Heartfeldt Politics Blog - Politics Gets Personal - Comments

Gloria Feldt comments on WHO IS JOHN MCCAIN? Hint: Not a Moderate, in Case You Were Wondering

Gloria Feldt — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 01:29:34 +0000

Stacy, thank you for the awesome link to the Carpetbagger Report article. It is exceptional. As you may recall, George W. Bush had the same technique for charming the press and it worked like a charm.

Part of the problem is the rapacious appetite for new content to feed the maw of all the media outlets competing for the public's very short attention span. This leads to mistakes and it leads to short cuts, one of which is going for the easy, charming interview rather than the substantive, if less cooperative one.

stacy comments on WHO IS JOHN MCCAIN? Hint: Not a Moderate, in Case You Were Wondering

stacy — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 00:02:25 +0000

Here's an interesting look at how the AP seems to have thrown objective journalism to the wind when it comes to reporting on McCain and Obama:

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/16081.html

stacy comments on WHO IS JOHN MCCAIN? Hint: Not a Moderate, in Case You Were Wondering

stacy — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:15:18 +0000

The media has ignored his purported treatment of Cindy McCain although the blogs have not- it's important to sort out the rumor and innuendo and not make a politicians private life front-and-center, but the stories of his verbal abuse of her (Cindy) seem well-sourced- I can't help but think if you call your wife/partner a c*** in public, what you call her or do to her in private is likely much worse.

The next question is, does it matter? Of course. Given that he seems to be running on a platform of "my character is unassailable" due to his military service and POW status (both of which I respect), the fact that he spent much of his early career mired in scandal (the Keating Five) coupled with his explosive temper and his treatment of his wife (no. 1 and 2)- this certainly calls into question his much lauded character. And of course, the Maverick has over 100 lobbyists working on his campaign and Karl Rove is now apparently on board to help him secure the Oval Office so as far as I'm concerned, any sense of ethics McCain *may* have had has just been jettisoned.

The media double-standard is interesting- nothing was off limits with the Clintons nor Obama, but when it comes to McCain...

Gloria Feldt comments on REALITY CHECKING IGNORANCE ONLY "EDUCATION"

Gloria Feldt — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 01:36:57 +0000

As I always say, your friends will do you in faster than your enemies. And the D's have sold their soul for way less than a mess of pottage on repro rights so many times that it
amazes me I keep my optimism about our ability to have an impact. Obey is one of many Democrats who aren't pro-choice, and play footsie with the social conservatives on abortion, family planning, and sex education.

The Clinton administration did many good things--they rescinded Bush I's executive orders implementing the global gag rule and prohibiting importation of RU-486 for example. Even so, they struck a deal that started the massive state funding for abstinence-only programs as part of the welfare reform negotiations. And welfare reform itself has had some horrid consequences for low income women, but that's yet another example of my main point.

And sadly, ultimately, Clinton backed down and accepted a slightly watered-down global gag rule in exchange for continued funding for international family planning and other foreign operations funding, after his clout was so weakened by the Lewinsky episode that he couldn't muster the votes to pass his own agenda.

stacy comments on REALITY CHECKING IGNORANCE ONLY "EDUCATION"

stacy — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 21:07:37 +0000

Firedoglake is covering this too, and some may be surprised it's not just the Republicans throwing money behind the 'abstinence only' misinformation campaign.

http://firedoglake.com/2008/06/25/why-is-dave-obey-d-wi-putting-our-children-at-risk/#more-26670

stacy comments on REALITY CHECKING IGNORANCE ONLY "EDUCATION"

stacy — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:34:36 +0000

I don't even understand how federal funding of 'abstinence only' was option- it's not scientifically or medically based and it sounds a lot more like a George BUsh's religious preference than sound policy. It doesn't even *sound* constitutional. But then again, under George Bush the CDC and HHS have pretty much become a joke. Julie Gerberding, MD of the CDC should be ashamed at what happened under her tenure.

And then there's the always inaccurate, morally-superior Chris Mathews doing everything he can to try to convince people the Democrats are the party of 'abortion as birth control':

http://mediamatters.org/items/200806160006

I sent him [Mathews] an email trying to point out that had he or one of his research assistants bothered to use google, he wouldn't have uttered such factually-deficient clap-trap. I know, it's five minutes of my life I will never get back, but it made me feel better...

Gloria Feldt comments on WHERE WERE YOU SIX MONTHS AGO, KATIE?

Gloria Feldt — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 03:08:28 +0000

Oh yes, personal responsibility. What a concept. It is better late than never. Perhaps you saw the New York Magazine article "The Fall and Rise of Hillary Clinton": http://nymag.com/news/politics/47837/
She has some choice words to say, She also would have been better served to have said them during the campaign.

stacy comments on WHERE WERE YOU SIX MONTHS AGO, KATIE?

stacy — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 12:13:05 +0000

Of course Katie may have pressure from her bosses, who determine content whom are biased and looking out for the bottom line as opposed to the truth, but we can't forget that Katie is not some powerless individual scraping by for a living who fears if she loses a job, she loses her house and ability to put clothes on her kids. In fact, she has considerable power, opportunity, contacts and wealth which make it all the more offensive to me that she is speaking out now after-the-fact and when Hillary's campaign is over and when Katie would seemingly have less to lose- there is something quite selfish about her refusal to do so earlier in my book, which is why I don't give her too much credit now, nor am I willing to put the blame solely on the networks themselves.

Gloria Feldt comments on WHERE WERE YOU SIX MONTHS AGO, KATIE?

Gloria Feldt — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 16:26:49 +0000

Three cheers for PunditGirl!

Stacy, McClellan is the perfect analogy. What do they say about the hottest places in Hell being reserved for those who in times of moral crisis do nothing? (A prize for the correct reference).

And Daisy has hit it on the head...the media is so timid in general that their definition of "neutral" is actually biased against rocking the boat, or defying conventional wisdom that they themselves have often created. I don't think that excuses her inaction or anyone else's though.

Daisy comments on WHERE WERE YOU SIX MONTHS AGO, KATIE?

Daisy — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 13:30:38 +0000

i wonder if Katie was under pressure not to appear biased while Hillary was still actively campaigning. In Katie's national position, the network has a lot of say in what she says and how she says it.