The Politico's Jayson Blair

I woke up this morning, and checked some "news" sites like I usually do. I put "news" sites in quotes because I visited the Politico* - a gossip rag whose ace "reporter" Jonathan Martin told me this:

In the wide-ranging [Meet the Press] appearance, Obama once again gave strong indications that he's backing off his stance on two key campaign pledges - whether to repeal President George W. Bush's tax cuts for the rich, and his call for bringing U.S. combat troops home from Iraq in 16 months.

I was pretty stunned at this, so I went to the tape and watched President-elect Obama on Meet the Press. And what do you know, he didn't "give strong indications that he's backing off" his income tax or Iraq pledges. He did nothing of the kind.

On taxes, Obama said, "My economic team right now is examining -- do we repeal that through legislation [or] do we let it lapse so that, when the Bush tax cuts expire, they're not renewed when it comes to wealthiest Americans?" In other words, he didn't say he was considering not repealing the tax cuts, he said he was considering how to repeal them - whether to support repealing them now, or whether to support them being automatically repealed by statute in two years. But the support for repeal is a foregone conclusion.

Likewise, on Iraq, Obama reiterated that it his top priority to withdraw troops from Iraq "as quickly as we can." Sure, he didn't explicitly say the phrase "16 months" - but in what way is a pledge to withdraw troops "as quickly as we can" a "strong indication" that he will withdraw troops in more time than 16 months? If anything, Obama's actually suggesting he may bring troops home sooner (I don't think he will, but my point is that if you can draw any conclusion from his statement, it is that, and not that he's "backing off" his 16 month timeline).

Look, Obama has clearly backed off his campaign promise for a windfall profits tax on oil and gas companies. I also think that his transition team has offered conflicting signals on whether the new administration's timing for its push to repeal Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. Those are concrete, verifiable, undebatable facts, and he deserves to be asked about them. I also think it's fair to criticize Obama for not moving to repeal the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy right when he enters office.

However, Jonathan Martin claiming in a straight news story that Obama's Meet the Press interview "gave strong indications that he's backing off" his overall promise to support the repeal of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy and withdraw troops from Iraq in 16 months is an outrageous lie - a made up fiction by a self-serving "reporter" looking to get his story on the front page of Drudge. Believe me, if Obama had done that, I'd be among the first to flag it (and if Obama in the future does, in fact, back off those promises, we should all call him out on it).

But that's not what he did on Meet the Press. The only thing that happened this morning is that an arrogant "reporter" manufactured a story. Remember, it was only a few years ago that people like Jayson Blair or Stephen Glass became national embarrassments for that kind of behavior - now it seems that's what passes for the norm in "political journalism."

* I'm not linking to the story because the entire reason the Politico made up this outrageous lie is to get people to link to the story and build up traffic which it then uses to attract ad revenue. If you want to see the story go to the Politico.

Comments

[sanaaiman]

j. martin is going to start contributing to ben smith's blog :-/.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1208/JMart_moonlighting.html?showall

[PumaJ]

I have also come to the conclusion that Politico does not offer real journalism, but rather gossip, innuendo and disinformation. Politico seems to be cast more in the mold of FOX News and Pajamas Media than it does in any form of a legitimate news broker.

I have come to generally ignore their reporting.

[stevensjohn26]

Blair is not the only one saying this...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20081208/pl_politico/16292

[Pdubya]

I prefer not to take either of your words. Rather, I looked to his voting record and will await performance come January. Then, get back to us, ok?

[Citizen-Jane]

Thanks Dave. This whole "Left" angry at Obama seems manufactured. It seems like a clever divide and conquer scheme. While some of Obama's picks are perplexing ro me as well. I still say that it is better than the alternative. John McCain/Sarah Palin.

The man hasn't started running his administration yet. If he backs off of campaingn promises in the future like Iraq and repealing the Bush tax cut. I will as I am sure will many others take it to Obama.
reminding him that his camapaign slogan is/was change using words cleverly to say the same thing is not change. Honestly I'd like to see more progressives in his administration too. But I can't help bet see that there is a plan a foot soooo let's just wait and see.

Now I also would like to hear more about how the right is having hissy fits as well about Obama's picks.
You KNOW that that is going on. Yet not so widely reported..?.. besides that won't look as bad as it does when the left criticize. Isolate the left. Paint them as angry and unreasonable and well as unhappy with Obama trying to bring people together. After all the right has to have something to feel good about. After all they'd like nothing better than to throw the Left under the bus.


Jan. 20th 2009 Obama its show time.

[ChiGuy]

In it's early days, it showed promise, and how quickly they sold-out.

Since the beginning of this most recently concluded election cycle, Politico has become a publicity-w'horing group tip-toeing the edges of tabloidism.

They are not, and will never be my go-to source for political news.

[SEQUOIABISON]

Nice reporting David. We finally have a president who is flexible and makes decisions based on circumstances at the time, and good for the country as a whole, unlike the dogmatic years of W, who made decisions based on helping his rich friends and tried to twist the facts to fit his neocon trickle-down philosophy.

[libbygirl]

Wow. Flexibility and thoughtful decisions....from a President. I had almost lost hope. Is it Jan. 20th yet?

[TN60]

Good comment, David. There are a lot of "commentators"out there spewing nonsense while calling themselves "newscasters. They are no more news people than I am.

They want attention and figure the best way to get it is to play "straight" while they are conservatives to the core. Look how many are booked onto TV news shows. "Sheep's clothing" doncha know !!!

I would hate to make my living waiting for the "big break" while spouting lies. They are beyond contempt.

