Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Drudge-ology 101: McCain, Obama and Media Bias

Yesterday was a typical recent day on the Drudge Report -- the single most influential source for how the presidential campaign is covered in the country.

In the banner headline spot for most of the day was a picture of entertainer Barbra Streisand touting a Beverly Hills fundraiser for Barack Obama -- not exactly the sort of headline that the Illinois senator wants as chum for the cable channels 49 days before the election.

Two other stories never merited attention from Drudge: a claim by a senior aide to John McCain that the Arizona senator had invented the BlackBerry and a statement by McCain surrogate Carly Fiorina that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company.

(A quick note to preempt the inevitable argument that Drudge's influence is overblown. Tomorrow morning, take a minute to look at the stories Drudge is highlighting. Then, later in the day, watch a few cable channels to see what stories they are talking about. It will open your eyes.)

The emphasis on Obama's Hollywood ties and the omission of two negative McCain items is consistent with a broader trend over the past month (or so) that has seen the Arizona senator receive far better treatment from Drudge than he had during the primary season when, as several other acute political observers noted at the time, a number of tough stories for McCain regularly appeared on Drudge.

The increase in positive McCain stories featured on Drudge has coincided with more skeptical coverage of Obama's candidacy. In recent weeks, Drudge has featured in his center well spot: A picture of Obama shooting at a far off basketball hoop with a subtitle asking "Will he get his groove back?"; an image of Obama sweating on stage at the Democratic National Convention during the Illinois senator's acceptance speech; and heavy coverage of the "lipstick on a pig" comments.

What explains the change in tone? It's easy to lapse into the tired old logic that Drudge is nothing more than a conservative mouthpiece returning to his roots as election day nears.

But, those who follow the news choices that Drudge makes on a day in and day out basis -- Democrats and Republicans alike -- argue that the shift in focus by Drudge is in keeping with a long time strain of his site: a healthy disdain for the mainstream media and their perceived biases.

"The Drudge Report penalizes mainstream media bias more effectively than any other venue," said one Drudge-ologist who was granted anonymity to speak candidly. "The more flags Drudge throws, the more site traffic he seems to get."

These Drudge-ologists (of which The Fix considers himself one) note that the coverage turned in earnest after McCain named Palin as his running mate.

Palin, an unknown commodity on the national stage, was immediately greeted with a series of tough stories about her background (Bristol Palin's pregnancy, Troopergate, earmark questions).

The McCain campaign smartly turned those stories into an "us versus them" narrative all its own, alleging that the mainstream media was trying to destroy Palin because she didn't fit the press' image of what a vice presidential candidate should look like.

Drudge, believing that the media had gone overboard in its skewering of Palin, began playing up stories that highlighted Palin's crowds and the polls that showed that the Alaska governor had helped bring McCain back to even in national head to heads. (Two recent prominent links from Drudge that provide evidence for the above statements: this item from the Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol about Palin coverage in the Post and this one reminding Newsweek of the favorable coverage they gave Palin in 2007.)

Palin -- and the mainstream media's coverage of her -- reminded us of another insight into Drudge: his strongest motivator is driving traffic to his site, not pushing some ideological agenda.

Palin, as The Fix can attest to, was and continues to be gold for blogs and Internet sites; love her or hate her -- and almost everybody, political or not, feels one way or the other -- Palin drives Internet traffic and conversation/comments like no one since, well, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

The second part of that traffic equation is the belief among many people that the media is fundamentally biased. In a Pew poll conducted last summer 55 percent of the national sample said the press was biased in their coverage while 31 percent said the press was "careful that their reporting is not politically biased." In an ABC News survey conducted the day after Palin's speech at the Republican National Convention, 50 percent of those surveyed said the media had treated the Alaska governor fairly while forty one percent said they had not. Of that latter group, 39 percent blamed the unfair treatment on "political bias" while 15 percent said it was the result of "sexism." (Hat tip to Post polling director Jon "The Numbers Man" Cohen and polling analyst Jennifer "J-Bug" Agiesta for their help in harvesting that data.)

Couple Palin's natural appeal on the Web and the hint of media bias and it's easy to see the perfect storm of web traffic brewing and a smart explanation of the flood of more positive coverage for McCain and more negative coverage for Obama on Drudge of late.

"Matt Drudge is successful because he has a nose for news: Sometimes his choice of stories and photos reflect the current news narrative, but often it reflects Drudge's understanding of where it is going," explained Tim Griffin, a GOP attorney and strategist who was U.S. Attorney in Arkansas and has held senior roles at the Republican National Committee and White House.

By Chris Cillizza  |  September 17, 2008; 6:30 AM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Wag the Blog Redux: What Should Hillary Do?
Next: McCain and the Power of Populism

Comments

The New York Times has definitely abandoned it's journalistic integrity and gone completely in the tank for Barack Obama ... but, they aren't the only ones !!! CNN, Jack Cafferty, MSNBC, the Los Angeles Times,
John Stewart, Colbert, the View, most of Hollywood, the anchors who went overseas with Obama ... just to mention a few!!! And, what's even worse is that they no longer publish, or report opposing views. And, they have denied those they accuse from having a platform from which to respond. To half of America, it's inconceivable that the media would not only do this ... but, that they'd back an empty suit, with over 20 years of anti-American, racist associations, while trashing an American hero with 42 years of service to our country. When I was a kid, I admired the press, which always fought for truth. Now, it's like living in a totalitarian state, where one side controls biased information to the people. To Hollywood and the media ... Joseph Goebbels would be proud !!!

Posted by: Howard | September 22, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

From Bidinotto Blog:

One thing that doesn't "change" is MSM lefty bias. Today's case in point: Chris Cillizza's political blog column in today's Washington Post.

Okay, now this is a blog post -- an opinion piece, not a news report. But I want to call your attention to how Cillizza blatantly distorts his reporting of plain facts. Follow the relevant links in his post for the quotations that appear below.

Cillizza refers to comments made yesterday by McCain supporter Carly Fiorina, a business executive. Fiorina was asked about Sarah Palin by on KTRS Radio: "Do you think she has the experience to run a major company, like Hewlett Packard?"

"No, I don't," Fiorina responded. "But you know what? That's not what she's running for."

Later, she added "that the question is a red herring."

"'I don't think Barack Obama could run a major corporation. I don't think Joe Biden could,' she said. 'But it is not the same as being the president or vice president of the United States. It is a fallacy to suggest that the country is like a company, so of course, to run a business, you have to have a lifetime of experience in business, but that's not what Sarah Palin, John McCain, Barack Obama or Joe Biden are doing.'"

In other words, Fiorini was saying that NONE of the political candidates -- who may very well be suited to hold high political office -- are necessarily qualified to run a major business corporation.

Of course, Team Obama jumped all over this, editing out all mentions about Biden and Obama to twist this into "a McCain backer and businesswoman says Palin and McCain are unqualified to run a business." This is campaign spin, and we expect it.

But why should we tolerate it when the MSM becomes an echo chamber for such blatant distortion of the quotation? In his blog, the Post's spinmeister Cillizza, parroting the Obama line, likewise frames Fiorina's comment as "a statement by McCain surrogate Carly Fiorina that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company."

Excuse me, but what happened to her inclusion of Obama and Biden, and her broader caveat?

Meanwhile, "The Trail" article in the Post to which Cillizza links is likewise headlined: "Fiorina: Palin Lacks Experience to Run a Company."

Nah, no media bias here. None at all.

Posted by: Jarrod | September 19, 2008 9:55 PM | Report abuse

It interesting that when someone does not criticize mccain suddenly they are bias but when people like Chris mathews treat obama like a god they are merely accenting the features of a presidential nominee. the Washington post itself is extremely bias for obama.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 19, 2008 5:20 PM | Report abuse

201 Reasons not to vote for Barry Obama


Abortion

1. Consistently for abortion even if it includes infanticide. Said I’ve got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby.
2. Obama wrongly claimed that abortions "have not gone down" under president bush. In fact, the abortion rate has gone down 9 percent, and the annual total has declined by more than 100,000.
3. Obama advocates abortion rights even more sweeping than those enacted under Roe v. Wade. "The first thing I'd do as president," he assured the Planned Parenthood Action Fund last year, "is sign the Freedom of Choice Act." The measure would not only codify Roe, it would eliminate even restrictions on abortion that the Supreme Court has allowed - the federal ban on government funding of abortion, for example, or the law prohibiting partial-birth abortion.

Campaign Finance

4. He vowed to take public financing but reneged on that option when he decided he could raise more money than the republicans.
5. Donations from lobbyists and special interest pacs Obama say he doesn’t take money from D.C. lobbyists and special interest pacs this is the type of double-talk “politics of the past” rhetoric Obama rails against. While his claim is technically true, what he does do is take money from state lobbyists and other big money contributors who have substantial lobbyist machines in D.C., like law firms and corporations. In April 2007, the LA times quoted the campaign finance institute’s Stephen Weismann as pointing out that the distinction Obama makes on lobbyist money is meaningless: “he gets an asterisk that says he is trying to be different. … But overall, the same wealthy interests are funding his campaign as are funding other candidates, whether or not they are lobbyists. “the capital eye reported that “[a]cording to the center for responsive politics, 14 of Obama’s top 20 contributors employed lobbyists this year, spending a total of $16.2 million to influence the federal government in the first six months of 2007.”
6. Special interests in January, the Obama campaign described union contributions to the campaigns of Clinton and John Edwards as "special interest" money. Obama changed his tune as he began gathering his own union endorsements. He now refers respectfully to unions as the representatives of "working people" and says he is "thrilled" by their support.

Distortions

7. He said McCain, far from being a maverick who’s “broken with his party,” has voted to support bush policies 90 percent of the time. True enough, but by the same measure Obama has voted with fellow democrats in the senate 97 percent of the time.
8. Dreams of my father, writes of a story in Life magazine that influenced him -- about a black man trying to bleach his skin white. No such article could be found in life or ebony.
9. "I’ve been long enough in Washington to know that Washington needs to change." he is running against Washington yet his campaign is populated with political professionals who are Washington insiders.
10. Rev. Jeremiah Wright: Barack Obama repudiated what he called “inflammatory and appalling remarks” made by his Chicago pastor. Obama said he had not been present during the sermons in question. Obama told MSNBC, “Had I heard them in church I would have expressed that concern directly to Rev. Wright. ”Please note, he says that he would have expressed concern, not repudiate, the words. (Source: audacity of hypocrisy) previously Obama had said "I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother — a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe."
11. Barack Obama won his first election by having his lawyers knock all his opponents off the ballot on technicalities
12. Addressing civil rights activists in Selma, Ala., a year ago, Sen. Obama traced his "very existence" to the generosity of the Kennedy family, which he said paid for his Kenyan father to travel to America on a student scholarship and thus meet his Kansan mother. The Kennedy’s never paid for his father’s scholarship.
13. Obama told Larry king on CNN – when asked about that anti-Hillary Rodham Clinton YouTube ad, Obama stated, "we don't have the technical capacity to create something like that." turns out the creator was unmasked and ended up being a political operative who worked for a firm overseeing the technical side of Obama’s web site.
14. Obama claimed that "I worked with John McCain" on ethics legislation. In fact, the two worked together for barely a week, after which McCain accused Obama of "partisan posturing" and added, "I won't make the same mistake again." McCain later voted against the ethics bill that Obama supported, stating that it was written by democrats with "no input" from Republicans.
15. Obama botched his facts in a speech criticizing the U.S. auto industry for “investing in bigger and faster cars while foreign competitors invested in more fuel-efficient technology.” Obama stated that “while our fuel standards haven’t moved from 27.5 miles per gallon in two decades, both china and Japan have surpassed us, with Japanese cars now getting an average of 45 miles to the gallon. Not true.
16. He once told an audience in Selma about how he had been conceived by his parents, Barack Obama Sr. and Ann Dunham, because they had been inspired by the fervor following the “Bloody Sunday” voting rights demonstration that was commemorated March 4. “There was something stirring across the country because of what happened in Selma, Alabama,” he said, “because some folks are willing to march across a bridge. So they got together and Barack Obama jr. was born. So don’t tell me I don’t have a claim on Selma, Alabama. Don’t tell me I’m not coming home to Selma, Alabama “Obama was born in 1961, and the Selma march occurred four years later, in 1965. The New York Times reported that when the senator was asked about the discrepancy later that day, he clarified: “I meant the whole civil rights movement.”
17. To be clear: Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies. — Obama spokesman bill Burton, cot. 24, 2007. Now, Obama says he will vote in favor of the FISA bill that gives the immunity Obama was so opposed to.
18. Decriminalization of marijuana: while running for the U.S. senate in January 2004, Obama told Illinois college students that he supported eliminating criminal penalties for marijuana use. In the Oct. 30, 2007, presidential debate, he joined other democratic candidates in opposing the decriminalization of marijuana.
19. Running for president or vice president of the United States: on the January 22nd edition of “Meet the Press,” Tim russet and Obama had the following exchange: Russert: “when we talked back in November of ‘04 after your election, I said, ‘there’s been enormous speculation about your political future. Will you serve your six-year term as United States senator from Illinois?’ ”Obama: “I will serve out my full six-year term. You know, Tim, if you get asked enough, sooner or later you get weary and you start looking for new ways of saying things. But my thinking has not changed. ”Russert: “so you will not run for president or vice president in 2008?” Obama: “I will not.”

Ear Marks

20. "In 2006, Obama requested that the University of Chicago receive $1 million to support its construction of the new hospital pavilion.
21. Obama requested a $1 million earmark for the university of Chicago medical center where his wife had just been appointed vice president.
22. Obama requested 139 projects totaling $334 million for FY 2007.
23. Obama requested 330 projects totaling almost $1 billion ($935.7 million) since being sworn in as a senator in January 2005.
24. In 2006 and 2007, Obama requested a total of $4 million in earmarks for the Illinois primary health care association (IPHCA) whose lobbying firm contributed nearly $38,000 to Obama:
25. IPHCA hired Holland & knight to lobby for its earmark request; lawyers at Holland & knight have contributed at least $37,900 to Obama’s senate and presidential campaign
26. Over a two-year period in the U.S. senate, Obama requested $3.2 million in earmarks for the center for neighborhood technology, an organization led by political supporters and friends:
27. In 2006, Obama requested $2.2 million for the center for neighborhood technology's information for communities’ project.
28. In 2005, Obama requested $1 million and secured $400,000 for the center for neighborhood technology's I-go car sharing program.
29. "Obama ... sought money for the center for neighborhood technology, where his neighbor Jacky grim haw is a honcho.

Education

30. Obama opposed and condemned school voucher programs, yet sends his daughters to private school with "a break on the cost":
31. While running for U.S. senate, Obama opposed school vouchers.
32. When speaking at an NEA meeting, Obama "condemned voucher programs."
33. When interviewed by the Milwaukee journal sentinel, Obama softened his approach on school vouchers
34. Obama originally voted in favor of no child left behind for states, now bashes it
35. As a state senator, Obama voted in favor of no child left behind.

Foreign policy

36. The Cuba embargo in January 2004, Obama said it was time "to end the embargo with Cuba" because it had "utterly failed in the effort to overthrow Castro." speaking to a Cuban American audience in Miami in august 2007, he said he would not "take off the embargo" as president because it is "an important inducement for change."
37. Obama stated "I believe in free trade" and then later said well, I don't think NAFTA has been good for America - and I never have.
38. NAFTA: on February 29th, the Obama campaign told Canadian television (CTV) that no message was passed to the Canadian government suggesting that Obama does not mean what he says about opting out of NAFTA if it is not renegotiated. However, the Obama camp did not respond to repeated questions from CTV on reports that a conversation on this matter was held between Obama’s senior economic adviser, Austin Goolsbee, and the Canadian consulate general in Chicago. Earlier, the Obama campaign insisted that no conversations have taken place with any of its senior ranks and representatives of the Canadian government on the NAFTA issue. CTV spoke with Goolsbee, but he refused to say whether he had such a conversation with the Canadian government office in Chicago. He also said he has been told to direct any questions to the campaign headquarters.CTV didn’t stop there. They announced that their sources, at the highest levels of the Canadian government,” reconfirmed the story to CTV and one of their primary sources provided a timeline of the discussion to CTV.
39. Meeting with Ahmadinejad: "Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama underscored his willingness to talk to leaders of countries like Iran that are considered U.S. adversaries but said that does not necessarily mean an audience with Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad." (Careen Behan, "Obama says won't guarantee Ahmadinejad a meeting," Reuters,(5/26/08)
"'There's no reason why we would necessarily meet with Ahmadinejad before we know he's actually in power. He’s not the most powerful person in Iran,' Obama told reporters while campaigning in New Mexico." (Careen Behan, "Obama says won't guarantee Ahmadinejad a meeting,"(Reuters,(5/26/08)
40. In July 2007, Obama said he would meet with the leaders of hostile foreign nations, including Iran.
41. Obama argued for years that we need to move from a 'Musharraf policy' to a 'Pakistan policy. False.
42. At a July 2007 debate, Obama announced he would personally meet with leaders of Iran, north Korea, Syria and other hostile nations "without precondition."
question: "[w]ould you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and north Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries?
"Obama: "I would. And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them - which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration - is ridiculous." (Cnn/Youtube democrat presidential candidate debate, Charleston, sc, 7/23/07) (Source: RNC via Newsmax)
43. Jerusalem: "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided," Obama declared Wednesday, to rousing applause from the 7,000-plus attendees at the American Israel public affairs committee policy conference.
44. Meeting with foreign leaders: Obama now claims that he will only meet with foreign leaders at a time of his choosing if it will advance U.S. interests, but previously said he would meet with rogue leaders his first year in office without preconditions: in his remarks to the AIPAC conference, Obama claimed that he would only meet with the "appropriate Iranian leaders at a time and place" of his choosing. Obama: "contrary to the claims of some, I have no interest in sitting down with our adversaries just for the sake of talking. But as president of the United States, I would be willing to lead tough and principled diplomacy with the appropriate Iranian leaders at a time and place of my choosing - if, and only if - it can advance the interests of the United States." (Sen. Barack Obama, remarks at the annual AIPAC policy conference, Arlington, V.A., 6/4/08) but at a July 2007 debate, Obama said he would meet with hostile leaders during his first year in office. Question: "[w]ould you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and north Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries?"...Obama: "I would. And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them - which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration - is ridiculous." (Cnn/Youtube democrat presidential candidate debate, Charleston, sc, 7/23/07) at a September 2007 press conference, Obama confirmed that he would meet specifically with Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Question: "senator, you've said before that you'd meet with president Ahmadinejad ..." Obama: "uh huh." question: "would you still meet with him today?" Obama: "yeah, nothing's changed with respect to my belief that strong countries and strong presidents talk to their enemies and talk to their adversaries. I find many of president Ahmadinejad's statements odious and I’ve said that repeatedly. And I think that we have to recognize that there are a lot of rogue nations in the world that don't have American interests at heart. But what I also believe is that, as john f. Kennedy said, we should never negotiate out of fear but we should never fear to negotiate." (Sen. Barack Obama, press conference, New York, NY, 9/24/07
45. Legislation labeling Iran’s revolutionary guard a terrorist organization: Obama has been inconsistent in his views on labeling Iran’s revolutionary guard a terrorist organization. "Obama’s campaign suddenly discovered that their man -despite having spent the last nine months campaigning on his opposition to kyl-lieberman - 'has consistently urged that Iran’s revolutionary guard be labeled what it is: a terrorist organization.' well, not that consistently. Senator Obama has been scrupulously careful not to call explicitly for designation of the irgc as a terrorist organization. Now, however, with the democratic nomination almost in hand, Obama feels comfortable telling a pro-Israel audience what it wants to hear."(Danielle Pletka, "Obama’s pander pivot," weekly standard, 6/4/08)
"[t]he audience at AIPAC might ask why senator Obama has pivoted from opposition to 'lieberman-kyl' to support for the irgc designation his audience demands. Is this really change they can believe in?" (Danielle Pletka, "Obama’s pander pivot," weekly standard, 6/4/08) "Which Barack Obama will be the democratic standard-bearer: the one who vowed to 'eliminate' the Iranian nuclear threat two days ago, or the one who opposed designating the revolutionary guards a terrorist organization?" (editorial, "Obama and Iran," the Washington times, 6/6/08)

Friends in Low Places

46. Obama paid $300,000 less than the asking price for his mansion, while Tony Rezko’s wife paid full price for a vacant lot next door on the very same day.
47. Obama later purchased a portion of Rezko’s land for $104,500; it was valued at $40,500.
48. In one of the biggest lies he ever told — Obama says he “vehemently condemns” the words of his pastor and mentor, Rev. Jeremiah a. Wright, an official member of Obama’s campaign.
49. Obama provided political favors to Tony Rezko, including writing letters on his behalf:"as a state senator, Barack Obama wrote letters to city and state officials supporting his political patron tony Rezko’s successful bid to get more than $14 million from taxpayers to build apartments for senior citizens
50. Rezko offered Obama a job after law school and the two have been friends ever since.
51. Obama has admitted to $250,000 worth of campaign funding provided by tony Rezko
52. Obama and Rezko socializing included their wives and a trip to Rezko’s lake house.
53. The Obama’s and Rezko’s took a trip together to Rezko’s home at lake Geneva, WI
54. Friend of Alexi Giannoulias. In 2006, Alex Giannoulias was elected treasurer of the state of Illinois. In 2006, Giannoulias came under fire for lending money to crime figures. Giannoulias accepted $5,000 in campaign contributions from a Florida casino fleet owner whose uncle was "gunned down in an execution-style slaying" and who has ties to lobbyist jack Abramoff.
55. Friend of William Ayers. A founding member of the group that bombed the U.S. capitol and the pentagon during the 1970s. From 1999 to 2002, Obama served with Ayers on the board of directors for the woods fund of Chicago.
56. Friend of Marilyn Katz. Katz organized Vietnam War protests through students for a democratic society (sods), including throwing nails in the street to thwart police officers. Katz met William Ayers through sods and defended him after his association with Obama surfaced in the 2008 presidential campaign.
57. Friend of Nadhmi Auchi. Nadhmi Auchi is an Iraqi billionaire with business and personal ties to convicted Obama fundraiser Anthony "tony" Reckon. "Auchi is the man who provided Rezko a $3.5 million loan that Reckon did not disclose to the court -- resulting in his January arrest."
58. Friend of Jodie Evans. Founder of code pink. Enough said.
59. Friend of Larry Lessig. Lessig has used a controversial video of Jesus getting hit by a bus in his speeches and lectures. "the former Harvard law school professor is the leading light of what is known as the 'free culture movement,' which insists that the age of the internet should mean the abolition of intellectual property rights." (editorial, "another odd guru, “investor’s business daily, 4/23/08)
60. Friend of Howard Guttmann. Guttmann is an attorney at Washington, D.C., law firm Williams & Connolly. In 1999 and 2000, Gutman was a registered federal lobbyist for Williams & Connolly.
Gutman represented Bolivia’s former president Gonzalo Sanchez de lozada and former defense minister José Carlos Sanchez berzain, who were accused of using controversial tactics in response to a political protest. Sanchez de lozada was accused of "crimes against humanity" after over 60 protesters were killed by soldiers; he responded that clearing roads "isn't a crime in this or any country
61. Obama said he could “pay for every dime” of his spending and tax cut proposals “by closing corporate loopholes and tax havens.” that’s wrong – his proposed tax increases on upper-income individuals are key components of paying for his program, as well.
Gaffes

62. Obama says the U.S. senate banking committee is "my committee”.
63. In June 2008, Obama falsely claimed his father served in world war II.
64. An Obama ad running in Michigan claims McCain didn't support loan guarantees for the auto industry. In fact, he does support them.
65. In may 2008, Obama claimed to have visited 57 states
66. On May 8th, Obama, caught up in the fervor of a campaign speech Tuesday, drastically overstated the Kansas tornadoes death toll, saying 10,000 had died. ”in case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died — an entire town destroyed,” the democratic presidential candidate said in a speech to 500 people packed into a sweltering Richmond art studio for a fundraiser. The death toll was 12.

Gay rights

67. Opposed to gay marriage and respected the rights of states to set conditions for marriage. Now he says he opposes California’s (delegate rich California) attempt to ban gay marriage. Flipped answer.

Gun control

68. Favored a ban on the manufacture sale and possession of fire arms and then he told people in Idaho that he was for the second amendment.
69. Supported a ban on firearms kept in the home.
70. Supported a ban on right-to-carry permits.
71. Supported a total ban on handguns.

Health Care-Welfare

72. Obama noted that McCain’s health care plan would “tax people’s benefits” but didn’t say that it also would provide up to a $5,000 tax credit for families.

73. Single-payer healthcare: on January 22nd, the Hillary Clinton campaign releases a video that proves that Obama lied about his position on “single-payer healthcare. “The video compares statements Obama made during the January 21st democratic debate with those he made to an AFL-CIO conference in June 2003 while campaigning for the senate. Contradicting what Obama said at the debate, the old footage shows the senator saying, “I happen to be a proponent of single-payer universal healthcare coverage. That’s what I’d like to see. “At the debate, Obama stated: “I never said that we should try to go ahead and get single-payer (healthcare).”Single-payer healthcare is a euphemism for socialized medicine.
74. Pay as you go: Obama promised to "restore a law that was in place during the Clinton presidency—called Pay as you go—that prohibits money from leaving the treasury without some way of compensating for the lost revenue." But now Obama says he's not going to sacrifice his domestic priorities for deficit reduction. Universal health care, renewable energy and all the rest won't be sacrificed on the altar of Pay as you go.(source: q and o)
75. Obama shifts on welfare reform. "I am not a defender of the status quo with respect to welfare," Obama said on the floor of the Illinois state senate on May 31, 1997. "Having said that, I probably would not have supported the federal legislation, because I think it had some problems."

Immigration

76. Illegal immigration in a March 2004 questionnaire, Obama was asked if the government should "crack down on businesses that hire illegal immigrants." he replied "oppose." in a Jan. 31, 2008, televised debate, he said that "we do have to crack down on those employers that are taking advantage of the situation."
77. Illegal immigrants and driver's licenses: as a state senator in Illinois, Obama voted to require illegal immigrants to get a driver's license. The change? In the November 2007 cnn debate, he was asked what his stand was on that issue and he said, "I am not proposing that's what we do."

Military

78. Stated in his own Iowa caucus video that he wants to rid the world of nuclear weapons.
79. On 9/7 Obama claimed he would buck his party by increasing the size of the military.
80. But in October 2007, Obama told the caucus for priorities that he would cut military spending.
81. Stated he would not make bin laden into a martyr by executing him. But later said he would. He thinks murdering 3k of our U.S. citizens might qualify for the ultimate penalty.
82. Obama claims his Iraq plan always depended on conditions on the ground, but previously said troops would be out in 16 months although he previously said ) Obama previously said he would immediately begin withdrawing troops from Iraq and would have them out in 16 months.
83. Said the surge would make things worse now he thinks it has been a success.
84. Obama accused his fellow American citizens of the indiscriminate murder of Iraqi civilians, saying, “and these private (Blackwater USA) contractors, they go out and they’re spraying bullets and hitting civilians and that makes it more dangerous for our troops
85. On July 28th, the day after his speech at the democratic convention catapulted him into the national spotlight, Barack Obama told a group of reporters in Boston that the United States had an “absolute obligation” to remain in Iraq long enough to make it a success. “The failure of the Iraqi state would be a disaster,” he said at a lunch sponsored by the Christian Science monitor, according to an audiotape of the session. “It would dishonor the 900-plus men and women who have already died. . . . It would be a betrayal of the promise that we made to the Iraqi people, and it would be hugely destabilizing from a national security perspective.
86. He twisted McCain’s words about Afghanistan, saying, “when john McCain said we could just ‘muddle through’ in Afghanistan, I argued for more resources.” actually, McCain said in 2003 he “may” muddle through, and he recently also called for more troops there.


Oil, coal gas

87. Opposed offshore.
88. Now supports offshore drilling.
89. Was for tapping the strategic oil reserve and then he was against it.
90. Obama tells Michigan voters that he "would have preferred a gradual adjustment" in gas prices? Obama opposes gas tax relief.
91. Obama told a Texas newspaper: "what we ought to tax is dirty energy, like coal and, to a lesser extent, natural gas."
92. Didn’t tell hardworking Michigan families that he opposes gas tax relief. Nearly four-fifths of Michigan households use natural gas to heat their homes.
93. Wrong for Pennsylvania’s economy. Obama told a Texas newspaper: "what we ought to tax is dirty energy, like coal and, to a lesser extent, natural gas." Pennsylvania has 270 Coal mines as of 2006. As of 2006, there were 7,526 people employed in Pennsylvania’s coal mining industry.
94. Coal: Obama, whose support for coal-to-liquid has been widely criticized by environmentalists, sent out a press release clarifying his position on liquid coal: senator Obama supports research into all technologies to help solve our climate change and energy dependence problems, including shifting our energy use to renewable fuels and investing in technology that could make coal a clean-burning source of energy…however, unless and until this technology is perfected, senator Obama will not support the development of any coal-to-liquid fuels unless they emit at least 20% less life-cycle carbon than conventional fuels.
This “clarification” is an important step for the Obama campaign in trying to gain support from environmental organizations and voters. However, the la times notes that his position change on this issue is even more significant because it symbolizes “there’s a race to the top among the democratic candidates for the strongest position on how to solve the climate crisis.”(source: carbon coalition)

Taxes

95. Barack Obama said on ABC Sunday that he might not go through with his plans to increase taxes.
96. Obama called for a windfall profits tax on oil companies.
97. Wants to raise taxes even above the levels of the Clinton era, including a huge increase in the payroll tax.
98. To date, Obama has voted for a tax increase approximately once every five days congress has been in session.
99. Americans for tax reform gave Obama a lifetime rating of 7.5 out of 100.
100. Citizens against government waste gave Obama a lifetime rating of 22 out of 100.
101. The national taxpayers union gave Obama a grade of “F” for his fiscal voting record.
102. The U.S. chamber of commerce gave Obama a 33 percent rating in 2007.
103. Obama told reporters he would raise taxes on the top 5 percent of earners also claimed that a family making less than $250,000 will not see higher taxes under his plan. In 2005, the cut off for the top 5 percent of earners began at $145,283 - well below Obama’s $250,000.
104. Obama claimed that the argument that middle income Americans would be hurt by a capital gains tax increase is "a phony argument and then clarified that middle income Americans would be exempted from his capital gains tax hike.
105. Obama shifts on taxes: said he may "defer" tax hikes depending on the economic situation - a tacit acknowledgment that higher taxes hurt the economy and affect job creation and then states he may "possibly defer" some of his tax increases based on the economic situation.
106. Obama said “average family income” went down $2,000 under bush, which isn’t correct. An aide said he was really talking only about “working” families and not retired couples. And – math teachers, please note – he meant median (or midpoint) and not really the mean or average. Median family income actually has inched up slightly under bush.
107. In 109th – 110th congresses, Obama voted at least 94 times for higher taxes.
108. HR. 6, CQ vote #425: motion rejected 59-40: r 9-39; d 48-1; I 2-0, 12/13/07, Obama voted yea;
109. HR. 6, CQ vote #416: motion rejected 53-42: r 5-39; d 46-3; I 2-0, 12/7/07, Obama voted yea;
110. H.R. 976, CQ vote #352: motion agreed to 69-30: r 18-30; d 49-0; I 2-0, 9/27/07, Obama voted yea;
111. H.R. 976, CQ vote #307: passed 68-31: r 18-31; d 48-0; I 2-0, 8/2/07, Obama voted yea;
112. H.R. 976, CQ vote #306: motion agreed to 67-32: r 17-32; d 48-0; I 2-0, 8/2/07, Obama voted yea;
113. H.R. 976, CQ vote #304: motion rejected 49-50: r 48-1; d 1-47; I 0-2, 8/2/07, Obama voted nay;
114. H.R. 976, CQ vote #296: motion rejected 39-60: r 37-12; d 2-46; I 0-2, 8/2/07, Obama voted nay;
115. H.R. 976, CQ vote #295: motion rejected 47-52: r 46-3; d 1-47; I 0-2, 8/2/07, Obama voted nay;
116. H.R. 976, CQ vote #292: rejected 36-60: r 1-46; d 33-14; I 2-0, 8/1/07, Obama voted yea;
117. H.R. 6, CQ vote #223: motion rejected 57-36: r 10-34; d 45-2; I 2-0, 6/21/07, Obama voted yea;
118. H.R. 2206, CQ vote #181: motion agreed to 80-14: r 42-3; d 37-10; I 1-1, 5/24/07, Obama voted nay;
119. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #172: adopted 52-40: r 2-40; d 48-0; I 2-0, 5/17/07, Obama voted yea;
120. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #161: motion rejected 44-51: r 44-2; d 0-47; I 0-2, 5/9/07, Obama voted nay;
121. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #159: motion agreed to 54-41: r 46-0; d 8-39; I 0-2, 5/9/07, Obama voted nay;
122. H.R. 1591, CQ vote #118: adopted 74-23: r 25-22; d 47-1; I 2-0, 3/28/07, Obama voted yea;
123. S. con. res. 21,cq vote #113: rejected 49-50: r 48-1; d 1-47; I 0-2, 3/23/07, Obama voted nay;
124. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #109: rejected 44-55: r 44-5; d 0-48; I 0-2, 3/23/07, Obama voted nay;
125. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #108: rejected 44-53: r 44-3; d 0-48; I 0-2, 3/23/07, Obama voted nay;
126. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #107: rejected 46-52: r 46-2; d 0-48; I 0-2, 3/23/07, Obama voted nay;
127. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #105: adopted 59-40: r 13-36; d 44-4; I 2-0, 3/23/07, Obama voted yea;
128. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #102: rejected 48-51: r 48-1; d 0-48; I 0-2, 3/23/07, Obama voted nay;
129. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #100: rejected 46-53: r 46-3; d 0-48; I 0-2, 3/23/07, Obama voted nay;
130. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #98: rejected 42-53: r 42-4; d 0-47; I 0-2, 3/22/07, Obama voted nay;
131. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #94: rejected 38-58: r 0-47; d 36-11; I 2-0, 3/22/07, Obama voted yea;
132. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #83: rejected 47-51: r 47-2; d 0-47; I 0-2, 3/21/07, Obama voted nay;
133. H.R. 2, CQ vote #38: motion rejected 46-50: r 44-3; d 2-45; I 0-2, 1/31/07, Obama voted nay;
134. H.R. 2, CQ vote #37: motion agreed to 49-48: r 1-46; d 46-2; I 2-0, 1/31/07, Obama voted yea;
135. H.R. 2, CQ vote #32: motion agreed to 50-42: r 3-42; d 45-0; I 2-0, 1/25/07, Obama voted yea;
136. H.R. 2, CQ vote #30: motion rejected 43-50: r 42-3; d 1-45; I 0-2, 1/25/07, Obama voted nay;
137. H.R. 2, CQ vote #28: motion rejected 42-51: r 41-4; d 1-45; I 0-2, 1/25/07, Obama voted nay;
138. s. 256, CQ vote #27: rejected 38-61: r 38-17; d 0-43; I 0-1, 3/7/05, Obama voted nay;
139. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #50: rejected 46-54: r 1-54; d 44-0; I 1-0, 3/15/05, Obama voted yea;
140. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #61: rejected 44-56: r 1-54; d 42-2; I 1-0, 3/17/05, Obama voted yea;
141. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #63: rejected 40-59: r 0-54; d 40-4; I 0-1, 3/17/05, Obama voted yea;
142. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #81: adopted 51-49: r 51-4; d 0-44; I 0-1, 3/17/05, Obama voted nay;
143. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #65: rejected 49-51: r 4-51; d 44-0; I 1-0, 3/17/05, Obama voted yea;
144. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #68: motion adopted 51-49: r 6-49; d 44-0; I 1-0, 3/17/05, Obama voted yea;
145. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #70: rejected 45-55: r 0-55; d 44-0; I 1-0, 3/17/05, Obama voted yea;
146. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #74: motion adopted 55-45: r 50-5; d 5-39; I 0-1, 3/17/05, Obama voted nay;
147. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #75: rejected 47-53: r 3-52; d 43-1; I 1-0, 3/17/05, Obama voted yea;
148. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #78: rejected 45-55: r 0-55; d 44-0; I 1-0, 3/17/05, Obama voted yea;
149. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #79: rejected 37-63: r 1-54; d 35-9; I 1-0, 3/17/05, Obama voted yea;
150. H. con. res. 95, CQ vote #114: motion adopted 52-47: r 52-3; d 0-43; I 0-1, 4/28/05, Obama voted nay;
151. H.R. 3058, CQ vote #258: motion rejected 42-57: r 42-13; d 0-43; I 0-1, 10/19/05, Obama voted nay;
152. s. 2020, CQ vote #330: rejected 44-55: r 2-53; d 41-2; I 1-0, 11/17/05, Obama voted yea;
153. s. 2020, CQ vote #331: motion rejected 35-64: r 0-55; d 34-9; I 1-0, 11/17/05, Obama voted yea;
154. s. 2020, CQ vote #333: motion rejected 40-59: r 1-54; d 38-5; I 1-0, 11/17/05, Obama voted yea;
155. s. 2020, CQ vote #337: motion rejected 43-55: r 0-54; d 42-1; I 1-0, 11/17/05, Obama voted yea;
156. s. 2020, CQ vote #338: motion rejected 36-62: r 0-54; d 35-8; I 1-0, 11/17/05, Obama voted yea;
157. s. 2020, CQ vote #339: motion rejected 50-48: r 9-45; d 40-3; I 1-0, 11/17/05, Obama voted yea;
158. s. 2020, CQ vote #341: motion rejected 33-65: r 0-54; d 32-11; I 1-0, 11/17/05, Obama voted yea;
159. s. 2020, CQ vote #343: motion rejected 43-55: r 1-53; d 41-2; I 1-0, 11/17/05, Obama voted yea;
160. s. 2020, CQ vote #345: motion rejected 47-51: r 3-51; d 43-0; I 1-0, 11/17/05, Obama voted yea;
161. s. 2020, CQ vote #346: motion rejected 42-56: r 0-54; d 41-2; I 1-0, 11/17/05, Obama voted yea;
162. s. 2020, CQ vote #347: passed 64-33: r 49-4; d 15-28; I 0-1, 11/18/05, Obama voted nay;
163. H.R. 4297, CQ vote #7: motion rejected 44-53: r 1-52; d 42-1; I 1-0, 2/2/06, Obama voted yea;
164. H.R. 4297, CQ vote #8: motion rejected 44-53: r 1-52; d 42-1; I 1-0, 2/2/06, Obama voted yea;
165. H.R. 4297, CQ vote #10: passed 66-31: r 49-4; d 17-26; I 0-1, 2/2/06, Obama voted nay;
166. H.R. 4297, CQ vote #15: motion rejected 40-53: r 1-52; d 39-1; I 0-0, 2/13/06, Obama voted yea;
167. H.R. 4297, CQ vote #16: motion agreed to 53-47: r 51-4; d 2-42; I 0-1, 2/14/06, Obama voted nay;
168. H.R. 4297, CQ vote #17: motion rejected 47-53: r 3-52; d 43-1; I 1-0, 2/14/06, Obama voted yea;
169. H.R. 4297, CQ vote #18: motion rejected 45-55: r 1-54; d 43-1; I 1-0, 2/14/06, Obama voted yea;
170. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #39: rejected 50-50: r 5-50; d 44-0; I 1-0, 3/14/06, Obama voted yea;
171. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #41: rejected 46-54: r 1-54; d 44-0; I 1-0, 3/14/06, Obama voted yea;
172. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #42: rejected 46-54: r 3-52; d 42-2; I 1-0, 3/14/06, Obama voted yea;
173. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #43: rejected 45-53: r 1-53; d 43-0; I 1-0, 3/15/06, Obama voted yea;
174. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #45: rejected 43-55: r 0-54; d 42-1; I 1-0, 3/15/06, Obama voted yea;
175. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #47: rejected 43-53: r 0-53; d 42-0; I 1-0, 3/15/06, Obama voted yea;
176. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #51: rejected 44-53: r 1-53; d 42-0; I 1-0, 3/15/06, Obama voted yea;
177. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #57: motion adopted 51-49: r 6-49; d 44-0; I 1-0, 3/16/06, Obama voted yea;
178. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #60: rejected 48-49: r 5-49; d 42-0; I 1-0, 3/16/06, Obama voted yea;
179. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #61: rejected 42-56: r 0-55; d 41-1; I 1-0, 3/16/06, Obama voted yea;
180. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #63: rejected 46-54: r 2-53; d 43-1; I 1-0, 3/16/06, Obama voted yea;
181. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #64: rejected 49-51: r 4-51; d 44-0; I 1-0, 3/16/06, Obama voted yea;
182. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #66: rejected 48-52: r 3-52; d 44-0; I 1-0, 3/16/06, Obama voted yea;
183. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #67: rejected 46-53: r 2-52; d 43-1; I 1-0, 3/16/06, Obama voted yea;
184. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #69: rejected 43-57: r 1-54; d 41-3; I 1-0, 3/16/06, Obama voted yea;
185. H.R. 4297, CQ vote #118: motion adopted 54-44: r 51-3; d 3-40; I 0-1, 5/11/06, Obama voted nay;
186. H.R. 8, CQ vote #164: motion rejected 57-41: r 53-2; d 4-38; I 0-1, 6/8/06, Obama voted nay;
187. H.R. 5970, CQ vote #229: motion rejected 56-42: r 52-3; d 4-38; I 0-1, 8/3/06, Obama voted nay;
188. H.R. 4954, CQ vote #244: motion agreed to 57-41: r 54-0; d 3-40; I 0-1, 9/13/06, Obama voted nay;
189. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #142: adopted 48- 45: r 2- 44; d 44- 1; I 2-0, 6/4/08, Obama voted yea;
190. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #85, adopted 51-44: r 2-43; d 47-1; I 2-0, 3/14/08, Obama voted yea;
191. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #82, rejected 45-51: r 45-1; d 0-48; I 0-2, 3/14/08, Obama voted nay;
192. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #77, rejected 48-50: r 47-1; d 1-47; I 0-2, 3/13/08, Obama voted nay;
193. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #74, rejected 49-50: r 48-1; d 1-47; I 0-2, 3/13/08, Obama voted nay;
194. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #50: rejected 50-50: r 48-1; d 2-47; I 0-2, 3/13/08, Obama voted nay;
195. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #52: rejected 47-53: r 47-2; d 0-49; I 0-2, 3/13/08, Obama voted nay;
196. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #48: rejected 49-51: r 48-1; d 1-48; I 0-2, 3/13/08, Obama voted nay;
197. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #43: rejected 47-52: r 47-2; d 0-48; I 0-2, 3/13/08, Obama voted nay;
198. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #47: motion agreed to: 50-50: r 49-0, vice president Cheney casting a ‘yea’ vote; d 1-48; I 0-2, 3/13/08, Obama voted nay;
199. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #46: motion rejected 49-51: r 0-49; d 47-2; I 2-0, 3/13/08, Obama voted yea
200. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #45: rejected 49-50: r 47-1; d 2-47; I 0-2, 3/13/08, Obama voted nay;
201. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #64: rejected 43-55: r 1-47; d 40-8; I 2-0, 3/13/08, Obama voted yea

Posted by: RightinMissouri | September 18, 2008 10:59 PM | Report abuse

This is a great post, and it's too bad that the commentary on it is mostly moronic vitriol.

Drudge is similar to the show "TMZ" on Fox. There's a core of news in there, but mostly it is sensationalism designed to provoke volatile emotional responses.

The genius of it is similar to the genius of Fox News. Fox News does well because most moderates and progressives use media like the BBC, NYTimes, WashPo, NPR, etc. (i.e. mostly non-partisan, non-sensational news sources with relatively large reporting budgets) as their primary news source. But cable news viewers tend to like more partisan news, and therefore gravitate to angry bloviators like Hannity, Dobbs, Olbermann, and especially Bill'O. (And the slimy Glenn Beck.) Note that I include Olbermann in that -- the news on his show is probably more in depth than with any other bloviator, but his main appeal is his unmasked contempt for Republican hypocrisy. David Gregory is more of a traditional newsman.

So just like the coveted 18-29 demographic, angry partisan TV watchers are a coveted demographic, and for whatever reason most of them are conservative (or at least socially judgmental). Rupert Murdoch is smart, business-wise, in identifying this demographic and what is most likely to be appealing to them. Sometimes I'm surprised we don't have a White Power bloviator to go on after Hannity.

Posted by: Mason | September 18, 2008 8:52 PM | Report abuse

Chris,

What are you smoking? And do you still have a job now your editor knows your read Drudge morning, noon, and night? And quoting Tim Griffin, Mr. Republican Vote Caging, without mentioning that fact? (Do you even know what vote caging is?)

The media is "biased" because it insists on letting Drudge lead its reporting and Drudge is a Republican tool.

I'll believe the media is unbiased when they spend the same of time spent currently on Drudge's favorite stories instead on reporting on US torture, illegal spying, the failure to properly regulate investment banks, and all the rest. You know, what Dana Priest reports on before lunch and most reporters can't be bothered to do in years.

I don't visit Drudge for the same reason I don't shop at Wal-Mart: why give a person you disagree with the benefit of your business, in Drudge's case, the clicks that let him charge his advertisers? (In Wal-Mart's case, it's how they shovel tens and hundreds of millions to the Walton family and senior managers while denying fair wages, vacation time, and real health benefits to staff who work the stores and make all that money possible.)

The sooner Drudge disappears the sooner we get our media back. Then again, maybe we'll need new reporters, reporters who have to much respect to write this sort of trash. This piece is beyond stupid given how messed up our country has become.

Posted by: Tim | September 18, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

ARE WE SELLING OUR BANKS TO OVERSEAS COUNTRIES?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 18, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Um, has anyone even heard Matt Drudge's radio show? It airs like once a week on Sunday nights here in missouri, or at least it was a few months ago. It's just verbatim Limbaugh talking points. How can anyone with a pulse not realize Drudge is a right wing tool, maybe one of the biggest ones in their toolbox? Jeez!

Posted by: Toyboat | September 18, 2008 2:55 PM | Report abuse

OBAMA 49% JOHN MCCAIN 45%

OBAMA BOOOOOOOOOM

TURMOIL IN FINANCIAL WORLD IS LIKE A SPREADING VIRUS.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 18, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

.


Voted One of the Nation's Best Blogs for the Election of 2008:


http://www.myspace.com/37thandostreet


Bookmark it now !


.
.


Voted One of the Nation's Best Blogs for the Election of 2008:


http://www.myspace.com/37thandostreet


Bookmark it now !


.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 18, 2008 9:05 AM | Report abuse

Let's just face the facts. The GAO has issued report after report this year supporting the economic proposals of Obama as 100% in line with what the US Economy needs. How did they rate McCain? 42%. Since that's about what share of the popular vote he should expect, we need not concern ourselves with this too much, but it is worth taking note of these hard facts before arguing about it.

Up is not Down, regardless of what the GOP Operative Hordes would have us believe.

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 18, 2008 8:47 AM | Report abuse

Drudge removed the link to this story this morning. We all saw Chris kick Drudge's a** all day yesterday. Our challenge still stands to Drudge a rematch with Chris in October!

Posted by: Katherine | September 18, 2008 7:56 AM | Report abuse

This article just goes to show how far out there the liberal media is. Most liberals call Fox News biased - yet Fox has JUST as many liberals as they do conservatives. The problem is is that the liberals are SO USED to seeing 95% of the news get slanted their way - that when they see a 50/50 split - they see 10 times more conservative-favored news than they are used to. I love it when liberals say Drudge is biased...like he WRITES the articles! He links to them. Liberals are those kids who would only play if they can play unfairly.

Posted by: TheTrueIndy | September 18, 2008 7:32 AM | Report abuse

Palin=Criminal
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/17/palin.investigation/index.html

It is not a matter of only Republicans do bad things. Rather, Republicans only do bad things. Common sense sees right through the chablis and bree GOP country club set that just sees us as a tax mine.

Exact and complete quote from Carly Fiorina, no matter what consumate Right Wing partisan liars would have you believe. On the record, and fact checked:

Carly: "Well, I don't think John McCain could run a major corporation, I don't think I could run a major corporation, I don't think you could run a major corporation,"

Carly continues (this part conveniently left out by the Right Wing McCain lap-doggers) "It is a fallacy to suggest that the country is like a company. So, of course, to run a business, you have to have a lifetime of experience in business, but that's not what Sarah Palin, or John McCain have. Businesses are held accountable for poor business practices, bad investments, and breaking the law. Sarah Palin and John McCain simply would not have to answer to any of those three concerns were they in the White House."

Come on folks! Don't drag this out. You're keeping the inanity of the Bush-McCain Failed Talking Points in the rotation!

This is just one example of daily bias by the Post, CNN and the NY Times.

These numbers were before the surge.

Did you know that 47 countries' have reestablished their embassies in Iraq, leaving only 145 that have not?

Did you know that the Iraqi government
currently employs 1.2 million Iraqi people in exotic jobs ranging from human landmine clearance to IED shielding on the exterior of vehicles transporting officials?

Did you know that 3100 schools have been renovated, 364 schools are under rehabilitation, 263 new schools are now under construction; and 38 new schools have been completed in Iraq, while only 4000 have been destroyed?

Did you know that Iraq 's higher educational structure consists of 20 Universities, 46 Institutes or colleges and 4 research centers, all currently operating without any students?

Did you know that 25 Iraq students departed for the United States in
January 2005 for the re-established Fulbright program and were never seen or heard from again?

Did you know that the Iraqi Navy is operational? They have 5 - 100-foot patrol craft, 34 smaller vessels and a naval infantry regiment which have been used primarily for piracy in the Gulf, and for raiding small villages along the banks of the Tigris and Euphrates.

Did you know that Iraq's Air Force consists of three operational squadrons,
Which includes 9 reconnaissance and 3 US C-130 transport aircraft (under Iraqi operational control) which operate day and night, and will soon add 16 UH-1 helicopters and 4 Bell Jet Rangers, as well as 7000 paper airplanes donated by American school children?

Did you know that Iraq has a counter-terrorist unit and a Commando Battalion which have both engaged American forces in combat, or retreated from combat situations when fighting along side American forces?

Did you know that the Iraqi Police Service has over 55,000 fully trained and equipped police officers who regularly engage American forces in combat?

Did you know that there are 5 Police Academies in Iraq that produce over 3500 new officers every 8 weeks, all of whom defect within days to the insurgency?

Did you know there are more than 1100 building projects going on in Iraq intended to replace the more than 80,000 structures destroyed since the invasion?

They include 364 schools, 67 public clinics, 15 hospitals, 83 railroad stations, 22 oil facilities, 93 water facilities 69 electrical facilities, and assorted defensive walls, barriers, and fortifications.

Did you know that 96% of Iraqi children under the age of 5 have received the first 2 series of polio vaccinations, as well as a lifetime supply of PTSD?

Did you know that 4.3 million Iraqi children were enrolled in primary school by mid October, but that by November 2.6 million girls had been removed?

Did you know that there are 1,192,000 cell phone subscribers in Iraq and phone use has gone up 158% since the integration of cell phones as detonators on IEDs?

Did you know that Iraq has an independent media that consists of 75 radio stations, 180 newspapers, 10 television stations, and 6000 "Armed Truth Squads"?

Did you know that the Baghdad Stock Exchange opened in June of 2004, and has since lost only 4,200% of its opening value?

Did you know that 2 candidates in the Iraqi presidential election had a
televised debate recently because it was too dangerous to debate in front of a live audience?

Phil Gramm was actually in favor of a Sub-Prime crisis. This is a known, and very well publicized fact. He knew that if US banks were able to diversify without any government regulation, that a sub-prime crisis could be created through inevitably loose lending policies.

He's on record as the sponsor of the bill that created it, and he continues to support that same bill today, as it achieved precisely what he set out to accomplish: An economic climate that would artificially increase the asset wealth of America's poor and through the use of a deliberate campaign of misinformation, encourage these same individuals to carry more debt. Once this had been achieved, the bill was designed to then create the economic environment (through rapid deregulation) that we have seen over the past several years; a rapid loss of available credit and available jobs leading directly to an enormous loss of wealth amongst the poor that would lead them to remain on the bottom with low education and poor skill sets. The end game? Simply the creation of an environment wherein more major corporations (the primary backers of Gramm and McCain for decades) could abandon American workes for cheap foreign labor, thus providing maximum profits for the very top 1% of society. These 1% have been further protected by the Bush-McCain tax cuts, which actually increased taxes on 95% of Americans (the bottom 95%).

This is so basic, and so well known that only a complete fool would argue against it. Why else would it be news?! Honestly... Plan and simple facts.

Hah! Laughable! When the going gets tough, the Republicans leave for Crawford, or Aspen. No worries there, as its a Democrat's job to save the country. Again.

The correlation between hard work and success is limited. Obviously, Obama is where he is because he worked hard and earned it. Bush and McCain are where they are because their fathers and grandfathers worked hard.

McCain has never even paid a bill in his life, so why should we trust him to protect our money? I don't think we need another silver spoon republican trying to run the economy. Just look at what happened under Bush: 56 million Americans who were middle class in 2000 are now out of work and considered below the poverty line. 23 million Americans who had health insurance in 2000 now do not.

McCain actually wrote the bills that caused this. Look it up! This is so basic that it hardly gets any attention. Obama is from a food stamps family, and federal assistance combined with his drive and natural ability helped him pull himself up by the boot straps. McCain was a bottom of the barrel student, mediocre officer, and quickly corrupted legislator. Had he not been born with high social status he would have never been able to land back asswards where he has.

Maybe you missed this. McCain owns at least seven houses and counting. It strikes me that these uber-rich Republican elitists who own so many houses are a real problem for the rest of us in that they drive up real estate values by gobbling up land and hoarding away homes. We wouldn't have had a banking meltdown if we hadn't had a subprime meltdown. We wouldn't have had a subprime meltdown if the average American had been able to afford a single home. The average American can't afford a single home because these chablis swilling country club loving Republican elites collect homes like the rest of us collect credit card bills.

Just so these crazy Bushies and McCainiacs don't pull the wool over your eyes on de-regulation... Here is the basic low down on what's behind it. Simple. Straight forward. Factual.

The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 established the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) in the United States and included banking reforms, some of which were designed to control speculation. Some provisions such as Regulation Q that allowed the Federal Reserve to regulate interest rates in savings accounts were repealed by the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980. Other provisions which prohibit a bank holding company from owning other financial companies were repealed in 1999 by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. Yes, that Gramm.

First repeal of the Glass-Steagall act allowed banks to determine what interest rates they could pay on savings, thus eliminating from our society sensible government oversight by the the Federal Reserve banks.

Second part repealed by the Gramm-Leahy act was that of the idea that a bank should be FORCED to not be able to invest in other forms of business. This was yet another portion of the bill aimed at preventing the government from protecting average Americans by maintaining a strong and balance economy by preventing companies over reaching.

The entirety of this bill is correctly attributed to our current sub-prime mortgage problem. This problem started on the banking side through de-regulation and led directly to predatory lending practices.

The Gramm-Leahy-Bliley act was signed into law by a Bill Clinton, who did not have the votes in Congress to prevent it.

It had positive economic results, allowing some finanacial companies to consolidate their resources and operate more efficiently, thereby saving money and increasing the value of their companies and increasing the value of the shareholders holdings in those companies.

Prior to the repeal of this law, foreign bankers held a financial edge against US banks because they were free to diversify their investments. Repealing this law allowed US banks to catch up with foreign banks and increase their value as a company. Again, increasing the value of their stocks to their stock-holders, but also removing necessary regulation to prevent predatory schemes.

Yes, it did allow companies the freedom to make good and or bad investments, just like any other company, but without necessary regulation to prevent abuse of the system.

The vast majority of banks are at risk, but are currently stable because they made wise investments. Some are not doing so well because they got caught up in too risky of deals, such as interest-only loans. They took a risk, they lost.

Buyers were duped into accepting these risk terms on their loans. That is the fault of predatory lenders.

Democrat president Bill Clinton had the option of veto-ing this bill but chose not to. He supported the bill and signed it into law in 1999 because the Republicans had the votes in Congress to ignore the veto.

One of the prime sponsors of the bill was this man, also a REPUBLICAN.
John McCain

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 18, 2008 7:18 AM | Report abuse

You're just realizing that the Print Media (including your pathetic blog), is irrelevant?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 18, 2008 7:11 AM | Report abuse

I only got through the first 2 or 3 paragraphs and decided to respond to that.

What you're opining is, basically, what we see all of the time from ABC, CBS, NBC, The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, The Boston Herald, The Atlanta Journal & Constitution, The Kansas City Star, The St Louis Post Displatch, The New Orleans Times-Picayune, The Chicago Sun-Times, USA Today and about 40,000 or 100,000 or a million other outlets: selective highlighting of particular stories based solely on the opinion of the editor(s).

Since it's Drudge doing it, that's somehow bad. But it's OK when all of the others mentioned, nearly in lock-step with each other, do the same thing.

There's a word for that sort of thing. I think it starts with the letter "h" and ends with the letter "ypocrit".

As you stated, Drudge puts it up, and the rest go get the story for their topics on afternoon TV. Too bad real journalists don't exist any more, huh?

Posted by: A.B. | September 18, 2008 7:09 AM | Report abuse

And the Washington Post wondered why I was cancelling my subscription after 15 years.....I'm just waiting for them to offer free subscriptions to anyone & everyone who votes for Obama.....but wait, those are the only ones reading it now, so even that won't increase their readership.

Posted by: John | September 18, 2008 7:05 AM | Report abuse

Corporations are run to make a profit. If your solution for running a country (corporation), that is heavily in debt is to increase spending at an astronomical rate. It would be demanded by the stockholders and the by the Board of Directors that your employment be teminated because of you basic lack of Economics 101

Carly is right. She forgot to add that MOST elected officials do not have the skills to run a corporation

Posted by: scott | September 18, 2008 6:49 AM | Report abuse

/www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnBXXssj0KY


Let's get the facts straight on what she actually said

Posted by: Debbie | September 18, 2008 6:48 AM | Report abuse

Thank God for Drudge. First, if there were no Drudge you wouldn't have anything to write about. YOU SURE HAVE A NICE JOB. Second, I would have never found your article. YOU MUST ENJOY THAT TIT COUSE YOU SURE SUCK A LOT. WITHOUT IT YOU WOULD CEASE TO HAVE A JOB.

Posted by: Bill | September 18, 2008 6:44 AM | Report abuse

Are you kidding me? For WEEKS Drudge printed all the positive polls that Osama Obama (As Ted Kennedy said) was leading. Now he is printing the truth about the MS and the POST and their biased pro-Osama-Obama reporting. For Pete's sake can the right have several outlets for the truth v. the left's THOUSANDS that promote LIES?

Posted by: Ironcross | September 18, 2008 6:39 AM | Report abuse

So you are telling me that Matt Drudge balances out CBS, NBC, ABC, PBS, NPR and every newspaper not named the Wall Street Journal. Be careful, your Obama kneepads are showing!

Posted by: A.G. | September 18, 2008 6:37 AM | Report abuse

This coming from a paper that buries the Palin email hack on page 4??

Chris Cillizza is another fine example of why the media is viewed with such distaste and is ranked so low in trust and telling the truth.

Posted by: JoeB | September 18, 2008 6:32 AM | Report abuse

McCain already pre-empted the Blackberry news by saying that it was a not-so-funny attempt at humor. And proving that the NEWS media has nothing better to do than advocate for failed causes, Cillizza wants to chop of the part Fiorina's statement that says neither Obama nor Biden can run a major corporation. That's as far as I got in reading WPost swill. At least Drudge is trustworthy in a world of biased, self-serving media and government.

Posted by: Nutty Buddy | September 18, 2008 6:32 AM | Report abuse

Wow. A signal conservative website versus the left leaning media. And someone is complaining about this? I find it funny that whenever the left seems to loose the attention of the public, the do whatever they can to get it back.

Keep up the awesome work Matt.

PS: For those who live in the Northwest, try Orbusmax.com ; Its like a mini-drudge

Posted by: R. Wing | September 18, 2008 5:58 AM | Report abuse

The Fironia quote seems relevant in that the twit is SUPPOSED to be campaigning for McCain/Palin. The relevant portion is her questioning the qualifications of the people she's supposed to be championing. It doesn't matter that she thinks non of the four are qualified, it's far more significant she made such a public blunder about her own candidate.

And, mercifully, all of Fironia's upcoming appearances on news have been abruptly cancelled. he he he...

Drudge...biased? Surely you jest? I suppose Wikipedia isn't a defacto standard for hard facts either?

Posted by: Kiki | September 18, 2008 5:56 AM | Report abuse

.


Voted One of the Nation's Best Blogs for the Election of 2008:


http://www.myspace.com/37thandostreet


Bookmark it now !


.
.


Voted One of the Nation's Best Blogs for the Election of 2008:


http://www.myspace.com/37thandostreet


Bookmark it now !


.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 18, 2008 5:52 AM | Report abuse

Living in New Zealand, the only news website I visit is Drudge. Its brilliant! In the news down here all we here is Obama this Obama that. Keep up the good work Matt, keep rooting for the underdog...McCain

Posted by: Ben | September 18, 2008 5:45 AM | Report abuse

The FUNNY blackberry comment did TOO make drudge!! that is where I first found it and he linked me to the story which, by the way was a joke, poking fun at Gore.

Now....the comment about who could run a corporation as CEO was covered in talk radio yesterday....it was taken OUT OF CONTEXT....the person said that Biden could not run one, either.

The person that wrote this is really intellectually dishonest.

New flash...I'm voting for McCain! get over it, deal with it...McCain and Palin are WINNING. Thank God....cuz Obama remains the most liberal congress critter in existence this year.

Posted by: Karen Stewart | September 18, 2008 5:40 AM | Report abuse

ok drudge and maybe fox is for McCain, that is two. Those in the tank for Barry, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, la times, new york times, washington post, Time, newsweek....shall i go on. oh and yes i got here from a link on drudge.

Posted by: lou | September 18, 2008 5:38 AM | Report abuse

This guy is dripping with Obamamania.

I don't even think he realizes it.

Posted by: Jim | September 18, 2008 5:32 AM | Report abuse

Cillizza: Give the FULL Fiorina quote, not just a highly edited version ... Then you'll see she was making the same exact point about Obama and Biden in the same sentence. Did Cillizza take a Journalism 101 class?

Posted by: Dan M. | September 18, 2008 5:16 AM | Report abuse

Republicans are over the MSM; we've had it. I used to love MSNBC - the (former) place for politics - but can't/won't watch it anymore. I don't want coverage to be biased in favor of my party, but I do expect it to be fair. The MSM by and large is not that. In order to become so they need to (1) recognize they have a bias; (2) realize they can't naturally check it; (3) hire conservative voices in the newsroom - and ensure the newsroom is a safe environment for them - so that they can check liberal bias and vice-versa.

Posted by: connor | September 18, 2008 5:05 AM | Report abuse

What an angry little man Chris is.

Anyone want to take a guess as to who he wants to be president ?

Posted by: Patrick / Fresno | September 18, 2008 4:59 AM | Report abuse

The Drudgereport does have some misleading headlines, buthe doesn't write the articles he links to. I am a moderate sometimes liberal democrat who reads his page each day. He seldom writes his own opinions anymore...just links. I get to read both sides. I can read all the pundits, link to overseas papers and make my own judgments.

As for the person who mentioned abortion and gay rights. I don't understand how people who want government smaller and out of our lives having anything to do with something as personal as abortion or our beliefs. Both are and should be left up to us, not the government. God gave us choice, why can't other's see that? Take care of the economy, energy, education etcetera, but please leave the values we have to make to our own accord. We don't need Big Brother telling us how to think or live...we have the ability to choose by God or if you don't believe then yourself. Having government control it takes away not only our rights, but our freedom of thought.

Posted by: pammydonovan | September 18, 2008 4:56 AM | Report abuse

I'm only here because of Drudge. I normaly don't waste my time on The Washington Post. If the Post says anything worth noting I'll hear about it somewhere else.

Posted by: Chasman | September 18, 2008 4:49 AM | Report abuse

Way before the election there was a study to see what news media was biased one way or the other and they found that the Drudgereport and USA Today were the top two when it came to fairness. Sure Drudge is tilted to the right, but it was a shock during the campaign when the MSM became so biased towards Obama. That's no myth...like the mythical candidate the press created. The facts are the majority of the Obama stories have been positive even protective when he says something stupid like he did in San Francisco, trying to explain away Rev. Wright and Obama's connection for 20 years to the racist church and his other questionable associates. Nope, they didn't protect Hillary during the Democratic race, they crucified her, made her husband out as a racist, thanks in part to Obama's camp.

I've never seen the press so blantantly biased, especially MSNBC and NBC, followed by ABC. Shockingly I found FOX news to be more fair and balanced..OMG the shock!!!

I stopped getting the Washington Post, another paper biased towards Obama, pushing us to support this inexperienced yet charismatic man. They loved the story, a African American man as President...don't look behind the curtain and see he is half white, that his was raised by his white Grandparents who adored him, sent him to the most prestigeous school in Hawaii. Not mentioning he not only couldn't identify with white rural America, but African Americans either.

I still don't know who the man is, what he stands for, what he plans to do. The change in how the press is reporting? Well he did attack them when they got too close to the truth, kept them out of appearances, blamed them for his gaffes and waffling. Nope I can't as much as I want to as a democrat relate to him, or trust him. I didn't buy into his being the messiah or Rock Star the press portrayed...I found him elitist, aloof, a typical politician who used his staff to make the attacks so he wouldn't have the blood on his hands. I don't think I'll ever know him, the press like after 9/11 when they were too afraid to be perceived as un-patriotic are now too afraid to appear racist.

Posted by: pammydonovan | September 18, 2008 4:13 AM | Report abuse

Cilliza the Girlie-Man needs to grow a pair.You Obamaloompas cry because you only control MOST of the media(ABC,CBS,CNN,NBC,MSNBC and most of the papers & mags)- If you have to have it all, too bad. Maybe you should work in Iran or Venezuela for the state-run press.

Posted by: El Marko | September 18, 2008 4:11 AM | Report abuse

Drudge Report: MORE LIPSTICK, QUICK!

Posted by: bill from OH | September 18, 2008 3:13 AM | Report abuse

Hey dumbass...Carly said none of the 4 candidates are qualified to run a corporation. And I say your not qualified to provide fair and balanced reporting.

Posted by: Daviid | September 18, 2008 2:39 AM | Report abuse

If it wasn't for Drudge..I never would of found this extremely biased article. So you owe him a thank you for linking to this tripe and getting extra webhits to it. Otherwise nobody would of read this article except your mommy.

Posted by: Skully | September 18, 2008 2:38 AM | Report abuse

You have the right to your opinion, as wrong as they are, but you do not have the right to your facts.

Posted by: JH | September 18, 2008 2:37 AM | Report abuse

Ah well – the reason I read Drudge is that it is quick, and I use it to segment into other pubs I read – like the Washington Post, The Guardian, Pravda, LA Times, Boston Globe, NYT ect. Its quick and its no more strenuous to weed out lies and crap like in your piece.


For instance: “Two other stories never merited attention from Drudge: a claim by a senior aide to John McCain that the Arizona senator had invented the BlackBerry and a statement by McCain surrogate Carly Fiorina that ‘.”

I know that you, Jack, know – that the full quote was that “neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company, and neither would Barak Obama…but that’s not the issue because the job of President of the U.S. is not like running a corporation…”

So, more big lies of omission. My reaction:
1.) The Washington Post/Jack thinks I’m stupid
2.) The Washington Post lies like most other media
3.) The Washington Post selectively lies
4.) When I read the Washington Post – I have to sort those lies as I do for Drudge, or for that matter Pravda

Well – in short – this is where you lost all credibility and I stopped reading your whiny article. Hey in reality – you, and media folks like you, are the chattering class cheerleaders.

Posted by: Richard | September 18, 2008 2:37 AM | Report abuse

Yo Fixer:

Why stop at "a statement by McCain surrogate Carly Fiorina that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company." when the full quote said the exact same about BO and old what's his name?

The Fix is in at the WaPo

Posted by: U Don't Care Anyway | September 18, 2008 2:34 AM | Report abuse

The writer of this article is deeply misinformed and needs to learn the facts regarding what the McCain aide said regarding the running of a corporation. His bias toward the left is showing what a poor reporter he is. Go Sarah....Go McCain.

Posted by: Steve J. | September 18, 2008 2:32 AM | Report abuse

"Two other stories never merited attention from Drudge: a claim by a senior aide to John McCain that the Arizona senator had invented the BlackBerry and a statement by McCain surrogate Carly Fiorina that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company."

Chris, do your homework - these were on Drudge hours before the Babs story. Just because you say it ain't so doesn't make it true.

As you said, Drudge leads with stories, and the MSM catches up the next day; you're a day behind.

Posted by: Tim | September 18, 2008 2:28 AM | Report abuse

Everyone just needs to SHUT UP! Drudge leans right, majority of the media leans left. That is obvious, and only bias people argue against it.

Everyone here has displayed the problem with the U.S., we are arguing about worthless issues and avoiding the true issues. I'm not sure if anyone has noticed but our country's economy is close to a melt down and people are arguing about biases. And Freddie Mac, Fannie May, and AIG are just a minor problem. In 20 years, Medicare and Medicaid costs will equal or surpass the gross revenues the federal government will take in, and you are arguing about he said, she said. And "you're an idiot" comments are extraordinarily productive. In 20 years, our government will wouldn't be able to pay for agriculture, defense, energy, Social Security, education, etc., etc. Don't think we can sell bonds to pay for it. We have serious issues, and we talk about Palin's pregnant daughter or Obama's middle name. How does that solve our problems? We need to debate the best approach to keep America strong. So stop the bickering of he said, she said. And before anyone talks, please look up both sides of the story. Then you can get by the biases and understand the truth.

Posted by: Ben | September 18, 2008 2:19 AM | Report abuse

Two comments.

1. Hopefully reporters won't be SO lazy that they don't take their responsibility seriously enough to shop more widely for story ideas.

2. I noticed an Obama ad on the Drudgereport.com website just now. Maybe there will be an upswing in coverage for him? You should track advertising and see how it is reflected in Drudge coverage.

Posted by: Jeff M | September 18, 2008 2:16 AM | Report abuse

Look at the current headline... "DIRTY TRICKS: PALIN EMAILS HACKED" that's not a bias headline? That doesn't scream "Obama breaks into Palin's eMail?!"

If Obama's email was hacked and published, would he use "Dirty Tricks" in the headline? No, because that would suggest the McCAIN camp was playing dirty tricks.

In addition to linking to articles he likes, Drudge writes these kinds of headlines to go with those links all the time. That's where his influence comes from.

Idiots.

Posted by: wow | September 18, 2008 1:58 AM | Report abuse

Chris, you're a perfect example of what's wrong with the MSM and why media companies such as yours are going down the tubes. Your comments about stories Drudge did not feature are disingenuous. The Blackberry comment was a poor attempt at humor, and Carly Fiorina said that none of the candidates, including Obama, were prepared to be the CEO of a major U.S. company, but that it didn't matter because Obama and McCain are running for president of the country. You pulled out only a part of the comment to try to make your point. Bad journalist.

Posted by: George | September 18, 2008 1:51 AM | Report abuse

Normally I don't submit comments to articles, but after reading many of the posts I had to make the following observation; Obama supporters are really angry and hateful. Which is funny, because those are the very traits they always assign to Republicans.

Posted by: Russman | September 18, 2008 1:49 AM | Report abuse

201 Reasons not to vote for Obama

Abortion

1. Consistently for abortion even if it includes infanticide. Said I’ve got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby.
2. Obama wrongly claimed that abortions "have not gone down" under president bush. In fact, the abortion rate has gone down 9 percent, and the annual total has declined by more than 100,000.
3. Obama advocates abortion rights even more sweeping than those enacted under Roe v. Wade. "The first thing I'd do as president," he assured the Planned Parenthood Action Fund last year, "is sign the Freedom of Choice Act." The measure would not only codify Roe, it would eliminate even restrictions on abortion that the Supreme Court has allowed - the federal ban on government funding of abortion, for example, or the law prohibiting partial-birth abortion.

Campaign Finance

4. He vowed to take public financing but reneged on that option when he decided he could raise more money than the republicans.
5. Donations from lobbyists and special interest pacs Obama say he doesn’t take money from D.C. lobbyists and special interest pacs this is the type of double-talk “politics of the past” rhetoric Obama rails against. While his claim is technically true, what he does do is take money from state lobbyists and other big money contributors who have substantial lobbyist machines in D.C., like law firms and corporations. In April 2007, the LA times quoted the campaign finance institute’s Stephen Weismann as pointing out that the distinction Obama makes on lobbyist money is meaningless: “he gets an asterisk that says he is trying to be different. … But overall, the same wealthy interests are funding his campaign as are funding other candidates, whether or not they are lobbyists. “the capital eye reported that “[a]cording to the center for responsive politics, 14 of Obama’s top 20 contributors employed lobbyists this year, spending a total of $16.2 million to influence the federal government in the first six months of 2007.”
6. Special interests in January, the Obama campaign described union contributions to the campaigns of Clinton and John Edwards as "special interest" money. Obama changed his tune as he began gathering his own union endorsements. He now refers respectfully to unions as the representatives of "working people" and says he is "thrilled" by their support.

Distortions

7. He said McCain, far from being a maverick who’s “broken with his party,” has voted to support bush policies 90 percent of the time. True enough, but by the same measure Obama has voted with fellow democrats in the senate 97 percent of the time.
8. Dreams of my father, writes of a story in Life magazine that influenced him -- about a black man trying to bleach his skin white. No such article could be found in life or ebony.
9. "I’ve been long enough in Washington to know that Washington needs to change." he is running against Washington yet his campaign is populated with political professionals who are Washington insiders.
10. Rev. Jeremiah Wright: Barack Obama repudiated what he called “inflammatory and appalling remarks” made by his Chicago pastor. Obama said he had not been present during the sermons in question. Obama told MSNBC, “Had I heard them in church I would have expressed that concern directly to Rev. Wright. ”Please note, he says that he would have expressed concern, not repudiate, the words. (Source: audacity of hypocrisy) previously Obama had said "I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother — a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe."
11. Barack Obama won his first election by having his lawyers knock all his opponents off the ballot on technicalities
12. Addressing civil rights activists in Selma, Ala., a year ago, Sen. Obama traced his "very existence" to the generosity of the Kennedy family, which he said paid for his Kenyan father to travel to America on a student scholarship and thus meet his Kansan mother. The Kennedy’s never paid for his father’s scholarship.
13. Obama told Larry king on CNN – when asked about that anti-Hillary Rodham Clinton YouTube ad, Obama stated, "we don't have the technical capacity to create something like that." turns out the creator was unmasked and ended up being a political operative who worked for a firm overseeing the technical side of Obama’s web site.
14. Obama claimed that "I worked with John McCain" on ethics legislation. In fact, the two worked together for barely a week, after which McCain accused Obama of "partisan posturing" and added, "I won't make the same mistake again." McCain later voted against the ethics bill that Obama supported, stating that it was written by democrats with "no input" from Republicans.
15. Obama botched his facts in a speech criticizing the U.S. auto industry for “investing in bigger and faster cars while foreign competitors invested in more fuel-efficient technology.” Obama stated that “while our fuel standards haven’t moved from 27.5 miles per gallon in two decades, both china and Japan have surpassed us, with Japanese cars now getting an average of 45 miles to the gallon. Not true.
16. He once told an audience in Selma about how he had been conceived by his parents, Barack Obama Sr. and Ann Dunham, because they had been inspired by the fervor following the “Bloody Sunday” voting rights demonstration that was commemorated March 4. “There was something stirring across the country because of what happened in Selma, Alabama,” he said, “because some folks are willing to march across a bridge. So they got together and Barack Obama jr. was born. So don’t tell me I don’t have a claim on Selma, Alabama. Don’t tell me I’m not coming home to Selma, Alabama “Obama was born in 1961, and the Selma march occurred four years later, in 1965. The New York Times reported that when the senator was asked about the discrepancy later that day, he clarified: “I meant the whole civil rights movement.”
17. To be clear: Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies. — Obama spokesman bill Burton, cot. 24, 2007. Now, Obama says he will vote in favor of the FISA bill that gives the immunity Obama was so opposed to.
18. Decriminalization of marijuana: while running for the U.S. senate in January 2004, Obama told Illinois college students that he supported eliminating criminal penalties for marijuana use. In the Oct. 30, 2007, presidential debate, he joined other democratic candidates in opposing the decriminalization of marijuana.
19. Running for president or vice president of the United States: on the January 22nd edition of “Meet the Press,” Tim russet and Obama had the following exchange: Russert: “when we talked back in November of ‘04 after your election, I said, ‘there’s been enormous speculation about your political future. Will you serve your six-year term as United States senator from Illinois?’ ”Obama: “I will serve out my full six-year term. You know, Tim, if you get asked enough, sooner or later you get weary and you start looking for new ways of saying things. But my thinking has not changed. ”Russert: “so you will not run for president or vice president in 2008?” Obama: “I will not.”

Ear Marks

20. "In 2006, Obama requested that the University of Chicago receive $1 million to support its construction of the new hospital pavilion.
21. Obama requested a $1 million earmark for the university of Chicago medical center where his wife had just been appointed vice president.
22. Obama requested 139 projects totaling $334 million for FY 2007.
23. Obama requested 330 projects totaling almost $1 billion ($935.7 million) since being sworn in as a senator in January 2005.
24. In 2006 and 2007, Obama requested a total of $4 million in earmarks for the Illinois primary health care association (IPHCA) whose lobbying firm contributed nearly $38,000 to Obama:
25. IPHCA hired Holland & knight to lobby for its earmark request; lawyers at Holland & knight have contributed at least $37,900 to Obama’s senate and presidential campaign
26. Over a two-year period in the U.S. senate, Obama requested $3.2 million in earmarks for the center for neighborhood technology, an organization led by political supporters and friends:
27. In 2006, Obama requested $2.2 million for the center for neighborhood technology's information for communities’ project.
28. In 2005, Obama requested $1 million and secured $400,000 for the center for neighborhood technology's I-go car sharing program.
29. "Obama ... sought money for the center for neighborhood technology, where his neighbor Jacky grim haw is a honcho.

Education

30. Obama opposed and condemned school voucher programs, yet sends his daughters to private school with "a break on the cost":
31. While running for U.S. senate, Obama opposed school vouchers.
32. When speaking at an NEA meeting, Obama "condemned voucher programs."
33. When interviewed by the Milwaukee journal sentinel, Obama softened his approach on school vouchers
34. Obama originally voted in favor of no child left behind for states, now bashes it
35. As a state senator, Obama voted in favor of no child left behind.

Foreign policy

36. The Cuba embargo in January 2004, Obama said it was time "to end the embargo with Cuba" because it had "utterly failed in the effort to overthrow Castro." speaking to a Cuban American audience in Miami in august 2007, he said he would not "take off the embargo" as president because it is "an important inducement for change."
37. Obama stated "I believe in free trade" and then later said well, I don't think NAFTA has been good for America - and I never have.
38. NAFTA: on February 29th, the Obama campaign told Canadian television (CTV) that no message was passed to the Canadian government suggesting that Obama does not mean what he says about opting out of NAFTA if it is not renegotiated. However, the Obama camp did not respond to repeated questions from CTV on reports that a conversation on this matter was held between Obama’s senior economic adviser, Austin Goolsbee, and the Canadian consulate general in Chicago. Earlier, the Obama campaign insisted that no conversations have taken place with any of its senior ranks and representatives of the Canadian government on the NAFTA issue. CTV spoke with Goolsbee, but he refused to say whether he had such a conversation with the Canadian government office in Chicago. He also said he has been told to direct any questions to the campaign headquarters.CTV didn’t stop there. They announced that their sources, at the highest levels of the Canadian government,” reconfirmed the story to CTV and one of their primary sources provided a timeline of the discussion to CTV.
39. Meeting with Ahmadinejad: "Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama underscored his willingness to talk to leaders of countries like Iran that are considered U.S. adversaries but said that does not necessarily mean an audience with Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad." (Careen Behan, "Obama says won't guarantee Ahmadinejad a meeting," Reuters,(5/26/08)
"'There's no reason why we would necessarily meet with Ahmadinejad before we know he's actually in power. He’s not the most powerful person in Iran,' Obama told reporters while campaigning in New Mexico." (Careen Behan, "Obama says won't guarantee Ahmadinejad a meeting,"(Reuters,(5/26/08)
40. In July 2007, Obama said he would meet with the leaders of hostile foreign nations, including Iran.
41. Obama argued for years that we need to move from a 'Musharraf policy' to a 'Pakistan policy. False.
42. At a July 2007 debate, Obama announced he would personally meet with leaders of Iran, north Korea, Syria and other hostile nations "without precondition."
question: "[w]ould you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and north Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries?
"Obama: "I would. And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them - which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration - is ridiculous." (Cnn/Youtube democrat presidential candidate debate, Charleston, sc, 7/23/07) (Source: RNC via Newsmax)
43. Jerusalem: "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided," Obama declared Wednesday, to rousing applause from the 7,000-plus attendees at the American Israel public affairs committee policy conference.
44. Meeting with foreign leaders: Obama now claims that he will only meet with foreign leaders at a time of his choosing if it will advance U.S. interests, but previously said he would meet with rogue leaders his first year in office without preconditions: in his remarks to the AIPAC conference, Obama claimed that he would only meet with the "appropriate Iranian leaders at a time and place" of his choosing. Obama: "contrary to the claims of some, I have no interest in sitting down with our adversaries just for the sake of talking. But as president of the United States, I would be willing to lead tough and principled diplomacy with the appropriate Iranian leaders at a time and place of my choosing - if, and only if - it can advance the interests of the United States." (Sen. Barack Obama, remarks at the annual AIPAC policy conference, Arlington, V.A., 6/4/08) but at a July 2007 debate, Obama said he would meet with hostile leaders during his first year in office. Question: "[w]ould you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and north Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries?"...Obama: "I would. And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them - which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration - is ridiculous." (Cnn/Youtube democrat presidential candidate debate, Charleston, sc, 7/23/07) at a September 2007 press conference, Obama confirmed that he would meet specifically with Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Question: "senator, you've said before that you'd meet with president Ahmadinejad ..." Obama: "uh huh." question: "would you still meet with him today?" Obama: "yeah, nothing's changed with respect to my belief that strong countries and strong presidents talk to their enemies and talk to their adversaries. I find many of president Ahmadinejad's statements odious and I’ve said that repeatedly. And I think that we have to recognize that there are a lot of rogue nations in the world that don't have American interests at heart. But what I also believe is that, as john f. Kennedy said, we should never negotiate out of fear but we should never fear to negotiate." (Sen. Barack Obama, press conference, New York, NY, 9/24/07
45. Legislation labeling Iran’s revolutionary guard a terrorist organization: Obama has been inconsistent in his views on labeling Iran’s revolutionary guard a terrorist organization. "Obama’s campaign suddenly discovered that their man -despite having spent the last nine months campaigning on his opposition to kyl-lieberman - 'has consistently urged that Iran’s revolutionary guard be labeled what it is: a terrorist organization.' well, not that consistently. Senator Obama has been scrupulously careful not to call explicitly for designation of the irgc as a terrorist organization. Now, however, with the democratic nomination almost in hand, Obama feels comfortable telling a pro-Israel audience what it wants to hear."(Danielle Pletka, "Obama’s pander pivot," weekly standard, 6/4/08)
"[t]he audience at AIPAC might ask why senator Obama has pivoted from opposition to 'lieberman-kyl' to support for the irgc designation his audience demands. Is this really change they can believe in?" (Danielle Pletka, "Obama’s pander pivot," weekly standard, 6/4/08) "Which Barack Obama will be the democratic standard-bearer: the one who vowed to 'eliminate' the Iranian nuclear threat two days ago, or the one who opposed designating the revolutionary guards a terrorist organization?" (editorial, "Obama and Iran," the Washington times, 6/6/08)

Friends in Low Places

46. Obama paid $300,000 less than the asking price for his mansion, while Tony Rezko’s wife paid full price for a vacant lot next door on the very same day.
47. Obama later purchased a portion of risk’s land for $104,500; it was valued at $40,500.
48. In one of the biggest lies he ever told — Obama says he “vehemently condemns” the words of his pastor and mentor, Rev. Jeremiah a. Wright, an official member of Obama’s campaign.
49. Obama provided political favors to Tony Rezko, including writing letters on his behalf:"as a state senator, Barack Obama wrote letters to city and state officials supporting his political patron tony Rezko’s successful bid to get more than $14 million from taxpayers to build apartments for senior citizens
50. Rezko offered Obama a job after law school and the two have been friends ever since.
51. Obama has admitted to $250,000 worth of campaign funding provided by tony Rezko
52. Obama and risk’s socializing included their wives and a trip to Rezko’s lake house.
53. The Obama’s and Rezko’s took a trip together to Rezko’s home at lake Geneva, WI
54. Friend of Alexi Giannoulias. In 2006, Alex Giannoulias was elected treasurer of the state of Illinois. In 2006, Giannoulias came under fire for lending money to crime figures. Giannoulias accepted $5,000 in campaign contributions from a Florida casino fleet owner whose uncle was "gunned down in an execution-style slaying" and who has ties to lobbyist jack Abramoff.
55. Friend of William Ayers. A founding member of the group that bombed the U.S. capitol and the pentagon during the 1970s. From 1999 to 2002, Obama served with Ayers on the board of directors for the woods fund of Chicago.
56. Friend of Marilyn Katz. Katz organized Vietnam War protests through students for a democratic society (sods), including throwing nails in the street to thwart police officers. Katz met William Ayers through sods and defended him after his association with Obama surfaced in the 2008 presidential campaign.
57. Friend of Nadhmi Auchi. Nadhmi Auchi is an Iraqi billionaire with business and personal ties to convicted Obama fundraiser Anthony "tony" Reckon. "Auchi is the man who provided Rezko a $3.5 million loan that Reckon did not disclose to the court -- resulting in his January arrest."
58. Friend of Jodie Evans. Founder of code pink. Enough said.
59. Friend of Larry Lessig. Lessig has used a controversial video of Jesus getting hit by a bus in his speeches and lectures. "the former Harvard law school professor is the leading light of what is known as the 'free culture movement,' which insists that the age of the internet should mean the abolition of intellectual property rights." (editorial, "another odd guru, “investor’s business daily, 4/23/08)
60. Friend of Howard Guttmann. Guttmann is an attorney at Washington, D.C., law firm Williams & Connolly. In 1999 and 2000, Gutman was a registered federal lobbyist for Williams & Connolly.
Gutman represented Bolivia’s former president Gonzalo Sanchez de lozada and former defense minister José Carlos Sanchez berzain, who were accused of using controversial tactics in response to a political protest. Sanchez de lozada was accused of "crimes against humanity" after over 60 protesters were killed by soldiers; he responded that clearing roads "isn't a crime in this or any country
61. Obama said he could “pay for every dime” of his spending and tax cut proposals “by closing corporate loopholes and tax havens.” that’s wrong – his proposed tax increases on upper-income individuals are key components of paying for his program, as well. And his plan, like McCain’s, would leave the U.S. facing big budget deficits, according to independent experts.

Gaffes

62. Obama says the U.S. senate banking committee is "my committee”.
63. In June 2008, Obama falsely claimed his father served in world war ii:
64. An Obama ad running in Michigan claims McCain didn't support loan guarantees for the auto industry. In fact, he does support them.
65. In may 2008, Obama claimed to have visited 57 states
66. On May 8th, Obama, caught up in the fervor of a campaign speech Tuesday, drastically overstated the Kansas tornadoes death toll, saying 10,000 had died. ”in case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died — an entire town destroyed,” the democratic presidential candidate said in a speech to 500 people packed into a sweltering Richmond art studio for a fundraiser. The death toll was 12.

Gay rights

67. Opposed to gay marriage and respected the rights of states to set conditions for marriage. Now he says he opposes California’s (delegate rich California) attempt to ban gay marriage. Flipped answer.

Gun control

68. Favored a ban on the manufacture sale and possession of fire arms and then he told people in Idaho that he was for the second amendment.
69. Supported a ban on firearms kept in the home.
70. Supported a ban on right-to-carry permits.
71. Supported a total ban on handguns.

Health Care-Welfare

72. Obama noted that McCain’s health care plan would “tax people’s benefits” but didn’t say that it also would provide up to a $5,000 tax credit for families.

73. Single-payer healthcare: on January 22nd, the Hillary Clinton campaign releases a video that proves that Obama lied about his position on “single-payer healthcare. “The video compares statements Obama made during the January 21st democratic debate with those he made to an AFL-CIO conference in June 2003 while campaigning for the senate. Contradicting what Obama said at the debate, the old footage shows the senator saying, “I happen to be a proponent of single-payer universal healthcare coverage. That’s what I’d like to see. “At the debate, Obama stated: “I never said that we should try to go ahead and get single-payer (healthcare).”Single-payer healthcare is a euphemism for socialized medicine.
74. Pay as you go: Obama promised to "restore a law that was in place during the Clinton presidency—called Pay as you go—that prohibits money from leaving the treasury without some way of compensating for the lost revenue." But now Obama says he's not going to sacrifice his domestic priorities for deficit reduction. Universal health care, renewable energy and all the rest won't be sacrificed on the altar of Pay as you go.(source: q and o)
75. Obama shifts on welfare reform. "I am not a defender of the status quo with respect to welfare," Obama said on the floor of the Illinois state senate on May 31, 1997. "Having said that, I probably would not have supported the federal legislation, because I think it had some problems."

Immigration

76. Illegal immigration in a March 2004 questionnaire, Obama was asked if the government should "crack down on businesses that hire illegal immigrants." he replied "oppose." in a Jan. 31, 2008, televised debate, he said that "we do have to crack down on those employers that are taking advantage of the situation."
77. Illegal immigrants and driver's licenses: as a state senator in Illinois, Obama voted to require illegal immigrants to get a driver's license. The change? In the November 2007 cnn debate, he was asked what his stand was on that issue and he said, "I am not proposing that's what we do."

Military

78. Stated in his own Iowa caucus video that he wants to rid the world of nuclear weapons.
79. On 9/7 Obama claimed he would buck his party by increasing the size of the military.
80. But in October 2007, Obama told the caucus for priorities that he would cut military spending.
81. Stated he would not make bin laden into a martyr by executing him. But later said he would. He thinks murdering 3k of our U.S. citizens might qualify for the ultimate penalty.
82. Obama claims his Iraq plan always depended on conditions on the ground, but previously said troops would be out in 16 months although he previously said ) Obama previously said he would immediately begin withdrawing troops from Iraq and would have them out in 16 months.
83. Said the surge would make things worse now he thinks it has been a success.
84. Obama accused his fellow American citizens of the indiscriminate murder of Iraqi civilians, saying, “and these private (Blackwater USA) contractors, they go out and they’re spraying bullets and hitting civilians and that makes it more dangerous for our troops
85. On July 28th, the day after his speech at the democratic convention catapulted him into the national spotlight, Barack Obama told a group of reporters in Boston that the United States had an “absolute obligation” to remain in Iraq long enough to make it a success. “The failure of the Iraqi state would be a disaster,” he said at a lunch sponsored by the Christian Science monitor, according to an audiotape of the session. “It would dishonor the 900-plus men and women who have already died. . . . It would be a betrayal of the promise that we made to the Iraqi people, and it would be hugely destabilizing from a national security perspective.
86. He twisted McCain’s words about Afghanistan, saying, “when john McCain said we could just ‘muddle through’ in Afghanistan, I argued for more resources.” actually, McCain said in 2003 he “may” muddle through, and he recently also called for more troops there.


