CNN labels NY Times/McCain/Lobbyist Story: 'Smear'
By John Amato Wednesday Feb 20, 2008 4:13pm
So nice to see that CNN is taking a stand for John McCain. (h.t billw) McCain Camp Fights "Smear"
I think Bill Keller of the NY Times would disagree.
John Amato’s virtual online magazine…OK, It’s a blog!
©2009 Crooks And Liars
Login or Register to post comments.
Now now, children!! Play nice!
They put "Smear" in quotes to reflect McCain's reaction.
Dropping Loads all over McCain Face!!!!!!!!
Watch Here : http://youtube.com/watch?v=GVy80H8G_oo
All the media seems once burned on this story. Maybe they remember the Judy Miller reports and where that got us. Probably don't want to be called fools again so they are treading easy on this one.
Eric Jaffa @ 2:
Yeah, there's nothing biased about that at all. That's the standard way you would put it, as a journalist. The Times is alleging something that both involved parties deny, so the onus is on them to provide some really compelling evidence that it's true. In the meantime, McCain calls it a smear, so when CNN discusses it, there's nothing wrong with that headline.
And the NYT's reaction to McCain's reaction is right under it, so I don't see a problem here. This is Journalism 101. Now I'm betting that over on Fox, those quotes are nowhere in sight.
The BIG global powers that be ....They'll smear anyone... to get their agenda..
Could they ALL be smearing McCain...
and preparing for a Bloomberg "Independent run" ?
and... There certainly are A LOT OF trolls everywhere smearing The democrats...
...because they are not impeaching and holding the admin accountable.
JonfromAL @ 5:
Fox just employs liberal use of question marks.
"Obama: baby-eating ghetto-Muslim who's coming for your daughters?" That's more their speed.
Man....I am starting to see Obama as president and it is good.
Now Now... Fight it out where it counts...
@ the BANK!!
http://politics.charityads.org
Smear was in "quotes". Doesn't that signal that wasn't CNN's wording? Slow news day even for the blogs...
This story would be helped a great deal if the campaign people who talked to the Times would come forward. If indeed the story is true.
Don't forget about the clinton/obama debate tonight
CNN is basicly taking McCain's position at face value, and so their use of McCain's term for the charge.
I'll bet the farm that CNN didn't call the Monica story a "smear."
Amazing. CNN thinks the story is all about an illicit sexual relationship so they think it's a smear campaign. These so-called reporters are missing the real story, the story about Mr. Campaign Finance Reform and his connections to a lobbyist. That's not smear. That's fact. If McCain thinks it's rough now, wait until the Fall when all the shit hits the fan.
Chris Matthews is broken hearted that his boyfriend Butch McCain is screwing around with another blonde.
He refused to buy into any of it. He believes like CNN, that it is a unfair smear.
Wonder if it had been a Clinton????
looks like all out war for the soul of the repugnant party. so mcLame sold his soul to someone other than lindsay lohan. cnn vs. the times. one lies daily, the other waits weeks-to-years to reveal it's been lying.
the truth is there's no outrage because of peoples' low expectations.
Cats r Flyfishn @ 12:
And I don't believe for a second that they are missing the real story by accident, not for a second.
Cindy McCain, like others, stands by man.
AP - 37 minutes ago
STAND BY UR' MANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!
Pump up his little ego
biff @ 9:
May not be their wording but they chose to use it. The could have more neutrally used the headline: McCain Camp Fights NYTimes Article.
On the other hand, the Times has so shamed itself that its hard to have any sympathy for em.
mclame could have picked a better one not work-safe.
Eric Jaffa @ 2:
If they were being objective, the chyron would have been worded to the effect, "McCain Calls NYT Piece a 'Smear'"
Is there an exact numerical incidence of Wolf doing really odd stories that seem to cater to pure defense of GOP card holders?
every so often his stories are lacking half of the actual story and seems like a politician told him to say it, and he groveled and said sure, love to, love to, love to, throw the stick........ aw, c'mon and throw it?
CNN?
They have the Virgin Mary Pretzel under latest news.
'Nuff said.
earl @ 19:
May she lodge in Bush's throat.
That'd be the Gannon Pretzel
Whats to know about Media people like Wolf other then they are concerned with golf and clothing and position and image, not how inflation is calculated and how it affects the average citizen. It is all about them and maintaining their status and position.
Isn't it obvious?
As long as they keep the story alive they can call it whatever they want. Apparently Drudge originally broke this story so if they want to trace this "smear" back to its' origin I think it will wind up coming from the Republican camp. Suhweeeet!
Peter G @ 23:
Of course it is. They go out to eat every night and eat fillet mignon because it is lower in fat and better than the less expensive cuts. They eat well and have nice things and the cost is not as irrelevant and much less a concern. Even $3.50 a gallon gas, even though it irritates them, is just an expense they tolerate.
The Democratic left chants we'll never vote for Hillary. The Republican religious right chants we'll never vote for McCain. The NY Times piece may embolden the religious right to sit out the election and concentrate on retaking the party for God and Rev. Huckabee. But in my view, this mostly sex piece hurt the NY Times more than McCain.
Dr. Matt @ 17:
I get that, but isn't that like hoping a mcdonald's hamburger turns into a filet mignon? Expecting CNN to be anything but outrageous is a waste of time. Stick to newshour...
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
I don't see it as a smear. IF it is true, I give McCain credit for having a lot of fire in his furnace. But this country, lets president's authorize killing, wars and letting the poor starve, like bush has done but they go apecrap crazy over a sex scandel. I don't understand why they make such a big deal over it. Look at what they did to Bill Clinton. Because he had a consenual sex act they went on to have an excuse to impeach him.
Isn't it funny. McCain finally got it up and people are putting him down.
Marge @ 28:
McCain will end up a hero and Cindy will stand by her man when this morphs into "a stunt-swift boat attempt now traced to the DNC. Possibly the Obama camp."
McCain is a liar. He is a man that can be bought and sold. Check out his history. Even in the news conference where he tries to defend his action he lies. Notice when he is caught in a lie during this news conference he has a nervous laugh attack.
The whole issue here is not the affair John McCain had. It is how John McCain is really a Washington insider that will write laws for the right price. In this case helping big media get the laws they wanted. In the past the Keating Five.
L.A. Confidential @ 29:
The reich-wingers are going to blame Obama regardless. I'm surprised they haven't started yet except for a few trolls on the blogs.
Does anyone know if they made the same statement in regards to the swiftboating of John Kerry? I'd be interested to know.
Its a legit story. Imagine if Obama had a problem with a woman where his staffers felt they had to intervene to keep him away from her? That wouldnt be news? Puuuh-fuck-en-leeeease.
L.A. Confidential @ 29:
It worked for Clinton and got him elected to a second term. McCain had to have something bring him to the attention of Americans.
Dr. Matt @ 31:
I'm don't even care to look or tune in when they open fire on Obama.
I expect some truly nasty, despicable stuff. Way out over the edge.
Anything that reminds the public of McSwain's hypocrisy wrt marriage, lobbyists and campaign reform is all good. And since he condemned Clinton for adultery it would be nice for the press to remind everybody that McSwain had a number of girlfriends during his first marriage, his present wife being one. Since Clinton’s infidelity was on the cover of every checkout counter news rack for 2 years, wouldn’t it be fair to dig up (metaphorically speaking) some of McSwain’s old flames and give them a little publicity? After all, once being a sex partner to potentially the most powerful man in the world has it’s cachet so these women (and I am sure they all are women), these minor Monicas, deserve there place in his-story?
john in california @ 36:
Why would the Con Media swift boat McDuke? Or do the six guys who control all the media in this country sit around saying, hey what can we do today to screw over everyones heads? Want to do McCain this week or should we stick with Hillary?
