Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock


Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict


Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links


Regional News


News Publications

To the media - please keep it up (Part II) (update)
Posted by: McQ on Thursday, September 04, 2008

Yes, friends Sarah Palin "cut funds" for pregnant Alaskan teenagers according to the Washington Post's Paul Kane. He even has pictures:
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican vice-presidential nominee who revealed Monday that her 17-year-old daughter is pregnant, earlier this year used her line-item veto to slash funding for a state program benefiting teen mothers in need of a place to live.
But as Allahpundit at Hot Air points out, only in liberal land is "expanding a program by $3.9 million instead of $5 million count[ed] as cutting funds"

He also points us to two bloggers who've debunked the entire WaPo story. As it turns out, the funds were for an expansion of Covenant House, and she took the funds down from 5 million to 3.9 million. The previous year Covenant House had received 1.2 million in government grants. The 3.9 million, three times the previous year's total, was budgeted to expand the outreach to pregnant teenagers.

Quite a "cut" wouldn't you say?

Whether or not you agree with government doing such things (I don't), the point here is the WaPo article was a blatant untruth brought about by "gotchya" journalism which only concerns itself with being the first out there with a "story", not whether the story is factually true or correct.

Another recent - very recent - example is the Alaskan Independent Party story and the charge that Palin had been a member. Guess who led with it? No great surprise - The New York Times (that's after it ran 3 days worth of above the fold stories about Sarah Palin's 17 year old daughter).

Guess who just has had to retract the story?

Keep it up, media, please, keep it up.

UPDATE: Mark Steyn goes off on the media as only he can do:
I would like to thank the US media for doing such a grand job this last week of lowering expectations by portraying Governor Palin - whoops, I mean Hick-Burg Mayor Palin - as a hillbilly know-nothing permapregnant ditz, half of whose 27 kids are the spawn of a stump-toothed uncle who hasn't worked since he was an extra in Deliverance.

How's that narrative holding up, geniuses? Almost as good as your "devoted husband John Edwards" routine?

I trust even now Maureen Dowd is working on a hilarious new column mocking proposed names for the Governor's first grandchild. Perhaps Richard Cohen can just take the week off and they can rerun his insightful analysis comparing the Palin nomination to Caligula making his horse a consul. Whereas we sophisticates all know that if McCain were as smart as Obama he'd have nominated a dead horse to be his consul. No wait...
Return to Main Blog Page

Previous Comments to this Post 

What do you expect. They are desperate leftists. They are willing to do anything to win.
Written By: Don
URL: http://
From an Alaskan paper today - ’our Mama beats your Obama’
Written By: meagain
URL: http://
This election is a success regardless of the outcome, because the media is throwing their scant remaining credibility right down the cr*pper with both grubby hands.

Please continue to destroy yourselves. Now excuse me while I head over to the business site to chuckle over the NYT share price.
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Our VP is hotter than your VP... :)
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
How can this be?

I keep hearing that the MSM is so superior to bloggers because of their "multiple layers of editing and fact-checking" . . .

If they cannot be bothered to check the simplest of facts, but instead merely regurgitate the misinformation they’ve been fed, how are they any better than the sloppiest, most partisan bloggers out there?

WaPo seems anxious to keep up with the NYT as the fastest-deteriorating "news"paper in the country. Stories like this certainly help them towards that goal.

Written By: Jim Addison
URL: http://
Too bad independents are turning on Palin!! LOL, McBush really screwed up!!

Written By: Cotts Rbe
URL: http://
Too bad independents are turning on Palin!! LOL, McBush really screwed up!!
Careful, mk might start quoting those back to us as proof.
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
Looks like Elisabeth Bumiller has joined Team Rather .. fake but accurate.
Written By: Neo
URL: http://
Is this the first "confirmed case" of PDS (Palin Derangement Syndrome) ?
Written By: Neo
URL: http://
I’ve been very cynical (even defeatist) about the slimy media coverage of Palin. I was certain that it would work to the detriment of Sarah Palin and the GOP. Perhaps I should have more faith in my fellow Americans. Via Tammy Bruce, Rassmussen is reporting that a slim majority of voters surveyed think that the media is doing a hatchet job on Sarah Palin... and quite a few people are planning to vote for her as a result of their outrage.
Over half of U.S. voters (51%) think reporters are trying to hurt Sarah Palin with their news coverage, and 24% say those stories make them more likely to vote for Republican presidential candidate John McCain in November.
O’ course, there are those who said that the smear campaign against Sarah Palin would make them less likely to vote for her, but I’m amazed that the numbers are as favorable for her as they are. Rassmussen even reports that aides to the Hilldabest are starting to get a little riled:
Several aides to Hillary Clinton, who Obama defeated for the Democratic presidential nomination, also have criticized the media coverage for its sexist tone.
Obviously, feminists are going to have to think hard about their stance regarding the coverage of Palin and their opposition to her. They’ve claimed for years that women can do a job just as well as men and that motherhood shouldn’t be a bar to hiring a woman. Yet, it’s "suggested" by the media that Palin can’t be VP because it would conflict with her responsibilities as a mother. Feminists have also squawked about privacy rights as a foundation for their support of abortion; a woman’s reproductive choices are her own business. Yet, the privacy rights of Sarah Palin and especially her teenaged daughter have been completely shredded by a press corps eager to find ANY dirt to derail Palin’s candidacy. That many feminsts not only accept that these things are happening but even gleefully join in speaks volumes about what Feminism is all about. Think hard, ladies: if Sarah Palin can be trashed and effectively barred from a job because of her gender and her daughter’s reproductive choices, so can you.

We’ve still got a couple of months to go until the election and the MSM has plenty of time to come up with newer, better smears, but it MAY be that they really have overplayed their hand this time, and that the American people are smart enough to see through their game. I’m especially curious to see how American women deal with this issue.

As an aside, it would be interesting to see what a psychologist would make of the mob mentality the MSM has demonstrated regarding Palin. What has made them throw out any semblence of professionalism and report completely unsubstantiated rumors? Why the blatant double standard between their coverage of Palin and of The Annointed One? Is it merely because she is conservative and they are liberal? Is it simply because they are supporting their candidate? Or is there some other cause at work, some inate brutishness that made them delight in savaging a woman and her teenage daughter in the same way that a group of children delight in bullying the fat kid in school, or a group of otherwise rational people hate others based on race or creed or national origin? In other words, did it simply feel good to bash Sarah Palin?
Written By: docjim505
URL: http://
I think the first person who said "they’re scared" summed it up best.

This is the reaction of people who are surprised and realize when the surprise wears off a bit, they actually frightened that something they didn’t think could happen IS about to happen and they’re doing their level best to try and prevent it.
Written By: looker
URL: http://
I dont think it is merely because she is a conservative. It is because she is a very successful (if relatively unknown) woman who does not kowtow to the leftist feminist establishment and their line. In the same vein as Clarence Thomas, Colin Powell (Uncle Tom’s and ’house n.....’s’) or Condi Rice (’Aunt Jemima’) receive bitter vituperation from leftist establishment blacks.
Written By: ABC
URL: http://
r1nZKb gkbcguasztkb, [url=]nhsrnrbzddeg[/url], [link=]zjotttcusaqt[/link],
Written By: 3

Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Vicious Capitalism


Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks