While Beltway pundits and others in the national press have alleged that Barack Obama is clearly and obviously out of touch with most not-so-bitter Pennsylvanians, leading newspapers in the state, who ought to know better, seem to disagree.
In recent days Obama has picked up the endorsements of every major paper in the state and many smaller ones.
Papers endorsing Obama include: The Philadelphia Inquirer, The Philadelphia Daily News, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Allentown Morning Call, The Patriot News of Harrisburg, the Scranton Times-Tribune and Bucks County Courier.
Hillary Clinton's endorsements have been far fewer, such as the Daily Pennsylvanian -- the University of Pennsylvania paper, which drew a lot of coverage yesterday. The daily in Wilkes-Barre said it is not endorsing at all.
My mom was born and raised in Lock Haven, Pa., and I spent a lot of time growing up in that central part of the state -- even going hunting with the relatives when I was about ten. So I have followed the race there closely.
Imagine Clinton's chagrin when her "hometown" Scranton paper wrote: "In a nomination campaign that has defied convention, Mr. Obama has energized an entire generation of voters that, for the most part, otherwise had checked out of political participation. That, at least, portends a new approach to governance that can help to dissipate the political miasma that has engulfed Washington at least since the impeachment of former President Bill Clinton."
The Philadelphia Daily News -- the so-called "peoples' paper" -- had this to say:
"Should Democrats choose someone who will employ hard-won -- even bitter - experiences gained in a past Democratic administration, or reach beyond political truisms toward a new (and untried) model of governing? "Neither choice is obvious. Perhaps that's why the race has gone on for so long.
"But the long slog through 44 primaries and caucuses has confirmed for us that Sen. Barack Obama's vision of change -- and the way he plans to pursue it -- is what we need right now. Badly."
**
Greg Mitchell's new book is So Wrong for So: How the Press, the Pundits -- and the President -- Failed on Iraq. It features a preface by Bruce Springsteen and has been hailed by Bill Moyers, Glenn Greenwald, Arianna Huffington and many others.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Only one thing I have to say, I just love political correct a........zz kissers like Greg Mitchell. Just love them.
WHEN "THE BUSH" WAS ELECTED TWICE, I THOUGHT IT WAS A FLUKE, BUT IF HILLARY BECOMES OUR NOMINEE...I'LL KNOW THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE GULLIBLE AND NOT TOO BRIGHT. BEING A DEVOUT DEMOCRAT, I WILL VOTE FOR HER TO PREVENT MCCAIN FROM GETTING IN, BUT WILL DO SO WITH GRITTED TEETH.
"Should Democrats choose someone who will employ hard-won -- even bitter - experiences gained in a past Democratic administration, or reach beyond political truisms toward a new (and untried) model of governing? "Neither choice is obvious.
You've got to be kidding me. The choice punched me right in the nose it was so obvious! No way I want to choose someone who's got experience in Bill Clinton's administration. There's nothing either Clinton says that rings as true to me anymore. New and untried? Maybe in the past several decades, but someone who believes in the constitution as Obama does is gravitating to what our country stood for in the first place! Nothing new about that, except we haven't had it for so long. And if you mean 'untried' is Obama, I guess you haven't a clue about his life either.
Please excuse my ignorance, but who has been grooming Obama from the start of this campaign?
Would you believe senior Illinois Sen Dick Durbin?
The fact is Obama's words were completely misconstrued, as usual, by both the MSM and his political enemies, obviously for political fodder. Any American with half a brain understands that.
Is Hillary Clinton for "The Citizens" of the U.S.A.? That is the function of the "President", or is it for personal gain? She never divulged the truth. Why should she start now? Just check the 1996 bill submitted to congress by Hillary Clinton and look who saved all America's butts, which includes all our children. Please begin your learning experience here: Congressional records of Hillary bill
http://www.eagleforum.org/psr/1998/dec98/psrdec98.html
When a president is talking foreign policy abroad misconstrued words can get you into a lot of trouble maybe Obama needs some lessons on speaking clearly.