Oil, coal gas

87. Opposed offshore drilling and now supports it.
88. Was for tapping the strategic oil reserve and then he was against it.
89. Obama tells Michigan voters that he "would have preferred a gradual adjustment" in gas prices? Obama opposes gas tax relief.
90. Obama told a Texas newspaper: "what we ought to tax is dirty energy, like coal and, to a lesser extent, natural gas."
91. Didn’t tell hardworking Michigan families that he opposes gas tax relief. Nearly four-fifths of Michigan households use natural gas to heat their homes.
92. Wrong for Pennsylvania’s economy. Obama told a Texas newspaper: "what we ought to tax is dirty energy, like coal and, to a lesser extent, natural gas." Pennsylvania had 270
93. Coal mines as of 2006. As of 2006, there were 7,526 people employed in Pennsylvania’s coal mining industry.
94. Coal: Obama, whose support for coal-to-liquid has been widely criticized by environmentalists, sent out a press release clarifying his position on liquid coal: senator Obama supports research into all technologies to help solve our climate change and energy dependence problems, including shifting our energy use to renewable fuels and investing in technology that could make coal a clean-burning source of energy…however, unless and until this technology is perfected, senator Obama will not support the development of any coal-to-liquid fuels unless they emit at least 20% less life-cycle carbon than conventional fuels.
This “clarification” is an important step for the Obama campaign in trying to gain support from environmental organizations and voters. However, the la times notes that his position change on this issue is even more significant because it symbolizes “there’s a race to the top among the democratic candidates for the strongest position on how to solve the climate crisis.”(source: carbon coalition)

Taxes

95. Barack Obama said on ABC Sunday that he might not go through with his plans to increase taxes.
96. Obama called for a windfall profits tax on oil companies.
97. Wants to raise taxes even above the levels of the Clinton era, including a huge increase in the payroll tax.
98. To date, Obama has voted for a tax increase approximately once every five days congress has been in session.
99. Americans for tax reform gave Obama a lifetime rating of 7.5 out of 100.
100. Citizens against government waste gave Obama a lifetime rating of 22 out of 100.
101. The national taxpayers union gave Obama a grade of “f” for his fiscal voting record.
102. The U.S. chamber of commerce gave Obama a 33 percent rating in 2007.
103. Obama told reporters he would raise taxes on the top 5 percent of earners also claimed that a family making less than $250,000 will not see higher taxes under his plan. In 2005, the cut off for the top 5 percent of earners began at $145,283 - well below Obama’s $250,000.
104. Obama claimed that the argument that middle income Americans would be hurt by a capital gains tax increase is "a phony argument and then clarified that middle income Americans would be exempted from his capital gains tax hike.
105. Obama shifts on taxes: said he may "defer" tax hikes depending on the economic situation - a tacit acknowledgment that higher taxes hurt the economy and affect job creation and then states he may "possibly defer" some of his tax increases based on the economic situation.
106. Obama said “average family income” went down $2,000 under bush, which isn’t correct. An aide said he was really talking only about “working” families and not retired couples. And – math teachers, please note – he meant median (or midpoint) and not really the mean or average. Median family income actually has inched up slightly under bush.
107. In 109th – 110th congresses, Obama voted at least 94 times for higher taxes.
108. HR. 6, CQ vote #425: motion rejected 59-40: r 9-39; d 48-1; I 2-0, 12/13/07, Obama voted yea;
109. HR. 6, CQ vote #416: motion rejected 53-42: r 5-39; d 46-3; I 2-0, 12/7/07, Obama voted yea;
110. H.R. 976, CQ vote #352: motion agreed to 69-30: r 18-30; d 49-0; I 2-0, 9/27/07, Obama voted yea;
111. H.R. 976, CQ vote #307: passed 68-31: r 18-31; d 48-0; I 2-0, 8/2/07, Obama voted yea;
112. H.R. 976, CQ vote #306: motion agreed to 67-32: r 17-32; d 48-0; I 2-0, 8/2/07, Obama voted yea;
113. H.R. 976, CQ vote #304: motion rejected 49-50: r 48-1; d 1-47; I 0-2, 8/2/07, Obama voted nay;
114. H.R. 976, CQ vote #296: motion rejected 39-60: r 37-12; d 2-46; I 0-2, 8/2/07, Obama voted nay;
115. H.R. 976, CQ vote #295: motion rejected 47-52: r 46-3; d 1-47; I 0-2, 8/2/07, Obama voted nay;
116. H.R. 976, CQ vote #292: rejected 36-60: r 1-46; d 33-14; I 2-0, 8/1/07, Obama voted yea;
117. H.R. 6, CQ vote #223: motion rejected 57-36: r 10-34; d 45-2; I 2-0, 6/21/07, Obama voted yea;
118. H.R. 2206, CQ vote #181: motion agreed to 80-14: r 42-3; d 37-10; I 1-1, 5/24/07, Obama voted nay;
119. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #172: adopted 52-40: r 2-40; d 48-0; I 2-0, 5/17/07, Obama voted yea;
120. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #161: motion rejected 44-51: r 44-2; d 0-47; I 0-2, 5/9/07, Obama voted nay;
121. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #159: motion agreed to 54-41: r 46-0; d 8-39; I 0-2, 5/9/07, Obama voted nay;
122. H.R. 1591, CQ vote #118: adopted 74-23: r 25-22; d 47-1; I 2-0, 3/28/07, Obama voted yea;
123. S. con. res. 21,cq vote #113: rejected 49-50: r 48-1; d 1-47; I 0-2, 3/23/07, Obama voted nay;
124. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #109: rejected 44-55: r 44-5; d 0-48; I 0-2, 3/23/07, Obama voted nay;
125. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #108: rejected 44-53: r 44-3; d 0-48; I 0-2, 3/23/07, Obama voted nay;
126. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #107: rejected 46-52: r 46-2; d 0-48; I 0-2, 3/23/07, Obama voted nay;
127. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #105: adopted 59-40: r 13-36; d 44-4; I 2-0, 3/23/07, Obama voted yea;
128. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #102: rejected 48-51: r 48-1; d 0-48; I 0-2, 3/23/07, Obama voted nay;
129. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #100: rejected 46-53: r 46-3; d 0-48; I 0-2, 3/23/07, Obama voted nay;
130. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #98: rejected 42-53: r 42-4; d 0-47; I 0-2, 3/22/07, Obama voted nay;
131. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #94: rejected 38-58: r 0-47; d 36-11; I 2-0, 3/22/07, Obama voted yea;
132. S. con. res. 21, CQ vote #83: rejected 47-51: r 47-2; d 0-47; I 0-2, 3/21/07, Obama voted nay;
133. H.R. 2, CQ vote #38: motion rejected 46-50: r 44-3; d 2-45; I 0-2, 1/31/07, Obama voted nay;
134. H.R. 2, CQ vote #37: motion agreed to 49-48: r 1-46; d 46-2; I 2-0, 1/31/07, Obama voted yea;
135. H.R. 2, CQ vote #32: motion agreed to 50-42: r 3-42; d 45-0; I 2-0, 1/25/07, Obama voted yea;
136. H.R. 2, CQ vote #30: motion rejected 43-50: r 42-3; d 1-45; I 0-2, 1/25/07, Obama voted nay;
137. H.R. 2, CQ vote #28: motion rejected 42-51: r 41-4; d 1-45; I 0-2, 1/25/07, Obama voted nay;
138. s. 256, CQ vote #27: rejected 38-61: r 38-17; d 0-43; I 0-1, 3/7/05, Obama voted nay;
139. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #50: rejected 46-54: r 1-54; d 44-0; I 1-0, 3/15/05, Obama voted yea;
140. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #61: rejected 44-56: r 1-54; d 42-2; I 1-0, 3/17/05, Obama voted yea;
141. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #63: rejected 40-59: r 0-54; d 40-4; I 0-1, 3/17/05, Obama voted yea;
142. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #81: adopted 51-49: r 51-4; d 0-44; I 0-1, 3/17/05, Obama voted nay;
143. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #65: rejected 49-51: r 4-51; d 44-0; I 1-0, 3/17/05, Obama voted yea;
144. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #68: motion adopted 51-49: r 6-49; d 44-0; I 1-0, 3/17/05, Obama voted yea;
145. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #70: rejected 45-55: r 0-55; d 44-0; I 1-0, 3/17/05, Obama voted yea;
146. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #74: motion adopted 55-45: r 50-5; d 5-39; I 0-1, 3/17/05, Obama voted nay;
147. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #75: rejected 47-53: r 3-52; d 43-1; I 1-0, 3/17/05, Obama voted yea;
148. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #78: rejected 45-55: r 0-55; d 44-0; I 1-0, 3/17/05, Obama voted yea;
149. S. con. res. 18, CQ vote #79: rejected 37-63: r 1-54; d 35-9; I 1-0, 3/17/05, Obama voted yea;
150. H. con. res. 95, CQ vote #114: motion adopted 52-47: r 52-3; d 0-43; I 0-1, 4/28/05, Obama voted nay;
151. H.R. 3058, CQ vote #258: motion rejected 42-57: r 42-13; d 0-43; I 0-1, 10/19/05, Obama voted nay;
152. s. 2020, CQ vote #330: rejected 44-55: r 2-53; d 41-2; I 1-0, 11/17/05, Obama voted yea;
153. s. 2020, CQ vote #331: motion rejected 35-64: r 0-55; d 34-9; I 1-0, 11/17/05, Obama voted yea;
154. s. 2020, CQ vote #333: motion rejected 40-59: r 1-54; d 38-5; I 1-0, 11/17/05, Obama voted yea;
155. s. 2020, CQ vote #337: motion rejected 43-55: r 0-54; d 42-1; I 1-0, 11/17/05, Obama voted yea;
156. s. 2020, CQ vote #338: motion rejected 36-62: r 0-54; d 35-8; I 1-0, 11/17/05, Obama voted yea;
157. s. 2020, CQ vote #339: motion rejected 50-48: r 9-45; d 40-3; I 1-0, 11/17/05, Obama voted yea;
158. s. 2020, CQ vote #341: motion rejected 33-65: r 0-54; d 32-11; I 1-0, 11/17/05, Obama voted yea;
159. s. 2020, CQ vote #343: motion rejected 43-55: r 1-53; d 41-2; I 1-0, 11/17/05, Obama voted yea;
160. s. 2020, CQ vote #345: motion rejected 47-51: r 3-51; d 43-0; I 1-0, 11/17/05, Obama voted yea;
161. s. 2020, CQ vote #346: motion rejected 42-56: r 0-54; d 41-2; I 1-0, 11/17/05, Obama voted yea;
162. s. 2020, CQ vote #347: passed 64-33: r 49-4; d 15-28; I 0-1, 11/18/05, Obama voted nay;
163. H.R. 4297, CQ vote #7: motion rejected 44-53: r 1-52; d 42-1; I 1-0, 2/2/06, Obama voted yea;
164. H.R. 4297, CQ vote #8: motion rejected 44-53: r 1-52; d 42-1; I 1-0, 2/2/06, Obama voted yea;
165. H.R. 4297, CQ vote #10: passed 66-31: r 49-4; d 17-26; I 0-1, 2/2/06, Obama voted nay;
166. H.R. 4297, CQ vote #15: motion rejected 40-53: r 1-52; d 39-1; I 0-0, 2/13/06, Obama voted yea;
167. H.R. 4297, CQ vote #16: motion agreed to 53-47: r 51-4; d 2-42; I 0-1, 2/14/06, Obama voted nay;
168. H.R. 4297, CQ vote #17: motion rejected 47-53: r 3-52; d 43-1; I 1-0, 2/14/06, Obama voted yea;
169. H.R. 4297, CQ vote #18: motion rejected 45-55: r 1-54; d 43-1; I 1-0, 2/14/06, Obama voted yea;
170. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #39: rejected 50-50: r 5-50; d 44-0; I 1-0, 3/14/06, Obama voted yea;
171. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #41: rejected 46-54: r 1-54; d 44-0; I 1-0, 3/14/06, Obama voted yea;
172. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #42: rejected 46-54: r 3-52; d 42-2; I 1-0, 3/14/06, Obama voted yea;
173. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #43: rejected 45-53: r 1-53; d 43-0; I 1-0, 3/15/06, Obama voted yea;
174. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #45: rejected 43-55: r 0-54; d 42-1; I 1-0, 3/15/06, Obama voted yea;
175. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #47: rejected 43-53: r 0-53; d 42-0; I 1-0, 3/15/06, Obama voted yea;
176. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #51: rejected 44-53: r 1-53; d 42-0; I 1-0, 3/15/06, Obama voted yea;
177. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #57: motion adopted 51-49: r 6-49; d 44-0; I 1-0, 3/16/06, Obama voted yea;
178. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #60: rejected 48-49: r 5-49; d 42-0; I 1-0, 3/16/06, Obama voted yea;
179. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #61: rejected 42-56: r 0-55; d 41-1; I 1-0, 3/16/06, Obama voted yea;
180. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #63: rejected 46-54: r 2-53; d 43-1; I 1-0, 3/16/06, Obama voted yea;
181. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #64: rejected 49-51: r 4-51; d 44-0; I 1-0, 3/16/06, Obama voted yea;
182. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #66: rejected 48-52: r 3-52; d 44-0; I 1-0, 3/16/06, Obama voted yea;
183. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #67: rejected 46-53: r 2-52; d 43-1; I 1-0, 3/16/06, Obama voted yea;
184. S. con. res. 83, CQ vote #69: rejected 43-57: r 1-54; d 41-3; I 1-0, 3/16/06, Obama voted yea;
185. H.R. 4297, CQ vote #118: motion adopted 54-44: r 51-3; d 3-40; I 0-1, 5/11/06, Obama voted nay;
186. H.R. 8, CQ vote #164: motion rejected 57-41: r 53-2; d 4-38; I 0-1, 6/8/06, Obama voted nay;
187. H.R. 5970, CQ vote #229: motion rejected 56-42: r 52-3; d 4-38; I 0-1, 8/3/06, Obama voted nay;
188. H.R. 4954, CQ vote #244: motion agreed to 57-41: r 54-0; d 3-40; I 0-1, 9/13/06, Obama voted nay;
189. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #142: adopted 48- 45: r 2- 44; d 44- 1; I 2-0, 6/4/08, Obama voted yea;
190. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #85, adopted 51-44: r 2-43; d 47-1; I 2-0, 3/14/08, Obama voted yea;
191. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #82, rejected 45-51: r 45-1; d 0-48; I 0-2, 3/14/08, Obama voted nay;
192. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #77, rejected 48-50: r 47-1; d 1-47; I 0-2, 3/13/08, Obama voted nay;
193. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #74, rejected 49-50: r 48-1; d 1-47; I 0-2, 3/13/08, Obama voted nay;
194. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #50: rejected 50-50: r 48-1; d 2-47; I 0-2, 3/13/08, Obama voted nay;
195. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #52: rejected 47-53: r 47-2; d 0-49; I 0-2, 3/13/08, Obama voted nay;
196. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #48: rejected 49-51: r 48-1; d 1-48; I 0-2, 3/13/08, Obama voted nay;
197. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #43: rejected 47-52: r 47-2; d 0-48; I 0-2, 3/13/08, Obama voted nay;
198. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #47: motion agreed to: 50-50: r 49-0, vice president Cheney casting a ‘yea’ vote; d 1-48; I 0-2, 3/13/08, Obama voted nay;
199. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #46: motion rejected 49-51: r 0-49; d 47-2; I 2-0, 3/13/08, Obama voted yea
200. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #45: rejected 49-50: r 47-1; d 2-47; I 0-2, 3/13/08, Obama voted nay;
201. S. con. res. 70, CQ vote #64: rejected 43-55: r 1-47; d 40-8; I 2-0, 3/13/08, Obama voted yea

Posted by: Rightinmissouri | September 18, 2008 1:28 AM | Report abuse

Boy, if ever proof was needed that if you otherwise-unemployable droolers currently "employed" at the paper formerly known as the Washington Post had been around 35 years ago, Nixon would still be President For All Eternity, it's crap like this that demonstrates it.

Matt Drudge was a joke in Hollywood till idiots like you started listening to him.

Hey idiot: do you really feel cool, that you follow the lead of a failed, talentless actor - a person with no discernable ability other than a low cunning as a con artist - the kind of guy even a dweeb like you could look down and laugh at while being chased home from school, is someone you are now foolish enough to listen to about ANYTHING???

Did you know that women laugh behind the backs of guys who look as dorky as you do? I guess it's what you have in common with Failure-boy.

Posted by: TCinLA | September 18, 2008 1:25 AM | Report abuse

Why is that more spelling and grammatical errors occur on angry posts from nutjob right wing conservatives than posts by centrists or progressives? Could it be that these people are the same stupid trailer park trash that voted for Bush both times? Naaaah!

America's new motto: "Stupid is as stupid does". Please folks, if you don't have more than two brain cells to rub together, stay home and listen to Rush while you fondle your Sean Hannity, Jeff Gannon, Ken Mehlman, Bill-O and Larry Craig plush toys.

Posted by: Steve Bonser | September 18, 2008 1:21 AM | Report abuse

It's AWESOME to see media BIAS trying to disguise IT'S OWN MEDIA BIAS!!!
Fiorina said that NONE of the current BATCH OF CANDIDATES could run a fortune 500 company (She would know, It is also sad to see our candidate choices).
Fiorina was CUT OFF (like in THIS BIAS ARTICLE) when she suggested that Palin is THE highest qualified for the job, since she has far more executive experience.
Another Big FAT LIAR. Who pays these people!

Posted by: James, SF BAY | September 18, 2008 1:15 AM | Report abuse

Only because of Drudge do we even get any mainstream coverage considered negative toward the elite. Remember Monica, probably not if you are a liberal. Without Drudge that story would never have been reported. It is sad that 100% of the elite were willing to overlook that story until forced to cover it. Of course to a math challenged liberal 100% one way (their way)is cosidered fair, that is why the NY Times and others are going down the tube. One thing the libs will like if Obama is elected, 9% Pelosi will eliminate talk radio.

Posted by: Edson | September 18, 2008 1:07 AM | Report abuse

Kieth Olbermann is Obama's personal Ass licker.

That is all.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 18, 2008 1:00 AM | Report abuse

Lets see, last evening CNN's Dumbbell Brown, and MSDNC's Keith "Obamas Azz sniffer" olberman and Rachel Mancow all refer to McCain as a liar a dozen times each. Yep, they all got the Obama talking points via blackberry yesterday. same thing every night, they must really think the american people are that stupid.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 18, 2008 12:49 AM | Report abuse

Latent seething hatred for Drudge from a WaPo employee. Drudge, who in the 90s, ran the Clinton-Monica dress story while the rest of the Media, Liberal, sat on it to protect Bill, their Liberal buddy. Congratulations Mr. Cilizza. You're now in the club.

Posted by: Politicus | September 18, 2008 12:41 AM | Report abuse

Heres one for you to try. Read the headlines in the Old York Times in the morning (Fresh from the daily Kos or Huff post). Then watch the story appear that evening on CNN and MSDNC while some Obama tool spews it as a talking point. The next day it will appear in this rag or the LA Times, and then later on the cover of Newsweek, Time or the Atlantic. There is a Tsunami of frustration building on the right with the contempt that the media has for the american people. We will excercise our right to vote in Novemeber. You have no idea what is coming.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 18, 2008 12:37 AM | Report abuse

Forget about political bias. A large part of the Drudge formula for success is simply that virtually all print journalism and a lot of broadcast/t. v. journalism is terminally self-important and booooring (the NY Daily News wins points for its recent "Crockefeller and Snooks" series, but that sort of thing is very rare). Drudge has a natural instinct that the news needs to be entertaining, so he's not above throwing in the occasional two-headed calf. The NYT, the LAT and the WP could put him out of business in a minute if they'd brighten up a bit, but evidently their editors imagine that they're a bunch of bishops and think that putting out lively papers would be a bit like farting in church.

Posted by: dfs | September 18, 2008 12:33 AM | Report abuse

There's a place for Drudge in the media array that I use to keep myself informed of current events local, national and abroad.
Sounds like some sour grapes if you ask me!

Posted by: KoKoMo | September 18, 2008 12:33 AM | Report abuse

All these complaints about who is giving face time to what stories. Neither Drudge nor the Washington Post give any time to stories about the third party candidates. Of course, both are biased. Being bi-partisan doesn't mean being non-partisan.

Posted by: common sense | September 18, 2008 12:31 AM | Report abuse

CBS, NBC, CBS, CNN, etc and all MSM are much more baised to the right than Drudge can ever be accused of in the other direction. What a bunch of BS!!!! Chris, you're typical of the rest of the conservative whiners. Boo Hoo. You Sissy.

Posted by: Brad | September 18, 2008 12:29 AM | Report abuse

By the way, this will likely draw the usual flak from the usual morons, but the so-called 'liberal' media isn't biased. At all.

I read a piece in the New Yorker that carefully went over Palin's pros and cons, and it warranted that while she is charismatic and well-liked in Alaska, there are big question marks around her leadership potential. Your grandparents would have called it common sense.

But then the right, uneducated and so ideologically blinded as to think they are above fact and common knowledge, realized you could taint the truth by calling it biased. It's not. Members of the media have simply had the advantage of completing a liberal arts degree, most of which covers history and political science, which a light skim through pretty much destroys the neo-Straussian ideology of the neo-conservative right in about five seconds.

Don't know Leo Strauss? Have a look see on wikipedia.

Posted by: Rich | September 18, 2008 12:29 AM | Report abuse

Wow. A little perspective. Matt Drudge is where lazy journalists go to get a sense for the lede. If anything, Drudge's popularity, and in fact the existence of something you've coined to be a 'Drudge-ologist' is further confirmation that the media aren't doing their jobs.

At the end of the day, Drudge is a Republican. Non-partisan conservatives are what the rest of the internet world calls trolls. Matt Drudge is an uber troll. He didn't mention those stories for the exact reason you consider to be 'tired' (of course, you offered no explanation as to why its tired, when it is absolutely justified). Drudge does not want Obama to win the presidency, period. He snuggles the recent poll shifts to Obama to a third rate lead. He is a blogger who got lucky.

Period.

Posted by: Rich | September 18, 2008 12:15 AM | Report abuse

This article is wrong. Drudge doesn't just "balance" the coverage, he alters stories by his use of headlines. Currently, his main lead is "Dirty tricks: Palins email hacked". This implies that it's some democratic conspiracy, of which there is no evidence or even suspicion of.

I've quit reading it.

Posted by: Chris | September 18, 2008 12:11 AM | Report abuse

You people are pure dopes.

Posted by: weedpuller | September 17, 2008 11:52 PM | Report abuse

Hey Nick III, that was a lot of hot air you let out...A whole lotta crap you have to remember too. The only thing we have to know about Obama is that he let's his little brother live in squaller in a cardboard HUT! What kind of help do you think he is going to bring the little man like you when his own family can't count on him?

Posted by: CatDestroyer | September 17, 2008 11:48 PM | Report abuse

Excuse me Mr Cillissa, but your statement "Two other stories never merited attention from Drudge: a claim by a senior aide to John McCain that the Arizona senator had invented the BlackBerry and a statement by McCain surrogate Carly Fiorina that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company." First off, the Carly Fiorina quote you are referring to was cutoff before she finished her sentence. She didn't just mention McCain and Pailin not being qualified to run a company. She also mentioned Obama and Biden. She concluded her statement by saying no politician is automatically qualified to run a company. If you wouldn't rely so much on phony doctored up testimonials posted on youtube by the kook/fringe left, you may actually regain some form of integrity.

Posted by: Randy | September 17, 2008 11:45 PM | Report abuse

We've gotten exactly what the Republican propaganda machine wanted to give us: a perfect "free market" unregulated nirvana. What was its name? Credit default swaps. No nasty government, just upstanding "greed is good" private sector folks making the system work. Great laissez-faire law of the jungle stuff. And a great money machine while it lasted. Ooops! We seem to have crashed the system. Well, gee, that's too bad. Hey Mr Treasury Secratary, can you help me? We'd all hate to have a crashed system.

It's unbelievable! The roof is caving in on the whole rotten edifice built with the aid and comfort of the American Enterprise Institute and other pawns of the Republican propaganda establishment who have preached the gospel of private=good and public=bad, and what are we crying about now? That they were mean to that nice Mr McCain (a real nice fellow like us) on The View.

Posted by: frank drebbin | September 17, 2008 11:43 PM | Report abuse

No kidding, that Drudge leans conservative and isn't "fair" to the Democrats...so what? The Washington Post is COMPLETELY unfair to Republicans. It's amazing how senstive the Liberal Media is to others doing the same things they themselves do.

Posted by: John Harper | September 17, 2008 11:39 PM | Report abuse

You idiots are only getting the traffic you got here BECAUSE Drudge linked you. I check Drudge at least 5 times a day, and I'm a dentist in Nevada with nothing to do with the media or politics. Drudgereport is the best news source available today. If it is, or will be news in the next 24 hours, it's on Drudge. You know, if the MSM was a bit less biased they might not have lost their credibility and subsequently, their readership and/or viewers.

¡VIVA EL DRUDGEREPORT!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 11:39 PM | Report abuse

Why did Drudge give all this traffic for this loser?

Posted by: Hell | September 17, 2008 11:33 PM | Report abuse

It's always about the money and who gave more advertising dollars

Posted by: Tatie | September 17, 2008 11:30 PM | Report abuse

This is funny stuff...So Drudge is bias by leaning more right than left....So I have to ask why is this a big deal? Are we not suppose to have freedom of speech? I bet most of you complaining about Drudge have never complained about the very bias MAINSTREAM media, because its your point of view. Why do you care? and more importantly why are you reading drudgereport.com if you have such a problem with it? Its just like watching TV...You don't like what you are watching...You change the channel.

By the way I caught this article on DRUDGEREPORT.COM

Posted by: Duane | September 17, 2008 11:19 PM | Report abuse

Palin=Criminal
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/17/palin.investigation/index.html

It is not a matter of only Republicans do bad things. Rather, Republicans only do bad things. Common sense sees right through the chablis and bree GOP country club set that just sees us as a tax mine.

Exact and complete quote from Carly Fiorina, no matter what consumate Right Wing partisan liars would have you believe. On the record, and fact checked:

Carly: "Well, I don't think John McCain could run a major corporation, I don't think I could run a major corporation, I don't think you could run a major corporation,"

Carly continues (this part conveniently left out by the Right Wing McCain lap-doggers) "It is a fallacy to suggest that the country is like a company. So, of course, to run a business, you have to have a lifetime of experience in business, but that's not what Sarah Palin, or John McCain have. Businesses are held accountable for poor business practices, bad investments, and breaking the law. Sarah Palin and John McCain simply would not have to answer to any of those three concerns were they in the White House."

Come on folks! Don't drag this out. You're keeping the inanity of the Bush-McCain Failed Talking Points in the rotation!

This is just one example of daily bias by the Post, CNN and the NY Times.

These numbers were before the surge.

Did you know that 47 countries' have reestablished their embassies in Iraq, leaving only 145 that have not?

Did you know that the Iraqi government
currently employs 1.2 million Iraqi people in exotic jobs ranging from human landmine clearance to IED shielding on the exterior of vehicles transporting officials?

Did you know that 3100 schools have been renovated, 364 schools are under rehabilitation, 263 new schools are now under construction; and 38 new schools have been completed in Iraq, while only 4000 have been destroyed?

Did you know that Iraq 's higher educational structure consists of 20 Universities, 46 Institutes or colleges and 4 research centers, all currently operating without any students?

Did you know that 25 Iraq students departed for the United States in
January 2005 for the re-established Fulbright program and were never seen or heard from again?

Did you know that the Iraqi Navy is operational? They have 5 - 100-foot patrol craft, 34 smaller vessels and a naval infantry regiment which have been used primarily for piracy in the Gulf, and for raiding small villages along the banks of the Tigris and Euphrates.

Did you know that Iraq's Air Force consists of three operational squadrons,
Which includes 9 reconnaissance and 3 US C-130 transport aircraft (under Iraqi operational control) which operate day and night, and will soon add 16 UH-1 helicopters and 4 Bell Jet Rangers, as well as 7000 paper airplanes donated by American school children?

Did you know that Iraq has a counter-terrorist unit and a Commando Battalion which have both engaged American forces in combat, or retreated from combat situations when fighting along side American forces?

Did you know that the Iraqi Police Service has over 55,000 fully trained and equipped police officers who regularly engage American forces in combat?

Did you know that there are 5 Police Academies in Iraq that produce over 3500 new officers every 8 weeks, all of whom defect within days to the insurgency?

Did you know there are more than 1100 building projects going on in Iraq intended to replace the more than 80,000 structures destroyed since the invasion?

They include 364 schools, 67 public clinics, 15 hospitals, 83 railroad stations, 22 oil facilities, 93 water facilities 69 electrical facilities, and assorted defensive walls, barriers, and fortifications.

Did you know that 96% of Iraqi children under the age of 5 have received the first 2 series of polio vaccinations, as well as a lifetime supply of PTSD?

Did you know that 4.3 million Iraqi children were enrolled in primary school by mid October, but that by November 2.6 million girls had been removed?

Did you know that there are 1,192,000 cell phone subscribers in Iraq and phone use has gone up 158% since the integration of cell phones as detonators on IEDs?

Did you know that Iraq has an independent media that consists of 75 radio stations, 180 newspapers, 10 television stations, and 6000 "Armed Truth Squads"?

Did you know that the Baghdad Stock Exchange opened in June of 2004, and has since lost only 4,200% of its opening value?

Did you know that 2 candidates in the Iraqi presidential election had a
televised debate recently because it was too dangerous to debate in front of a live audience?

Phil Gramm was actually in favor of a Sub-Prime crisis. This is a known, and very well publicized fact. He knew that if US banks were able to diversify without any government regulation, that a sub-prime crisis could be created through inevitably loose lending policies.

He's on record as the sponsor of the bill that created it, and he continues to support that same bill today, as it achieved precisely what he set out to accomplish: An economic climate that would artificially increase the asset wealth of America's poor and through the use of a deliberate campaign of misinformation, encourage these same individuals to carry more debt. Once this had been achieved, the bill was designed to then create the economic environment (through rapid deregulation) that we have seen over the past several years; a rapid loss of available credit and available jobs leading directly to an enormous loss of wealth amongst the poor that would lead them to remain on the bottom with low education and poor skill sets. The end game? Simply the creation of an environment wherein more major corporations (the primary backers of Gramm and McCain for decades) could abandon American workes for cheap foreign labor, thus providing maximum profits for the very top 1% of society. These 1% have been further protected by the Bush-McCain tax cuts, which actually increased taxes on 95% of Americans (the bottom 95%).

This is so basic, and so well known that only a complete fool would argue against it. Why else would it be news?! Honestly... Plan and simple facts.

Hah! Laughable! When the going gets tough, the Republicans leave for Crawford, or Aspen. No worries there, as its a Democrat's job to save the country. Again.

The correlation between hard work and success is limited. Obviously, Obama is where he is because he worked hard and earned it. Bush and McCain are where they are because their fathers and grandfathers worked hard.

McCain has never even paid a bill in his life, so why should we trust him to protect our money? I don't think we need another silver spoon republican trying to run the economy. Just look at what happened under Bush: 56 million Americans who were middle class in 2000 are now out of work and considered below the poverty line. 23 million Americans who had health insurance in 2000 now do not.

McCain actually wrote the bills that caused this. Look it up! This is so basic that it hardly gets any attention. Obama is from a food stamps family, and federal assistance combined with his drive and natural ability helped him pull himself up by the boot straps. McCain was a bottom of the barrel student, mediocre officer, and quickly corrupted legislator. Had he not been born with high social status he would have never been able to land back asswards where he has.

Maybe you missed this. McCain owns at least seven houses and counting. It strikes me that these uber-rich Republican elitists who own so many houses are a real problem for the rest of us in that they drive up real estate values by gobbling up land and hoarding away homes. We wouldn't have had a banking meltdown if we hadn't had a subprime meltdown. We wouldn't have had a subprime meltdown if the average American had been able to afford a single home. The average American can't afford a single home because these chablis swilling country club loving Republican elites collect homes like the rest of us collect credit card bills.

Just so these crazy Bushies and McCainiacs don't pull the wool over your eyes on de-regulation... Here is the basic low down on what's behind it. Simple. Straight forward. Factual.

The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 established the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) in the United States and included banking reforms, some of which were designed to control speculation. Some provisions such as Regulation Q that allowed the Federal Reserve to regulate interest rates in savings accounts were repealed by the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980. Other provisions which prohibit a bank holding company from owning other financial companies were repealed in 1999 by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. Yes, that Gramm.

First repeal of the Glass-Steagall act allowed banks to determine what interest rates they could pay on savings, thus eliminating from our society sensible government oversight by the the Federal Reserve banks.

Second part repealed by the Gramm-Leahy act was that of the idea that a bank should be FORCED to not be able to invest in other forms of business. This was yet another portion of the bill aimed at preventing the government from protecting average Americans by maintaining a strong and balance economy by preventing companies over reaching.

The entirety of this bill is correctly attributed to our current sub-prime mortgage problem. This problem started on the banking side through de-regulation and led directly to predatory lending practices.

The Gramm-Leahy-Bliley act was signed into law by a Bill Clinton, who did not have the votes in Congress to prevent it.

It had positive economic results, allowing some finanacial companies to consolidate their resources and operate more efficiently, thereby saving money and increasing the value of their companies and increasing the value of the shareholders holdings in those companies.

Prior to the repeal of this law, foreign bankers held a financial edge against US banks because they were free to diversify their investments. Repealing this law allowed US banks to catch up with foreign banks and increase their value as a company. Again, increasing the value of their stocks to their stock-holders, but also removing necessary regulation to prevent predatory schemes.

Yes, it did allow companies the freedom to make good and or bad investments, just like any other company, but without necessary regulation to prevent abuse of the system.

The vast majority of banks are at risk, but are currently stable because they made wise investments. Some are not doing so well because they got caught up in too risky of deals, such as interest-only loans. They took a risk, they lost.

Buyers were duped into accepting these risk terms on their loans. That is the fault of predatory lenders.

Democrat president Bill Clinton had the option of veto-ing this bill but chose not to. He supported the bill and signed it into law in 1999 because the Republicans had the votes in Congress to ignore the veto.

One of the prime sponsors of the bill was this man, also a REPUBLICAN.
John McCain


Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 11:17 PM | Report abuse

Matt Drudge does have a bias. He is a very extreme Christian Conservative. I knew him just before he started his website and the guy was nuts. Talk your ear off about Armageddon, was absolutely convinced it was coming (I think that's why he is so obsessed with hurricanes) and that Los Angeles especially was doomed. (He hates Hollywood in case you haven't noticed)

But I think he is a very religious man which why he jumped on board when Pentecostal Palin joined the ticket.

Thats my 2 cents anyway...

Posted by: KnewMattWhen | September 17, 2008 11:16 PM | Report abuse

The surge is working. McCain/Palin have surged in the polls. It was not a BOUNCE by the way.

Minnesota, Michigan and Colorado are in play and McCain/Palin are up in Ohio, Florida and gained big in Penn.

Independents and undecided voters and women are choosing McCain/Palin.

She was a great choice and has as much experience as OBAMA

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 11:15 PM | Report abuse

Can I butt in here please?
Stop whining. all of you.
Do you want to see a disgusting display of favortism and hostility? WATCH THE VIEW. Watch it the day Obama was on and watch how the hens were sliding out of their seats and creaming their jeans over him. Then watch how those same hens practically assaulted McCain. I thought babawa wawa was going to SPIT on McCain. WHY? Good GOD people, WTF is wrong with you?

Posted by: Chardonnay | September 17, 2008 11:14 PM | Report abuse

Ummm, that statement that neither McCain or Palin were qualified to be CEOs, was conveniently cutoff...Fiorina also said that neither Biden or Obama were fit either. So, it was not a "negative" story about McCain that you imply.

Drudge biased? Give me a break.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 11:07 PM | Report abuse

This paper is totally one sided! So let Drudge have his side also.


Posted by: cam | September 17, 2008 11:05 PM | Report abuse

This paper is totally one sided! So let Drudge have his side also.


Posted by: cam | September 17, 2008 11:03 PM | Report abuse

what an idiotic article.

Posted by: karlos | September 17, 2008 11:01 PM | Report abuse

Translation: "It's MY press. Give it back, Matt! Mine Mime Mine Mine MINE!"

Posted by: fran | September 17, 2008 11:01 PM | Report abuse

This Independent Voter agrees with Chris! So take that you neo conservative bullies!

Posted by: Liz | September 17, 2008 10:52 PM | Report abuse

One more thing, thanks to the comments from others, i'll be checking out Drudge blog in hopes of finding more balanced reporting that is exceedingly hard to find in the rapidly disappearing newspaper industry. (Gee, i wonder why?)

Posted by: Wanderson | September 17, 2008 10:48 PM | Report abuse

Who owns the media? NBC: General Electric. CBS: Westinghouse -- part of Nuclear Utilities Business Group of British Nuclear Fuels. ABC: Disney (that well-known lefty corporation - not). FOX: Rupurt Murdoch (Mr flaming lefty). Biggest owner of radio stations nationwide: Clearchannel (another lefty corp - not). How much longer are we going to believe the myth of left-wing media bias, a myth the right uses as a club to bash anybody saying anything it doesn't want said? The real bias is to big business and the right, which thinks things are just fine and dandy as they are and doesn't want the American MSM audience to see or hear anything which might interfere with being good little consumers who don't rock the boat or anything that might raise too many questions about who's getting rich doing what to who.

Posted by: frank drebbin | September 17, 2008 10:47 PM | Report abuse

Chris,
you must be smoking some good stuff because you need to recalibrate what you're reading/hearing. As an independent voter, i loathe the TV networks: I refuse to watch CNN or MSNBC whose bias toward Obama make Fox Network actually look a bit more balanced. BTW, I hate Fox too. The newspapers are even more nauseating. My libertarian friend used to complain so much to me about "the liberal media" and "the Clinton News Network" and we'd argue constantly about fair coverage. After going through the primaries and now the general election, i find it pathetic that the media just can't seem to hide their bias, mostly in support of Obama. I'm not a supporter of McCain, as I stated I'm an independent. Today's media needs to do a serious reality check. Thank goodness we have the Internet so that readers' choices can be vastly expanded to minimize the glaringly obvious bias. Buy a ticket. Obama's had a free ride with press, unwilling to ask tough questions or make waves for fear of being branded racists much like Charles Gibson & George Stephanopolous were post one of the debates.

Posted by: Wanderson | September 17, 2008 10:43 PM | Report abuse

Funny how you, the author, purposely failed to mention that Fiorina made that comment about all FOUR candidates: McCain, Palin, Obama, and Biden. She said being a president requires a different skill set than a CEO.

Now who looks biased?

Posted by: Nathan | September 17, 2008 10:43 PM | Report abuse

Awwww. You mean the UBBER-LIBERAL Washington Post is actually whining because conservatives have a news source? How pathetic! We've been taking Republican/Conservative-bashing crap from the Washington Post, CNN and other liberal media sources for DECADES. Your article smacks like a love-sick Junior High girl... with a crush on the DREAMY Barry Obama; all up in arms because Drudge isn't giving your crush equal air-time. PATHETIC. If you want to read about Barry Obama, read your own puerile rag of a newspaper.

Anything can be said to bash John McCain, Sarah Palin, or any conservative republican for that matter, with liberal Democrats demanding that we just bend over, take it, and say "Thank you, sir, may I have another." I, for one, am grateful for the way Matt Drudge handles news.

Finally, an UNBIASED source! DRUDGEREPORT.COM FOREVER BABY!!

Posted by: Chris | September 17, 2008 10:42 PM | Report abuse

This is for Obama/Biden and all voters!

Alicia Keys - No One http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktUSIJEiOug

Posted by: Eva | September 17, 2008 10:42 PM | Report abuse

this just in...


right wing dittoheads don't think Drudge has a blatant right wing bias

Posted by: reality | September 17, 2008 10:37 PM | Report abuse

I think comments like Carly Fiorina said McCain/Paliin weren't qualified to run a major corporation - when the actual quote was that all four candidates weren't qualified , and for good reason - is why we distrust the media. Take a hint - the full truth is out there for us to find, and with little effort.

Be fair, be honest, and be thorough - then maybe we will regain a respect for you. In all honesty I often wonder how so many clearly biased media types can rationalize their lack of objectivity and professionalism.

Posted by: bern2 | September 17, 2008 10:36 PM | Report abuse

So nitty negative stories on McCain got a pass on Drudge. You guys sure got them out front and center. Calling drudge biased is like the pot calling the kettle black, only in this case, the Washington post is both pot and kettle.

Posted by: Third Pipe | September 17, 2008 10:36 PM | Report abuse

Those two McCain stories you're talking about didn't warrant an appearance on Drudge. The Blackberry claim was refuted by others in the McCain camp almost as quickly as that dumb story came out. Second, the Fiorina story was called overblown and taken out of context by Fiorina herself. The MSM's attempt to make big stories out of these can't stand up to Drudge's real news filter. I'm elated that I have the DrudgeReport during this campaign. I've taken A LOT of "news" websites out of my bookmarks this campaign season. As Hannity has been saying, "2008 will go down as the year journalism in America died." Isn't that the truth.

Posted by: Joe | September 17, 2008 10:32 PM | Report abuse

Mary's a dope.

Posted by: Tom Paine | September 17, 2008 10:31 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: 343 | September 17, 2008 10:30 PM | Report abuse

Drudge reports facts, that's why people flock to his site. He's not an editorialist like the rest of the msm. Those who don't see the "perceivable bias" are sheep following a blind shepherd. This election will be won by McCain/Palin not because of Drudge, but because this country has more than just babbling elitist pundits.

Posted by: toofunny | September 17, 2008 10:28 PM | Report abuse

It is irrelevant whether or not Carly Fiorina mentioned that Obama and Biden would not be fit to run any major corporation. The story is that she believes that her own candidate and his pick for VP would not be able to. It is expected for her to trash Obama and Biden she is on McCain's payroll. Or at least she was when she made the statement. As an independent it's quite amusing to see the sheep on the right fall for the evil Washington or evil Media argument. This is a completely legitimate story.

Posted by: EricKhody | September 17, 2008 10:27 PM | Report abuse

use NEWSER.COM !!!!!!!!!

NEWSER.COM
NEWSER.COM
NEWSER.COM
NEWSER.COM
NEWSER.COM
NEWSER.COM
NEWSER.COM

Posted by: avril | September 17, 2008 10:26 PM | Report abuse

Drudge doesn't act so presumptiously as to tell me what is true and what isn't. And he doesn't have fake headlines which don't match stories. And he doesn't edit the parts of a story which don't fit his political agenda.

And, that, pretty much is why I go to Drudge before I would even go to you idiots. I only come to you to find out where the lies and spin are being printed.

Posted by: bpjam | September 17, 2008 10:26 PM | Report abuse

Honestly, who cares that McCain said that? I go to drudge to read the news. If I want to know who said what, or a topic of equal importance, like what "wardrobe malfuntions" Britney and Paris had last night, I'll go read National Enquirer.

Posted by: Dml | September 17, 2008 10:25 PM | Report abuse

I am so disgusted with this stupid add that Obama has put out... He is dividing this nation and not bringing it together. Obama, if we vote for McCain/Palin "are we racist and do we hate Mexicans" ??? I like McCain/Palin and guess what.... My Uncle is Mexican and I Love him. Obama is this okay?

Obama is dividing the Nation

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 10:25 PM | Report abuse

Matt:
Just drop the Washington Post from you web list. It doesn't deserve to be there!

Posted by: Captslingshot | September 17, 2008 10:24 PM | Report abuse

vote Harry Sackryder!

Posted by: jesse | September 17, 2008 10:23 PM | Report abuse

I had noticed the change in Drudge and one day wrote
the Drudge Report email mentioning two major negative stories about McCain and asked the question, "Why don't you link to these?"
Anyway, as a result of his bias, I no longer have the site bookmarked and so never read it. I do not miss the Drudge Report at all!

Posted by: Marty2008 | September 17, 2008 10:23 PM | Report abuse

I am so disgusted with this stupid add that Obama has put out... He is dividing this nation and not bringing it together. Obama, if we vote for McCain/Palin "are we racist and do we hate Mexicans" ??? I like McCain/Palin and guess what.... My Uncle is Mexican and I Love him. Obama is this okay?

Obama is dividing the Nation

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 10:23 PM | Report abuse

Dude, change your photo. You're trying to hard to look important. It just comes over as condescending or constipated.

Posted by: Shawn (again) | September 17, 2008 10:22 PM | Report abuse

Interesting that you write of Drudge's unbiased behavior but only give a fleeting mention of the presses perceived bias.

Posted by: Shawn | September 17, 2008 10:21 PM | Report abuse

Chris Cillizza is now the Worlds powerful Reporter for the Day! Chris is the winner today. We challenge Drudge for a rematch with Chris Cillizza in October!

Posted by: Katherine | September 17, 2008 10:17 PM | Report abuse

Gee Chris, if Drudge hadn't graciously added your article to his site, I seriously doubt you'd have gotten even 10% of the attention you've gotten. Be grateful.

Posted by: Amy | September 17, 2008 10:12 PM | Report abuse

Boo-hoo, cry me a river. The Left owns most newspapers and networks. Not happy with that they also want to control individuals.

Fair Doctrine huh?

Posted by: Mauricio Villablanca | September 17, 2008 10:12 PM | Report abuse

Talk about out of context:

>>>a statement by McCain surrogate Carly Fiorina that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company.

She said the same about Obama and Biden. Why doesn't the unbiased Cillizza mention that? (Hint: it's because THAT's why it isn't a story!)

As for what drives the national news: Do the same with the NYT morning headlines as he asks you to do with the Drudge Report.

Posted by: Kurtiss | September 17, 2008 10:12 PM | Report abuse

Boo-hoo, cry me a river. The Left owns most newspapers and networks. Not happy with that they also want to control individuals.

Fair Doctrine my ass.

Posted by: Mauricio Villablanca | September 17, 2008 10:11 PM | Report abuse

Boo-hoo, cry me a river. The Left owns most newspapers and networks. Not happy with that they also want to control individuals.

Fair Doctrine my ass.

Posted by: Mauricio Villablanca | September 17, 2008 10:08 PM | Report abuse

I have been following the Drudgereport for years and have been a fan. It is quite amazing at the influence that he has over mainstream media...who now-a-days are jokes! But even looking at this article, Chris mentions that Drudge left out Carly Fiorina's assertopm "that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company", but he failed to also mention that she amended her statement and said, "I don't think Barack Obama could run a major corporation. I don't think Joe Biden could." It is a slippery slope that we walk on when they begin to pick and choose parts of what people say and not the entirety.

Posted by: pinouye | September 17, 2008 10:04 PM | Report abuse

As a very longtime Drudge reader I've actually been very disappointed in his coverage this election cycle. He's gone from Obama cheerleader to McCain apologist and neither is particularly endearing. It saddens me that I have to look elsewhere to find the pulse because Drudge is trying to set an agenda that involves sweeping McCain's recent disasters under the rug. I just wish he would report... everything and stop trying to manufacture certain angles.

Posted by: Chris J | September 17, 2008 10:03 PM | Report abuse

The Washington Post is a great newspaper with great reporters. The difference between Chris and Drudge is that Chris will put himself on the line and let readers comment on his stories. This is a Democracy. Drudge doesn't do this.

Drudge serves a different role. He has great sources who feeds him information. Many are conservative. In the last few days hes been linking up neo-conservative writers. The headlines of these writers are designed to bring Obama down. Yet many of his links are also left to center writers. Yet many of us book mark Drudge. Why? He covers a lot of ground. Right now the front page is RAW NERVES – Wall Street. We are not experts. This helps. Last week it was Hurricanes.

But Drudge can't change the tides of history. After 8 years of Bush/Cheney does Drudge think he can help the create a 3rd Bush term or go against the wishes of the majority of America people who want change? We will never know will we? Drudge doesn't write we can't response to him. But Chris gave us a chance to response to Drudge who has linked up this story. Thanks Chris and the Washington Post.

Posted by: Bobby | September 17, 2008 10:02 PM | Report abuse

CBS, NBC, CBS, CNN, etc and all MSM are much more baised to the left than Drudge can ever be accused of in the other direction. What a bunch of BS!!!! Chris, you're typical of the rest of the liberal whiners. Boo Hoo. You Sissy.

Posted by: John | September 17, 2008 10:00 PM | Report abuse

I think enough people corrected you over your miss quotes on McCain. So all I have to say is your an Idiot. Your job is to report facts not distort the facts, you should be a shamed of yourself. But I guess you accomplished your mission and have job security with your liberal bosses for now. Just remember, Chris Matthis thought his job was secure too. This election is showing the true faces of people. By the way I canceled my subscription and I'm not going to anymore Hollywood movies.

Posted by: Jim | September 17, 2008 10:00 PM | Report abuse

Drudge + Fox News VS The rest of the media giants. The playing field is now level. It doesn't take much to counteract socialist lies.

Posted by: arkyump | September 17, 2008 9:57 PM | Report abuse

No, he didn't lie. Chris was right.

Fiorina opposes Obama so her comments about him are irrelevant and not newsworthy in the least. She was expected to bad-mouth him; that's simply not news.

The thing is Fiorina supports Palin and Mac.

The news story here is that the most mouthy and obnoxious female supporter of the Palin/Mac ticket publicly -- and loudly -- stated on TV more than once that both Mac and Mrs. Todd Palin are not qualified to run a business. This at a time when having fiscal competence in the Executive Branch is critical.

As Maureen Dowd points out, what makes it worse is that Fiorina is a FAILED CEO saying this. It's the pot calling the kettle black. This is why the part of her quote about Obama isn't part of the real story. Chris was right in not wasting space quoting it.

Cap
_____
"Yes, you lied about the entire Fiorina quote. That's why we get our news from Drudge, not your dinosauric newspaper.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 9:30 PM "

Posted by: Captain America | September 17, 2008 9:55 PM | Report abuse

I came to this site because it was featured on Drudge. He's my first source of news because he's not totally biased like the MSM. I never would have visited this newspaper were it not for Drudge.

The MSM is a disgrace and a joke.

Posted by: midwestlady | September 17, 2008 9:49 PM | Report abuse

The "hint of media bias"? I have decided the media elites have had their heads up their fundamental apertures (thanks, Tom Wolfe) so long, they do not understand the degree they are biased.

I have spent a lifetime in politics, and habitually scan the the media with a wary eye. I have never, in any political contest from the local level to the national, seen such bias in coverage as I find in the media's support for Barack Obama.

When people complain that the MSM has become basically an appendage of the Obama Campaign, they are not exaggerating. It is clear to anyone who watches, listens, or reads. Public TV and radio is a bad as the rest, which is why I do not give a dime to them on sweeps week.

I hope real america will show up for this election, and put far-left elitism in its place--out of office.

Posted by: RPhillips | September 17, 2008 9:48 PM | Report abuse

Matt Drudge makes his money from advertising, I'm sure. What gets hits? Palin stories. The more he fuels the controversies, the more money he gets.

Posted by: Tin | September 17, 2008 9:47 PM | Report abuse

The quote goes on to say that Barack Obama and Joe Biden are also not equipped to run a corporation...

^^^^ ACTUALLY NO. She only added that part AFTER she said it about Palin on a seperate talk show as a clean up.

It was not said in the same vein. She realized what she said and tried to clean it up to no avail.

Posted by: JN | September 17, 2008 9:44 PM | Report abuse

I came to this site because it was linked to Drudge. Congrats to Mr. Cilliza's as this is undoubtably the most read article he has ever written.

Posted by: Earl | September 17, 2008 9:41 PM | Report abuse

Well said, Mesndblues.

Drudge is a bit biased. But he provides equal access to a broad range of sites of differing viewpoints.

More importantly, Drudge provides access to NEWS, rather than bloviating. Unlike the Post and the MSM, he does not spend time dodging and spiking stories. He broke Lewinsky after the MSM spiked it. He linked to the Enquirer scoop about Edwards while MSM dodged it. He reports on Hillary's refusal to genuinely campaign for Obama by challenging Palin.

Other sites are doing great as well. Daily Kos reports the Palin bounce has gone bust: Obama is up 5 now and surging.

What gets me is: How does the Post get away with not reporting the news? --
No reporting on the Edwards' scandal and coverup, Palin's foolish baby hoax (supported by loads of circumstantial evidence and not disproven by any documentation), Palin's alleged witnessed racial slurs against Obama and AAs, and her quotation of racist Westbrook Pegler in her convention speech (look, you do not quote Pegler by accident)? No reporting on her over-the-top extreme views on just about everything?

How does the Post not report on Palin's alleged racial slurs against Obama (evidently that story was there for any MSM reporter who got off his butt and went to Alaska to talk to people), a major story broken by Internet journalist Charley James in laprogressive.com?

MSM, quit dodging stories and start reporting them and then you won't have to worry about Drudge.

____________________

"The thing about the "Drudge Report" is that the stories linked to it span the gambit of journalism, and we, the readers and fans of drudge are smart enough to digest the stories based on the orign of the articles. It's quite ingenious on Drudges part because we as his followers never get angry at him for the content on his website because it's fairly balanced, it's never all Obama bashing OR all McCain bashing. Give us ALL the news, good, bad, indifferent, we can take it without getting mad..the only time we get mad is when it's all one way, like (deep breath) abc, cbs,nbc,pbs,cnn msnbc,new york times,wall st. journal,mtv, comedy central,bet,...they all suck, they are all in Obama's corner, except fox news...one crummy cable network we conservatives get, that and DRUDGE!!!! THANK GOD FOR MATT DRUDGE!!! And Matt has absolutely nothing to worry about for competition because anyone who might possible challenge him is too bias, like you, so you will ALWAYS be unsuccessful at catching up to Drudges traffic, you simply are too bias to be a threat to him..And btw, if Matt ever started being simply the mouthpiece to bash libs and libs only, his hits would drop like a lead zeppelin..

Posted by: Mesndblues | September 17, 2008 9:05 PM"

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 9:35 PM | Report abuse

Yes, you lied about the entire Fiorina quote. That's why we get our news from Drudge, not your dinosauric newspaper.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 9:30 PM | Report abuse

Any stories on Franklin Raines and Jim Johnson making millions while running Fannie Mae...of course not, they're Democrats, but you spend your time with this nonsense.

Posted by: Leo Grapevine | September 17, 2008 9:29 PM | Report abuse

Nice. Way to leave out the rest of the quote. Do you ever wonder why people consider you to be a trash journalist? You know what the whole quote was and you chose to lie. The best news in that trash papers like the Post are heading down the crapper. You along with it.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 9:21 PM | Report abuse

How the MSM follows Drudge's stories just shows how lazy the MSM have become. Lazy and jealous. Remember Drudge came to everyone's attention when he broke the story on Monica Lewinsky and Billy boy Clinton. The MSM was covering that up and would have never broken that story. Chris and the Wash Post are jealous of Drudge who has worked hard and taken risks to be number one.

Posted by: Joan | September 17, 2008 9:17 PM | Report abuse

Haay Ricky, Me thinks thee need mores edumacation. No other President in history has MB like our President. His IQ HAS been testrd - 122-126 (Superior) Me thinks you's
Qy is 98.

Posted by: Bean | September 17, 2008 9:16 PM | Report abuse

Matt Drudge is not a journalist. Matt Drudge isn't a commentator. All Matt Drudge does is have his staff paste links to articles written by others, and then write headlines that often aren't even close to the actual article. And he has ALWAYS done this while leaning far-right. Drudge is a nothing who has been made into a "something" by a semi-blind, and very lazy, media.

Posted by: Chuck L | September 17, 2008 9:13 PM | Report abuse

The thing about the "Drudge Report" is that the stories linked to it span the gambit of journalism, and we, the readers and fans of drudge are smart enough to digest the stories based on the orign of the articles. It's quite ingenious on Drudges part because we as his followers never get angry at him for the content on his website because it's fairly balanced, it's never all Obama bashing OR all McCain bashing. Give us ALL the news, good, bad, indifferent, we can take it without getting mad..the only time we get mad is when it's all one way, like (deep breath) abc, cbs,nbc,pbs,cnn msnbc,new york times,wall st. journal,mtv, comedy central,bet,...they all suck, they are all in Obama's corner, except fox news...one crummy cable network we conservatives get, that and DRUDGE!!!! THANK GOD FOR MATT DRUDGE!!! And Matt has absolutely nothing to worry about for competition because anyone who might possible challenge him is too bias, like you, so you will ALWAYS be unsuccessful at catching up to Drudges traffic, you simply are too bias to be a threat to him..And btw, if Matt ever started being simply the mouthpiece to bash libs and libs only, his hits would drop like a lead zeppelin..

Posted by: Mesndblues | September 17, 2008 9:05 PM | Report abuse

The Fix - thank you, thank you, thank you for calling out the Drudge Report for its sheer bias and favoritism for the republicans. Thank God there is still some decency left in journalism.

The spirit of Tim Russert's integrity has finally come back.

Posted by: Sherry | September 17, 2008 9:04 PM | Report abuse

Drudge is popular because he reports, or links to, actual news, actual facts, just as HuffPo, Daily Kos, and other alternative media do.

The Post and the MSM not only do not report the news, they dodge stories and waste energy attacking those who actually do reporting.

For instance --

Thanks to Drudge, today I know Obama is up 2 and surging and the electoral map shows Virgina leaning his way. I know various analysts believe that, like it or not, race is shaping up as the major factor in the campaign not the foolish junk the MSM is talking about (e.g., lipstick on a pig).

Thanks to HuffPo I know failed CEO Carly Florina said McCain and Palin are totally unqualified to run a company, an act of candor that caused Mac's campaign to cancel her scheduled appearances on TV as a Mac surrogate. I know Palin cheerfully quoted the late racist Westbrook Pegler in her convention speech, an act that outraged RFK Jr., who reminded us of racist comments Pegler made about his father. I know Troopergate is far bigger than the MSM is letting on and that Palin is fighting an all-out battle to prevent the investigation of it from moving forward.

Thanks to the National Enquirer, I know that, Palin allegedly engaged in an elaborate baby hoax (a story, supported by mountains of circumstantial evidence, which, contrary to MSM reports, was not disproven down by hospital records, doctors statements, or anything remotely believable). And I know she allegedly engaged in an "inappropriate" relationship with her husband's business partner that caused the breakup of the partnership.

Thanks to Charley James of laprogressive.com I know that Palin, allegedly, used racial slurs in referring to Obama (she called him something rhyming with "Rambo," allegedly), AAs, and Eskimos (she calls them Arctic Arabs, allegedly).

None of this stuff appears in the Post, the so-called paper of record.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *
As for the Post --

Thanks to the Washington Post, I get pages of bloviating by folks with multiple agendas and well-known conflicts of interest. I get pages about why legitimate news stories are just rumors (of course not one of these "rumors" has been knocked down by the MSM) to justify the Post's not reporting them.

Come to think it the only useful "news" I get from the Post is .......the weather. Thank you, Post. Sunny and 60 tomorrow?

Posted by: Captain America | September 17, 2008 8:55 PM | Report abuse

You don't mention that Fiorina's comment went on to say that neither Obama or Biden could run a major corporation, conveniently truncating her actual comment to fit your editorial. Also, I take the inventing the Blackberry comment to be funny, a joking reference to Al Gore inventing the internet.

Posted by: RussT | September 17, 2008 8:44 PM | Report abuse

The Link that will make ObaMao FINISHED!
****************************************

http://therealbarackobama.wordpress.com

****************************************

Posted by: Charlie D. | September 17, 2008 8:41 PM | Report abuse

wow! a left wing rag, more insignificant than the NYT, citing Drudge has bias

way to go Post - more insightful than ever-

oh to all the kook-nutjob leftists on this board - send the holy one some pepto-bismol - he is sick over november

Posted by: bill clay | September 17, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

Since Chris Cillizza been winning this bout with Drudge does this mean Chris Cillizza is the most powerful reporter in the world? Think about it.

Posted by: Seth | September 17, 2008 8:27 PM | Report abuse

For all who think they know Drudge.

A study of press bias by a professor of political science at the University of California-Los Angeles, Tim Groseclose, listed the Drudge Report as one of the most liberal sites on the Web because it consistently posts articles from left-of-center sources.

Posted by: Paul | September 17, 2008 8:22 PM | Report abuse

OK, where do I start... 1. McCain's campaign didn't claim he invented the Blackberry! One member claimed that his policies led to the invention, to which McCain immediately said was rediculous. Not news worthy. 2. Carly didn't say they couldn't run a major US company. The interviewer asked if they were equiped to run HP. She said, "No," which is her honest opinion. We all know that Obama and Biden couldn't run HP either. But, hey, they're not running for CEO! Again, not news worthy. Anyway, at least Palin has some Executive experiance. No one else in the race does. Why do you think we always elected Governors during the past 40+ years. Cillizza - Please do some research and get your facts straight before bantering mindlessly, please.

Posted by: HighIQ | September 17, 2008 8:22 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Tian Li | September 17, 2008 8:17 PM | Report abuse

by not giving the whole Fiona Quote reguarding obama and binden also not being qualified to run a major corporation you just proved yourself to be an a**wipe. How do you like them apples?

Posted by: dontini | September 17, 2008 8:17 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Chris -- what an jerk...

You completely demonstrated why DRUDGE is so popular and why guys like you are a dying breed.

In your third paragraph you make the following point: "...and a statement by McCain surrogate Carly Fiorina that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company...."

What you completely chose to IGNORE was that Fiorina ALSO said that Obama and Biden were also not qualified to be CEO's either.

Therefore Fiorina's comments weren't specific to McCain and Palin, she was speak broadly about ALL politicians - that they are not suited to business life. For those of us who work in large corporations, this is an OBVIOUS conclusion to draw.

But b.s. artists like you intentionally distort the facts to try and make "gotcha" points.

Drivel that you guys produce will soon be eliminated from our culture. The MSM a-holes are in their swan song.

Posted by: Bubba | September 17, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

republicans after 8 years of your great leader you still drink the kool-aid makes me want to be one so i can just say a bunch of crap and you will follow me no matter what i say keep up the great work

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 8:11 PM | Report abuse

Chris is a wonderful example, no, Chris is just an example, no, stereotypical. Yes.

Chris and his predecessors are the reason for Drudge.

Leaving out Biden and Obama.Tsk, tsk, tsk.

You have spawned another Drudgeman some where.

Say good by to "mainstream" media and hello to by and for the People!!!!

Posted by: rightside | September 17, 2008 8:07 PM | Report abuse

You mean more like the nostalgic bare fist bouts of 30 or more rounds of the late 1800s and early 1900s. Chris just clocked Drudge all day long!

Posted by: Denny | September 17, 2008 8:05 PM | Report abuse

Forget all the hype and remember that the most important event in the next four years will be the lifetime appointment of supreme court judges.
A prominent attorney who had argued hundreds of cases before the Supreme Court once remarked that the Supreme Court is not final because it's right, it is right because it is final. The Court's position as the court of last appeal and as the highest court in the land means that its decisions are binding and largely unchangeable. Once the Court has ruled, its decisions have all the effect and permanency of law.
Remember, the defining difference between liberal and conservative justices can mean the difference between the true American way of life and the continuing drift toward Socialism/Communism when liberals are in control.

Posted by: The Old Guy | September 17, 2008 7:59 PM | Report abuse

Chris, your analyses are usually sharper than this. It does not take rocket scientist to figure what Drudge is all about - getting McCain or any Republican presidential candidate elected like he did against Gore, Kerry, and now, Obama. He has been trying to shape this since the start of the primaries. He chose to demonize Hillary Clinton because he thought Obama would be easier for McCain to beat. He is a purveyor of negative images and negative images about Obama. McCain could make some stupid comments like a 9/11 commission to study Wall Street and you don't see a peep of it in Drudge. The heroine he is trying to make of Palin is laughable. Please Republicans spare me of your complaints. You don't love this country any more or as much as I and the only media you seem to consider fair is something like Drudge, which is in your tank.

Posted by: Paul | September 17, 2008 7:58 PM | Report abuse

This story has been linked to Drudge all day. Its starting to look like a heavyweight boxing match between Chris and Drudge, also all the posters on both sides. You all just watch after this duel between Chris Cillizza vs Drudge they will become friends. Just like all those Senators from both Parties after they debate and fight in the Senate.