Some, like Rove should be in jail......Some need to be sued for deflamation...Some like me should be sued for not being able to spell :-)

[DrVandy]

Finally, someone is calling Politico out on this form of reporting. I have had several email exchanges with their "reporters" on this very issue. I would listen to a speech during the campaign and then go to their website to find it had been completely mischaracterized. Unfortunately, Jonathan Martin was not the only one guilty of this. Include Ben Smith and several others in there as well.

It is as if they mistake their opinion, wish or beliefs, for facts. I have no problem with a blogger expressing their opinion of a politician's stances in their blog, as long as they note that it is just their opinion but when individuals such as Jake Tapper suggest Obama is planning to invade Pakistan based on nothing more than their own twist on his words, it is false reporting and unethical.

[middlegirl]

My very reaction when I read Martin's distorted take on Obama's position. Let Jmart know if you are similiarly offended.

[e-mail]

[Mayoyo]

You are right...Martin and Rove perfect together.
I expect my President to adapt smartly to situations.'
Also with all that crap we are going thru rith now...all campaign promises should be thrown out of the window.

[jbatch]

You know, one of the reasons I voted for Obama is that he seemed to have the intelligence to know when the world had changed and adapt his policies to new situations, rather than blindly and ignorantly "staying the course" like the ethical infant Bush, and the iconic Ronald Reagan.

And things have changed. Like an unprecedented economic melt down, for instance.

And yes, it is a bad idea generally to raise taxes in a recession. So if he changes his mind on this, it's a good thing. I'm confident he will ultimately move to restore a little economic justice when the time is right.

Burt if we progressives start expecting him to "stay the course" and insist that he go blindly forward regardless of how things may have changed, then we deserve the debacle we will surely get.

[boogiewoman]

Martin and Rove are buddies, enough said!

[Nonamnesiac]

Obama has done what politicians do. Rather than make a firm commitment on repealing the tax cuts to the wealthy (which are one of the causes of the collapse) he leaves himself cover not to repeal them. Same for getting completely out of Iraq.

Given his appointments of voodoo economics/Reaganomics/Rubinomics free traders and his appointments of those with warmongering records to State and Defense, Politico is perfectly within appropriate boundaries for interpreting Obama's remarks on Meet the Press as it did. Obama's team of unbridled free-trade, deregulating, market-controls-all-in-the-end privatizers, all personally helped cause the crash and profitted massively from that brand of economics -- an economic brand that caused the most massive shift of resources from the poor and middle class to the wealthy (including those same voodooistas) in history.

Together with Obama's warmongerers -- Bush's policies will continue in the end. All Politico was noting is that Obama's appointees give credence to Bush's lawless, reward-the-rich-at-the-expense-of-the-middle-class policies. Politico believes Obama's actions speak louder than his words. So when Obama parces his words, Politico listens and reports it. It's unclear given what Obama said on MTP whether he will push to repeal the tax cuts or get all of our troops out of Iraq quickly or not.

[RoloTomassi]

What you're pushing here is utter nonsense, and it's a clear indication that 1) yu're not paying attention or doing any research, or 2) your comment stem from a forgone conclusion, and no amount of information will change your POV.

I saw the interview, and Sirota's interpretation is the correct one; the Politico interpretation is unfounded.

[DMHendrix]

Martin's "interpretation" or opinion should not be relayed as fact. Period. I watched MTP and my "interpretation" was something completely different. What makes him right?

[MichaelDeane]

Sorry but "interpretation" is not journalism but public relations or propaganda.

Politico has a conservative bent with Martin and others having a strong connection to Karl Rove.

So you have spliced together a very tenuous argument for why conservatives should continue to act badly against your own interests.

I find that curious but even more sad.

[Nonamnesiac]

Journalism? We haven't had journalism for a very long time -- just competing, poorly researched opinions of idelogically driven know-nothings (Republicans/Conservatives) and know-littles (Democrats) that run the full gamut between the right and right center with left thinking and analysis and top flight research wholly excluded.

Having said that, there's nothing wrong for anyone to state that Obama did not state he would push to repeal Bush's tax cuts to the rich or guarantee complete withdrawal of all US forces from Iraq on MTP. He didn't. And his appointees give us no reason to have confidence he will either repeal Bush's tax cuts for the rich or pull out all US troops and contractors from Iraq quickly.

[MaryT63]

Yes, definitely J. Martin twisted the truth. I saw the mtp piece on Obama. He said then as he have said for a few weeks now that his economic team is looking at the numbers as to whether to appeal or let expire. I watch Obama speak every chance I get so as not to be taken in by pundit's spin. Thanks, for being one of the watch dogs for keeping the truth out there.
Don't these so called 'reporters' know that there is more to be gained and discussed in reporting the truth rather than creating 'conflict or gotta' journalism. When will they learn.

[RuckHumper]

Repeatedly during the campaign, Obama promised to repeal the Bush tax cuts. Letting them expire is not repealing them.

Repeatedly during the campaign, Obama promised to order the General Staff to start drawing up plans for withdrawal from Iraq as soon as he took office. Following the recent Staus of Forces agreement in not withdrawing from Iraq as soon as possible.

However, these are good signs that Obama is going to be a good president. He's going to follow Bush's lead on almost every issue.

[DrVandy]

1. When he promised to repeal the Bush tax cuts, Lehman Brothers had not gone bankrupt and AIG, CITIGroup and the Big Three automakers were not on the verge of bankruptcy. Grow up, there is a new economic reality and he has to act responsibly to deal with it. Allowing the tax cuts to expire is perfectly acceptable given these new facts.

2. You may not have noticed, but Obama is not president yet, so how could he have reneged on an agreement to begin making plans for withdrawal as soon as he takes office. BTW, Gates is already working on a plan for withdrawal. He said so in a speech he gave the day after it was announced that he would stay on as DefSec. Notice this is happening 1 1/2 months before Obama takes office.

3. You are either clueless or a republican (or as I'm guessing, both).