MARK HALPERIN'S MAKE-UP CALL?
Surely by now you've seen the Drudge-published memo by ABC's top political editor, Mark Halperin. (If not, Halperin asserts that Bush, unlike Kerry, is trying to "win the election ... at least partly through distortions" of the opponent's record and positions, and so releases his staff from the need to "reflexively and artificially hold both sides 'equally' accountable.") Lefty bloggers, who believe Bush is "qualitatively more dishonest" than Kerry, approved mightily. Meanwhile, the Right side of the blogosphere complained that this was basically license for journalists at the network to be as liberal as they saw fit.
But today Salon import Jake Tapper and writer Dennis Powell hold both campaigns equally to account for various statements they've made in recent weeks. To summarize their conclusions:
Meanwhile, Kerry's statement is an outrageous case of demagoguery without regard to the facts and a subtle appeal to the lunatic no-blood-for-oil crowd. ABC's expert notes, there are "issues in Russia [including the Yukos debacle], there's rampaging Chinese demand growth, there's a lack of tankers, a shortage of refinery capacity" and there are more -- count in Venezuela and the hurricanes.
And Edwards' statement, while perhaps not intended as it sounds, nevertheless politicizes the unfortunate passing of Christopher Reeve and encourages false hopes about what stem-cell research can do for people. Because there's no way it could do what Edwards said. Yet even today a campaign spokesman disingenuously insisted: "That's what the scientists tell us — that we're not that far away from breakthroughs." Please.
Read it for yourself -- it's pretty even-handed, but seems to identify more egregious statements on Kerry's part.
Was Halperin, via Tapper and Powell, calling a foul on one team to make up for a poor call made earlier in the game? I have no way of knowing, but it seems like a fair guess.
Surely by now you've seen the Drudge-published memo by ABC's top political editor, Mark Halperin. (If not, Halperin asserts that Bush, unlike Kerry, is trying to "win the election ... at least partly through distortions" of the opponent's record and positions, and so releases his staff from the need to "reflexively and artificially hold both sides 'equally' accountable.") Lefty bloggers, who believe Bush is "qualitatively more dishonest" than Kerry, approved mightily. Meanwhile, the Right side of the blogosphere complained that this was basically license for journalists at the network to be as liberal as they saw fit.
But today Salon import Jake Tapper and writer Dennis Powell hold both campaigns equally to account for various statements they've made in recent weeks. To summarize their conclusions:
- Bush cites a National Journal survey that found Kerry to be the liberalest senator last year -- but that's because he was out on the trail; his lifetime ranking is lower.
- Bush claims Kerry's health care plan would put 8 of 10 Americans on Medicaid, i.e. the government dole. Actually, the number is lower.
- Kerry claims Bush's mismanagement of the war is a primary reason for high gas prices, but the truth is there are several factors of greater significance.
- Earlier this week Edwards said stem-cell research would cure a host of ailments "when John Kerry is president," but no advocate of the research technique thinks it will yield such benefits for decades.
Meanwhile, Kerry's statement is an outrageous case of demagoguery without regard to the facts and a subtle appeal to the lunatic no-blood-for-oil crowd. ABC's expert notes, there are "issues in Russia [including the Yukos debacle], there's rampaging Chinese demand growth, there's a lack of tankers, a shortage of refinery capacity" and there are more -- count in Venezuela and the hurricanes.
And Edwards' statement, while perhaps not intended as it sounds, nevertheless politicizes the unfortunate passing of Christopher Reeve and encourages false hopes about what stem-cell research can do for people. Because there's no way it could do what Edwards said. Yet even today a campaign spokesman disingenuously insisted: "That's what the scientists tell us — that we're not that far away from breakthroughs." Please.
Read it for yourself -- it's pretty even-handed, but seems to identify more egregious statements on Kerry's part.
Was Halperin, via Tapper and Powell, calling a foul on one team to make up for a poor call made earlier in the game? I have no way of knowing, but it seems like a fair guess.
<< Home