Posted by: Kevin | September 17, 2008 7:58 PM | Report abuse

VISITS TO DRUDGE 9/17/08

027,341,094 IN PAST 24 HOURS
741,135,308 IN PAST 31 DAYS
6,472,378,145 IN PAST YEAR

Posted by: Up yours | September 17, 2008 7:56 PM | Report abuse

Chris, Chris, Chris, Ms Barbra Streisand must be throwing pots and pans and anything she can get her hands on at the suggestion that being coupled with her for two months will ruin a man's reputation...good on you. As for the blackberry comment, I think it has been conceded that it was a lame joke and the Fiorina comment has been exposed as incomplete. Is there no truth anywhere?

Posted by: Aching sides | September 17, 2008 7:54 PM | Report abuse

One must be careful not to compare the pot and the kettle, since someone might think you are a racist...

Just say NObama.

Posted by: twinstick | September 17, 2008 7:51 PM | Report abuse

Actually, Fiorina said that neither McCain, nor Obama, nor Biden are capable of running a corporation. And she further said that to treat the presidency the sane as running a corporation is a fallacy. Nice try on your part though. Unfortunately for you not all of your readers are dumb to take what you are writing at face value. If you have respect for your readers you should make the necessary corrections. By the way, I have the transcripts of that Fiorina interview. You and Andrea Mitchel-Greenspan misrepresented that Fiorina interview the same way.

Posted by: Surv Eyron | September 17, 2008 7:51 PM | Report abuse

Lets get Drudge to vote Obama/Biden everyone! Drudge has a lot of fans and they are all not conservatives! Look at all the articles he links up to Science! Entertainment! Sports! Drudge has a life!

Posted by: Kim | September 17, 2008 7:44 PM | Report abuse

Get your facts straight! Fiorina also said that neither Obama nor Biden were equipped to head a corporation. A deliberate omission on your part?

In addition, Barbra's performance was news since her appearance was going to draw in big bucks for Obama. And moreover, the big bucks were going to Obama's campaign while Texas is reeling from the hurricane and all America from the financial crisis. Obama should have donated the money to the Texas situation rather than continuing to fill his overstuffed coffers. But then ambition always trumps doing what's moral.

Posted by: judithod | September 17, 2008 7:41 PM | Report abuse

The Fix is a HAAAAACK!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Concerned reader | September 17, 2008 7:33 PM | Report abuse

This article is absolute crap. What a waste of 60 seconds. The author obviously suffers from a bipolar disorder of some sort. Get help my brother; you need it.

Posted by: Chris DuPont | September 17, 2008 7:30 PM | Report abuse

My, my, my...Drudge charged with media bias by Washington Post! Isn't this kinda' like the pot calling the kettle black?

Posted by: joepoi | September 17, 2008 7:25 PM | Report abuse

As an independent, I say let this drudge person do what he wants. Its called the first ammendment and I sure hope the fairness doctrine does not pass. The prospect of any political entity controlling the airwaves is a very scary thought. People should be allowed to say what they want and respectfully acknowledge contradicting opinion, not try to snuff it out.

Posted by: Independent | September 17, 2008 7:23 PM | Report abuse

[Kevin D. Williamson]

... or so you'd think from ABC's The Blotter. A reader shares:

Here’s all you need to know about the state of the elections…

A tally of name appearances at 4:15 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, September 16, on the ABC News website at “The Blotter from Brian Ross and The Investigate Team”

Palin: 24

McCain: 2

Biden: 1

Obama: 0

One is tempted, and I think I will, to use the “Send Tips to Brian” link in the upper right of the page to let him know that not only is Sarah Palin not running for President, but I have heard Barack Obama might be….


http://media.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MTI4OTdjOGE1YWNlY2U1MGM1YjU0MGMwM2Y0NWUyMTU=

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 7:22 PM | Report abuse

Gee, did any of you ever think that the mainstream media just might have a bias toward intelligent, logical journalism, not simply pandering to one side or the other?

But, it just so happens that the intelligence falls on the left, while the right is busy appealing mostly to faith, creationism, xenophobia, chauvinism, jingoism and other pre-totalitarian emotional appeals.

When the media notices these tendencies and reports on them, you folks on the right think it's bias. It's not. It's just reporting. Maybe you should examine your motives and how you are being manipulated.

Posted by: msaxe | September 17, 2008 7:17 PM | Report abuse

Ferrari vs. Lamborghini = Chris Cillizza vs. Drudge
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeBd_F2Bz5Y

Democrats and Obamacans courting Republican and Independent auto fans.

Obama/Biden '08


Posted by: Ch’áak’ Eagle nas’gadooshú | September 17, 2008 7:10 PM | Report abuse

Obama’s Communist Mentor a Sexual Deviant & Pornographer

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/2601914/Frank-Marshall-Davis-alleged-Communist-was-early-influence-on-Barack-Obama.html

Connect the dots
www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/2086366/the-long-march-to-the-white-house.thtml

Drudge, won't touch these facts!

Posted by: Tian Li | September 17, 2008 7:07 PM | Report abuse

Check out the video about Obama here :
http://www.calebgrace.com
He is VERY dangerous ..... Please research these candidates for your self ....
More videos about Obama right here :
http://www.youtube.com/user/StudentsofAmerica
http://www.youtube.com/user/VetsForFreedomVideo
Unreal ..... How Obama has made it this far is scary and his party is showing their true colors ....
Please research the TRUTH before you VOTE in November !!!!!
and thanks to chris for this post ......
>What do the top ten cities with the highest poverty rate "all" have in
> common? Answer: Democrat leadership.
>
>
> Detroit, MI (1st on the poverty rate list) hasn't elected a Republican
mayor since 1961;
>
> Buffalo, NY (2nd) hasn't elected one since 1954;
>
> Cincinnati, OH (3rd)... since 1984;
>
> Cleveland, OH, (4th)... since 1989;
>
> Miami, FL (5th) has never had a Republican Mayor;
>
> St. Louis, MO (6th).... since 1949;
>
> El Paso, TX (7th) Has never had a Republican Mayor;
>
> Milwaukee, WI (8th)... since 1908;
>
> Philadelphia, PA (9th)... since 1952;
>
> Newark, NJ (10th)... since 1907.
>
> It is the disadvantaged who habitually elect Democrats,
> yet are still disadvantaged ... hmmm...make you wonder?


Does anymore REALLY need to be said ????????

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 7:03 PM | Report abuse

This is tooo funny. The Washington Post, lib-lands favorite newpaper after the NYT, complaining about the drudge report. He failed to report on Drudge's coverage of how many media reports reported favorably on Obama vs no/negative coverage of McCain. This is yet another attempt at distorting the reality of bias in the "mainstream" press. Is it any wonder that many of these same newspapers are slowly going out of business?

Keep it up CC. Maybe someday you'll have a chance to bus my table at a restaurant

Posted by: Brock | September 17, 2008 6:58 PM | Report abuse

VISITS TO DRUDGE 9/17/08

027,341,094 IN PAST 24 HOURS
741,135,308 IN PAST 31 DAYS
6,472,378,145 IN PAST YEAR

Posted by: Jr Ewing | September 17, 2008 6:58 PM | Report abuse

Pot - Kettle - Black ROFLMFAO -

WaPo - did you really print this?


WHACKED!

Posted by: iam7545 | September 17, 2008 6:57 PM | Report abuse

Who writes these comedy acts for the Post? Keep writing your making me laugh. When are you going to do the expose on the Obama ties to the failed banks that are part of his senior advisory staff and when are you going to write that McCain predicted this back in 2005 and Biden voted against him to fix the corruption of the Freddie and Fannie debacle. Did I hear you say that you knew that both were littered with ex-clintonites? Journalism is dead in America. Enjoy your future severance checks due to low interest in your paper.

Posted by: Mark in Georgia | September 17, 2008 6:54 PM | Report abuse

As stupid a question as what kind of tree would you be.

Posted by: Morgo | September 17, 2008 6:51 PM | Report abuse

http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/drudgereport.com
-Drudge internet traffic rank: 679


http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/washingtonpost.com
WaPo Internet traffic rank: 315


http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/nytimes.com
NYT Internet traffic rank: 101

Drudge "runs the internet and television news"? Yeah freakin' right; his site gets a fraction of the viewership that Washington Post's site and many other news organizations' sites pull in on a regular basis.

Posted by: Matt | September 17, 2008 6:48 PM | Report abuse

Libs love government control of healthcare, banking, real estate, energy... I wonder how the liberal media will feel when the goverment takes over the media.

Posted by: Good bye USA | September 17, 2008 6:44 PM | Report abuse

Hey Wapo? hows your pals at the NYT doing?? last i heard there stocks are at 5 cents a share

LOLOLOLOL

Posted by: WAPO | September 17, 2008 6:44 PM | Report abuse

48 percent of Drudge Fans voting for Obama – Fox News
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65I0HNvTDH4

Posted by: John | September 17, 2008 6:43 PM | Report abuse

Can you assure us, Chris, that the Drudgeologist granted anonymity to speak freely is not yourself?

Or do you reserve the right to outsource your own words within your own work?

I ask because referring to yourself as a Drugeologist right after quoting one anonymously looks like one of those "sources close to Steinbrenner" winks on the sports pages when "close" means "in the same body as."


Posted by: David L Steinhardt | September 17, 2008 6:41 PM | Report abuse

I think its safe to say that the little socialist will sleeze his way into the the whitehouse. I'll also bet that he wins the grand prize for shortest time in office before somebody takes him out.

Posted by: Obama will Win | September 17, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

How ironic the Post would whine about coverage when you've been in the pocket of Obama from the very beginning. If you aren't crying and gnashing your teeth over illegal aliens and the amnesty you support, you post biased and exaggerated articles about Obama.

Posted by: tinyt55 | September 17, 2008 6:36 PM | Report abuse

The liberal media anointed Obama as President months ago. How dare Drudge not fall in line.

Posted by: Crusader | September 17, 2008 6:36 PM | Report abuse

(A quick note to preempt the inevitable argument that Cillizza and his colleagues are balanced. Any day and time of your choice, take a minute to look at the stories ABC-CBS-NBC-CNN-MSNBC-NPR-PBS-WP-NYP-NYT-LAT-CST-BG-BH-PI-USAT-NYDN-USW-AP-etc. highlight. Then, later in the day, check the facts for yourself. It will open your eyes.)

Sour grapes do not a journalist made, mister opiner.

Posted by: Brodie | September 17, 2008 6:35 PM | Report abuse

Drudge is for Drudge. Everyone knows that. His scandalous headlines and ability to put up the info very fast get him millions of hits. We trust him no more than the so-called main stream media.
Re: Sarah Palin, what is obvious about the left-wing media establishment is their zealousness to scandalize every element of Sarah Palin's life and totally ignore DANGEROUS connections that Barack Obama has to Ayers, ACORN and others. If the media had done their research on the Clintons they would have never sullied the White House and left with all the dishes.

Posted by: T Wood | September 17, 2008 6:33 PM | Report abuse

As the Obama-loving bias continues to swirl, the curculation and ad rates of the Post and NY Times continue to circle the drain. Think there might be a connection here? Americans do not want to have their future determined by a bunch of elitist snobs who think they know better. Drudge, Huffington, Newsmax, et al are much the superior news sources than the mainstream media. It is always good to get both sides of the story.

Posted by: ThisYearsModel | September 17, 2008 6:33 PM | Report abuse

Thanks to "Obama is a pervert" I was able to reread the bill used by McCain in an ad claiming Obama's only education accomplishment was to teach sex education to kindergarteners. It certainly can be interpreted or twisted around, but it is also clear that the Obama was not one of its several sponsors and therefore cannot be his "accomplishment." It also clearly requires that if any district offers sex education, parents get to say no and the material includes information on abuse of all types.

Posted by: Ricky | September 17, 2008 6:30 PM | Report abuse

IS IT TRUE THAT OBAMA IS SEARCHING FOR THE OJ LURY FOR HIS CABINET?

Posted by: cbsperry@msn,com | September 17, 2008 6:27 PM | Report abuse

I love how people are so jealous of Drudge... c'mon, admit it Mr. Cillizza.

Posted by: DrudgeIsRight | September 17, 2008 6:25 PM | Report abuse

I sense a very large amount of jealously by Mr. Cillizza and the rest of the left media because they don't control EVERYTHING. They have MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS NYT, LATimes, and most other big media outlets, but they go crazy because they can't control Drudge(read Fairness Doctrine), Rush and others. You will never be as influential as Drudge, live with it. Unless maybe you started reporting accurately. Then the those of us who get our news from the Internet might take you seriously. Until then dream of greatness because that's the only place it will be.

Posted by: Dave | September 17, 2008 6:24 PM | Report abuse

Your a tool. The comment about Mccain and the blackberry was accurate. He was involved in legislation that led to the creation. Also, the statement by Fiorina applied to both candidates... Your sir are a liar, and a total Tool!

Posted by: Rod in Oregon | September 17, 2008 6:23 PM | Report abuse

Drudge is great. He posts relevant stuff that mainstream sources will not report. Between Drudge and mainstream media one can get a much wider perspective. Unfortunately, I've come to realize that mainstream media is strongly biased toward the left as is most of hollywood. While Drudge may lean a bit right, his lean does not compare to the flat out lying spinning shift to the left of the mainstream media.

Posted by: vj | September 17, 2008 6:23 PM | Report abuse

Funny, Fiorina said Palin and McCain couldn't run a company.....but but but she also said Obama and Biden couldn't either. Why is the blog autor, Mr. Cillizza keeping that out?

On one hand he blames Drudge for cherry picking and then he does the exact same thing. What a hypocrite.

Posted by: James | September 17, 2008 6:19 PM | Report abuse

America is doomed if McCain wins. How can you not recognize the gross negligence perpetrated by the Bush neocons over the past eight years? Almost everything America stands for blown to smithereens.

Get a clue. Republicans cover their rape of the middle class by throwing them the bone of religious bigotry to keep them happy. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Posted by: Smithereens | September 17, 2008 6:19 PM | Report abuse

If enough people believe that MSM is fair and unbiased, Obama's got a chance. Unfortunately, the American people see the "intelligentsia" when they look in the mirror. M/P LXIV

Posted by: Bryon | September 17, 2008 6:18 PM | Report abuse

What a pathetic piece of crap journamalism.

Cillizza, you make your fellow sycophants look magisterial by comparison.

Drudge is a right-wing hack, and yet he somehow sets YOUR agenda? What does that say about you?

If you're going to practice Drudge worship and work at the Washington Post, you should at least pretend to be a "serious" journalist - you know, like David Broder. Maybe that's why they call him the "dean"?

Posted by: mateosf | September 17, 2008 6:17 PM | Report abuse

Confucius say: "Democrat getta good job, but Repbulican foka his wife"

Posted by: Mary | September 17, 2008 6:17 PM | Report abuse

Chris Cillizza scores 20 goals against Drudge today :-D
The 20 Best Hockey Goals ever seen!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTcu6rEOCws

Posted by: DC Cillizza Fan! | September 17, 2008 6:16 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, that Hoooossein needs to eat some more. That boy needs to stop eating Aragula, and start bulking up.

Posted by: Bob | September 17, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse

Chris,

Thanks for a refreshing article. I alugh at those who found bias in an article that slaps around both sides. That's the problem: Most of the public find bias in any article that isn't 100% in favor of their position. That, to them, is balance.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse

I hope Mary cross posts her confucious jokes with Michelle Malkin. She needs help with the dialect.

Posted by: Ricky | September 17, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse

Obama is too skinny. He must have some kind of wasting disease. Perhaps he has worms.

Posted by: Sandy | September 17, 2008 6:12 PM | Report abuse

I made a well informed decision to stop watching the cable and network news several years ago. I might add I am better informed through my own research, which includes the drudgereport. The bottom line is trust, and time and again I cannot trust a single media source to give a moderate,unslanted and down to earth story. You might find it interesting to know I came here from drudge and not because I remotely respect the Washington Post as a credible news source. You could learn something from outlets like drudge, rather than dismissing them as irrelevant.

Posted by: Rob | September 17, 2008 6:12 PM | Report abuse

I am an amateur "Drudge-ologist" and have to concur with the article. He definitely has a slant to the right and at times it is quite obvious. Just this past week, for instance, the poll numbers have been a hot topic. He was very quick to keep on top of the polls that showed McCain surging. But when those numbers began to diminish, very little mention at all. This article sort of makes light of this fact by saying Matt is just giving us what we want. I am not sure about that. He is a conductor, and like Fox News, he is providing the dialectical counter-narrative in a very conscious manner. I am not apposed to this, but I am opposed to pretending not to have an agenda (which, he never really has, unlike FNC).

Posted by: Steve | September 17, 2008 6:10 PM | Report abuse

You conveniently left out the part related to Fiorina where she also said that neither Obama nor Biden were qualified to run HP either. And she also said that Obama was the least experienced candidate of the group. Hmmm, thankfully we have other sources of news besides the MSM and you!

Posted by: fljoe | September 17, 2008 6:10 PM | Report abuse

Obama is weak, confused, and unpatriotic. I would vote for Colin Powel, now he's a real American. This Obama is just a fabrication of the liberal media.

Posted by: Jessica | September 17, 2008 6:08 PM | Report abuse

Not to contradict me own mum, but she taught me that standard deviation was what drove Larry Craig to the men's room in Minneapolis, and that Norm was the local Senator he was hoping to bump into there.

Posted by: Ricky | September 17, 2008 6:07 PM | Report abuse

Drudge has been my news aggregator for 10+ years. The first page of Drudge is meaningful and relevant with at best a slight right bias. I have cancelled Boston Globe, Los Angeles Times & New York Times (and I can get them for free from work.) They are too much paper and too left for me. If they have anything useful, Drudge usually finds it. Thanks Matt.

Posted by: Darren | September 17, 2008 6:07 PM | Report abuse

"Carly Fiorina that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company". You have once again lied Chris! You needed to quote the entire statement which stated;
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, doesn't have the experience to run a major corporation. "Well, I don't think John McCain could run a major corporation, I don't think Barack Obama could run a major corporation. I don't think Joe Biden could run a major corporation." NOW THAT'S THE WHOLE TRUTH OF WHAT WAS SAID!!!

Posted by: Daboraje | September 17, 2008 6:07 PM | Report abuse

Sooooo. The WashingtonPoo doesnt like
Drudge? Thats news? Har!

Posted by: Joe Bite'n | September 17, 2008 6:07 PM | Report abuse

Ah..You skipped part of the statement by Carly...she also said that Obama and Biden were not qualified to run a corporation. You must have been watching the MSNBC version. You do know MSNBC,the Obama/Biden campaign headquarters or is it CNN. Who knows? AMERICA KNOWS!!!

She was asked if any of the candidates could run a corporation like HP and she said that's not what their running for. You might not like the way Matt Drudge operates but, have you looked in the mirror lately

Posted by: Tom Woods | September 17, 2008 6:05 PM | Report abuse

Fiona also said that BIden nor Obama could run a major company too - way to cut that out! Jackass journalism is the order of the day...

Posted by: Michael | September 17, 2008 6:04 PM | Report abuse

Chris Cillizza (The Fix) vs Drudge ...

Unbelievable Hockey Fight - Chris Cillizza loves Hockey!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1-25s4uwFQ

Chris Cillizza takes down Drudge :-D

Posted by: DC Cillizza Fan! | September 17, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse

I check out Drudge most days, but I find Huffington Post much easier to navigate and a much richer source of information. Drudge will post anything, while HuffPo does review all articles posted before they see the light of day. To get news from Drudge you have to sort through a bunch of stuff to find what you want -- and I do resent the sensationalism of some of his stories...that "developing" thing is wrong half the time and pretty pompous.

Posted by: 21stcenturygrandma | September 17, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse

Clearly Ricky has not read the bill. The sex ed bill mentions nothing about sexual predators or pedophiles. It specifically calls for teaching children about abstinence, the prevention of an unintended pregnancy, and sexually transmitted infections.

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?DocName=&SessionId=3&GA=93&DocTypeId=SB&DocNum=99&GAID=3&LegID=734&SpecSess=&Session

Posted by: Obama is a pervert | September 17, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse

Drudge is a self-hating homosexual. I find that EXTREMELY ironic

Posted by: beverins | September 17, 2008 6:00 PM | Report abuse

No, Mary, I don't believe the liberal media, which if you were reading, you would have noticed. I followed links to the bill McCain used to make the tawdriest claim ever in a TV ad claiming Obama wanted to teach sex education to kindergarteners before reading and that it was his one accomplishment. Have you taken the Bush IQ test yet?

Posted by: Ricky | September 17, 2008 5:56 PM | Report abuse

Obama will lose just like Dukakis, Gore, and Kerry. People don't like being told how to vote by left-wing, liberal, atheist, godless gay lovers.

Posted by: Jackie | September 17, 2008 5:56 PM | Report abuse

Confusious would say that republicans win because so many americans are dumb.

Posted by: Try this | September 17, 2008 5:56 PM | Report abuse

Wow an article about bias that is itself biased. Isn't it Ironic, don't you think?

And dude with the fannie mae "article" that you posted in the comments section. Yeah, McCain is way cleaner than Obama on this issue if you don't look at his 20+ years of voting, his recent comments about being against regulation, or his involvement in the S&L scandal.

Posted by: Ironic | September 17, 2008 5:54 PM | Report abuse

I am ashamed to admit I did not read the whole article at first. Chris quotes Tim Griffin, the disgraced Rove aide whose expertise at digging up dirt for campaigns got him appointed to be a U.S. Attorney as some sort of source on the value of Drudge?
Chris is apparently so lazy he just flips open his address book at random and calls the first number that pops up. No wonder guys without journalism degrees like the late Tim Russert and Chris Matthews dreaw even biggers bucks than Chris. Any hack can do the job. Chris, try dating Cokie's daughter. NEpotism is big in your biz.

Posted by: Ricky | September 17, 2008 5:52 PM | Report abuse

Hoooossein needs to stop playing so much basketball and start focusing. Man, that boy has gotta focus.

Posted by: Bob | September 17, 2008 5:52 PM | Report abuse

Confucius say: If Republican so dumb, why he win every time? Oh, ah so, cuz Democrats more dumb. They very good atta Math, but no getta laid.

Posted by: Mary | September 17, 2008 5:50 PM | Report abuse

Drudge has clearly "Jumped the Shark".

Posted by: Pam | September 17, 2008 5:50 PM | Report abuse

Both of my parents recieved advanced degree from Harvard U. I don't trust them with my own children without supervision. A quota minority like Obama doesn't impress me either. Why did he leave Boston and go to the southide of Chicago anyway? Are those his people(or is he scared of a challenge)?
The Palins are real people with lives and interests other than polotics. Ted Kennedy should have at least two DUI's that I can think of, and he is your patriarch.
PS Anyone could be a CEO!
PSS Cillizza(jackass) is just keeping his bosses happy.

Posted by: Charles | September 17, 2008 5:50 PM | Report abuse

I love the Drudge Report. Get all my news in a uncluttered website.

I forget, was it the Washington (Com)Post that ran the George Allen/'macaca' story for 18 days straight?

Yes, media bias exists and there is a liberal monopoly of it.

Posted by: drudge | September 17, 2008 5:50 PM | Report abuse

Obama is divisive and polarizing. This guy can't even unify the Democrats. How can he unify the country ?

Posted by: Beth | September 17, 2008 5:46 PM | Report abuse

Ricky is pathetic. He believes the biased left wing media.

Posted by: Mary | September 17, 2008 5:45 PM | Report abuse

OK, for any truthful and hardworking Journalist not in the pocket of Obama, here is something that is truly newsworthy.

Franklin Delano Raines (born January 14, 1949 in Seattle, Washington) is the former chairman and chief executive officer of Fannie Mae who served as White House budget director under President Bill Clinton. He is currently employed by Barack Obama's Presidential Campaign as an economic adviser.

The son of a Seattle janitor [1], Raines graduated from Harvard University, Harvard Law School; and Magdalen College, Oxford University as a Rhodes Scholar.

Couple this Obama connection to what McCain said in 2005 ...

[Sen. John McCain [R-AZ]: Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae’s regulator reported that the company’s quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were “illusions deliberately and systematically created” by the company’s senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight’s report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae’s former chief executive officer, OFHEO’s report shows that over half of Mr. Raines’ compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.]

Then couple this to the fact that Obama is the number 2 recepient of lobbying money coming from Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Then, couple this to the fact that Obama was a key defender of the current failed policies of Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.

Couple this with the fact that Obama has consistently and is on record as having supported looser lending practices in order to pander to his base, the poor, the minorites, etc.

Surely these key issues would be excellent news-worthy items to explore and expose.

Posted by: KMichaels | September 17, 2008 5:45 PM | Report abuse

Rick doesn't even understand what an IQ test is, let alone how it works, what it measures,and what a standard deviation is.

Posted by: Ricky's Mom | September 17, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Democrats and Obamacans courting all Republican and Independent voters -

The Chantay's - Pipeline (Lawrence Welk Show)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j09C8clJaXo

Dean Martin & John Wayne
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sd5xBDdG9UI

Change we need

Obama/Biden '08

Posted by: Ch’áak’ Eagle's nephew | September 17, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

How about this for ironic: the only reason I read this article was because of the link on Drudge.

Posted by: Mike H | September 17, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

I'll read Drudge ANY day over the Washington Post. Why? Because Drudge admits his bias; the Post probably doesn't even know it's a liberal fish and chips wrapper.

Posted by: Harald Hardrada | September 17, 2008 5:43 PM | Report abuse

WHY ARE LEFTISTS SO STUPID???

WHY HAVE NONE OF THEM EVER TAKEN A CLASS IN ECONOMICS???

WHY DO THEY NOT KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE ACTUALLY MAKE THE MINIMUM WAGE???

RAISING THE MINIMUM WAGE HARMS THE LOWER CLASSES AT A GREATER RATE AND TO A HIGHER DEGREE THAN THOSE IN HIGHER FINANCIAL CLASSES (which is why there is a greater divide between the rich and the poor EVERY SINGLE TIME the minimum wage is raised). Raising the minimum wage HURTS THE LOWER INCOME EARNERS more than it helps the lower wage earners BECAUSE THERE ARE SUCH A SMALL PERCENTAGE THAT EVEN EARN THE MINIMUM WAGE. Raising the minimum wage HARMS THOSE WHO RENT THEIR ABODES at a significantly greater degree than home owners.

The Left LOVES TO NAG the Right about "not caring" because they don't want to raise the minimum wage. THAT IS BECAUSE RIGHTISTS HAVE MORE RESPECT FOR THE INDIVIDUAL AND THEY KNOW THAT RAISING THE MINIMUM WAGE HURTS PEOPLE, AND WEAKENS THE ECONOMY, AND CAUSES INFLATION, AND LOWERS THE NUMBER OF ACTUAL MINIMUM WAGE JOBS, AND HURTS EVERYONE WHO IS IN THE LOWER MIDDLE CLASS TO A GREATER DEGREE THAN ANY OTHER GROUP.

WHY DOES TED KENNEDY ALWAYS HARP ON THE MINIMUM WAGE? BECAUSE HIS FAMILY OWNED THE LARGEST RENTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTY IN THE WORLD AND THEY MADE THEIR MONEY OFF OF RENTS!!! He is such a liar that he made his idiot followers actually believe that he was doing it "for the people" WHEN HE KNOWS THAT IT HARMS "THE PEOPLE" (what did he care, he was out for the family SO HE WOULDN'T HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF THEM!!!!).

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 5:42 PM | Report abuse

If Chris wanted people to give him any credibility he would not let his blog host an ad claiming Bush has an IQ of 125. That may be the favored proof of his rum from college days, but not his IQ.

Posted by: Ricky | September 17, 2008 5:39 PM | Report abuse

I can't believe newspapers are still around.

Posted by: Post Isnogood | September 17, 2008 5:38 PM | Report abuse

Hmmm... It is interesting what you come with when you check out Drudge on a single day. For people who rely on idiots like this guy to get there news, most television does not come from drudge. However, most any radio talk show does talk about the topics drudge highlites. Remember, 99% of what is on drudge are links to other news organizations!

Also I read about both of the topics the author presesent... off of drudge links!!! What an idiot! BTW, here is a current headline on drudge which has been up since at least yesterday. "PAPER: Sarah Palin and the links to a Kenyan witch-hunter... " Yup, handling them with kid gloves!

Posted by: Dave in Obamaland | September 17, 2008 5:38 PM | Report abuse

If the mainstream media were objective and balanced- Drudge wouldn't exist. If his site is "Frankenstein's monster" to the liberal media- they are the good doctor.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 5:38 PM | Report abuse

I can't believe newspapers are still around

Posted by: Suck it, post | September 17, 2008 5:37 PM | Report abuse

If the mainstream media were objective and balanced- Drudge wouldn't exist. If his site is "Frankenstein's monster" to the liberal media- you are the good doctor.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 5:36 PM | Report abuse

Mary is pathetic. She believes campaign ads.

Posted by: Ricky | September 17, 2008 5:34 PM | Report abuse

I want to add to Sheridan1 posted above as the press will never ask this of Obama.

You rose in one of the most corrupt political machines in our country. What did you ever do to change it? Did you try to lower Chicago city taxes that are the highest in the country?

I recommend we follow one change Obama tells us to do, vote anyone but dem or republican in congress this time. Get those bad guys out of washington. If we did that, we would see real change and it would not matter if Obama or McClain were at the top, they would get in-line. Vote them all out this time.

Posted by: Tarsuspaul | September 17, 2008 5:31 PM | Report abuse

To those who think the press is a unified body marching to a corporate master or a biased instrument of liberal stalinist intrigue, you are both full of what you derive after having your heads up your backsides for too long. The press is an intellectually lazy group of people my Australian Shepherd could direct more easily than four leggeed critters with wool. They are not smart enough to have an agenda as a group. They are not clever enough to think as indivduals. If you think media corporations are smart, take a look at Wall Street. If you think the media are liberal, ask how they got fooled about and by a dim bulb like Bush for eight years.

Posted by: Ricky | September 17, 2008 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Obama is disgusting: he supports sex ed for kindergartners.

Posted by: Mary | September 17, 2008 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Drudge rules the world.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 5:30 PM | Report abuse

Because average people distrust the media, they enjoy it when McCain fights with them. When the media howls that McCain is lying, they sit back and laugh. After all, when a liar accuses someone else of lying, it's pretty funny.

Posted by: Jack Handy | September 17, 2008 5:30 PM | Report abuse

Chris Cilliza is just jealous. Working for the Washington Compost is not as 'esteemed' as it once might have been
Posted by: James


Hahaha.. that's soo true :O

Posted by: Gill | September 17, 2008 5:26 PM | Report abuse

By openly supporting Obama, the media is hurting him. Since the media lacks credibility, the average voter ignores the media. As a result, people can no longer vote on the issues: so they vote on biography and personality traits. This is why McCain will win.

Posted by: Jane | September 17, 2008 5:26 PM | Report abuse

Chris wrote ""(A quick note to preempt the inevitable argument that Drudge's influence is overblown. Tomorrow morning, take a minute to look at the stories Drudge is highlighting. Then, later in the day, watch a few cable channels to see what stories they are talking about. It will open your eyes.)"

No, Chris, we have known for a long time that the press is composed of intellectually lazy easily manipulated fools like yourself for some time.

Posted by: Ricky | September 17, 2008 5:22 PM | Report abuse

There are many posts who deride those on the "right" because they perceive liberal bias in the media, even saying that what was "bias" was really reporting. Yet this columnist cited an event that was circulated by the Obama campaign in which Ms. Fiorina's comments were aired; the clip stopped just before she said the same claim against Obama and Biden.

True reporters get their facts from unbiased investigation, not from a political campaign. The fact that he simply regurgitated something like this certainly does not help to disprove the liberal media bias claim.

Posted by: AOSig | September 17, 2008 5:22 PM | Report abuse

The main-stream biased? I'm shocked, SHOCKED!!

These guys are living in a fantasy world. The internet has exposed them, and they stick their heads in the sand.

These are the facts. The VAST majority of the main-stream media voted for Gore and Kerry over Bush. They also personally support Obama over McCain. They claim their personal biases do not affect their reporting, but reading what they produce clearly shows that they are wrong. THEY ARE BIASED. Get used to it.

Posted by: EdwardATeller | September 17, 2008 5:22 PM | Report abuse

Why why why did Obama take all that money from Fannie and Freddy? How can that be in my best interest? It's only in his best interest.

Posted by: JR | September 17, 2008 5:21 PM | Report abuse

Mass media is run by large corporations (like most anything else in this country), and what they do is about making money. If they are biased toward one candidate, it's because an election win for that candidate will benefit them in some way.

Consider this... if Obama wins, he becomes the first black president in American History. That's a news cow that they can milk for a long time. If McCain wins, sure he's a war hero and all, but beyond that he's essentially just another old white guy in the White House. Not news. Sarah Palin is somewhat of a novelty, but she's conservative and, frankly, kind of boring - a more or less typical working American mom. She could be your next door neighbor anywhere in suburbia.

Bottom Line: Corporate mass media wants Obama to win so they can sell more soap. Simple as that. If you want real news (meaning: useful information), you have to dig for it, and Drudge is always a great place to start.

Posted by: Quuzlfut | September 17, 2008 5:21 PM | Report abuse

Better DRUDGE dictating TV news than THE NEW YORK TIMES.

Posted by: Jack N. | September 17, 2008 5:20 PM | Report abuse

The MSM has had a year to expose Obama's ties to the unrepentant American terrorist William Ayres...but there's barely a peep.

And the media's covering of the biggest story, Obama's history of working to help ACORN...[crickets chirping]

ACORN has repeatedly been caught committing voter fraud. They've been instrumental in massive increases in voter registrations, including the names of the dead, multiple registrations for the same name, restaurants as home addresses for multiple voters, etc.

In large part, THIS was Obama's community organizing...helping an apparent criminal enterprise alter the desires of the voting public.

But Drudge is the slanter of news stories. Do tell!

The best to you.

Kelley

Posted by: Kelley | September 17, 2008 5:19 PM | Report abuse

I stopped reading when the author discredited himself in paragraph 4...

"(A quick note to preempt the inevitable argument that Drudge's influence is overblown. Tomorrow morning, take a minute to look at the stories Drudge is highlighting. Then, later in the day, watch a few cable channels to see what stories they are talking about. It will open your eyes.)"

Posted by: Matt | September 17, 2008 5:19 PM | Report abuse

The MSM has had a year to expose Obama's ties to the unrepentant American terrorist William Ayres...but there's barely a peep.

And the media's covering of the biggest story, Obama's history of working to help ACORN...[crickets chirping]

ACORN has repeatedly been caught committing voter fraud. They've been instrumental in massive increases in voter registrations, including the names of the dead, multiple registrations for the same name, restaurants as home addresses for multiple voters, etc.

In large part, THIS was Obama's community organizing...helping an apparent criminal enterprise alter the desires of the voting public.

But Drudge is the slanter of news stories. Do tell!

The best to you.

Kelley

Posted by: Kelley | September 17, 2008 5:18 PM | Report abuse

To Nolovlost, Loved all your facts and figures, but Illinois (in 2000) had a population of just over 12 million people and we have 61 State senators which means each senator represents just about 204,000 people. Which in Obamas case is probably about 4 square miles. I know you put down 750,000 people he represented to try and show he represented more people than Sarah Palin as Governor of Alaska, but I have to ask, to make this point why did you just not say he is a Senator who represents 12 million people? As for the people he helped register to vote, You could probably cut that in half as most signatures are fake and I would bet that maybe 1/10th of those people voted.

Posted by: Randy | September 17, 2008 5:18 PM | Report abuse

You know, I lost track of the body count. How many McCain advisers have been revealed to be lobbyists for industry? How many for foreign companies? How many for foreign governments?

Posted by: Ricky | September 17, 2008 5:18 PM | Report abuse

I stopped reading when the author discredited himself in paragraph 4...

"(A quick note to preempt the inevitable argument that Drudge's influence is overblown. Tomorrow morning, take a minute to look at the stories Drudge is highlighting. Then, later in the day, watch a few cable channels to see what stories they are talking about. It will open your eyes.)"

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 5:18 PM | Report abuse

Chris Cilliza is just jealous. Working for the Washington Compost is not as 'esteemed' as it once might have been. I am glad print media is becoming so irrelevant, especially from sites like DrudgeReport. The author is just mad his dinosaur medium/employer is becoming extinct.

Posted by: James | September 17, 2008 5:18 PM | Report abuse

It should be mentioned that Drudgereport list links to ALL major news outlets and most smaller news outlets, papers, blogs, whatever. I don't recall seeing a link to the Drugereport on DailyKos. The site isn't so much biased in that he never editorializes in the sense that he states opinions. That would make him unique in the company of Limbaugh, MSNBC, CNN, CBS, FoxNews, ABC, The View, Huntington Post, DailyKos...

Posted by: LSbrew | September 17, 2008 5:16 PM | Report abuse

Pulled from person who actually lives in Chicago and knows the facts:

"For those who are not from Chicago I will give you the real story of Rezko/Obama. Rezko was Obama's longest and largest fundraiser/donor. Obama paid him back by helping Rezko get $14 mill in state money for a project that was in Obama's district. In return Rezko helped Obama get his dream house in Hyde Park for $300,000 less than what was asked by agreeing to buy the adjoining lot next door which was also for sale by the same owner. That is how Cook County and Chicago politics works. One hand washes the other and they have perfected pay to play politics here in IL. It is almost laughable when I hear people call Obama a different kind of politician. For those who do not live here I suggest you do a little research on the joke that is the Cook County Machine and Obama is one of them. Stroger, Blagoevich, Emil Jones, Madigan, Daley and Obama are part of the most corrupt political organization in the country.

While Obamas cronies and mentor Emil Jones and his buddies are running IL into the ground and bankrupting the state with out of control corruption and pension promises that can never be met Obama has never said one word while these guys rob our state. That is why his calls of change ring very hollow for me or anyone who cares about corruption."

Posted by: Foolish Liberal DemocRATS | September 17, 2008 5:16 PM | Report abuse

You should take your own advise and write an accurate story. You failed to mention that Carly Fioriana said that NOT one of the presidential candidtates and their running mates could run a corporation--you just mentioned the republicans.

The media is a joke

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Very clever, you mention Drudge and get a link from his site to all of those articles that should have merited his mention.

The first thing you need to learn in Drudgeology 101 is that Matt Drudge is a narcissist.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

someone's bound to have said this by now, but i don't have the time to read all the comments. the second negative story, about the comment that neither mccain nor palin could run a company is a joke. the next sentence in that quote is "neither is barack obama." the mainstream press loves to leave that little bit out. seriously look for the video clip yourselves.

Posted by: anonymous | September 17, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

my God, the posts of you people out there... the same people who spread the Gore-Internet story now act like victims about this McCain-Blackberry story.

And this lib media crap is so, so old; I guess you're talking about the same media (especially Drudge)that put Chalabi's defectors on the news, day after day, saying there were nukes made in Iraq, right up to the war.

Pathetic... Obama is going to win huge and all your rants will be just bytes in the cyberdust.

And then

Posted by: SPENCER | September 17, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Chris
You are the reason old media and the Wash Post Co is going down.
You and the old media is biased beyond belief. Even surveys of its employees show time after time the bias by 90%. Reporters admit time after time their personal contributions to the Left and Dems over 90%, and you do not have the decency to admit it??? Why is that??? What is wrong with you?? BE HONEST. The Blackberry comment was a joke.
It was not news. It was also a reference to the big fat Dem who claimed invention of the internet. Do you remember Chris who that was??? Why not mention that in your post. Carly's comment about Running a business also included Biden and Barak BUT that was cut off by ABC News. That's the story and real proof of the BIAS. Why was her comment cut off when she said Obama and Biden's names? Got an answer for that Chris???? Why do you not men5tion that in your post??? The more you are blatently dishonest like ABC was with Carly's comment and you make no mention of it but complain about Drudge is the reason old media is no longer taken seriously and is in decline. Good luck as your Company and the NY Times Co rush to the oblivion like Lehman Bros.

Posted by: Honesty on the Right | September 17, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

We are over taxed, over spent, and under drilled, and the democrats want more taxes, more spending an less drilling.

That explains why millions of foks will agree with the author and vote with the democrats.

Posted by: Tom Malone | September 17, 2008 5:12 PM | Report abuse

One Foolish Liberal DemocRAT talking to another Foolish Liberal DemocRAT:

In the beginning Obama created the heaven and the earth.

And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.

And the Spirit of Obama moved upon the face of the waters.

And Obama said, Let there be light: and there was light.

And Obama saw the light, that it was good: and Obama divided the light from the darkness

Posted by: Foolish Liberal DemocRATS | September 17, 2008 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Oh, that was fun! Now do Obama and his cohorts Huffington Post, Washington Post, NYT, CNN, LA Times, etc. etc.

The media has totally dropped the ball on this election. Where are the stories concerning Bill Ayres and Obama saying he's just someone he passed in the neighborhood. We know more about Sarah Palin in two weeks than we know about Obama over 2 years. Fair much?

Posted by: NYSmike | September 17, 2008 5:09 PM | Report abuse

The author is absolutely right. Drudge is a balance to the left wing democratic party liberal news media, including the author, who is a typical libeal that can't stand another point of view. Go Drudge! If he blended in like the rest of the media he would not be so popular.

As a liberal.. i totally agree

Posted by: ally | September 17, 2008 5:08 PM | Report abuse

what i find most annoying about some journalists in most major newspapers is `opinion' reporting in which `facts' are ignored or twisted to parallel opinions of the journalist. most reporting on obama is soft and fuzzy. questions like, `mr. obama, please name 2 pieces of legislation you worked up and passed or, mr. obama, please describe your economic philosophy or, mr. obama, why have you in the past associated yourself with known Marxist, sol alinsky? or, please tell the american people your differing thoughts regarding the economic philosophies of milton friedman, thomas sowell, walter williams and adam smith? or, please name 3 of your major accomplishments since being a state senator and a neighborhood agitator?

Posted by: tommy richards | September 17, 2008 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Chris C said in the article: 'Two other stories never merited attention from Drudge'...and then mentions the "McCain invented Blackberry" article, which I read because it WAS listed on Drudge report. So, Chris, you are either a total idiot, or a total liar. Which is it?

Posted by: YouRDumb | September 17, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse

what i find most annoying about some journalists in most major newspapers is `opinion' reporting in which `facts' are ignored or twisted to parallel opinions of the journalist. most reporting on obama is soft and fuzzy. questions like, `mr. obama, please name 2 pieces of legislation you worked up and passed or, mr. obama, please describe your economic philosophy or, mr. obama, why have you in the past associated yourself with known Marxist, sol alinsky? or, please tell the american people your differing thoughts regarding the economic philosophies of milton friedman, thomas sowell, walter williams and adam smith? or, please name 3 of your major accomplishments since being a state senator and a neighborhood agitator?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse

I think Drudge's real obsession is with ... MADONNA! But in terms of politics, I think it is more complex than this article suggests. Drudge's anti-Hillary tendency made me think he somewhat supported Obama (Drudge didn't play up the Rev Wright stuff). Recently, after the Banner stories of Babs and Oprah (rejecting Palin Intv), I wonder if he withheld negative Obama stories during the primaries just because Hillary was a bigger threat/annoyance to him than any one else around. Now that Hillary is out, he figures McCain is the lesser of two evils I suppose. I just want to be around for the Drudge and Madge show.

Posted by: Gabriella Foom | September 17, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

The author is absolutely right. Drudge is a balance to the left wing democratic party liberal news media, including the author, who is a typical libeal that can't stand another point of view. Go Drudge! If he blended in like the rest of the media he would not be so popular.

Posted by: Tom Malone | September 17, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

RE: Hunter Gather,

HunterLOser says: "But, it just so happens that the intelligence falls on the left”
(INSERT GUT BUSTING LAUGHTER HERE...)

HunterLOser says: while the right is busy appealing mostly to faith, creationism, xenophobia, chauvinism, jingoism and other pre-totalitarian emotional appeals.

(AGAIN, WAS IT NOT THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATS WHO ALL HAD TO SEEK PSYCHIATRIC HELP AFTER THE 2000 and 2004 ELECTION WHERE BUSH WON? SOUNDS LIKE THE LEFT HAS THE EMOTIONAL PROBLEMS TO ME).

I CAN RECALL WERE ALL YOU DEMOCRATS WERE PROMISING TO MOVE TO CANADA INCLUDING BARBARA STREISAND WHOM JUST MET WITH OBAMA!!..

Posted by: Foolish Liberal DemocRATS | September 17, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

I got to this story via Drudge

Same here

Posted by: Saint | September 17, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

WaPo whining about about bias? is this a joke??

Posted by: GG | September 17, 2008 5:04 PM | Report abuse

Funny, but you didn't mention that Fiorina said the same about Obama and Biden seconds later and explained her context.

Might you have an agenda. byw, I got to this story via Drudge

Posted by: AK_Anon | September 17, 2008 5:03 PM | Report abuse

Chrissy,

You've really got to get off your knees and close your mouth when writing these love notes to Matty.

Make sure to wipe your chin, too. You're starting to embarrass everyone - even the late-Mrs. Graham's spoiled brat granddaughter.

Posted by: Mark | September 17, 2008 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Doesn't Drudge just link to stories from other publications? Until I started paying closer attention I thought he was a lefty.

Posted by: smithncustom | September 17, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Howdy ya'll, ise love barock obombba, hes so grate. keeth obermin told me so. id foller keeth rite up barocks azz.

Posted by: skeeter | September 17, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

Hey PalmG, yeah, there's dumb people and you're one of them. Read Robert Bidinotto's post below yours. Now who's the idiot? The point is that when you EDIT out a quote of what was said and MAKE that quote "newsworthy" by choice, THAT IS BIAS! DUH! When you don't get the entire story you get bias, pure and simple. And it's done by all media, both conservative and liberal, and it is part of what makes having any type of an honest debate practically impossible in this country.

Posted by: Troy | September 17, 2008 4:56 PM | Report abuse

trouble with liberals is they can't stand turnabout

Posted by: gert | September 17, 2008 4:56 PM | Report abuse

This was one of the worst written blogs I've read in these past few months. People that know absolutely nothing about the election but what their liberal propaganda dictates back to them should keep their mouth shut. You sir, should keep your mouth shut. Ah, to be back in Rome around 300 A.D. when they'd throw trash like you to the lions.

Posted by: Jacob Baumann | September 17, 2008 4:55 PM | Report abuse

Washington Post talking about BIAS?

ROFL

Posted by: Saint | September 17, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Leftist, what Drudge linked to was a person't OPINION that America is reluctant to elect a black man. How does that make it fact? The opposite is more likely true. In addition to nearly every black American, millions of white Americans would like to see America elect its first black president. As a conservative, I would love to see that too...just not this one. I am not a racist, but racism may well enter this election to elect the first black president because he is black. Geraldine Fiero was criticized for suggesting this, but it just might happen.

Posted by: JCIll | September 17, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Cillizza grats on your 2 million page hit

Posted by: Jr Ewing | September 17, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse

All the king's horses and all the king's men couldn't put Humpty Dumpty back together again.

Thank you.

Cast:

Humpty Dumpty - Barack Obama.
King's horse - Howard Dean
King's men - The media

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Someone at the Washington Post is commenting on bias? Too funny...

Posted by: snance | September 17, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

You liberals and your victim mentality. I can not believe a reporter or columnist for the Washington Post is complaining about some other news organizations bais. What utter hyprocrisy written in this article, when has the Post been fair or balanced?

You hate Drudge because he was at the forefront of reporting a story that got President Clinton impeached, if Drudge had impeached President Bush then he would be a hero to you liberals. Those that think we who disagree are the enemy.

Palin is popular because she is new and different. Most news organizations have increased their McCain coverage greatly bc of that fact.

The Washington Post's myopic view of the world will be its undoing. I used to read the Post everyday but I always read the Drudgereport.

Posted by: Rexxiii | September 17, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Howdy y'all! i am a hik an i love drodge bekause he helps me be know wich way the wind blow you know? now pulse vote for obamay bekuse he likes change jus like me.
god bless my gun 'n bible.

Posted by: Skeeter | September 17, 2008 4:47 PM | Report abuse

This article was written by an idiot.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Dear Mr. Cillizza,

Are you sure you aren't an MSNBC "comentator" in disguise?

Convenient how you neglected to mention that Fiorina said Obama and Biden couldn't run a business, either, in the same sentence. Typical liberal reporting -- edit out the parts that don't further your warped agenda.

The BlackBerry comment was clearly a joke (sort of like Obama's expereince). But, I suppose, you also believe Al Gore really invented the Internet, because he's a loon, like you.

If you are judging McCain by innocent remarks his associates are making, perhaps you'd like to write about the not-so-innocent remarks -- and actions -- of Obama-related scum, like Ayers, Wright, Farrakhan and Rezko? Then again, probably not, because it doesn't further your deranged agenda of getting your dreamboat elected.

Journalism is indeed dead thanks to lackeys like you. Thank God for Drudge.

Posted by: Mike Mahoney | September 17, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Steve:

Did you ever stop and think that maybe you just don't matter that much. That would be my guess.

Yeah buddy,
Rodneck Robbie

Posted by: Redneck Robbie | September 17, 2008 4:43 PM | Report abuse

i do not want anyone attacking or bashing Sarah palin or john mccain or anyone else for that matter we are fedup with the lies that the Liberal media is reporting you liberal doo anything to help the democrats get in power they will be hell to Pay

Posted by: georgie | September 17, 2008 4:43 PM | Report abuse

I've been a registered Democrat for 35+ years but will not follow my party over the cliff that the far left is taking us. Where is our leadership? How have we gone from the party of Truman and JFK to this? Reid? Pelosi? Obama? Its not that I don't agree the ideals that they stand for. They don't stand for any. My party has left me and I will not follow them.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 4:43 PM | Report abuse

"Carly Fiorina that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company."

I have never written to one of these things ever, but the above quote by someone the Post wants us to read and take seriously is shameful. How dare this man leave out the fact that she said "and neither are Obama and Biden".

This is one of the world's leading newspapers and their web folks can't even get a quote right?

Shameful. I hope the editors of this paper contact this Chris fellow and let him know readers will not stand for such reporting.

And I would feel the same way if the quote was about the Dems. The media has simply lost its way.

Posted by: Dave | September 17, 2008 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Gee, did any of you ever think that the mainstream media just might have a bias toward intelligent, logical journalism, not simply pandering to one side or the other? But, it just so happens that the intelligence falls on the left, while the right is busy appealing mostly to faith, creationism, xenophobia, chauvinism, jingoism and other pre-totalitarian emotional appeals. When them media notices these tendencies and reports on them, you folks on the right think it's bias. It's not. It's just reporting. Maybe you should examine your motives and how you are being manipulated.

Posted by: Hunter Gatherer | September 17, 2008 4:42 PM | Report abuse

I'm a little confused. Let me see if I have this straight...

If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you're "exotic,
different."

Grow up in Alaska eating moose burgers, and yours is a quintessential
American story.

If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.

Name your kids Willow, Trig and Track, you're a maverick.

Graduate from Harvard law School and be President of the *Law Review*,
you are unstable.

Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're well-grounded.

If you spend 3 years as a community organizer, create a voter
registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years
as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator
representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of
the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years
in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people
while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs,
Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you
don't have any real leadership experience.

If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city
council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000
people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people,
then you're qualified to become the country's second-highest ranking
executive.

If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising
2 beautiful daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a
real Christian.

If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your
disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a
Christian.

If you teach responsible, age-appropriate sex education, including the
proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.

If, while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no
other option in sex education in your state's school system while your
unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant, you're very responsible.

If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a
prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner-city
community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values
don't represent America's.

If your husband is nicknamed "First Dude," with at least one DUI
conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until
age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession
of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.

Posted by: Sheridan1 | September 17, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

If Senator Obama had half the scrutiny of Gov Palin, he would not be on the national ticket for dog-catcher. I'm not in love with McCain, but Senator Obama's shady past and lack of experience mean I could not vote for him in this cycle. He's a bright guy, but ill-equipped at this time to be president.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Steve,
I appreciate your total arrogance like most elitist from the left you try to look down on people who disagree with you. All you can do is throw out words to try to hurt your critics instead of arguing with facts. When will the far left learn that a majority of people frown on this. If you want to have a civil conversation then lets do it, but name calling?

Posted by: econ101 | September 17, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Gee, did any of you ever think that the mainstream media just might have a bias toward intelligent, logical journalism, not simply pandering to one side or the other? But, it just so happens that the intelligence falls on the left, while the right is busy appealing mostly to faith, creationism, xenophobia, chauvinism, jingoism and other pre-totalitarian emotional appeals. When them media notices these tendencies and reports on them, you folks on the right think it's bias. It's not. It's just reporting. Maybe you should examine your motives and how you are being manipulated.

Posted by: Hunter Gatherer | September 17, 2008 4:40 PM | Report abuse

As with so much from the "puditry," this journalist wonders: Hey, dude, where's the story here? Anyone who bothers to visit Drudge — I do at least daily, as anyone who is interested at all in politics should — shouldn't be surprised at the bias in what he features. Sure, some interesting points here. But really....

Instead the media should be doing what journalism is supposed to do. Determining and reporting THE TRUTH, the hell with what Drudge may or may not do. This election is a clear-cut case of bald-faced liars (and rather mean and nasty ones to boot) versus those who don't and have some dignity and honor (not that all aren't politicians and immediately suspect and tainted). Until the MSM (and hardly "liberal" media) starts doing its job — fair and balanced, no matter how Fox twists it, means reporting the facts, ma'am — we shall not have a real and fair presidential election in this nation.

And the other big story — and guess what? Linked on Drudge — is how America is reluctant to elect a Black man (and only even half-Black, though he identifies as Black).

Post-apartheid South Africa elected a Black man as President. The fact that the US might not because he is Black shames me. And makes me glad my passport is valid.

Posted by: Rabid Leftist | September 17, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

A Democrat Panelist complained today that they are "sick of seeing and hearing Sarah Palin".

How long has it been? 3 Weeks?

Well we have been seeing and hearing Obama since January 1st, that is almost 9 full months, so Democrats cannot complain. And he was even making a "world" tour and standing on Mount Obamanopolis. Dems need not complain!

We are the WE that we are STILL sick of!

Posted by: TOO MUCH OBAMA | September 17, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Drudge and Breitbart are so afraid of opposing views that they ban IP's of people who pose a threat, where it is legal because they won the source, it also smacks of infringement on free speach. Make too much sense in a rebuttal? Breitbart bans you, simple as that. Personally I find great pride in being able to be banned from a slanted rag anyway. I learned long ago I am not the only person on this planet let alone in this country with questions regarding leaders who are so quick to go to war with other countries or do one on one battle with dissenters. I do relish the time I had to get opposing views out and there are more of me out here to pick up the lance and do battle.

Posted by: bob graham | September 17, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

Beerent, I have no idea who you are. I don't hate you, but I hate that every time that I follow a Drudge Report link, the white power idiots come out. Have a nice day.

Posted by: Steve | September 17, 2008 4:33 PM | Report abuse

The Palin choice and the Liberal Media's attack on her have awakened a "sleeping giant" of quiet but resolved conservatives. This is still a right-center country and we are determined to fight back the liberal media insurgency and their lunatic left masters in the blogasphere.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 4:33 PM | Report abuse

So, if my vote is committed to another person other than Obama, does that still make me a supporter of Obama? What if I fundamentally disagree with him on just about everything, but I fundamentally disagree with you on just about everything, does that just not compute. Can there be a third choice, or is everything a binary with you?

Posted by: Steve | September 17, 2008 4:31 PM | Report abuse

Steve.

You are not listening to my arguments. I am not a McCain supporter. I'm not even sure what to say to the White Power Comment.

You're imagining what I am. If I disagree with you I'm apparently everything you hate. This is not a personal attack, it's an observation.

This is the last message I'll address to you. You're just adding noise to this discussion.

This is supposed to be about media bias, not personal bias.

Posted by: beerent | September 17, 2008 4:31 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Cilliza:

You forgot to mention Fiorina's statement that neither Obama nor Biden could run a company. The main-stream media never gets the story straight. Your days are numbered. This election coverage has exposed media bias like never before.

But I agree with your analysis; Drudge has "a healthy disdain for the mainstream media and their perceived biases". But I would add that the biases are REAL, not just perceived.

Posted by: Geo | September 17, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse

ALL I've heard are opposing views, for the past 30 years. My viewpoint is never heard.

Posted by: Steve | September 17, 2008 4:24 PM | Report abuse

fascism is on the right, communism is on the left. Get your poly sci facts right. Duh.

Posted by: Steve | September 17, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Sure, Steve. You are far from an Obama supporter. And I'm a hard-core liberal who thinks that McCain is God and Obama is a empty suit.

Posted by: JCIll | September 17, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Steve.

As matter of fact. Fascist tend not to listen to opposing arguments. They would rather slander the opponent because they have no solid ground to support their opinions.

Pot, kettle, black.

Posted by: beerent | September 17, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

You are a fascist because you align yourself with nazis and white power advocates, and you want a supposed strong leader who will do away with the so-called liberal media and liberals in general. That's what has been going on since Nixon, as documented in the book, "Wrecking Crew."

Posted by: Steve | September 17, 2008 4:22 PM | Report abuse

The real fascists are the left, they are all for free speech and freedom of the press until you disagree with them. Conservative radio beats them day after day because the world KNOWS they get this drive-by reporting from the mainstream media. Because of this, they want to use the fairness doctrine in a lame attempt to silence those who DARE disagree…that’s so very communist now, how DARE anyone try to call anyone else a fascist. That’s the pot calling the kettle black, get real.

Posted by: Claude | September 17, 2008 4:22 PM | Report abuse

Well my father didn't fight the Nazis just to see our country become a socialist state. Thanks, but no thanks Mr. Obama.

Posted by: Dan | September 17, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

The shear arrogance that MSM is displaying is either very comical or very scary and I'm leaning towards scary. It is obvious by the severe drop in subscriptions, veiwership and overall confidence in the 5th estate numbers that the people are'nt buying it. I am also aware that my comments or any of the other comments posted here have no bearing on anything written here. So go ahead and vent nobody really is listening nor cares.

Posted by: Bill | September 17, 2008 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Surprise, surprise, another personal attack. You guys might want to mix it up a bit.

In what way am I a fascist?

Posted by: beerent | September 17, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse

Whoa whoa whoa fellas. McCain has better economic policies and advisors? Did tax cuts for the rich help us under Bush? Do we really want the man who invented "reganomics," which is perhaps the most harmful economic mistake ever made, in charge of our nation's economic policy? There aren't enough wealthy folks (who are getting the actual tax cuts) to make up the Republican voting rosters, so some of y'all must have felt the effects of our economic situation just like those of us who don't ascribe to these doctrines. So what is it that makes this set of policies and people so applealing to you?

Posted by: Economics | September 17, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse

I'm far from an Obama supporter, but McCain's brainwashed zombie pandering is alarming.

Posted by: Steve | September 17, 2008 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Of COURSE there is a left-slanted media bias in this country. Here in NY, there is one daily out of the three that has a conservative slant, the NY Post. The Times, which is supposed to be the beacon of talent, and The Daily News are nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Obama camp, as is every mainstream media outlet in the world. I can't help but be stunned by the GALL of the left to complain about Drudge, Fox News or the RW radio hosts in this country, they have had it MADE for years. Now that people have seen this media bias and have options for getting their news outside of the mainstream, guess what – THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA LOST VIEWERS AND SUBSCRIBERS. I chalk that up to the good people of this nation seeing things with their own eyes and making their own choices, not being brow beat into submission by the old school leftist media mentality. There is a reason Rush, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Mike Savage and the countless others have great ratings – people agree with them and with the fundamental idea that the media is totally biased for the left.

Posted by: Claude | September 17, 2008 4:17 PM | Report abuse

I noticed the shift too...the same day I saw a McCain ad at the top of Drudge.

Posted by: Ad dollars support the Empire | September 17, 2008 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Just because McCain can be slammed for the Blackberry comment, doesn't mean he should be. The Gore Internet story is irrelevent as well.

Again, it makes the Obama supporters look weak and desperate, if not vindictive for past wrongs.

Posted by: beerent | September 17, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse


Personal attacks are a sign of a weak argument.

You're just mad because the statement, "...semi-literate posts from drooling hicks and illiterate white trash that can barely tie their shoe laces..." is the truth. It hurts don't it, ya fascist.

Posted by: Steve | September 17, 2008 4:15 PM | Report abuse

What this author left out, either through intentional bias or sloppy journalism, is that the quote suggesting that neither McCain nor Palin is qualified to run a corporation, also included Obama and Biden. The obamabats immediately created an ad without the dems. The production was so bad, you can actually hear the cuts in the tape where they leave out Obama and Bidens's names. The Washington Post is Air America in print.

Posted by: JCIll | September 17, 2008 4:15 PM | Report abuse

Re: ...watch a few cable channels to see what stories they are talking about. It will open your eyes.)

Liberal whiner Chris Cillizza should open his eyes wider. He'd see that the paradigm for TV news is really Fark.com

Posted by: thomas blustin | September 17, 2008 4:15 PM | Report abuse

Spin of your own, Chris? McCain didn't claim to have invented the Blackberry, thanks.

Posted by: Radion | September 17, 2008 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Here on for you to try. Read the headlines in the Old York time in the morning (Fresh from the daily Kos or Huff post). Then watch the story appear that evening on CNN and MSDNC while some Obama tool makes the spews it as a talking point. The next day it will appear in this rag of the LA Times, and then latter on the cover of Newsweek, Time or the Atlantic. There is a Tsunami of frustration building on the right with the contempt that the media has for the american people. We will excercise our right to vote in Novemeber. You have no idea what is coming.

Posted by: Max | September 17, 2008 4:13 PM | Report abuse

every time there is a link from the Drudge Report, the nazi white power people always seem to turn up in the comments. Witness the "Race Riot" dork's comments. Is this who the conservative movement cozies up to? Heck, I'd rather be likened to a Streisand listener (And I hate her guts), than a white power idiot. My Grandfathers didn't beat the Nazis in WWII just so they could move their ideology over here. Nazis out of the US, that should be the conservative clarion call.

Posted by: Steve | September 17, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

"semi-literate posts from drooling hicks and illiterate white trash that can barely tie their shoe laces?"

Impressive! Illiterate white trash manages to submit a semi-literate post while drooling in his mobile home, with unlaced shoes watching NASCAR and drinking moonshine with his daughter/lover.

Wow, that was pretty easy!

Personal attacks are a sign of a weak argument.

