Obama’s upcoming team is looking more like he is hoping that Bill Clinton’s administration was actual as successful as it claims… He now has landed Hillary as his Secretary of State…
So far it seems that his administration will be nothing more than Clinton’s, he fails to realize that it was the computer industry boom that made Bill Clinton look like he did such wonderful job with the economy and very little to do with Clinton’s administration…
Now remember back to the democratic debates, these two were all over each other claiming the other was not experienced enough… One of the criticism of Clinton was that she had no foreign relations experience…
More Change You Can Believe In!
Hillary Clinton plans to accept the job of secretary of state offered by Barack Obama, who is reaching out to former rivals to build a broad coalition administration, the Guardian has learned.
Obama’s advisers have begun looking into Bill Clinton’s foundation, which distributes millions of dollars to Africa to help with development, to ensure that there is no conflict of interest. But Democrats do not believe that the vetting is likely to be a problem.
Clinton would be well placed to become the country’s dominant voice in foreign affairs, replacing Condoleezza Rice. Since being elected senator for New York, she has specialised in foreign affairs and defence. Although she supported the war in Iraq, she and Obama basically agree on a withdrawal of American troops.
Clinton, who still harbours hopes of a future presidential run, had to weigh up whether she would be better placed by staying in the Senate, which offers a platform for life, or making the more uncertain career move to the secretary of state job.
As part of the coalition-building, Obama today also reached out to his defeated Republican rival, John McCain, to discuss how they could work together to roll back some of the most controversial policies of the Bush years. Putting aside the bitter words thrown about with abandon by both sides during the election campaign, McCain flew to meet Obama at his headquarters in the Kluczynski Federal Building, in downtown Chicago.
Obama, speaking before the meeting, said: “We’re going to have a good conversation about how we can do some work together to fix up the country.” He said he also wanted to thank McCain for his service to the country.
Asked by a reporter whether he would work with Obama, McCain, who has long favoured a bipartisan approach to politics, replied: “Obviously”.
Sources on both sides said Obama did not offer McCain a cabinet job, but focused on how the senator for Arizona could help to guide through Congress legislation that they both strongly favour.
Given Obama’s status as president-in-waiting, the two met in a formal setting, a room decked out with a US flag, and were accompanied by senior advisers. Obama appeared the more relaxed of the two, sitting with legs crossed, smiling broadly and waving to reporters, while McCain sat stiffly, with a seemingly fixed grin.
Although the two clashed during the election campaign over tax policy and withdrawal from Iraq, they have more in common than they have differences. They both favour the closure of the Guantánamo Bay detention centre, an increase in US troops to Afghanistan, immigration reform, stem cell research and measures to tackle climate change, and oppose torture and the widespread use of wire-tapping.
Although Democrats made gains in the Senate in the November 4 elections, they fell short of the 60 seats that would have allowed them to override Republican blocking tactics and will need Republican allies to get Obama’s plans through. This was highlighted today when the Democratic leadership in Congress announced that a broad economic stimulus package Obama sought was not likely to be passed because of Republican opposition.
Obama confirmed at the weekend that he would offer jobs to some Republicans. One of the names that crops up most often is Chuck Hagel, the former Republican senator who is a specialist in foreign affairs and a critic of the Iraq war.
Not that their media bias is news, but rather their admission. The problem is that their excuse is wrong. Utimately they are saying that Barack got more media coverage because he is “new”. That is an outright lie. First of all it was not just the amount of coverage but the type. They delved into every last aspect of Sarah Palin’s life, yet did almost nothing to investigate anything about Barack Obama who was running for President. I would think that more scrutiny would go into the Presidential candidate than the VP candidate. Additional, the stories stunk of a clear campaigning tone, where Obama was made out to be Good and McCain was made out to be Bad. This bias does not belong in the media and their late response to the people is lacking in any sincerity.
Most of the media in the US followed this same train of thought and some still are… The LA Times still has yet to release the video of Barack Obama’s speech at the Rashid Khalidi party… What about William Ayers, yes there is more to that story that the public does not know…
There is much of Barack Obama that is unknown, the media did nothing to report on Barack Obama’s past.
Yes the elections are over, however Barack’s past is still an issue and I will still be posting about any topics that come up about him as well as what he does between now and the end of his presidency.
I hope the mass media decides to return to Journalism and start investigating Barack Obama and reporting its unbiased findings.
The Post provided a lot of good campaign coverage, but readers have been consistently critical of the lack of probing issues coverage and what they saw as a tilt toward Democrat Barack Obama. My surveys, which ended on Election Day, show that they are right on both counts.
My assistant, Jean Hwang, and I have been examining Post coverage since Nov. 11 last year on issues, voters, fundraising, the candidates’ backgrounds and horse-race stories on tactics, strategy and consultants. We also have looked at photos and Page 1 stories since Obama captured the nomination June 4. Numbers don’t tell you everything, but they give you a sense of The Post’s priorities.
