Yesterday, CNN conducted an interview with Vice Presidential Nominee Sarah Palin. In the interview, the reporter quoted an article form the national review. The full quote is as follows:
Watching press coverage of the Republican candidate for vice president,
it’s sometimes hard to decide whether Sarah Palin is incompetent, stupid,
unqualified, corrupt, backward, or — or, well, all of the above.
The quote appeared in a CNN interview as follows:
CNN: Yeah. Governor, you've been mocked in the press. The press has been pretty hard on you,
the Democrats have been pretty hard on you, but also some conservatives have been pretty hard
on you as well. The National Review had a story saying that, you know, I can't tell if Sarah Palin
is incompetent, stupid, unqualified, corrupt or all of the above.
Palin: Who wrote that one?
CNN: That was in the National Review, I don't, have the author.
Palin: I'd like to talk to that person.
CNN: But they were talking about the fact that your experience as governor is not getting out.
Do you feel trapped in this campaign, that your message is not getting out, and if so who do you blame?
Yes, the reporter did eventually, in that last line, say what the point of Byron York's article was, but he took the quote of York 100% completely out of context.
Now, I don't know if the interviewer had a malicious intent, just misquoted the article by accident, if CNN misquoted the article by accident and gave it to him, or if CNN was out to get Governor Palin by maliciously misquoting an article and the reporter was left to take the fall.
I do know, however, that CNN has yet to acknowledge the incident, and is far from issuing an apology at the time of writing. Maybe having the interview be the focus of Bill O'Reilly's talking points memo last night will put some pressure on the news organization.
Accident or not, CNN needs to issue some sort of statement. Whether you support Governor Palin or not, this is a case of irresponsible journalism. It is entirely possible that the same thing has happened to Senator Barack Obama, but I am unaware of it. Many, including myself, have felt that the media have been unfair to Governor Palin and Senator John McCain in their coverage of the campaign, and have been too easy on Senator Obama.
In the spirit of full disclosure, I am a supporter of McCain, but my politics do not blind my journalism. If this incident had happened to Senator Obama, I would be just as outraged. It is the purpose of the media to be unbiased and to provide facts and insight, not to slant reporting to change the minds of their audience. The editorial component of the media, including those like O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Keith Olberman, JoeScarborough, and any opinion pieces in newspapers are allowed to project their opinions and to sway people; that is what editorialist do. But a straight news interview with a Vice Presidential candidate should not be putting forth an editorial agenda.
This election cycle has made me more disappointed in the state of journalism than I could have imagined, but it has also strengthened my resolve to become a major player in the industry, in order to bring it back to what its purpose is intended to be. Let's hope I am not too late.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Friday, October 17, 2008
Palin Rally- Indianapolis
Today, I had the amazing opportunity to attend Sarah Palin's rally in indianapolis. We left at about 1 and arrived in Noblesville around 3-ish. We walked for what seemed like FOREVER to get to the VIP line. The general admission line seemed to stretch for miles. No one seemed to be complaining, though, and everyone looked ecstatic to be there!'
Look at that line!!!
We found Justin and he directed us to the VIP entrance, and we were taken to our seats...on stage! We sat there for an hour and a half doing nothing, listening to random chants and cheers, and doing the wave. Then the chairman of the state Republican party came out and warmed us up, followed by the republican candidate for Attorney General and the Republican candidate for Director of Education.
We then listened to a country group that I cannot remember the name of, and waited half an hour, listening to bad music over speakers.
Waiting is so lame, but these guys made it entertaining!
They handed out these "handmade" signs...blech
Finally,the Lt. Governor came out to introduce Palin. The crowd was so excited, it didn't really matter what the Lt. Governor said. When Palin was announced, it was deafening. She was wearing a purple sweater and black slacks. Unfortunately, I couldn't see her shoes :( I didn't get any great pictures of her face either, because people were always holding signs in the way, and the secret service is not very accommodating when it comes to picture taking.
Mean secret service...
Lt. governor!
And then...PALIN!!!
Her speech was amazing. While some of its content was recycled from her speech in Ohio earlier in the day, it was still amazing! The crowd was with her every step of the way, and her jokes and jabs were delivered flawlessly.
After her speech, she spent nearly half an hour walking around the crowd. She held a baby dressed as an elephant and signed zillions of autographs.