Yeah, maybe Bush could give him some tips? : )
And maybe the media needs lessons on context and responsible reporting and thinking as if it did not have a lobotomy. The media's job is reality checking, and I don't know what you call what they're doing now but it's not reality checking. Sensational dereliction of duty comes to mind. Criminal comes to mind, even with the First Amendment. It's the equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire. We are electing a president, and this is the best they can do?
The media shame is that Obama did speak clearly. See elsewhere on HuffPo, David Coleman: I Was There: What Obama Really Said About Pennsylvania - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-coleman/i-was-there-what-obama-re_b_96553.html. See Cenk Uygur on The Young Turks, The Truth Behind Obama's Bitter Comment - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPBUJ91Ha48. The truth is out there.
I agree. They only report (or rather spin) what they want---the rest they leave out. No one is questioning Hillary Clinton or John McCain's past and present associates, where they go to church, or who may have contributed to their campaigns. But Obama seems to get all the scrutiny as the talking heads play "ain't it awful" with each other on infinitum about how terrible they think he is. Unfortunately, it does influence people in their decision making about the political race. This is not real journalism, but news shows that are designed and funded to influence the outcome of elections. At first I thought it was just Fox news that was the culprit. But, lately, it seems like they are all pretty horrid.
I now understand the name "residentchimp". You say "I believe President Bush will receive the same acclaim that President Lincoln has 100 years from now." Bush will make the history books, but for an entirely different reason. Lincoln was intent on ending slavery. Bush has made a mess of the economy, our country and the world. Desperation is hoping that you'll be remembered more favorable when every one who was alive when you were is gone...
That game has already been called. See BenTripp in 2003 on George XLIII, before the invasion of Iraq: He'll Be Remembered As An Asshole: http://www.counterpunch.org/tripp02142003.html.
"George W. Bush, how will we loathe thee? Let me count the ways."
the Penn. newspapers know better ----- what a rag comment, from a rag profession ---- lies for fact ---- leg work today is surfing the net ---- sharing drinks and whores with the pols. ---- standing by while the 1st is being destroyed ----- yea, they know better !!!
While it is my hope that Obama becomes elected, I have a great deal of respect for Hillary Clinton for her past efforts to bring universal health care to everyone as well as her experience.
While this isn't a popular idea, I'd love to see the winner choose the other as a VP, because as a team, I think they could solve many of our nation's problems - although undoing the damage already done to the economy by the disastrous choices by this current administration and Wall Street will probably take decades to un-do.
Not popular with me. Hillary first in line to be president if something happens to Obama? Why give her opportunity? She's got motive already and has amply demonstrated what she'll do with that given any opportunity, which is anything, anything.
That would explain why print media is going down the tubes. Luckily, despite their desires to the contrary, voters decide Pennsylvannia not the fawning media.
We've all known for a long time that the media is in the tank for Obama. Their endorsements serve as nothing more than lining for the litter box. They contain no objectivity whatsoever.
Did you read the article? It says that while beltway media pundits are down on Obama, PA newspaper media are endorsing him. Media is media except when it's not?
Beltway media pundits are not down on Obama. They have their lips firmly attached to his primary posterior fundament.
Except when not: NBC and MSM and DNC disappeared Senator Gravel from future debates after this telling "I'm ashamed of you Hillary"-for-Iran-war-enabling-vote moment and her ha-ha-ha response: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3gQfz8GC0o
Right. Like the ABC news pundits that spent the first 45 minutes in the last nationally televised debate accusing Obama of being a domestic terrorist, while Hillary sat smugly in her corner professing her love of guns and God like a bionic carpetbagger. Yeah, those moderators were in the tank for Obama. Get real.
WTF? what planet do you live on?
Oh so because the media outlets in PA support Obama, Clinton should just drop out. I couldn't care less who supports Obama at this point. He's single handedly destroying this party. His surrogates and supporters are some of the ugliest people and the poorest of debaters on the issues. He's just a paper tiger with more prowl than prowess. IF he gets the nomination there will be a feeding frenzy. Not just on issues that have come out in this primary about him and his character more and more. Obama has ZERO credentials and he's the opitimy of the impatient, power hungry politician. "GET OUT NOW HILLARY!! JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE I'VE "FACED" and "WON" AGAINST" This is what Obama wants. This is what Obama NEEDS. He needs to run against candidates like Alan Keyes in order to win. Either that or just find some BS to take his opponents candidacy to court and have them thrown out of the race. Obama, you're NOTHING, politically speaking. Which is why you use the meme of "All things to all people at all times". And when that doesn't work you cry racism. When that doesn't work you cry about negative Rovish campaigning by someone in your own party. This ain't the South Side of Chicago small potatoes. This isn't the corrupt Illinois State Legislature where you were made king by Emil Jones. You were a shooting star. Now all you are is a brown dwarf completely burnt out by your meteoric rise.
