? Or will everyone be too afraid to make that point?”

Read it all.

I sincerely hope the “JournoListers” know that an ever growing number of Americans are going to the polls this November with them in mind.

UPDATE: This sums it up pretty well.

Technically, they were all acting as Obama campaign advisers and that’s the scandal.

In this particular case however, the person in question actually worked for the Obama Campaign. The Volokh Conspiracy has the details…

Jared Bernstein, chief economist for Vice President Joseph Biden, served in 2008 as an economic adviser to the Obama campaign. At the same time, he was a member of JournoList, the controversial progressive email list.

Bernstein’s bio at Politico, which appears not to have been updated since 2008, states: “He is an economic adviser to the Obama campaign.”

He was known to many for his regular appearances on the financial channel CNBC. His primary employer in 2008 was the Economic Policy Institute, a pro-labor progressive think tank, but according to his bio when appointed to the Obama-Biden Administration, he also was a member of the Panel of Economic Advisers of the Congressional Budget Office.

Reached today at the Office of the Vice President, Bernstein revealed that his position with the Obama campaign was as something called a “surrogate.” “I was not paid by the campaign,” he explained. “They would call me from time to time to represent their positions, that side of the debate.”

Asked when he left JournoList, Bernstein replied, ‘‘I think I left the list around the time I came here.” Bernstein was announced as Chief Economist and Economic Policy Adviser to the Vice President-elect on December 8, 2008.

One question that has arisen in the last week is how closely JournoList members, not only discussed how to shape the news to advance the fortunes of Barack Obama, but coordinated with the Obama campaign. Jared Bernstein’s position as an unpaid adviser and surrogate shows that there was at least one direct link between JournoList and the Obama campaign.

I, for one, am shocked.

Graphic yanked from Gateway Pundit.

Unless you’re a big fan of Obama, you probably remember thinking during the 2008 presidential campaign that many members of the media were doing more than just reporting. In fact, you might have even thought that they were actively trying to get Obama elected.

Well, Tucker Carlson and the Daily Caller have acquired the archives of Journolist and guess what… You were right.

It was the moment of greatest peril for then-Sen. Barack Obama’s political career. In the heat of the presidential campaign, videos surfaced of Obama’s pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, angrily denouncing whites, the U.S. government and America itself. Obama had once bragged of his closeness to Wright. Now the black nationalist preacher’s rhetoric was threatening to torpedo Obama’s campaign.

The crisis reached a howling pitch in mid-April, 2008, at an ABC News debate moderated by Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos. Gibson asked Obama why it had taken him so long – nearly a year since Wright’s remarks became public – to dissociate himself from them. Stephanopoulos asked, “Do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?”

Watching this all at home were members of Journolist, a listserv comprised of several hundred liberal journalists, as well as like-minded professors and activists. The tough questioning from the ABC anchors left many of them outraged. “George [Stephanopoulos],” fumed Richard Kim of the Nation, is “being a disgusting little rat snake.”

Others went further. According to records obtained by The Daily Caller, at several points during the 2008 presidential campaign a group of liberal journalists took radical steps to protect their favored candidate. Employees of news organizations including Time, Politico, the Huffington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Guardian, Salon and the New Republic participated in outpourings of anger over how Obama had been treated in the media, and in some cases plotted to fix the damage.

In one instance, Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent urged his colleagues to deflect attention from Obama’s relationship with Wright by changing the subject. Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics, Ackerman wrote, “Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.”

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air rightly notes:

Gee, doesn’t that sound familiar?

Based on these stunning revelations from The Daily Caller, can we finally put to bed the stupid notion that anyone who disagrees with Obama must be a racist?

Can we also acknowledge something many of us suspected all along… That the useless MSM has a liberal agenda and is officially an extension of the Democrat Party?

Last week the NAACP, which has become nothing more than a far left political organization, made completely false charges of racism against the Tea Party. Andrew Breitbart, the conservative libertarian internet publisher responded. And won…

Here’s the timeline…

July 13: The NAACP passed a resolution calling the Tea Party “racist.”

July 15: Andrew Breitbart released a statement saying the NAACP claim was bullshit and said he had damning video evidence of racism at an NAACP event.

July 19 @ 8 AM: Andrew Breitbart published the promised video of a USDA official at an event sponsored by the NAACP.

July 19 @ 8 PM: USDA official Shirley Sherrod RESIGNED.

Despite Andrew Breitbart’s cash reward, no one has been able to prove that the Tea Party is a racist organization.

As ACE has noted, some “MFM” outlets have even picked up on this scandal.

Paging the Southern Poverty Law Center…

Hello???

UPDATE: I can’t keep up with this story, just read these.

Unlike Chris Matthews of MSNBC, I have actually been to a Tea Party and believe it or not, there were plenty of people in attendance who were not white.

But that fact doesn’t fit the agenda being pushed by Chris Matthews and MSNBC. Facts get in the way when you’re trying to convince people that the Tea Party movement is the rebirth of the KKK.

Where are the black people at MSNBC, Chris? I guess racial diversity doesn’t apply at MSNBC, where the news team is as white as the driven snow.

Again, facts and blatant hypocrisy can’t get in the way of pushing liberal propaganda. So enjoy the following video which should make your blood boil if you’re an American who loves your liberty, regardless of your racial background.

Also notice how many times Matthews uses the word “teabaggers.” Accident? Probably not.

Hat tip to NewsBusters.

I hate this commercial but it’s important to note its “progressive” political message.

Nice purse, dude….

Ever wondered how liberals think? Here’s a short but definitive crash course in two videos.

VIDEO 1: Josh Marshall of the liberal blog “Talking Points Memo” was REALLY freaked out by Sarah Palin’s suggestion that profiling Nidal Malik Hasan might have prevented the shootings at Fort Hood. (Note the unflattering screen capture.)

VIDEO 2: Chris Matthews of super-lefty network MSNBC has no problem whatsoever racially profiling people standing in line to get Sarah Palin’s autograph on her new book.

LIBERAL SUMMARY:

Profiling Islamic radicals who want to kill Americans is racism.

Profiling Americans who just want Sarah Palin to sign her book is acceptable.

Democrats are going after fraud? What are they going to do, investigate themselves?

From the department of laughable via Politico:

“The Obama administration on Tuesday will announce “a sustained, multilevel attack on financial fraud,” including mortgage rip-offs, a senior administration official said.”

“The crackdown will range “from executives who illegally profited on Wall Street, to the bad actors still targeting middle class families with mortgage fraud schemes,” the official said.”

“The probe is to be announced at noon Tuesday at the Justice Department by Attorney General Eric Holder, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan and Securities and Exchange Commission Enforcement Division Director Rob Khuzami.”

So they’re going after the frauds… Good for them.

Will they be investigating Barney Frank & his buddies at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for their involvement in the US mortgage meltdown?

Will they be “cracking down” on the financial fraud of uber-corrupticrat Charlie Rangel?

How about the fraud of Chris Dodd and his shady Countrywide mortgage deals?

Is ACORN voter fraud on the target list?

Perhaps Obama’s campaign finance fraud?

Everything you need to know about the hypocrisy of this supposed “crackdown” is summed up in the fact that Tim Geithner, the tax fraud who’s running the Treasury Department, is part of the team announcing the attack on “fraud.”

What a farce.