Unfortunately, I didn't get anything signed...and the best pictures I have of her face are these blurred photos..
The experience was amazing! To be around so many people who care about the same things you do just as passionately as you do is surreal. And the idea of having 25,000 people chanting you name is mind boggling, but Palin handled it like a pro, but while keeping something that let you know she was just one of you.
While I spent the entire day trying to get a picture of Palin's face, I neglected to see the most wonderful picture I got. It is not as close as I would have liked, but it is beautiful nonetheless.
Look at that line!!!
We found Justin and he directed us to the VIP entrance, and we were taken to our seats...on stage! We sat there for an hour and a half doing nothing, listening to random chants and cheers, and doing the wave. Then the chairman of the state Republican party came out and warmed us up, followed by the republican candidate for Attorney General and the Republican candidate for Director of Education.
We then listened to a country group that I cannot remember the name of, and waited half an hour, listening to bad music over speakers.
Waiting is so lame, but these guys made it entertaining!
They handed out these "handmade" signs...blech
Finally,the Lt. Governor came out to introduce Palin. The crowd was so excited, it didn't really matter what the Lt. Governor said. When Palin was announced, it was deafening. She was wearing a purple sweater and black slacks. Unfortunately, I couldn't see her shoes :( I didn't get any great pictures of her face either, because people were always holding signs in the way, and the secret service is not very accommodating when it comes to picture taking.
Mean secret service...
Lt. governor!
And then...PALIN!!!
Her speech was amazing. While some of its content was recycled from her speech in Ohio earlier in the day, it was still amazing! The crowd was with her every step of the way, and her jokes and jabs were delivered flawlessly.
After her speech, she spent nearly half an hour walking around the crowd. She held a baby dressed as an elephant and signed zillions of autographs.
Unfortunately, I didn't get anything signed...and the best pictures I have of her face are these blurred photos..
The experience was amazing! To be around so many people who care about the same things you do just as passionately as you do is surreal. And the idea of having 25,000 people chanting you name is mind boggling, but Palin handled it like a pro, but while keeping something that let you know she was just one of you.
While I spent the entire day trying to get a picture of Palin's face, I neglected to see the most wonderful picture I got. It is not as close as I would have liked, but it is beautiful nonetheless.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Game On!
When I was a teenager, I decided I was a Democrat. President Bartlet was the main reason I decided this, and this clip is a great example of why. While I am a steadfast Republican now, I would vote for President Bartlet anyday!
If only we had that sort of leadership nowadays.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Thursday, October 2, 2008
The Tragedy of Campus Voting
On Tuesday I was doing voter registration in the student union. An elderly man walked up to me and started talking about how he supports McCain. As our conversation progressed, he talked of a policeman who killed an IU football player many years ago. The policeman was later promoted by a democratic official. While the student body was furious that the police officer shot the student, they later willingly elected the official by voting a straight democrat ticket.
His comment made me think. The IU student body is about 40,000. That kind of voting force can create immense difference. Most students don't stick around in the college towns after their four-year servitude. However, those that live in the city are stuck with whatever choices those students make.
Most also don't know that you don't have to vote for every race on a ticket for your ballot to me valid. So they pull a straight ticket, having no knowledge of those races other than the major ones. Minor offices are decided by uninformed college students who just want to vote for president, leaving the citizens of the town with a government they may not have wanted.
Such is the case with this police officer. Most college students are indoctrinated with liberal ideals and the need to vote a straight ticket. They put a corrupt official in office and left without a goodbye. The man I talked to said that the person made many bad choices for the city.
After hearing from him, I agreed with his point: college students should not be allowed to vote at their school. They should either go home to vote, or vote absentee. They only live at school for half of the year, and are gone within four years. Why should their huge numbers be able to decide the future of a town?
Although, the low turnout of the youth vote may make this a mute point. So please, if you are a college student and plan to vote, don't pull a straight ticket for either party. Vote just for the races you care about. Let the citizens choose the rest.
His comment made me think. The IU student body is about 40,000. That kind of voting force can create immense difference. Most students don't stick around in the college towns after their four-year servitude. However, those that live in the city are stuck with whatever choices those students make.