I caught this on the TeeVee and immediately thought, "What does CNN have against investigative journalism?"
Then I came to my senses.
I don't care if he screwed a sheep. Provided that the sheep wasn't a lobbyist for the wool industry. Isn't that the bigger story? That he *allegedly* had an iimproper relationship with someone who was trying to gain favors from him?
Wednesday’s contributions to the McList of (currently 170) McPetNames(h/t Dr. Matt)
In case anyone's looking for it :)
Will check back later
out
Not only do the bring McCain's all-powerful lawyer Bennett into their studio and fawn over him, they start hawking his book as well.
Wolf, how far you have fallen...
L.A. Confidential @ 37:
Don't matter to me Murdo, as long as the sheep sit around glued to the tube and not out hustling after our pie is good with me.
Is it really a smear to be 72 and tied to a sexy romance with a young, hot lobbyist? This may be just what McCain needs. He is typically perceived as a grumpy old man.
RHM's blog
Does anyone know where we can get a live feed to the debate tonight via the internet?? I would guess that CNN would have one, but I see nothing on their website.
Any advice would be appreciated.
Marge @ 28:
I know! They are just going right for his nuts...wait.
They are just trying to castra....no no no!
This just a low blow! ...Damn!
Wolf and Chris are such news whores. When did the last real news reporter die off?
RHM @ 43:
Young hot lobbyist?
You can't be serious.
Rufus @ 46:
When newspapers were bought out by giant corporations. Television reporters? Never been one. All about ratings since day 1.
Deepthroat_2001@ziplip.com @ 27:
Uh... Mr. Amato I believe you're looking for fire where none exists. I've been watching the CNN coverage off and on, and I don't think they're siding with anybody on this issue. That title of theirs doesn't imply anything to people with a brain, the word "smear" is in quotes, meaning thats what the McCain group calls it.
The burden of proof at this point is on the NYT. They've cited anonymous sources. I happen to think the NYT is probably right, but its unfortunately not watertight enough yet, and we don't know for sure how far it really goes. So when/if they produce more substansial evidence, I think CNN/MSNBC and others have been covering this fairly, maybe a little braindead and asking the wrong questions, but fairly overall =)
Anyway, I'm not sure what makes anyone think CNN did something wrong here. Could you please elaborate? Now the burden of proof is on you.
Rufus @ 49:
Oh, come on, flying an aircraft in combat has always been classified as work.
goatsage @ 38:
Lol, good one.
Proud2bHumble, where is the whole list? Is McSwain a neoMcCism?
Rufus @ 46:
As I recall, it was Ernie Pyle sometime in the early to mid 50's.
ConcernedCanuck @ 48:
I'm not saying that they're necessarily wrong about McCain but, any paper that gave us the Whitewater "scandal," the Wen Ho Lee travesty or printed the collected works of Judith "Chalabi" Miller, ought to be treated with a strong degree of skepticism, no?
L.A. Confidential @ 55:
My error. That isn't ConcernedCanuck edit screw up on my part.
So, let me get this straight. The NYT has been working on this story for months, yet they endorsed John McCain for the republican nomination?
Sorry, but whether the allegations are true or not, the NYT has lost any remaining credability it had after its Iraq War fiascos. This will hurt their paper more than it will hurt McCain.
They endorsed Hillary as well. What more needs to be said? Utter irrelevance.
L.A. Confidential @ 55:
Richard C @ 50:
Well these kind of subtle things are talked about often here at C&L (see yesterday's post of the CNN captions saying that Al Queda called Obama to congratulate him and the further links from there). Coming out and being openly partisan verbally would make them the full clone of the F-Word channel. But having the bullet points and words on the screen say it, simply gives the context of what's reported a new frame of interpretation.
Notice how CNN uses the term "smear" (even if it is in quotes to imply that THEY are not saying it) when this story comes out against McCain, but the whole Obama Madrassa story or the Edwards $400 haircut were real news stories.
As a side note, personally, I think this story on McCain does nothing to help our country and side-tracks us from what we should be talking about. The whole story annoys me to no end, but I do have to agree with Amato that this is another example of a pattern of biased journalism from CNN.
So what does Rush Windbag have to say about McKale now? Are they buddies yet?
Chris @ 58:
Certainly not defending the NYT's, but as someone rightly pointed out earlier, the
Editorial/Opinion Section of the newspaper is totally and seperate from the investigative
division; each stand alone, independent of one another.
Does anyone know of a site that will be streaming tonights debate over the tubes of the Internets?
Bangkok Bob @ 63:
Sorry, cannot help since I had my tubes tied..
Doggiebobo @ 64:
are you online prophilacticaly?
Bangkok Bob @ 65:
oh yeah, don't need rubber cause the tied tubes ... OK.
Bangkok Bob @ 66:
Now I've got a picture in my head of all my words sitting out crammed up in that little resevoir at the end.
Bangkok Bob @ 65:
Absolutely, attempting to prevent and ward off any further disease caused the
last 7 plus years by the Repugs.
Doggiebobo @ 68:
with that ... I'm off to breakfast ... ciao America
Now we know where McHepatitis got the yellow teeth.
McNutless - hoisted on his own peeturd.
john in california @ 55:
No his McNeocyst is inoperable.
I am so sick of the media defending that corrupt, lying mother fucker. I still seethe when I think of what the Rethugs did to Kerry and Cleland and how McCain acted as though their service to this country meant nothing by not defending them, while his whole political career is based on how much he suffered as a POW. Well, guess what, JohnnyBoy? The Rethugs screwed you by going after their military careers, because you are now fair game. And I sincerely hope this story destroys you and your pandering ways. Fuck you, John McCain. Yeah, FUCK YOU! The MSM doesn't have the balls to call you out, but I do. Bring it on, bitch!
Now it says at the bottom of the screen
BREAKING NEWS
"TABLOID TIMES"
McCain Rips New York Times
Very flattering coverage from what I have seen on both MSNBC and CNN.
EMPY @ 76:
Forgot the FOXNEWS question mark on "TABLOID TIMES?"
And Ron Paul's racism in a new letter with nothing more then his name on it wasn't smear?
To me, the quotes around "smear" scream that the word is meant to be taken with a grain of salt ... a Lot's-wife-sized grain of salt. So much so, I'd expect the Foxwits to be bitching and moaning that CNN weren't being objective, not the good people here.
The Media is useless with all it's damn pundits. If he's lying, it'll come out over the next month or two. If not, or it can't be proven, the story will die away. Me does think he protest too much though.
The said part? I wish the pussy Dems would fight back this hard against, well, anything.
John McCain should not be elected president because of his stand on ALL the ISSUES, not because of possible flaws in his private life.
I am sick and tired of these stories coming out about all the candidates that have nothing to do with anything. People end up VOTING based on these irrelevant things and guess what happens - we end up with elected officials who are sober and loyal to their spouses but who SUCK AT LEADING!
McCain can and should lose based on the fact that he would continue and augment the disasterous policies of the current administration. There should be a front page story every day about that; not about unsubstantiated accusations.
TimV @ 60:
I understand subtlety, but I think this is too subtle to be a real complaint. CNN definitely has their biases, but I don't see anything wrong with this title. The fact that some people would interpret the title card at the bottom of the screen that extremely shows that people like John Amato are way too sensitive to any hint of bias in the media. I actually feel sorry for CNN that they would end up on C&L for this.
Bonkers @ 47:
lol
john in california @ 55:
I'll be putting up the whole list Fridays and Tuesdays on McToast and Open threads at my convenience or tolerable inconvenience... ;-)
Good God! This has to be the most useless post I've ever seen on C&L.
Mr. Amato, the quotes mean something. Either you know that and don't care, or you don't know it and shouldn't have your own web site.
