Norah O’Donnell takes Obama to task
Something’s been going on with the MSM lately.
First it was the Boston Globe, criticizing Biden’s “chains” remark.
Then it was Tina Brown’s Newsweek, publishing a Niall Ferguson cover story on why Obama needs to go.
Then we got Politico‘s expose of the narrow, petty nature of the Obama campaign and the infighting among his operatives.
And now I notice that CBS’s White House Chief Correspondent Norah O’Donnell has jumped on the bandwagon of critiquing Obama. I’m not ordinarily a watcher of network news—or even TV news, for that matter—so I’m not really familiar with O’Donnell’s prior reporting, or when she started being a bit more critical of the president. But when I looked her up, I saw that her credentials for the usual sort of pro-Obama reporting seemed impeccable: gigs on NBC and MSNBC and then CBS, as well as substitute hosting for Chris Matthews (he of the Obama-induced leg thrill).
But something has evidently been going on that led up to this:
Note, also, that although it’s O’Donnell who is toughest on Obama in the clip, her response was to a question that seemed to purposely set up the critique.
So why is CBS news suddenly starting to sound a bit like Fox every now and then? I submit that at least one of the reasons may be that Obama has been ignoring the press lately. That makes it personal for them, and these small and probably temporary defections are being fired as warning shots.
Another reason for it may be that the press is mad at Obama for what they see as committing unforced errors. They’re been carrying his water and they expect him to do his part.
Jake Tapper, one of the few MSM correspondents who’s been relatively fair about Obama from the start, has this to say:
“I have said before”¦ [that I] thought the media helped tip the scales. I didn’t think the coverage in 2008 was especially fair to either Hilary Clinton or John McCain,” Tapper said.
On the 2008 coverage, he noted, “Sometimes I saw with story selection, magazine covers, photos picked, [the] campaign narrative, that it wasn’t always the fairest coverage.”
It is emblematic of the whole problem with press bias that critiques as exceptionally mild as Tapper’s—that the 2008 coverage wasn’t [emphasis mine] “especially fair” or “always the fairest“—now qualify as newsworthy criticisms of the press.
I suggest that the issue needs to be more precisely defined. It’s not bias per se. Brit Hume once pointed out that everone has biases. Remember that many newspapers were created as mouthpieces for a particular party or cause and more than a few still tout their names as the XXXX-Republican or the XXXX-Democrat.
The real sins were that the media convinced the public that it is now, or at one point actually was unbiased and fair in its reportage, and that the public, without any standard against which to measure largely bought into that myth.
Ignoring those who’ve aided and abetted his rise, lied for him, and buried his lies, – fits the Obama profile -narcissist.
Responding negatively to the unforced errors made by someone purportedly too great make them fits the MSM profile — imperative Leftism will brook no loser. The more apparent it becomes Obama will lose the more the MSM will seek to extricate itself and the Leftist manifesto from the herald. Remember, “don’t back no losers”
George Pal,
If I am not mistaken, Don Surber (op editorialist for the Charleston Daily Mail–WV) made that prediction 7 or 8 months ago with precisely the same rationaleon his now-discontinued blog.
So why is CBS news suddenly starting to sound a bit like Fox every now and then?
[this is out to the ether of people, if it dont fit you, then its not about you… ]
a long time ago, i reported that George Soros made a statement that Obama wasn’t the man…
and now your forgetting that he is driving this, and right on cue, the press is making him out slowly not to be the man?
Its kind of like experiencing one of Oliver Sachs patients. ie. the patent with broken memory, forgets you 10 minutes after you leave the room… so when you come in, its like meeting them all over again.. and again, and again…
if you guys cant remember the past enough to remember the things that cause the things you talk about later. then i guess all you do have is to make up stuff as to why… you certainly cant remember the past events to see the patterns and changes…
George Soros says Obama must go
22.11.2010
http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/22-11-2010/115867-george_soros-0/
2010… thats how long ago i mentioned it and said that the course of the ship will change as of that..
now your wondering why that ship changed course… you cant remember the captain giving the order, then i guess just make up something… (admitting you didnt remember, and have nothing as an explanatin is a no no, we are not conditioned to accvept that… are we?)
“…if this president can’t do what we need, it is time to start looking somewhere else.” “Huffington Post” quoted Soros
and i never stopped saying that you have to read their crap to know whats going on there… all the way to reading the papers that inspired the ideas that they would destroy their own people in internal cold or hot civil war for.
you cant pull answers from the other hole no matter how far up you want to reach till your twiddling with tonsils..
knowing comes from knowledge, not belief.
knowlege requires facts, principals, histories, and all that stuff… musing imagination stated in opinions as fact or fact like, is not knowlege, its false erudition… (and feels good now that everyone is pretending to be a soap box marxist in behavior, not ideological goals)
“Mr. Soros fully supports the president as the leader of the Democratic Party. He was not suggesting that we seek another candidate for 2012. His comments were made in a private, informal conversation that was about the need for progressives to be more forceful in promoting their agenda. He was stressing the importance of being heard by elected officials.” Mr Vachon (george soros adviser)
still quoting PRAVDA
but when has anyone believed self proclaimed communists were communists? feminist leaders say it all the time… but we dont believe they are..
the excuse put another way would be like bumping into a farm girl and defining all of stalins russia by her saying, she is not communist, so the leaders arent… (which is why i dont accept non leaders excuses as to leaders edicts and positions… and why they follow something that claims to want to destroy what they want, while disbelieving they mean it on some level)
here is a list from the article
the AGENDA…
i put a [check] next to everyone that is in the pipeline and working towards that you can see.. [and note, here is a list.. no musings.. no guessing… why not look at the list? or other such lists? better to not and pretend smarts through false erudition, no? no ego points the other way, is there? ]
and the past few days..
A Source Tells The New Yorker That George Soros ‘Feels Hurt’ By Obama
http://www.businessinsider.com/george-soros-obama-pissed-on-2012-8
if your in on HOW IT WORKS buy STUDYING..
then you know that these constant missives are picked up by those that know where to get their cues from…
do a search on tina, and you will see the flip flop and when it happened…
Tina Brown Gets Into Publishing
http://www.greatertalent.com/speaker-news/tina-brown-gets-into-publishing/
In a joint venture with Perseus Books Group, The Daily Beast is forming a new imprint, Beast Books, that will focus on publishing timely titles by Daily Beast writers – first as e-books, and then as paperbacks on a much shorter schedule than traditional books.
how nice.. no?
so she suddenly went there, and voila, is promoting his books and so on.. and now he says obama isnt right. and starts cuing comments and she does a newreek cover that parallels that stuff?
PublicAffairs also publishes..
GEORGE SOROS ON GLOBALIZATION
THE PHILANTHROPY OF GEORGE SOROS
THE BUBBLE OF AMERICAN SUPREMACY
The Soros Lectures at the Central European University
FINANCIAL TURMOIL IN EUROPE AND THE UNITED STATES
The New Paradigm for Financial Markets: The Credit Crisis of 2008 and What it Means
The Age of Fallibility: Consequences of the War on Terror
Open Society: Reforming Global Capitalism
The Crisis of Global Capitalism: Open Society Endangered
ALL by Soros, and lots more too if ya want to find out..
more next post (CBS and that link. since you said that CBS is changing direction too)
George Soros says Obama must go
Then he’s gone. And we need look no further for why the MSM is turning on him.
I’ve wondered if the talking heads in the media occasionally read blogs. If so they must be aware that their version of the truth is no longer universally accepted and they don’t have the monopoly on truth that they once possessed.
Perhaps the less cognitively challenged among them are beginning to realize that at least an occasional hat-tip to balance is required.
2008 was the highpoint of media power. They crushed a primary candidate (Hillary) and carried another (Obama). But they’re being disintermediated and they know it. And they know there aren’t enough Ford Foundation grants to go around for everyone and not enough political gigs either. Maybe they’ll realize that there is money in truth?
Doubtful. I think Neo is right; these are just warning shots if the Golem (heh) they created doesn’t play ball.
didnt realize the last was so long..
so i am cutting this one real short.