Most also don't know that you don't have to vote for every race on a ticket for your ballot to me valid. So they pull a straight ticket, having no knowledge of those races other than the major ones. Minor offices are decided by uninformed college students who just want to vote for president, leaving the citizens of the town with a government they may not have wanted.
Such is the case with this police officer. Most college students are indoctrinated with liberal ideals and the need to vote a straight ticket. They put a corrupt official in office and left without a goodbye. The man I talked to said that the person made many bad choices for the city.
After hearing from him, I agreed with his point: college students should not be allowed to vote at their school. They should either go home to vote, or vote absentee. They only live at school for half of the year, and are gone within four years. Why should their huge numbers be able to decide the future of a town?
Although, the low turnout of the youth vote may make this a mute point. So please, if you are a college student and plan to vote, don't pull a straight ticket for either party. Vote just for the races you care about. Let the citizens choose the rest.
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Change? I Think Not.
As a member of both the Students for McCain and the College Republicans, I recieve many a dirty look as I walk around campus in my McCain Palin hat and College Republican shirts. And, of course, snide comments when I am forced to share the lit Desk in the student union with teh College Democrats and "Campaign for Change" doing voter registration.
As I have experienced these things, a thought has occured to me: the "Campaign for Change" is a pretty huge misnomer. "Change"? It seems that their campaign is pretty much the same as the campaigns of old: low and dirty methods and a "do whatever it takes" mentality that causes one to abandon all morals and ethics, as long as the assigned goal is met.
Example one: I have been told that the Campaign for Change has campaigned in the residence halls of Indiana University. Partisan groups are not allowed to solicit in the residence halls. Upon being told this, Higher ups in the campaign told their field ops to go back in, despite the reprimand.
Example two: Rules don't seem to apply to them either. While using the lit desk in the union for voter registration, a group is not allowed more than 2 people to be there at any one time. Apparently, 2 people is the same as 5, as that is usually how many people they have there. Also, they apparently NEED almost the entire desk in order to monopolize it and spread out their "Free Obama posters!" while other student organizations are squeezed to the edges of the desk.
Example four: In adition to rule breaking and ignoring warnings, the Campaign for Change will do anything it can to meet its goals. I have also been told that when using the lit desk with others doing voter registration, they have stolen completed forms in order to meet their own quota. They were told yesterday that anything less than 400 new voter/address change forms would be "unacceptable." With such pressure, it makes sense that they would do whatever it took to reach their goals.
Does this sound like "change" to you? Even if these orders are not coming from Obama or those close to him, they are still coming from someone in the campaign, and official order or not, still reflect upon him and his organization. These are the tactics of old-school politics. Of a politics involving party heads and Tammany Hall. A politics lacking ethics and morals. And a politics of dangerous consequences.
Change? I don't think so.
As I have experienced these things, a thought has occured to me: the "Campaign for Change" is a pretty huge misnomer. "Change"? It seems that their campaign is pretty much the same as the campaigns of old: low and dirty methods and a "do whatever it takes" mentality that causes one to abandon all morals and ethics, as long as the assigned goal is met.
Example one: I have been told that the Campaign for Change has campaigned in the residence halls of Indiana University. Partisan groups are not allowed to solicit in the residence halls. Upon being told this, Higher ups in the campaign told their field ops to go back in, despite the reprimand.
Example two: Rules don't seem to apply to them either. While using the lit desk in the union for voter registration, a group is not allowed more than 2 people to be there at any one time. Apparently, 2 people is the same as 5, as that is usually how many people they have there. Also, they apparently NEED almost the entire desk in order to monopolize it and spread out their "Free Obama posters!" while other student organizations are squeezed to the edges of the desk.
Example four: In adition to rule breaking and ignoring warnings, the Campaign for Change will do anything it can to meet its goals. I have also been told that when using the lit desk with others doing voter registration, they have stolen completed forms in order to meet their own quota. They were told yesterday that anything less than 400 new voter/address change forms would be "unacceptable." With such pressure, it makes sense that they would do whatever it took to reach their goals.
Does this sound like "change" to you? Even if these orders are not coming from Obama or those close to him, they are still coming from someone in the campaign, and official order or not, still reflect upon him and his organization. These are the tactics of old-school politics. Of a politics involving party heads and Tammany Hall. A politics lacking ethics and morals. And a politics of dangerous consequences.
Change? I don't think so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)