Rovian concern troll #83
Proud2bHumble @ 86:
@85
mccain (mctongue*, we know that works) says vicki is a friend of his. I wonder if vicki a is friend of his wife also?
I'm watching the repugs do the rove stiff dance. repugs know damn well if the jackboot was on the other foot...
Pathetic stupid repugs nothings. Self-righteous, arrogant
tHeGaMeOfLiFe @ 88:
We're all his friends, and he wants to fist-fuck us too.
#199 McTongue, lol tHaNkZ! :-p
Swashbuckler @ 85:
Go cry on your own type of blog.
Go Obama!
I have no doubt he cheated on his wife from watching him answer questions this morning. Calling it a smear or gutter politics is just his way to deny, deny, deny. Disgusting.
now the mayberry machiavellis are in full-blown histrionics(see pat buchanan and sister bay, if you can stand it) and are looking for a face-saving device as an excuse to get behind mccain. if they weren't so dad-gummed prejudice and phony, they could find a decent candidate. rallying behind mccain is going to be interesting because somebody is going to get blown out of the water on certain
'social' issues. CAN'T WAIT!
Good day Proud. The "mc's" keep on coming. We barely get a chance to digest the previous mc before he starts a new one. mcpathic.
I wish I was the fly on their wall:
mctongue: "Lay back vicki and think telecom."
missmcreciver: "Ok, daddy...giggle."
At a bling of her eyes they literal turned to $,$.
$Cha-motherfucker-ching$
Low and behold vicki got what vicki wanted. Who is this masked bitch?
I'm really tired of paying for their sexual whatevers. When are we going to ask for our money back from these crooks.
It's robbing us into the poor house.
why was mccain's wife wearing black?
anonymous @ 92:
Damn you're right!
The bay I have been seening on these news show? Siblings?
tHeGaMeOfLiFe @ 93:
Hey tHeGaMeOfLiFe (still lovin' the moniker)!
#208, thanks!
P.S. Call me whatever you like, but if you'd like to forestall the onset of carpel by a few minutes you could go with '2b'. Besides, 'Proud' is a little embarrassing, since I'm so 'proud of how humble I am' - lol.
Unless I'm mistaken, there is no proof of the allegation yet, correct? So then how is it wrong for McCain to call it a smear?
Have you all realized that you've been had? The NY Times helped sell the Iraq war in the first place. Remember Judith Miller?
This story has gone and made McCain a stronger candidate, and gave the Conservatives an excuse to rally around him.
The Times knew exactly what the Neocons wanted it to do. And it did it.
so it's a smear? i thought so. so they admit mccain's too old to have sex then?
The Significance Of CNN's Support For John McCain
It is no revelation to me CNN came to the defense of John McCain. CNN is part of the conservative hit media, who has taken every opportunity to bash Hillary Clinton and hype Barack Obama. There will be no doubt who CNN will be supporting in an election between McCain and Obama. Spare me this analogy, why does the conservative media attack Clinton in favor of Obama? The question has been a torn in my side, as for why I am not totally sold on Barack's appeal.
Let me say this, I will support whoever wins the Democratic nomination. My problem is with the influence the media has had on the Democratic primary. From the start, MSNBC's Chris Matthews has been spending what amounts to millions of dollars making sure we know Clinton is a Bitch unworthy of being our president. This also amounts to money Obama does not have to spend to say somewhat the same thing. You could make the case Obama has a money advantage because he has not had to spend any money.
There is plenty of evidence the conservative media is spending much buck on bashing Clinton. Why they have chosen Obama in this way is also a torn in my side. Spare me this crap Clinton is too divisive because so is McCain. Anyone with the advantage Clinton once had says something about appeal.
My ending point is why, why, why. I will always want to know why the conservative media does one thing or another. They are deceptive, manipulating and corrupt to the core. They will always have an agenda.
Joseph
I watch CNN all the time, I saw the CNN report, they let his attorney explain McCain’s side, CNN did not label it a smear.
Login or Register to post comments.