Media General, Inc. is one of the owners of various CBS and other stations…
almost all of them are represented EXCEPT FOX…
look up media general and Warren buffet Berkshire Hathaway…
http://www.4-traders.com/business-leaders/Warren-Buffett-6/news/Buffett-s-Berkshire-Hathaway-Buys-More-Newspapers–14334212/
take some time to read the 13-F report with the SEC that these men file…
Media General announces operations changes, reorganizes management
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/media-general-reorganizes-operations-management-174454308.html
The Richmond, Va.-based company agreed in May to sell 63 newspapers to World Media Enterprises Inc., a division of Berkshire Hathaway Inc. The $142 million deal was completed in June.
so soros is hurt obama wont let him stop by the white house and chat when he feels like it… and of course buffet is in that too..
keep digging, and you can find lots of stuff that make it obvious
dont follow threads, read these things that the public doesnt and such, and then all you have is pretending making up reasons is knowlege and erudition…
From the New Yorker: (emphasis ours)
…When Soros wanted to meet with Obama in Washington to discuss global economic problems, Obama’s staff failed to respond. Eventually, they arranged not a White House interview but, rather, a low-profile, private meeting in New York, when the President was in town for other business. Soros found this back-door treatment confounding. “He feels hurt,” a Democratic donor says.
“They pissed on him,” a confidant says. “He didn’t want a fucking thing! He didn’t want a state dinner, or a White House party–he just wanted to be taken seriously.”
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/george-soros-obama-pissed-on-2012-8
My take, T, is that many papers did take a party affiliation, and that was fine until we got to one-big-paper towns. Then they started that neutral-observer scam (Partisan? Who, us?? Surely you jest.)
So they’re lying to us about that, and most of us know it.
Whether or not they’re taking orders from Soros — and for all I know they are — at least some members of the media seem to be becoming uncomfortably aware of how transparently they have been contorting themselves in trying to cover for the rapidly unraveling Obama. It’s getting to the point where it’s too obvious to miss, even for those thoroughly soaked in Kool-Aid.
A case in point: you may have seen the photo that circulated earlier today in which Obama and three young men tried to spell O-H-I-O with their hands, Y-M-C-A style, but ended up spelling O-I-H-O. (Actually, it’s worse than that on second look — it’s O-I-H-I — but that error, unlike the misplaced H, isn’t Obama’s.) Anyway, the Washington Post promptly ran a little blip headlined something like “Obama Can Too Spell Ohio” that explained away the picture as photoshopped and ran a tweet, purportedly from Obama, with a second photo in which the four men managed to spell it right.
Well, the first picture plainly wasn’t photoshopped, as a quick look at both photos clearly shows, and the WaPo has been scrambling to correct and recorrect itself and cover for its evident bias ever since then. The piece (too short to call an article) is now headlined “Can Obama Spell Ohio?” and carries a “correction” that, earlier today, said the WaPo “assumed” the first photo was fake, and now says it “incorrectly stated” that it was photoshopped. It’s pretty much incomprehensible in its current state:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/buubash
The story is not, of course, whether Obama can spell Ohio (Yes He Can — on the second try!) The story is the speed with which the paper, without even checking, leapt to reassure its readers that of COURSE anything suggesting that Dear Leader might be less than perfect is obviously fake. And the rest of the story is the obviousness of the Post’s embarrassment at being caught with its biases on such plain display.
They have their fingers to the wind.
I’ve always felt that Jake Trapper must be a closet slightly right of center man. For some time now, he has asked some fairly tough questions at press conferences.
If the MSM ever gets even neutral on Obama, he’s toast.
If he loses this November, I predict he’ll act like a jerk and long term, he’ll become the perfect example of a crap president..probably more so than Carter.
Another comment: I watched part of Obama’s surprise press conference the other day. When he put his chin down, frowned, and looked towards the camera with his eyes, he reminded me of Richard Nixen when he was saying “I’m not a crook.”
I’d like to see more of this rather than having print media ombusdmen and media critics like Howard Kurtz wringing their hands over media bias after the election (because they’ll only acknowledge media transgressions after the desired outcome has been achieved).
I’m not getting excited about any of this just yet…
Artfldgr: The same stuff happens at the local scale. It’s fascinating to pull back the curtain and see *why* particular developments are built and contracts are let. Boss Tweed lives in your town, too.
People still think voting matters…
Given that I live in nyc, of course boss tweed lived in my town, we even have a Tammany hall. 🙂
sorry… couldn’t resist…
bad, wicked, naughty Zoot!
i think this might make up for it…
http://www.amazon.com/gp/election-heatmap
OHIO was spelled correctly from Obama’s perspective, which of course is the only one that matters.
I trust everyone has seen the TOTUS photo that Reuters released. If not:
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/08/21/breaking-totus-stages-coup-detat/
They’re turning on him . . .
Besides the more sensible (or self-preservation-oriented) among the press, or even the Mighty Soros putting out the word that the One must go, I wonder if there isn’t some potential story bubbling up to the top that the media insiders know about … something so damaging to the Obama administration that it will sink them entirely when it comes out. Something worse than Fast and Furious, something infinitely worse … and they are frantically trying to disassociate themselves from a sinking administration.
Or … maybe the serious journos started to read the popular indy/libertarian/conservative blogs and are beginning to realize, with horror, how the Obaminator and all his czars look to those outside the establishment media bubble.
And the TOTUS photo from Reuters is hilarious – I think they are turning on him. I plan to sit back and make lots of popcorn.
Artfldgr Says:
August 22nd, 2012 at 6:28 pm
That’s a really interesting map, Art. If we went by that, this election would not only be in the bag, it would be a landslide of historic proportions.
It also implies that many leftist voters simply don’t bother to read much.
And I guess it should come as no surprise that DC is the “bluest” area of all.
Sgt. Mom,
I have thought, many times, that this or that revelation about Obama would mean that Obama’s political career was over. If Obama’s career finally ends due to some revelation about Obama, then it will catch me by surprise. I have given up thinking that any scandalous revelation can do him in.
I think he will lose the election b/c he is, overall, a bad POTUS, and voters will notice. I have thought this for a long time. But, re a revelation: if Jeremiah Wright didn’t end him, then what could? If Fast and Furious didn’t end him, then what could? And you and I could both go on, and on, with a litany of revelations.
Could it be that the MSM is just sensing (and beginning to reflect) the presence of the now-building ‘preference cascade’ that Instapundit has been citing?
“They have their fingers to the wind.”
Yes, and because they are so closely identified with BHO, they are beginning to feel their ever slipping control of the media market is at risk. They are rats who smell the bilge water rising and are beginning to fear it threatens their ship. A BHO defeat will take down many elements of the elitist progressive edifice.
All the billions of Soros will not be able to put Humpty back together. Instead what they will swiftly resurrect will be a rather tatterdemalion monster. A monster to ravage the sensibilities of the ‘independents in all 57 state.
easy answer- Wall St money is going 70/30 to Romney, in 08, it all went to Obama. the difficult question is why is he getting 30% of their money, or why he got it in 08 at all.
When he put his chin down, frowned, and looked towards the camera with his eyes, he reminded me of Richard Nixen when he was saying “I’m not a crook.”
The ironic thing is that Nixon was not a crook, certainly not in the financial context (which was the allegation he was addressing). I’ve never seen any indication that Nixon took advantage of his government service to enrich himself, unlike … well … most Republicans and essentially all Democrats in office today.
Concerning the coming election, on Fox News Special Report tonight, an analysis was cited that uses a state by state model that has 100% accurately predicted the outcome of the presidential elections for the last 32 years.
It predicted Romney would win with 53% of the popular vote and would get 350 electoral college votes.
Man oh man, I hope it’s right again.
reg Says:
August 22nd, 2012 at 8:54 pm
That’s an excellent point, and I was thinking of mentioning it. Of course, the big Wall Street guys make their living on betting on winners and cutting their losses to losers. The fact that they are contributing heavily to Romney now tells us how they believe this election will go.
I wonder if there is any evidence of Soros betting on Romney. It wouldn’t surprise me, and it would be very disconcerting. If that is the case, it would be powerful evidence that our electoral process is just bread and circuses for the peasantry.
Oops…I see the prediction I mentioned above was also quoted at Ace and Hot Air. They said 320 electoral votes…not 350. I was watching across the kitchen. 🙂
texexec, I know how it goes. I have surgery for a detached retina coming up. Meanwhile, I stay away from the good crystal.
Ref media: I used to spend a lot of time on a couple of media boards–got banned–telling them I wasn’t trying to straighten out their view of reality. I was trying to tell them everybody knows better already and they should think about what they look like telling people stuff people already know is bogus. ’cause the people think the journos know better, too. So the people think the journos lie.
