Posts Tagged ‘Endorsements’

By now, we all know the L.A.Times and numerous other liberal newspapers have endorsed John McCain and it got me wondering who has endorsed McCain?  I also question why the L.A Times will not release a transcripts of a confidential video where Obama and his wife were at a “Jew-Bash” dinner, roasting and toasting PLO associate Khalidi with Bill Ayers and his wife.   If one thinks Obama is hiding pertinent information about his past now, wait and see what he hides from the American People if be becomes elected President.  Too many dirty little secrets. 

Wiki lists a who’s who http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_John_McCain_presidential_campaign_endorsements with notable politicians and movie stars from Clint Eastwood to Lee Greenwood and at  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspaper_endorsements_in_the_United_States_presidential_primaries,_2008.  The accuracy of Wiki being reliable is especially questionable when it continues to show that the N.Y. Times has endorsed McCain, when in fact it has endorsed That One.

Info chimps blog spent a little time revealing the disparity geographically of Newspaper Endorsements.  http://blog.infochimps.org/2008/10/22/2008election-newspaper-endorsement-map/Apart from the unsurprising evidence that (choose one: [[Obama is the overwhelming choice]] -OR- [[there is overwhelming liberal media bias]]), I’m struck by the mismatch between papers’ endorsements and their “Red State” vs “Blue State” alignment.”  Definitely an interesting read of factual data with a little bit of a debatable fictional twist.

What gives newspapers and not television stations the right to endorse any one at all?  It is rather obvious which networks are fair and balanced in their political reporting.

In this campaign of Obama being everywhere, it is becoming annoying to see his face and logo go into saturation mode.  The half hour infomercial was an embarrassment to the whole political system, mocking the fact that he chose not receive federal funding.   I think by now Americans after two years get who the candidates are and what they stand for.  Finally, in making light of endorsements we have the  http://www.weeklyworldnews.com/alien-alert/october-surprise-alien-switches-endorsement-to-mccain/ depicting even an Alien turning away from Obama and supporting McCain. 

For sure endorsements matter even when they are from other worlds.  An alien endorsement for McCain has sealed the deal for me and McCain has my vote.

Read Full Post »

It comes as no surprise that The New York Times is endorsing Obama for President.


“As tough as the times are, the selection of a new president is easy. After nearly two years of a grueling and ugly campaign, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois has proved that he is the right choice to be the 44th president of the United States.”  “Mr. McCain, whom we chose as the best Republican nominee in the primaries, has spent the last coins of his reputation for principle and sound judgment to placate the limitless demands and narrow vision of the far-right wing,” it said.

It is almost laughable that readers of the NY Times, didn’t already know that the paper itself, its editors and journalist are all biased against John McCain and have supported Obama from the first days he announced his candidacy.  Just this week the company, reported a 16 percent drop in advertising revenue at its news media group, also said it might write down as much as $150 million at its New England operations, underscoring the dismal state of newspaper advertising.  It isn’t just dismal advertising dollars, readers have already gotten the news dismal news somewhere else long before the New York Times comes out.  Between the net and TV, the pubic who might care about an issue finds stories everywhere else but in national newspapers.

In the case of The Wall Street Journal http://online.wsj.com/public/us , readers do manage to get features that are related to Wall Street and the finance industry. News articles, are in fact news and editorial opinions are found in the editorial section. 

If there are any undecided voters out there, certainly an endorsement of either candidate by The New York Times is not going to make a difference with less than two weeks to go until the election.  If you are still undecided, I suggest you do not vote.  http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/10/16/the-myth-of-the-undecideds/ Americans have endured two years of this getting to know the candidate through every means necessary.  Town Halls Meetings, debates, campaign ads, interviews, the web, blogs, etc.   I know enough that I question every reform platform and motive Obama has.  As a duly registered voter, I also question McCain’s policies and prior voting records but what I do not question is is his motive.  To both Obama and McCain, I question why 40% of workers do not qualify to pay taxes in the first place and why?   http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/13/obama-tax-cut-refunds-those-who-dont-pay/ 

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/presidential-race/index.html is a reasonable place to compare the candidates. 

Educated voters by now have heard more than enough to make an educated decision in the voting booth.   In the long run, The Times have done its audience a favor in clearly labeling itself the slanted liberal paper the rest of us always knew it to be.

Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: