Tag Archives: mark halperin

Halperin-Meacham: Obama’s No Ideological Liberal

All you need to know about the MSM: two of its stalwarts don't think Barack Obama is a real liberal . . . Time editor Mark Halperin, and Jon Meacham (until recently head Newsweek honcho) expressed–to the astonishment of Joe Scarborough–their fact-defying views on today's Morning Joe. View video after the jump. read more

Read the original here:
Halperin-Meacham: Obama’s No Ideological Liberal

Taranto: How the Press Looks Silly for Projecting ObamaCare Would Make GOP ‘Sore Losers’

James Taranto at the Wall Street Journal  pointed out in his “Best of the Web Today” review on Thursday how Mark Halperin of Time seems to disagree so vehemently with himself about how the Obama presidency was supposed to unfold this year. Why would Obama delay business-tax-cut talk until the fall, for example : It is fair to ask (and many Democrats have) why the President is only now proposing such critical measures, rather than offering them up earlier in his term, before election-season politics brought governing to a standstill. It’s fair to answer, too. While Americans were anxious about the economy, Obama was obsessed with wrecking our health care. He was urged on by cheerleaders in the media like the one who wrote an article on March 22, the day after the House passed ObamaCare, which began as follows: In the 7½ months between now and November’s midterm elections, millions of Americans will be whipped into a frenzy over the purported evils in the Democrats’ health care bill, egged on by Fox News chatter, Rush Limbaugh’s daily sermons, threats of state legislative and judicial action and the solemn pledge of Republicans in Washington to make the fall election a referendum on Obamacare. But in doing so, they may be playing right into the Democrats’ hands. The author of that paragraph: Time magazine’s Mark Halperin . It would be unsporting to dwell on Halperin’s lack of prescience. After all, anyone who makes political predictions is going to get it wrong sometimes. But in his March 22 piece, Halperin went beyond prognostication: Democrats will be joined in the fray by much of the press. For Republicans, this will seem like familiar ground, since generations of conservatives have complained that the so-called mainstream media have been biased against them. Well, get ready, Republicans, for déjà vu all over again. The coverage through November likely will highlight the most extreme attacks on the President and his law and spotlight stories of real Americans whose lives have been improved by access to health care (pushed, no doubt, by Democrats from every competitive congressional district and state). The louder Republicans yell, the more they will be characterized and caricatured as sore losers infuriated by the first major delivery of candidate Obama’s promise of “change.” The focus on the weekend’s alleged racial and gay-bashing verbal attacks by opponents of the Democrats’ plan should be a caution to Republican strategists trying to figure out how to manage the media this year. Halperin is a member of the press, and as the first paragraph of the March article makes clear, he was among the ObamaCare cheerleaders who, as he accurately observed, made up “much of the press.” Thus, that last excerpt is not just a prediction but a promise: Don’t worry, Mr. President, we in the press will propagandize relentlessly for you and turn this into a political winner. We think that was an unwise promise to make, not only because the press is supposed to be independent, but also because it was impossible to deliver the goods. The liberal media monopoly has long since been broken. Halperin and his colleagues were never going to be able to put lipstick on the ObamaCare pig by slandering opponents or producing puff pieces on “real Americans whose lives have been improved.” Yet having promised to do just that, Halperin isn’t even trying. Instead, he is chastising the president — for inexplicably following Halperin’s advice!

Read the original here:
Taranto: How the Press Looks Silly for Projecting ObamaCare Would Make GOP ‘Sore Losers’

Mark Halperin Signs On at MSNBC; But Wait, He Used to Bash ‘Irresponsible Partisan Niche Media’

TV Newser and other sites reported yesterday that MSNBC has named Time’s Mark Halperin to be its “senior political analyst,” continuing his regular gigs on the set of Morning Joe, but also adding his observations to other programming. Would that include the hard-core opinion shows like Olbermann and Maddow? Not if those stars read Halperin’s comments about our “irresponsible partisan niche media” from the Jewish newspaper Forward in 2006. ”It’s going to take citizens, whether they have strong ideological views or not, to appreciate the necessity, in a free democracy, of a powerful, responsible, unbiased press,” Halperin continued. “If the country doesn’t care if we have that, if the view of the people of America is, ‘We want irresponsible, partisan, niche media,’ that’s what we’ll have. It’s going to take consumers of news, voting through their subscriptions and their eyeballs, to have an unbiased press. Most of the trend lines are bad.” Halperin was offering one of his occasional admissions of liberal media bias that so frustrate the left-wing blogosphere. (Typical was Salon.com’s Alex Pareene, with the headline “Mark Halperin now paid to be wrong about everything on MSNBC.” He contrasts him as far inferior to MSNBC’s other recent addition, David Weigel.) Halperin argued in 2006 that conservative new media was dominating the discussion (which, er, made Obama’s election impossible?):  “We’ve gone from a system with major national news organizations strong enough to umpire, but who did it in a way that Republicans saw as liberally biased and in important ways was liberally biased,” he said. “That system has been replaced by one that favors conservatives through the new media, which masquerades as a referee but is simply part of the partisan shouting on one side or the other. The old system favored liberals but was a better referee. The new system favors conservatives but is no referee at all. Best would be if we could strengthen national news organizations and eliminate liberal bias.” So perhaps Halperin meant that only conservatives are responsible for creating “irresponsible, partisan niche media.” That would make him a nice match with Bill Press, who thinks only the conservatives engage in “toxic talk.” He may want to avoid Olbermann in the hallway with that talk of how it would be “best” to eliminate liberal bias.

View original post here:
Mark Halperin Signs On at MSNBC; But Wait, He Used to Bash ‘Irresponsible Partisan Niche Media’

Poll Finds Americans Think Dems Are Too Liberal, Undermining Media Meme

The legacy media love to paint steadfast conservatives as “far right” “ideologues” who are destroying the GOP’s “big tent” and “purging” moderates. The notion that the Republican Party has drifted too far to the right, however, is contradicted by a new Gallup poll showing that Americans are more concerned about Democrats’ fringe elements. About half (49%) of poll respondents told Gallup that they thought the Democratic Party is too far left. Forty-two percent said the GOP is too far right. The former number is the highest it has been since 1994, when Republicans picked up 54 seats in the House and eight in the Senate. Of course most journalists probably don’t share that sentiment–indeed, a number have bemoaned President Obama’s supposed refusal to move even further to the left. Since those journalists are well outside of the nation’s mainstream, center-right political outlook, they will inevitably see Republicans as too far right and Democrats as moderate and centrist. Hence we have Chris Matthews decrying the “frightening, almost Cambodia re-education camp going on in [the Republican] party, where they’re going around to people, sort of switching their minds around saying, if you’re not far right, you’re not right enough.” There is probably not much hope in showing Matthews the light, but this new Gallup poll should dispel theories such as Mark Halperin’s , that Republicans’ steadfast opposition to the president’s agenda is “unlikely to produce a majority against the administration.” In fact, as long as voters see the Democrats’ agenda as too far to the left, such opposition is likely to pay off in November. Ed Morrissey explains : First, it speaks to voter enthusiasm for Democratic candidates.  They won’t get the kind of turnout in 2010 that they did in 2008 when half of all Americans consider them the extreme.  Independents are the biggest problem; in 2008, when Democrats extended their control of Congress and took the White House, independents were narrowly split 43/40 in thinking that the Democratic Party ideological position was “about right.”  Now they have a 19-point deficit among independents, 33/52. They have even lost 10 points among Democrats for “about right” in the last two years, although that got evenly split between “too conservative” and “too liberal.” Second, Obama and Democratic leadership have already hinted that they want to argue in the midterms  that Republicans are the real extremists.  That argument would have worked, according to Gallup’s data, until Democrats started pushing ObamaCare through Congress.  At that point, a plurality of voters thought the GOP was too conservative as opposed to “about right,” 43/34.  That has shifted to 40/41, while Democrats have gone from a “too liberal/about right” split of 46/42 to 49/38 in the same period.  They’re not going to win a debate over extremism, not while rolling up debt like a college freshman with his first Visa card.

Go here to see the original:
Poll Finds Americans Think Dems Are Too Liberal, Undermining Media Meme

So, Who Was Bill Clinton’s Girlfriend?

Why won’t Mark Halperin and John Heilemann tell us who Bill Clinton was sleeping with? This may sound like a plea from a shameless scandal-merchant for more grist, but it is actually an honest question: what makes that information privileged? The authors assert that Bill Clinton was having an affair

See the original post here:
So, Who Was Bill Clinton’s Girlfriend?