On February 25, 2008 CNN let loose a string of reports through Wolf Blitzer, Lou Dobbs and John Roberts that played like an extension of Hillary's campaign; from distancing her from NAFTA, to encouraging racial backlash against Barack.
Across the board, from Wolf Blitzer to Lou Dobbs, to John Roberts, the "reporting" seemed to have the goals to: Obscure Hillary's ties to NAFTA and to falsely implicate Barack as having ties to NAFTA. Highlight African American support for Barack as a way of dissuading white males from voting for him and to encourage them to vote for Hillary instead. Protect Hillary from the implication that her campaign published pictures of Barack in African garb, but to encourage the audience to believe that wearing the clothes and having Muslim relatives makes it likely that Barack is Muslim.
Hillary claims credit for the administration that passed NAFTA, and she is on record for describing it in glowing terms on many occasions. In his mailer, Barack used a quote from Newsday that Hillary called NAFTA "a boon for the American economy." Which is fair because, even though Newsday subsequently said "we did not have the Clinton campaign using the word 'boon' in describing NAFTA," they also said that they used that word as their "characterization of how (they) best understood her position on NAFTA, based on a review of past stories and her public statements. ..."
Meanwhile, Barack Obama has never complimented, supported, or otherwise approved of NAFTA, yet CNN represented his disinclination to commit to ending NAFTA as equal to Hillary implementing and complimenting NAFTA. To that point, Lou Dobbs said: "He causes Hillary to be weak on NAFTA and he plans on being weak himself." Since when is a disinclination to get rid of something equal to creating and supporting it?
Then Lou Dobbs characterizes Barack, who had nothing to do with NAFTA, and Hillary, who had everything to do with NAFTA, as having the same NAFTA related purpose. "Hillary and Barack are fighting to distance themselves from NAFTA." Clearly Lou Dobbs is manipulating language to create the false impression that, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton, share a similar relationship with NAFTA.
On two occasions Wolf Blitzer questioned the numbers of African Americans voting for Barack. He also mentioned that Hispanics were voting in significant numbers for Hillary Clinton, but he did not question that.
William Schneider was asked to answer the African American voting question, and he concluded that African Americans are voting for Barack Obama because of "pride." Many African Americans have said they intend to vote for Barack Obama on camera, but not one of them gave "pride" as their reason. As a matter of fact, the only person who characterized the African American vote for Barack Obama, as based on pride, was Bill Clinton, when he was playing the race card in South Carolina. After that, the numbers of African Americans voting for Barack Obama went up dramatically. Consequently, a good answer for why African Americans are overwhelmingly voting for Barack Obama, could be, that they prefer not to vote for a candidate who exploits the conditions created by racism, in order to win an election -
Finally, CNN did all that it could to protect Hillary from, even the implication, that she was responsible for sending a picture of Barack dressed in African clothing to The Drudge Report, even though The Drudge Report indicated that it came from her campaign. After "clearing" Hillary, CNN went on to make fun of the African clothing, at least twice, referring to it as "bad judgement in dressing." Then they repeated Hillary's, blame the victim, passive aggressive, mean spirited suggestion that the real photo, and the real social dilemma that it creates for Barack's candidacy, is "nothing more than an obvious and transparent attempt to distract from the serious issues confronting our country today and to attempt to create the very divisions they claim to decry."
If all of this weren't enough, Wolf Blitzer made sure the audience drew the conclusion intended by the picture circulating perpetrator, by ACTUALLY CALLING THE CLOTHING THAT BARACK WORE MUSLIM CLOTHING, and if that didn't do it, he went on to inform the audience that some of Barack's relatives are Muslim!!!!!
As part of CNN's report, it was mentioned that Barack was viewed more favorably by people who viewed the February debate in Texas, than by those who obtained information about the event from the media. Clearly reports like this is the reason why. Instead of "reporting," CNN is bombarding the public with their desperate desire for Hillary Clinton to win this nomination, and they seem not to mind if they accomplish it at the expense of the will of the American people, and in disregard for democracy.
To make things right, CNN should:
Inform the public that Barack is not a supporter of NAFTA and never has been, and that his characterization of Hillary's support of NAFTA was fair and that the use of the word "boon" was a direct quote from Newsday.
Apologize to African Americans for trivializing and racializing their vote, and for making fun of things African, and they should inform the public that they have no information to support the idea that African Americans are voting for Barack Obama based on pride.
Apologize to white men for entertaining a discussion that characterized the vote of white men for Barack Obama as against women or as an effort to show that they are not racist, and CNN should inform the public that they have no credible basis for saying that white men are voting for Barack Obama for any of those reasons.
Finally, CNN should inform the public that they furthered a ploy to associate Barack Obama with the Muslim religion by calling the clothing he wore in a picture "Muslim clothes," when there is no such thing as Muslim clothes, and by pointing out that some of his relatives are Muslim.
Student of social dynamics, especially as it relates to issues of race and sex.
She has been whining and sniping so far. I would have to assume that crying and weeping are next with curses of "you viscous brute" and "male chauvinist". I wonder who will be dirtier? Clinton or McClain? McClain has already been attacking Obama which probably shows that he fears Obama more than Hillary. It is the old establishment that we must defeat and Obama is our only hope at this time(Help us Obama 1 cannadati). Barrack has been quite discrete so far and I hope he continues to be so. That just makes Hillaries attempts at mud throwing seem that much more inept.
by
Hayesml47 (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 469 comments)
on Thursday, March 6, 2008 at 1:19:29 PM
1 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