If what Obama is doing is distroying the democratic party, then it needs to be distroyed and a new one built to take its place. Personally I think new young vitalized spirit like Obama is bringing NEW LIFE to the Party that is why we have increased voter registration and people like me who have not voted in 40 years are taking an active role in this election. My first ballot was an absentee ballot while serving in the Marine Corps in Viet Nam and my second ballot will be cast for Barack Obama.
How is it that the guy winning on ALL THREE COUNTS is the one destroying the party?
Do you feel that, since he's winning popular vote, states won, AND delegates, Obama should bow out gracefully to allow Hillary, who is in second place across the board, her "right" to be president?
If Obama were "nothing, politically speaking" -- then wouldn't "front-runner of inevitability" Hillary have ended this race long, long ago?
StephenJK,
rotflmao, "He's single handedly destroying this party." You people are to funnee.
Let's face it, we live in an America where "educated people", even those who sit in the White House, have a very difficult time putting their words in understandable terms. We pray for the current President, but his poor communication skills have not served us well. (And) look at the problems that the media is causing the nation, because they only seem to be able to analyze this election in terms of white, black and gender. What ever happened to issues?
Do people really want to hear the truth? We get angry when former Presidents speak with those we don't like, upset when it is suggested that we may still have a race problem and offended when a Pastor/Theologian apparently used the wrong words to say that America is not a perfect nation(which should surprise no one). Let's stop complaining and make some constructive comments as to why we are not producing Presidential material in our $ 30,000 a year plus colleges and universities.
I come from the "common sense" school. Problem are best dealt with when you admit that you have them, take positive steps to address them and pray that God will help you when you don't have all the answers.
The America that Lincoln and others fought to preserve, will be just find if she does not forget the God who has blessed her so, despite all of her shortcomings and weaknesses!
Common Sense and God ----- strange bedfellows ! ! !
Very good comment. For those who are actually conversant with the history of Lincoln, you can see a lot of Parallels with President Bush. Both were villfied for their looks, the way they talked, how inarticulate they were and that they were not the real power in the Oval Office. They were also condemned for getting the Country into a war we couldn't win and neither were expected to be re-elected. I believe President Bush will receive the same acclaim that President Lincoln has 100 years from now.
I can hardly wait
It isn't the job of the Pennsylvania press to reflect the will of their readership. It is their job to cut through the agendas being presented by campaigns and other forms of media to get to a greater truth. To tell their readers who will actually represent them in our government. If the population does not respond to this, then the cries for better education are only validated at a level that affects everyone. Blue Collar doesn't have to mean ignorant.
Most editorial board members are in their ivory towers eating aurgula and sipping Starbucks and do not eat Philly cheesestake or scrapple
Did it ever occur to Greg Mitchell that maybe the newspapers are out of touch with their readers?
Because a paper endorses a politician DOES NOT mean the readers do.
So...it's good for Sen. Clinton, then, that these papers didn't endorse her?
Exactly!
White Catholic priest defends Rev. Jeremiah Wright against FoxNews smears
http://youtube.com/watch?v=20j5iDfg_p8
http://youtube.com/watch?v=SBKeCIDGvwY
the guy also a fan of leader of the the nation of islam.
What do you say to the pastor of Hillary's church in DC, Dean Snyder?
He also has strong words of PRAISE for Reverend Wright.
(After eight years of Bush some people won't even remember what the First Amendment means....)
I guess some people think you're supposed to agree with everything your pastor (or candidate) says, on every issue, holy or mundane. Well, fortunately, many people in the U.S. still know how to think for themselves and expect others to do the same.
Posted April 19, 2008 | 01:25 PM (EST)