Maybe I had some impact. “there at the beginning”.
Bill Whittle recalced the 2008 election taking into account Evan Thomas’–late of Newsweek–assertion that the media were worth fifteen points to Obama/dems and concluded that, without the fifteen points, Obama gets Vermont and DC. Seven electoral votes.
Thomas later claimed it was closer to five percent.
Once you speculate how many votes would go to third-party, write-in candidates in the absence of media bias, you can do the math and figure that taking away the five percent from the dems/Obama would cover up to eight or nine percent of the votes Obama got in the actual election. Haven’t figured the EV count in that case, but it would still amount to a landslide.
So I guess the question is whether the journos are beginning to wonder what the rest of us might be thinking of doing if they screw us again. Since there’s no longer any possibliity of denying they try.
rickl: The banksters know they already own Obama, so they just have to pay maintenance. They’re in the process of getting title to Romney.
He might be expensive, though. Romney’s morals make it hard for his Justice Dept ignore so many obvious and admitted crimes.
I wonder if this round of Obama-bashing by the left is a parallel to the righties having to shake off their distaste for Romney once they realized he’s who they’re stuck with. Indulge each other in some disappointed complaining, then lock arms and attack the strawman in the opposite-color jersey until election day.
Could it be that some of these “legacy” networks are beginning to understand that their bottom lines are falling because people are tuning them out in favor of Fox and the internet? Fox is wondering why none of them have recognized that their model of providing a more balanced approach is gaining them market share. Fox is laughing all the way to the bank. I’ve been expecting Comcast to shake things up at NBC and MSNBC. They didn’t buy the network to let it wither on the vine. That said, they have done nothing so far.
For those who are wondering about the so-called unbiased media. It occurred during WWII. Prior to that newspapers were pretty much partisan and many cities had two or more papers with differing political viewpoints. People knew where they stood and everything was out in the open. During WWII they all put toned down their partisanship to support the war effort. After the war was won, they decided it was a good model. The idea was to be unbiased with all the news that’s fit to print and let the citizens decide. Unfortunately, as time wore on they continued to represent and believe that they were unbiased, but the new journalists coming out of college were increasingly liberal. By the time the Vietnam War was in its third or fourth year, the newspapers and TV news swung further left, but continued to believe in their minds that they represented the great middle. It has only gotten worse as time has gone by. Whenever I hear one of the MSM commentators say they try to be “fair and balanced,” I know they haven’t got a clue where the middle ground is. Maybe some of them will wake up and give Fox some competition, but I’m not holding my breath.
J.J.
One thing the media bigs miss is the Weather Channel.
An economically-significant number of people are more interested in weather in places other than their own than they are in other channels’ presentations.
Weather. Other channels.
…………….
Hmmm.
I’ve noticed CNN is more critical of Obama and his mouthpieces by refuting Obama’s false claims of the Ryan Medicare plan immediately after Mr Obama’s surprise presser yesterday and Wolf Blitzer getting a bit irate over the “Romney killed my wife” meme.
Add this one to the chorus of lefties disappointed with Obama.
The writer (Thomas Frank) identifies some genuine differences in the execution of office that would keep me in the ABO camp. He and I agree, however that those points are trivial in comparison to the financial/economic issues.
But what really inspired me to link it here is that it shows a plausible and plausibly effective path for the Obama campaign.
Barry comes out and acknowledges that he was just too hopeful that the GOP was willing to work with him. He wanted to reach across the aisle, and the mean Republicans peed in his hand. Obama is a victim of his own good nature.
From that basis of apology, all the blame for the miserable times of the past four years, and his magnificent failings on core issues become the fault of the other team. Obama then promises a refreshed vision of hope and change, this time more focused on the goal than on bipartisanship. Just give him four more years, another chance, as a wiser and harder man, and yes, the earth will begin to heal…
I know it’s all crap, but y’all know the lefties would eat it up. Obama could trade on his personal magnetism once again as campaigner.
The biggest hurdle would be his own ego. I’m not sure he could even fake the proper humility necessary to launch this strategy.
foxmarks Says:
August 23rd, 2012 at 12:19 am
That’s pretty much what he’s been saying for the last four years, isn’t it?
Not if you live in the universe where that writer resides. 😉
Foxmarks, where have you been? That’s Already their strategy: that cow is already out of the barn!
The Republicans are a bunch of Ole Meanies who Just Block all the Wonderful Things that Our Dear Leader has tried to do to save us!
[gnash, gnash, gnash those teeth!]
@Artfldgr,
As Soros is stating that Obama must go, this means one of the following:
1. He, Soros, does not understand the connection between policy and consequences: he did not expect the economic upheaval caused by implementing Marxist ideology;
2. He is willing to have his chess piece removed and to have the policies he advocated – which were put in place – overturned; and he is back to 2008;
3. He has a replacement for Obama in the wings (if this: there is only Romney: who/what is Romney?)
4. Obama slipped his leash back in 2010 cutting Soros out of power: Soros wants his power back and is willing to take a step back in order to re-establish his grip: Obama is holding the reins of a legal but yet to be fully realized dictatorship and Soros and crew do not want Obama to be the Dictator;
5. Valerie Jarrett is like the Mayor of the Palace (see Mohammed and Charlemagne by Pirenne) under the Merovingian kings: not the State but runs the State: Soros sees the puppets revolting (in 2010); she would pull Obama’s strings;
6. Soros and crew do not want the Jarrett/Obama and Muslim Brotherhood axis to exist: he and his crew perceive a threat to their very existence.
I do not think 1 & 2 are his reasons; Romney could be the replacement: providing stability, consolidating Marxist/progressive gains, and quiet advancing of progressive policies already in the pipeline; 4 through 6 are most likely.
Finally, this little civil war exposes Marxism/Communism for what it is: a front for the Merchant Princes to have power and global governance.
My’O’My…Nora is showing some mileage. Lordy, you should’a seen that lambchop a few years ago at PMSNBC. YOWZZZAAAA…!
But, I digress. In fairness, Neo-Neocon, she, even several years back, tended to bring more balance & fairness to her reporting than I’d expect. Nice to see this and glad she jumped ship to something more potentially wing-sprouting for he career than thew malignant MSNBC.
“he”–her….”Thew”…the…Too much LaLlave this a.m. (-: Whew.
Norah O’Donnell was on a satellite TV show in the mid 90’s with Tom Fitton and she wasn’t that liberal. I think when she got a job with the liberal media she turned to the darkside. But now she seems to be on the mend. Also females are much more liberal when they are single. They are sold on cliches like “Hope and Change”. This often changes when they marry and have children as the world takes on a bit of reality instead of the feel good “Can’t we all just get along” claptrap.
BTW the answer to the last sentence is NO!
John Dough: I also noticed from her Wiki bio that her husband owns a restaurant, which I suppose would make him a small business owner. So recent economic events might have made her less sympathetic to Obama, too.
JJ Formerly . . . wrote above (@10:31pm)
“For those who are wondering about the so-called unbiased media. It occurred during WWII. . . . During WWII they all put toned down their partisanship to support the war effort.”
That you (and I) might have agreed with those viewpoints doesn’t make the media any less biased during WW II. They supported the govt’s Allied War effort, they now support Obama’s govt effort. What’s the difference?
The media supporting the war effort was not a lack of bias, it was a bias with which most Americans agreed. Don’t forget. the press simply fed to the public what the govt and the military fed to them and then mostly without question, just like the press now accepts what the Obama adminstration feeds them, mostly without question.
I repeat my assertion: The press/media has never been unbiased and it’s always been the obligation of the reader to see through that myth.
It’s damage control. They pushed people to the edge and are now retreating to safer ground. It may also be Democrats who are unhappy that Clinton’s candidacy was sabotaged by Obama’s faction.
Mayor of the Palace
Seneschal…
A seneschal was an officer in the houses of important nobles in the Middle Ages. In the French administrative system of the Middle Ages, the sénéchal was also a royal officer in charge of justice and control of the administration in southern provinces, equivalent to the northern French bailli. It is equivalent to Slavic stolnik.
Under the Ancien Régime in southern France, the sénéchal was the king’s representative charged with the application of justice and control of administration in the sénéchaussée (administrative district). In northern France, the terms used were bailli and bailliage (bailiwick). According to historian Henry Hallam, the first sénéchaux to receive judicial functions did so by an edict of Philip II of France in 1190, and “acted as the king’s lieutenants in his domains”, or a sort of roving ambassadors or ministers for the throne. See bailli for more information.
you can find the historical parallels all over… however, what you will find is that the labels have changed.
thts all thats needed to trick the rubes in the public… dont belive me? socialism isnt communism… see, label change… works every time… facism becomes chrony capitalism… no problem… heck. works so well, people claim hitler wasnt a socialist and only had that on the label…
neo-neocon
her husband is a upscale chef, of the kind that politicans and those go to for expensive meals, and catering that is safe… (ie aint going to show up wearing a protest T shirt).
if you want to call tavern on the green, Aureole, and that a small business go ahead… but they arent much affected by the underclasses
take for instance my favorite such restaurant. its in Rye ny… you wouldn’t even know it was there unless you were ‘in’… can drop a grand on dinner easy… more if you decide to drink from their incredible wine cellar…
they could bomb ny, and the wealthy off the beach at rye ny and Connecticut would talk about it over dinner…
XXXXXX is appointed an AAA Four Diamond Award Winner for the 15th consecutive year! This rating process is North America’s premier restaurant rating program. 2009 NY winners list includes upscale places such as Bouley, Le Bernardin, La Grenouille, Blue Hill, Four Seasons…
i believe the daughter of the owner is an A list young actress somebody… (just as nicholsons daughter is doing her own latex, leather lace stuff on fashion runways, and so on and so forth, if you know them)
when small businesses complain, i doubt Bernadine worries much…
here is the menu for his restaurant LIA…
http://www.chefgeoff.com/assets/files/lias/pdf/LIAS%20SUMMER%20DINNER%202012%20website.pdf
30 dollars a plate… and up..
as i said… the same class as the restaurant i love above… and the others… though does not have a diamond rating…
Geoff serves as an executive on the board of the Restaurant Association of Metropolitan Washington.
Geoff contributes to more than 150 charities and organization every year in the form of silent auctions, fundraising appearances, and even the Chef Geoff sponsored Little League team. In 2006, the National Restaurant Association awarded Chef Geoff’s The Best Neighbor Award for its contributions to the community. In 2009 Geoff was awarded Albert Uster “Chef of the Year Award”. Geoff is also a member of the Washington Baltimore chapter of the Young Presidents Organization.
Geoff is extraordinarily fortunate to be married to CBS News Chief Washington Correspondent Norah O’Donnell. They reside in Wesley Heights with their three beautiful children Grace, Henry, and Riley.
three kids… funny how these people end up with more kids than is recomended by these people…
Thanks for the response Artfldgr.
The term Mayor of the Palace refers to the Frankish kings. Charlemagne’s house arose out the office as his ancestor made the office de facto hereditory; finally the king was removed: this was mid 7th Century.
Artfldgr: that’s why a wrote “which I suppose would make him a small business owner.” I thought it was almost certainly a trendy upscale place. But even those type of places are indeed small businesses (as opposed to large corporations; see this definition).
People who are in business for themselves, including fancy restaurant owners, still can feel the bite when their taxes go up, or when there is a financial climate that seems stagnant. People who are in business for themselves, even if profitable, still are more likely to understand that the Obama administration has created a somewhat hostile climate for small businesses (and that climate includes Obamacare).
And by the way, looking at that menu, I don’t see $30 a plate. If a person had appetizer, salad, entree, etc., it would add up to the more than that, of course. But the main courses I see are all under $30, which makes it a not-especially upscale restaurant. Just a typical nice restaurant that’s moderately expensive, and even somewhat reasonable for Washington DC.
Sounds awfully good, too. I guess I’m hungry.
T said, “The media supporting the war effort was not a lack of bias, it was a bias with which most Americans agreed.”
Yep, but they were politically more even-handed because both sides needed to cooperate in order to win the war. Thus, they began to see themselves as bipartisan, center of the road, and more interested in what was best for the country rather than pushing a partisan agenda. They maintained that stance through most of the Korean War. But their personnel were becoming more liberal and it began to show markedly during the Vietnam War even though most of the TV networks still believed themselves to be middle of the road. They continued to believe that even as they drifted further left. Bernie Goldberg has written a couple of books about this and he appears on Bill O’Reilly’s show to talk about the way that many of the major networks and big city newspapers think. They think they’re middle of the road mainly because they have few or no conservatives on staff. In their eyes Fox news is wildly right wing even though their newscasters are essentially apolitical. Yes, Fox’s news analysts mostly tilt right, but they try to include lefties and their opinions on every show. Both sides do get a hearing. You almost never see that on the legacy networks.
beverly: That’s where our side says they’ve been. It isn’t quite how their side sees it. And the critical component is the apology for enduring too much GOP obstinance. That’s the finishing move.
JJ is right about bottom lines, I think. But I doubt the media are becoming more balanced; they’re hedging their bets.
I suspect, too, that some of the seasoned reporters like O’Donnell are pushing to get some REAL stories, something interesting and hard-hitting. It’s already the end of August and Obama’s hired guns are still doing the heavy lifting. At this point last election, Bush was still answering the press’ questions about policy and the war on terror; Obama is talking superpowers and writing an op-ed piece for PREVENTION magazine. Last election was a referendum on race; this seem to be shaping up as a referendum on some regional GOP candidate named Akin. Ryan isn’t fun, not the way that Palin was (even Katie Couric is nostalgic, trying to get her on the new talk show). The big “message” of the DNC seems to be that abortion should be legal and that rich people are morally bankrupt for filing legally-acceptable tax returns. Or it’s the Year of Women, which is why former president Clinton will be speaking at the convention, given his fine perhaps can FINALLY explain the finer points of “Is.” But I digress.
There’s also the just-plain-money issue. Holmes is on to something when he writes that there’s not enough Ford Foundation money to go around – the Ford family successfully sued the Ford Foundation because they were giving grants to ridiculous lefty crap on the East Coast, going against the foundation’s original intentions and completely ignoring Michigan programs.
Remember when NPR and PBS were annoyed by the threat of cutting federal funding of their programs, but their spokespeople were happy to point out that the taxpayer money wasn’t that big a piece of their pie? It’s three years later and suddenly the tone is different. Not only grants are shrinking, but so is viewer support – which is a double whammy, as corporate matches also drop. Then there’s this little un-fun fact: the brouhaha about Romney’s unseen tax forms centers on closing the “unfair” tax write-offs used by corporations and wealthy people. The irony is thick, I’m surprised all the lefties working at nonprofits aren’t performing the Heimlich on each other! As I told my cousin that works at NPR, “If it weren’t for the tax write-off, who would pay money to listen to a man-girl narrate stories on ‘This American Life?'”
JJ formerly . . . ,
You wrote (@7:43): “. . . they began to see themselves as bipartisan, center of the road, and more interested in what was best for the country rather than pushing a partisan agenda.”
I don’t disagree with that statement though I offer a caveat and a question in response.
The caveat: The issue you stake out is how they see themselves, which I agree with and which is different than what they really are. When their perspective is well to the left of center, even the slightly right of center looks outlandishly reactionary–and this doesn’t even begin to address the bubble in which the MSM lives.
The question: I wonder if they really considered what was best for the country during WW II, or did they simply report such news because that us what sold papers and drew ears to radio broadcasts. Imagine the public response in 1943 to a 1960’s style protest to get out of Europe and stop murdering our troops (“FDR lied, soldiers died!”).
Now I must confess my own bias here. I don’t trust the MSM as far as I can throw them. A quote that I recently heard about Hollywood applies equally well to the MSM (I paraphrase): There are no socialist filmmakers, only capitalist filmmakers who make socialist films. Likewise the MSM, and liberalism has sold for at least the last 50 years
I hope that we have reached a tipping point. As the 24/7 internet news cycles makes it more difficult to obscure the truth, and as the silent majority becomes less silent about and less tolerant of this 1960s style anarchistic nonsense, I hope that we see a trend to more even handed reporting even if only because it draws eyes. If we get the govt we deserve, then perhaps we will get the media we accept. Perhaps the dwindling readership of Newsweek and the increasingly abysmal ratings of CNN and MSNBC are a first step.
I won’t hold my breath though.
If anyone is still following this post, the following, I think, sums it up quite nucely:
“The most surprising new member of this club, though, might be Norah O’Donnell . . . ”
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/08/22/Jake-Tapper-Im-Spartacus-Inspire-Others
T, thanks for that! That is so interesting and TRUE.
Good article T… Thanks for that