The count was lopsided, with 1,295 horse-race stories and 594 issues stories. The Post was deficient in stories that reported more than the two candidates trading jabs; readers needed articles, going back to the primaries, comparing their positions with outside experts’ views. There were no broad stories on energy or science policy, and there were few on religion issues.
Bill Hamilton, assistant managing editor for politics, said, “There are a lot of things I wish we’d been able to do in covering this campaign, but we had to make choices about what we felt we were uniquely able to provide our audiences both in Washington and on the Web. I don’t at all discount the importance of issues, but we had a larger purpose, to convey and explain a campaign that our own David Broder described as the most exciting he has ever covered, a narrative that unfolded until the very end. I think our staff rose to the occasion.”
The op-ed page ran far more laudatory opinion pieces on Obama, 32, than on Sen. John McCain, 13. There were far more negative pieces (58) about McCain than there were about Obama (32), and Obama got the editorial board’s endorsement. The Post has several conservative columnists, but not all were gung-ho about McCain.
Stories and photos about Obama in the news pages outnumbered those devoted to McCain. Post reporters, photographers and editors — like most of the national news media — found the candidacy of Obama, the first African American major-party nominee, more newsworthy and historic. Journalists love the new; McCain, 25 years older than Obama, was already well known and had more scars from his longer career in politics.
The number of Obama stories since Nov. 11 was 946, compared with McCain’s 786. Both had hard-fought primary campaigns, but Obama’s battle with Hillary Rodham Clinton was longer, and the numbers reflect that.
McCain clinched the GOP nomination on March 4, and Obama won his on June 4. From then to Election Day, the tally was Obama, 626 stories, and McCain, 584. Obama was on the front page 176 times, McCain, 144 times; 41 stories featured both.
Our survey results are comparable to figures for the national news media from a study by the Project for Excellence in Journalism. It found that from June 9, when Clinton dropped out of the race, until Nov. 2, 66 percent of the campaign stories were about Obama compared with 53 percent for McCain; some stories featured both. The project also calculated that in that time, 57 percent of the stories were about the horse race and 13 percent were about issues.
Counting from June 4, Obama was in 311 Post photos and McCain in 282. Obama led in most categories. Obama led 133 to 121 in pictures more than three columns wide, 178 to 161 in smaller pictures, and 164 to 133 in color photos. In black and white photos, the nominees were about even, with McCain at 149 and Obama at 147. On Page 1, they were even at 26 each. Post photo and news editors were surprised by my first count on Aug. 3, which showed a much wider disparity, and made a more conscious effort at balance afterward.
Some readers complain that coverage is too poll-driven. They’re right, but it’s not going to change. The Post’s polling was on the mark, and in some cases ahead of the curve, in focusing on independent voters, racial attitudes, low-wage voters, the shift of African Americans’ support from Clinton to Obama and the rising importance of economic issues. The Post and its polling partner ABC News include 50 to 60 issues questions in every survey instead of just horse-race questions, so public attitudes were plumbed as well.
The Post had a hard-working team on the campaign. Special praise goes to Dan Balz, the best, most level-headed, incisive political reporter and analyst in newspapers. His stories and “Dan Balz’s Take” on washingtonpost.com were fair, penetrating and on the mark. His mentor, David S. Broder, was as sharp as ever.
The Post’s biographical pieces, especially the first ones — McCain by Michael Leahy and Obama by David Maraniss — were compelling. Maraniss demystified Obama’s growing-up years; the piece on his mother and grandparents was a great read. Leahy’s first piece on McCain’s father and grandfather, both admirals, told me where McCain got his maverick ways as a kid — right from the two old men.
But Obama deserved tougher scrutiny than he got, especially of his undergraduate years, his start in Chicago and his relationship with Antoin “Tony” Rezko, who was convicted this year of influence-peddling in Chicago. The Post did nothing on Obama’s acknowledged drug use as a teenager.
The Post had good coverage of voters, mainly by Krissah Williams Thompson and Kevin Merida. Anne Hull‘s stories from Florida, Michigan and Liberty University, and Wil Haygood‘s story from central Montana brought readers into voters’ lives. Jose Antonio Vargas‘s pieces about campaigns and the Internet were standouts.
One gaping hole in coverage involved Joe Biden, Obama’s running mate. When Gov. Sarah Palin was nominated for vice president, reporters were booking the next flight to Alaska. Some readers thought The Post went over Palin with a fine-tooth comb and neglected Biden. They are right; it was a serious omission. However, I do not agree with those readers who thought The Post did only hatchet jobs on her. There were several good stories on her, the best on page 1 by Sally Jenkins on how Palin grew up in Alaska.
In early coverage, I wasn’t a big fan of the long-running series called “The Gurus” on consultants and important people in the campaigns. The Post has always prided itself on its political coverage, and profiles of the top dogs were probably well read by political junkies. But I thought the series was of no practical use to readers. While there were some interesting pieces in The Frontrunners series, none of them told me anything about where the candidates stood on any issue.
A longer column is online. Deborah Howell can be reached at 202-334-7582 firstname.lastname@example.org.
I will be taking the next couple of days to do some maintenance of the tags and categories on the site.
I will post my reaction to Barack Obama’s win as President of the United States over the weekend as I want to make sure I clearly think about what I am going to post and ensure that it is objective as possible.
I will also post my opinion of the loss by John McCain and Sarah Palin.
Well Said, Those of you on the later time zones, please continue to the poles until the last one closes.
By Ross Balano, Kansas City Star Midwest Voices Columnist 2008
You McCain supporters; don’t believe the press or the polling numbers. I have been looking at as much data as I could find today and I believe this election is closer than anyone thought.
Do not, repeat, do not allow the media to suppress the vote. Get out there and make your voice heard.
Reports are coming in from all over, especially Pennsylvania and Ohio about intimidation from Democrats. There are even more reports of possible voter fraud. Military ballots were mailed late and may not be counted. There IS an attempt to steal this election. Do not let it happen.
The media was allowed to select our candidate when they convinced too many of us that McCain was the only Republican who had a chance to win. Now they want to convince us that the election is over. It’s not over until we say it’s over.
If you don’t want higher taxes, and don’t believe that 95% tax cut routine because it will not happen
If you don’t believe in “spreading the wealth.”
If you don’t want more liberal supreme court justices.
If you don’t want Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid running the country.
If you don’t want a leader who’s formative years were spent with the likes of Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers.
If you do not want this country to be taken over by the radical left and policy formed by them.
Get up, get to the polls and vote. It’s not too late to spoil Obama’s party.
More reports of Voter fraud and intimidation. Pretty wide spread, and this is just the tip of the iceberg I bet. More Change You Can Believe In!
GOP presidential candidate John McCain’s campaign said Tuesday that it is hearing of several instances of voter intimidation and fraud on Election Day, and sued twice to rectify what it sees as illegal conduct.
On a conference call with reporters, McCain advisers said they have successfully sued in Philadelphia to have their poll watchers recertified, and they expect similar results from an effort to do the same in New Hampshire.
Sen. McCain’s (Ariz.) campaign alleged that Democratic supporters of McCain’s rival, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), have been calling Republican voters in Lancaster, Pa., and telling them that their polling places have been moved.
McCain spokesman Ben Porritt said caller ID had helped identify the callers as Obama supporters, but he stopped short of saying the calls reflected any kind of concerted effort by the Obama campaign.
“It would be hard to make that connection,” Porritt said.
In some parts of Virginia, the advisers said, the ballot is two pages and only Obama appears on the first page.
McCain adviser Brian Jones said the campaign feels “elections should be decided by voters, not lawyers,” but it is committed to ensuring that fair voting practices are followed.
The Obama campaign has been quiet about any Republican efforts to influence the election through fraud or voter suppression. However, the group Election Protection said it had received more than 48,000 calls by 2:45 p.m. at a toll-free number that opened at 5:30 a.m.
And this is why organizations such as the Black Panthers can militantly assualt America’s right to vote… The legitimate authorities are blocked from it… Notice how the stories excuses of why the republican EB members were kicked out differs… More Change You Can Believe In!
GOP Election Board members have been tossed out of polling stations in at least half a dozen polling stations in Philadelphia because of their party status.
A Pennsylvania judge previously ruled that court-appointed poll watchers could be NOT removed from their boards by an on-site election judge, but that is exactly what is happening, according to sources on the ground.
It is the duty of election board workers to monitor and guard the integrity of the voting process.
Denying access to the minority (in this case Republican) poll watchers and inspectors is a violation of Pennsylvania state law. Those who violate the law can be punished with a misdemeanor and subjected to a fine of $1,000 and sent to prison between one month and two years.
Those on site are describing the situation as “pandemonium” and there may be video coming of the chaos.
Some of the precincts where Republicans have been removed are: the 44th Ward, 12th and 13th divisions; 6th Ward, 12th division; 32nd Ward, Division 28.
“Election board officials guard the legitimacy of the election process and the idea that Republicans are being intimidated and banned for partisan purposes does not allow for an honest and open election process,” said McCain-Palin spokesman Ben Porritt in a statement to Townhall.
The City of Brotherly Love was roiled in controversy during the 2004 election because of rigged voting machines that showed nearly 2,000 votes for Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry before the polls had opened. A man also used a gun to intimidate poll workers at Ward 30, division 11 in 2004.
Update: Fox News just did a report about the controversy. The Democrats are saying that the polling station is crowded and election board members need to cycle through the areas intermittently.
Update 10:53am: Pennsylvania Secretary of State Pedro Cortes says this matter is already being heard in court and should be resolved soon. He says there was a dispute of the names of the poll watchers on record. This is a different story than the Democratic officials told Fox News earlier this morning.