Posted by: beerent | September 17, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

The "invent the blackberry" comments are relevant. If Gore (who I did not vote for) can be skewered for "inventing the internet," then McCain should be skewered. (Only, I mean it literally). It's similar to the credit given to your precious celebrity leader, the dead Ronald Reagan. How many of you think he personally tore down the wall? Didn't the Germans do it? Why should your dead celebrity, (along with your John Wayne and Charlton Heston) be lionized and sanctified?
Keep on calling us crybabies. When we win the election, it's time to drive you fascists out of the country for good, and none too soon, you damn dirty apes.

Posted by: Steve | September 17, 2008 4:09 PM | Report abuse

Hey mibrooks27, keep promoting the elitist liberal stereotype. It's done your cause a lot of good thus far...

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Where does anyone get off claiming that the mainstream media has a LIBERAL bias? Mainstream media is always slightly right of center (unless you are Fox news, or Drudge, in which case you are more than slightly right of center, but not all the way in the far off right). Mainstream press of this election should show that major outlets are right-side biased (anyone else see all the CNN correspondents at McCain's house on the tire swing? If not, google it.)

Posted by: Questioning | September 17, 2008 4:07 PM | Report abuse

Well Chris, those stories you mentioned as "shoulda been reported" may fall in the Post's journalism standard, but nobody else's. Let's take a look:

"Two other stories never merited attention from Drudge: a claim by a senior aide to John McCain that the Arizona senator had invented the BlackBerry" - it was tongue in cheek there, Chris - offhand humor is generally not taken as a factual statement now is it?


And:

"a statement by McCain surrogate Carly Fiorina that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company." Now really, are you going to disengenuously try this? Fiorina stated that Barack Obama and Joe Biden also could not run a company, because running a company is different than being president or vice president of the United States. Apparently your only view of that tape was the Obama campaign's edited version, a fact which is very telling in itself.

Posted by: Frank Davis | September 17, 2008 4:07 PM | Report abuse

Gasp! Flop! Help me get off the floor! A news media outlet leaning to the right!! (Said as clutching heart).

Posted by: BB | September 17, 2008 4:07 PM | Report abuse

"the singlemost"? more wapoganda. when is the last time you bookmarked drudge?! he is not only so yesterday, he is last year! at least.

Posted by: preAmerikkkan | September 17, 2008 4:05 PM | Report abuse

Since Drudge posted a link to this forum you get an idea of just how ignorant and few his readers are. In "roime time", we get, what, maybe a thousand semi-literate posts from drooling hicks and illiterate white trash that can barely tie their shoe laces? What a pathetic response! What an eye opener for the bankruptcy of "power of Drudge".

Posted by: mibrooks27 | September 17, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

wow, another liberal crybaby. there's a good chance chris is a regular viewer of opera, the view, countdown, and probably hardball. all of these media outlets are strait down the middle, just like this column.

Posted by: walter soapczech | September 17, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

Mainstream media and the liberal print presses are in for a rude awakening.

Posted by: Doe | September 17, 2008 3:54 PM | Report abuse

It is not a matter of only Republicans do bad things. Rather, Republicans only do bad things. Common sense sees right through the chablis and bree GOP country club set that just sees us as a tax mine.

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Some headlines from Drudge's right-wing propaganda outlet:

PAPER: Sarah Palin and the links to a Kenyan witch-hunter...

CNN's Jack Cafferty: Only Racism Explains Close Polls...

GALLUP: OBAMA BACK UP 2...

DON'T BLAME US FOR FINANCIAL MESS... (Pelosi)

Obama buys 2-minute commercial on economy...

----------

Today's Drudge, the one that links to the article you just read, also has the above links. Are these authorized by Drudge's Neocon taskmasters?

Drudge also links to many left wing online papers. So, why do people insist he's a rightest tool?

Maybe because he's best known for his role in the Clinton sex scandal. It seems to me that he's really just a good marketer of the news.

Another thing, all of these stories are linked from another source. He doesn't write the news. Duh. So these "biased" stories exist somewhere before he links to them. They just happen to reside on sites that don't get the draw that he does. Again, great news marketer.

So, people should really look at things before firing off duds.

Posted by: beerent | September 17, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Are you lovers?

Geez.

Posted by: Packing drudges fudge? | September 17, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

To the poster who stated that "Reagan's
FCC eliminated ownership limits", you are INCORRECT. That happened in 1996, under Bill Clinton's watch. Guess you went to some lib school, where you learned that only Republicans do bad things!

Posted by: Don | September 17, 2008 3:48 PM | Report abuse

Looking back at history, McCain appears to be Herbert Hoover incarnation! With the economy in a cliffhanger, McCain proclaimed yesterday that “the economic fundamentals are strong” and boosted his anti-regulation credentials before he backpedaled, of course. McCain is clearly out of touch with reality, if thinks “fundamentals are strong” in the middle of this economic meltdown. You have Alan Greenspan, probably the person most identifiable economist to the common American, admit that this is a ONE IN A CENTURY EVENT, and is the worst he's ever seen it. You have the collapse of the real estate market, where the majority of Americans have their wealth and retirement tied up in. You have large investment banks and giant securities failing one after the other, and John McCain thinks the economic fundamentals are strong”! WTF!

Herbert Hoover who was president during great depression (1929) which lasted over 10 years was the first to assert the soundness of the economy, even as it was evaporating around him. Unemployment soared to 25%, banks were failing left to right, millions had life savings wiped out overnight. (Does any of this sound familiar, folks?)…Despite McCain wishful assessment, we are absolutely in a very difficult period and more than any other time, we need someone that understands the gravity of the economy. Steady hand that can bring about a viable and equitable change. We can’t afford another Hoover and definitely not McCain/Palin at the WH, dumb and dumber, when we need our smartest people to guide this economic ship to safety.

Posted by: John HOOVER McSame | September 17, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Exact and complete quote from Carly Fiorina, no matter what consumate Right Wing partisan liars would have you believe. On the record, and fact checked:

Carly: "Well, I don't think John McCain could run a major corporation, I don't think I could run a major corporation, I don't think you could run a major corporation,"

Carly continues (this part conveniently left out by the Right Wing McCain lap-doggers) "It is a fallacy to suggest that the country is like a company. So, of course, to run a business, you have to have a lifetime of experience in business, but that's not what Sarah Palin, or John McCain have. Businesses are held accountable for poor business practices, bad investments, and breaking the law. Sarah Palin and John McCain simply would not have to answer to any of those three concerns were they in the White House."

Come on folks! Don't drag this out. You're keeping the inanity of the Bush-McCain Failed Talking Points in the rotation!

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Simple Economics:
People consume what they like. CBSNBCABC news divisions' viewership are all down, NYT etc. readerships are all down. Drudge is up. Fox is up.

People no longer trust the Left-biased "Mainstream News" because it is two lies in one. It is not "News"... it is editorializing and propaganda, and it is not "Mainstream"... it falls between left-leaning and far-left.

The "Mainstream News" has violated their duty under our Constitution... and the damage will take generations to undo. Look at all the trash (lies and misinformation) people read now on blogs in search of information, because they cannot trust the major traditional news suppliers. The should be ashamed.

Posted by: voiceofreason | September 17, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

If you know where the writer/publisher/blogger.. whatever is coming from, does that not better inform your thinking when reading it? Any intelligent person who has followed the "news"/politics for any length of time should have a certain awareness of the sources of their information and use that in making considered decisions... If you go to MSNBC or CNN or Fox News, the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, etc.. you should pretty much know what to expect. When someone says "progress", "improvement", etc.. it is very important to know about the source, for as it should be plain to see, progress and improvement for one group are precisely the opposite for another. Another term that should be viewed with much caution: "Change". If one gets a huge raise or promotion, that's a "change"! Hurray!! If one is laid off, that's also a "change"! Oh No!!

Posted by: ralph | September 17, 2008 3:45 PM | Report abuse

I agree with Deroy's comments: Chris Cilliza neglected to mention that Fiorina said that NONE OF THE FOUR candidates are qualified to run a business - NOT JUST Palin and McCain...geez, man - you even included the link!...if you plan on slamming McCain and Palin, you should try to cya at least a little!...Cilliza completely took Fiorina's comment out of context. And really - even IF Drudge is right-wing, then that makes only TWO repub-favored media outlets instead of just one (Fox)...two against the entire remainder of the left-wing media...big deal

Posted by: kent | September 17, 2008 3:44 PM | Report abuse

drudge isn't a news site, just a lame gop spinning site. there's also word he is a hidden homosexual.

Posted by: jen l | September 17, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

Drudge is the first site I go to in the early AM, I read all the links and then start covering the mainstream media sites. Often I go do some research on my own, especially about Obama and his Chicago Political machine ties. Read it and then dig a little more on the subject. And I have only found one site that has gotten comments from some of Obama's former co workers regarding his inflated resume. Why does the mainstream media refuse to research such things, they were quite happy to dig up/make up what they can about Palin. Even interviewing her hairdresser.

Posted by: Jay | September 17, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

The reason many of us go to Drudge is we are tired of the same old lies, the willful distortions, deliberate slanting and blatant bias of the mainstream liberal press represented by the NYT , Washington Post and your article. You deliberately and willfully distorted Carly Fiona's statement with selective editing and willful omission of the FACTS of what she really said. You have no credibilty and this is just more left-wing spin, lies and distortion.

Posted by: Nevada Bill | September 17, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

The pot calls the kettle ba]lack. The quote about the CEO is a twist of the truth and makes this author guilty of what he accuses Drudge of. The quote goes on to say that Barack Obama and Joe Biden are also not equipped to run a corporation...then explains that corporations and politics aren't one in the same and the comparison is a fallacy. Incredible how the Post think it can do whatever it wants, but Drudge should be more objective.

Posted by: floatby | September 17, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Here's what Carly Fiorino, one of McCain's economic spokespersons actually said, taken from the MSNBC site. This is the whole excerpt and nothing but. Now put this STUPID rumor "only republican candidates can't run a corporation" to bed and move onto something important, like the deficit.

<<The radio host asked, "Do you think she [Palin] has the experience to run a major company, like Hewlett-Packard?"

"No. I don't," Fiorina said. "But you know what? That's not what she's running for [laughs]. Running a corporation is a different set of things. I would just remind you that it is Barack Obama who is running for president, John McCain who is running for president. Sarah Palin has more executive experience than Barack Obama has. Barack Obama has never made an executive decision in his life. He has been a state senator and during his time there when a difficult issue came up, he voted present over 100 times instead of standing up and being accountable to a yes or no vote. He has been in the U.S. Senate for a very short period of time and has been running for office most of that time.

"Sarah Palin as a mayor and a governor has made executive decisions, challenged her own party, taken accountability for those decisions, so I find it quite stunning actually that the Barack Obama campaign is questioning Sarah Palin's experience who's got more executive experience than he does -- and she's the vice presidential nominee. Barack Obama is the presidential nominee."

But later she told NBC's Mitchell that neither McCain nor Obama nor Biden were qualified to run a major corporation.

"Well, I don't think John McCain could run a major corporation; I don't think Barack Obama could run a major corporation; I don't think Joe Biden could run a major corporation.
"But, on the other hand, running a major corporation is not the same as being the president or the vice president of the United States. It is a fallacy to suggest that the country is like a company. So, of course, to run a business, you have to have a lifetime of experience in business. But that's not what Sarah Palin, John McCain, Joe Biden or Barack Obama are doing."

Democratic campaign strategists & MSNBC picked up half the quoe for their "breaking news." How does that cable channel stay in business? I don't trust 'em or believe 'em.

Posted by: nancy be. | September 17, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

This is just one example of daily bias by the Post, CNN and the NY Times.

These numbers were before the surge.

Did you know that 47 countries' have reestablished their embassies in Iraq, leaving only 145 that have not?

Did you know that the Iraqi government
currently employs 1.2 million Iraqi people in exotic jobs ranging from human landmine clearance to IED shielding on the exterior of vehicles transporting officials?

Did you know that 3100 schools have been renovated, 364 schools are under rehabilitation, 263 new schools are now under construction; and 38 new schools have been completed in Iraq, while only 4000 have been destroyed?

Did you know that Iraq 's higher educational structure consists of 20 Universities, 46 Institutes or colleges and 4 research centers, all currently operating without any students?

Did you know that 25 Iraq students departed for the United States in
January 2005 for the re-established Fulbright program and were never seen or heard from again?

Did you know that the Iraqi Navy is operational? They have 5 - 100-foot patrol craft, 34 smaller vessels and a naval infantry regiment which have been used primarily for piracy in the Gulf, and for raiding small villages along the banks of the Tigris and Euphrates.

Did you know that Iraq's Air Force consists of three operational squadrons,
Which includes 9 reconnaissance and 3 US C-130 transport aircraft (under Iraqi operational control) which operate day and night, and will soon add 16 UH-1 helicopters and 4 Bell Jet Rangers, as well as 7000 paper airplanes donated by American school children?

Did you know that Iraq has a counter-terrorist unit and a Commando Battalion which have both engaged American forces in combat, or retreated from combat situations when fighting along side American forces?

Did you know that the Iraqi Police Service has over 55,000 fully trained and equipped police officers who regularly engage American forces in combat?

Did you know that there are 5 Police Academies in Iraq that produce over 3500 new officers every 8 weeks, all of whom defect within days to the insurgency?

Did you know there are more than 1100 building projects going on in Iraq intended to replace the more than 80,000 structures destroyed since the invasion?

They include 364 schools, 67 public clinics, 15 hospitals, 83 railroad stations, 22 oil facilities, 93 water facilities 69 electrical facilities, and assorted defensive walls, barriers, and fortifications.

Did you know that 96% of Iraqi children under the age of 5 have received the first 2 series of polio vaccinations, as well as a lifetime supply of PTSD?

Did you know that 4.3 million Iraqi children were enrolled in primary school by mid October, but that by November 2.6 million girls had been removed?

Did you know that there are 1,192,000 cell phone subscribers in Iraq and phone use has gone up 158% since the integration of cell phones as detonators on IEDs?

Did you know that Iraq has an independent media that consists of 75 radio stations, 180 newspapers, 10 television stations, and 6000 "Armed Truth Squads"?

Did you know that the Baghdad Stock Exchange opened in June of 2004, and has since lost only 4,200% of its opening value?

Did you know that 2 candidates in the Iraqi presidential election had a
televised debate recently because it was too dangerous to debate in front of a live audience?

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 3:39 PM | Report abuse

Now that the medium of "news" has been forced to turn a profit, news has experienced cutbacks just like any other corporate entity. A portion of those cutbacks include actual investigative journalism and research.

22 year old news producers no longer light up the phones seeking out that next big story. They simply load the Drudge Report in their browsers and highlight, copy, and paste.

Drudge is the Hearst to my generation X. Do not criticize Drudge for his influence throughout the news for profit industry. Criticize lazy news producers who do not have the ability to look beyond Drudge for an opposing viewpoint.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

Wonder if it is true that the actual candidate that bumps off mutual opponent will win in November regardless of issues and poll numbers?

Apparently the mutual opponent is wealthy and exposed corruption within both parties and is presently targeted.

The question is how?

Will the GOP use Guiliani-like mob ties such as used by his protege, ex-NYPD commissioner and may be doing up to 140 years of jail time? Or Gotti, Jr. who is currently on trial for conspiracy and murder?

Will Dem use an OJ Simpson-like black convict with jail time? Coincidentally, OJ's trial with robbery and kidnapping is today too.

Will both political parties use the popular law enforcement practice of 'sweetheart exchange deals' where convicts commit crime/murder in exchange for less jail time, conveniently covered up and real culprits not publicly suspected?

Having shared this information, do we too have to worry about our personal safety? For example, does my husband have to worry about his life when he is doing his daily jog after work in the Hackensack/Bogota/Teaneck, NJ areas? Do we have to worry about the tampering of our food, water and air inside our home since our habits and plans are known in advanced due to bugging devices in private and public?

What do you think?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

chris - you intentionally left off that fiorina said all FOUR candidates would not be qualified to run a large corporation (of course, neither was she). senators biden, mccain, and obama are particularky unqualified for executive work.

are these senator yakkers with no leadership, executive of managerial skills going to bcome executive tallent on jan 20, 2009? not likely. disaster awaits, these senate losers.

the senate trio have not even been leaders in the aimless senate. so their peer group does not recognize their leadership talents.

oh, hillary clinton, chris dodd and sam brownback fall into this group of endless talkers.

Posted by: deroy | September 17, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

Drudge is a tool. He panders to the small and the mean spirited, in the same way that Hearst pandered to the country's worst instincts with his yellow journalism. Drudge's world is a world in which everyone is base and dirty, which is probably how he sees himself. He links to whatever his right wing buddies ask him to link to and pointedly ignores or downplays anything that gets in the way of their propaganda. The only reason he posted any positive stories about Obama early on was that his buddies wanted to bash Hillary more.

Posted by: millie | September 17, 2008 3:33 PM | Report abuse

I can't believe (alright, I can) that this journalist is crying about unfair media coverage for Obama. If Drudge sets the tone for every cable outlet, then obviously he must be biased toward Obama, because the majority of the industry is.

Yes, the world has been so unfair to Obama. That's why he's the least qualified presidential candidate ever, yet is hailed as the savior of our democracy. Only a media darling could pull off something like that.

When Obama gets in a rut it seems that it's time for the Left to do what they do best... whine loudly. Could it be that he's not infallible, is mortal, and doesn't win all battles? Why not blame his campaign for his troubles? Oh yes, infallible, got it.

Maybe Drudge is just trying to stand out in a sea of suck-ups. Would be a smart move for a thinking person.

These types of stories make Obama supporters look desperate. This leads one to believe that Obama is short on substance, and long on hype.

So, Drudge didn't talk about the "Blackberry" story. Good for him and good for us. That story only illustrates the desperate nature of the Obama campaign. It is also an insult to anyone that prefers to think about politics instead of feel about politics.

Let's raise the bar. It's getting pretty ridiculous.

Posted by: beerent | September 17, 2008 3:33 PM | Report abuse

Do you wonder why there is the perception of media bias? It’s precisely because of the flat-out misstatements and half-truth in your column. First, accordingly to the link your own article, McCain’s aide never said he “invented” the Blackberry. What he said was this:

"He did this," Holtz-Eakin informed them. "Telecommunications of the United States is a premier innovation in the past 15 years -- comes right through the Commerce Committee -- so you're looking at the miracle John McCain helped create and that's what he did."

Clearly, the reference to “this” was not the invention of the Blackberry device itself, but the fact that people can use a Blackberry through innovations and legislation allowing telecommunications, which were passed through the Commerce Committee before being approved. As John McCain was part of the committee that approved that legislation, it is fair to say that he helped create the ability to use Blackberrys in today’s world.

Your second falsehood by omission is your claim that McCain surrogate Carly Fiorina stated “that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company.” Shocking!!! A candidate’s own spokesperson claims her ticket isn’t qualified. That must mean the other ticket IS qualified.

But wait!! What is omitted from your piece is that Carly Fiorina, a former corporate CEO, indicated that NONE of the candidates for president or vice-president were qualified to be the CEO of a major corporation. I realize that while leaving out Fiorina’s reference that Obama and Biden are equally unqualified to run a corporation doesn’t work for your story on bias, it certainly does perpetuate the stereotype that the media is biased and slants and distorts the facts to achieve its goals. However, there can’t be a stereotype without a prototype.

Posted by: kingwolf | September 17, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

Good for DRUDGE to counter the liberal imbalance of campaign coverage.

Someone has to do it and its warming to know that DRUDGE is the premier source.

Posted by: Breauxman | September 17, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

This is just one example of daily bias by the Post, CNN and the NY Times.

These numbers were before the surge.

Did you know that 47 countries' have reestablished their embassies in Iraq, leaving only 145 that have not?

Did you know that the Iraqi government
currently employs 1.2 million Iraqi people in exotic jobs ranging from human landmine clearance to IED shielding on the exterior of vehicles transporting officials?

Did you know that 3100 schools have been renovated, 364 schools are under rehabilitation, 263 new schools are now under construction; and 38 new schools have been completed in Iraq, while only 4000 have been destroyed?

Did you know that Iraq 's higher educational structure consists of 20 Universities, 46 Institutes or colleges and 4 research centers, all currently operating without any students?

Did you know that 25 Iraq students departed for the United States in
January 2005 for the re-established Fulbright program and were never seen or heard from again?

Did you know that the Iraqi Navy is operational? They have 5 - 100-foot patrol craft, 34 smaller vessels and a naval infantry regiment which have been used primarily for piracy in the Gulf, and for raiding small villages along the banks of the Tigris and Euphrates.

Did you know that Iraq's Air Force consists of three operational squadrons,
Which includes 9 reconnaissance and 3 US C-130 transport aircraft (under Iraqi operational control) which operate day and night, and will soon add 16 UH-1 helicopters and 4 Bell Jet Rangers, as well as 7000 paper airplanes donated by American school children?

Did you know that Iraq has a counter-terrorist unit and a Commando Battalion which have both engaged American forces in combat, or retreated from combat situations when fighting along side American forces?

Did you know that the Iraqi Police Service has over 55,000 fully trained and equipped police officers who regularly engage American forces in combat?

Did you know that there are 5 Police Academies in Iraq that produce over 3500 new officers every 8 weeks, all of whom defect within days to the insurgency?

Did you know there are more than 1100 building projects going on in Iraq intended to replace the more than 80,000 structures destroyed since the invasion?

They include 364 schools, 67 public clinics, 15 hospitals, 83 railroad stations, 22 oil facilities, 93 water facilities 69 electrical facilities, and assorted defensive walls, barriers, and fortifications.

Did you know that 96% of Iraqi children under the age of 5 have received the first 2 series of polio vaccinations, as well as a lifetime supply of PTSD?

Did you know that 4.3 million Iraqi children were enrolled in primary school by mid October, but that by November 2.6 million girls had been removed?

Did you know that there are 1,192,000 cell phone subscribers in Iraq and phone use has gone up 158% since the integration of cell phones as detonators on IEDs?

Did you know that Iraq has an independent media that consists of 75 radio stations, 180 newspapers, 10 television stations, and 6000 "Armed Truth Squads"?

Did you know that the Baghdad Stock Exchange opened in June of 2004, and has since lost only 4,200% of its opening value?

Did you know that 2 candidates in the Iraqi presidential election had a
televised debate recently because it was too dangerous to debate in front of a live audience?

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 3:26 PM | Report abuse

Chris--
Very interesting piece. I have a collateral question: What influence does Real Clear Politics have on the news cycle? Their polling compilations seem to be often quoted by all sides of the news media. I personaly find their site very useful, so much so that I almost never read anything in print anymore. I found this column by going to RCP.

I have a theory that within the last two years the media has bifurcated into the old MSM and the Alternative Media because the total audience now follows one or the other almost exclusively, although there is still some overlap. Many people now get all of their news from Talk Radio and/or Fox News and pay no attention to the rest of the media. The split may be roughly 50/50, at least among those that consume news of current events, which is probably only about two-thirds of the electorate.

So, when a consumer of the MSM and a consumer of the AM strike up a conversation in a bar, they talk past each other because their understanding of the facts of political events are completely different. There is almost no common ground.

The theory predicts a polarized country, and it is. So what? This is not the first time we have been so polarized. For most of the 19th century, newspapers (the only media) were openly partisan.

My evidence for the theory is that the Alternative Media has generated public outcry that stopped three key public policy moves that in the old day would probably have succeeded. The Harriet Miers nomimation was killed by public opposition, not by senatorial opposition. The Dubai Ports Deal was scuttled by a similar populist outcry. Most importantly, Bush's immigration reform had broad bi-partisan support form the political class--both parties--but it was stopped cold by the public.

The key fact about the Alternative Media is that it is driven by its consumers--it does not drive them. It is a very democratic institution, particularly Talk Radio. On the other hand, it is excellent at fact checking current events, helping its consumers to be more informed, a role the MSM abandoned long ago in favor of creating a news narrative that advances a political agenda. This is why the MSM continues to lose consumers.

Posted by: Bill Eastland | September 17, 2008 3:24 PM | Report abuse

come on chris, fiorina said that obama and biden also were not qualified to run the country. we need at least one honest broker commenting on the election.

Posted by: jrterrier | September 17, 2008 3:24 PM | Report abuse

Poor leftist liar Nick Collins the Joke hates it when I set him straight with the facts and logic.

Deregulation or adherence to loose lending policies? Which caused our current problem?

1) Cause has been well known for years to be loose lending policies. Even before the housing bust wise economists stated that loose lending policies would lead to business failure and house loan defaults.

2) The law allowed loose lending policies well before the Gramm 1999 law. These issues are not connected.

3) The Gramm law was in regards to US banks being able to diversify. Something the foreign banks have been allowed to do for decades.

4) Gramm himself, along with other republicans warned Clinton and democrats that we needed to tighten loose lending policies.

5) Clinton refused saying that tight lending policies would hurt the minorities and the poor. Hmmm, dem pandering at its finest.

6) Obama, Dodd, Franks, Bill, Hill are all on record as being in favor of sub-prime loans in order to pander to their base.

7) Deregulation is a standard red-herring that dems like to bring up. They have been successful in the past due to a stupid electorate.

8) If the Gramm bill was bad, then why not blame Clinton who signed it into law? He had the power to veto the bill and win. Reps did not have enough votes to overcome a veto.

9) Recapping: It was reps against loose lending policies and it was democrats in favor of loose lending policies.

10) Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac both failed because of loose lending policies. Obama and Chris Dodd were #2 and #1 recepients of lobbying money coming from, guess who, Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.

11) Repeating the key issue. Obama was for loose lending policies and it was exactly loose lending policies that caused our current banking problem.

Posted by: KMichaels | September 17, 2008 3:16 PM | Report abuse

THIS JUST IN: THE MEDIA MAY BE BIASED.

THIS JUST IN: AMERICANS MAY THINK INDEPENDENTLY FROM THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA.

I must admit the second surprises me much more than the first, and the past few weeks -- the fact that McCain and Palin's numbers have not taken much of a hit despite the glaring media smears -- have done more to restore my faith in America than Barack Obama could ever do.

Posted by: Jenny | September 17, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

The main media operates under news by omission.

Drudge brings the omitted news to the headlines.

Where is main line news about Obamas dark side? its omitted.

Where is main line news about McCains good
side? its omitted.

Drudge is not a guinness, he just posts the news the main line media refuses to talk about.

that works for him.

Posted by: Frank | September 17, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse

Watch the newspaper guy continue to lose subscribers because of Lib bias. The backlash against "old media" elite Libs deciding hwat's news is what's got your undies in a bundle. This is fun to watch- the unraveling of Obama and th Lib media. Deer in headlights anyone?

Posted by: Waaaaaaaahhhhhhh..... | September 17, 2008 3:12 PM | Report abuse

The surge is working. McCain/Palin have surged in the polls. It was not a BOUNCE by the way.

Minnesota, Michigan and Colorado are in play and McCain/Palin are up in Ohio, Florida and gained big in Penn.

Independents and undecided voters and women are choosing McCain/Palin.

She was a great choice and has as much experience as OBAMA

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 3:12 PM | Report abuse

WOW, saying that Drudge is driving MSM?

I am sure the Washington Post would LOVE to be driving MSM. Instead, earnings are tanking and layoffs continue: (from the wsj.com )

"Washington Post Co. reported a second-quarter net loss, reflecting staff cuts made to offset steep advertising revenue declines at its namesake newspaper ..."

BUH bye!

Posted by: Persk | September 17, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Washington Post-OLOGY 101.

The Washinton Post has become a joke over the last decade. The Graham's would be firing all of you. It is a disgrace.

How many Post employees are republican and how can they report fairly when they are tingling up their legs for Obama.

Why don't you ever report information like I list here below. Because you want to blame the Republicans defeat them.

This is just one example of daily bias by the Post, CNN and the NY Times.

These numbers were before the surge.

Did you know that 47 countries' have reestablished their embassies in Iraq ?

Did you know that the Iraqi government
currently employs 1.2 million Iraqi people?

Did you know that 3100 schools have been renovated,364 schools are under rehabilitation, 263 new schools are now under construction; and 38 new schools have been completed in Iraq ?

Did you know that Iraq 's higher educational structure consists of 20 Universities, 46 Institutes or colleges and 4 research centers, all currently operating?

Did you know that 25 Iraq students departed for the United States in
January 2005 for the re-established Fulbright program?

Did you know that the Iraqi Navy is operational? They have 5 - 100-foot patrol craft, 34 smaller vessels and a naval infantry regiment.

Did you know that Iraq ' s Air Force consists of three operational squadrons,
Which includes 9 reconnaissance and 3 US C-130 transport aircraft (under Iraqi operational control) which operate day and night,and will soon add 16 UH-1 helicopters and 4 Bell Jet Rangers?

Did you know that Iraq has a counter-terrorist unit and a Commando Battalion?

Did you know that the Iraqi Police Service has over 55,000 fully trained and equipped police officers?

Did you know that there are 5 Police Academies in Iraq that produce over 3500 new officers every 8 weeks?

Did you know there are more than 1100 building projects going on in Iraq ?

They include 364 schools, 67 public clinics, 15 hospitals, 83 railroad stations, 22 oil facilities, 93 water facilities and 69 electrical facilities.

Did you know that 96% of Iraqi children under the age of 5 have received the first 2 series of polio vaccinations?

Did you know that 4.3 million Iraqi children were enrolled in primary school by mid October?

Did you know that there are 1,192,000 cell phone subscribers in Iraq and phone use has gone up 158%?

Did you know that Iraq has an independent media that consists of 75 radio stations, 180 newspapers and 10 television stations?

Did you know that the Baghdad Stock Exchange opened in June of 2004?

Did you know that 2 candidates in the Iraqi presidential election had a
televised debate recently?


OF COURSE WE DIDN'T KNOW!

WHY DIDN'T WE KNOW?

BECAUSE OUR MEDIA WON'T TELL US!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Many people posting here are implying that Drudge writes all of these news articles himself. It seems to me Drudge only posts links to articles that the mainstream media outlets would normally sweep under the rug. I guess it's just coincidence that so many of those articles that 'Big News' wants to sweep under the rug are favorable to conservatives? Maybe if our regular news sources would give us all of the news, and not just what they think we need to know, Drudge wouldn't have a void to fill.

This elitist "It's not news unless we say it is" modus operandi needs to stop.

Posted by: Nimrod | September 17, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

The logic contradicts itself here. Drudge influences mainstream media heavily, but penalizes a bias he "sees" in it? How is Palin naturally appealing and not perceived so by some bias? A lot of cirularity lies at the base of the note here. It might be more persuasive if Drudge reflected on his own influence or if it didn't reflect a longer-term bias of Drudge himself toward more conservative figures, especially some labelled as "maverick." After all, Palin has yet to be examined with the scrutiny that all the other major candidates, including McCain, Obama, and Clinton, have been through.

Posted by: a reader | September 17, 2008 3:09 PM | Report abuse

The surge is working. McCain/Palin have surged in the polls. It was not a BOUNCE by the way.

Minnesota, Michigan and Colorado are in play and McCain/Palin are up in Ohio, Florida and gained big in Penn.

Independents and undecided voters and women are choosing McCain/Palin.

She was a great choice and has as much experience as OBAMA

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 3:07 PM | Report abuse

So I guess we're supposed to ttake "professional" journalists seriously because they get their ideas from Drudge (all the while complaining about liberal bloggers)?

Given the glib, GOP-leaning tone of Chris' blog, he clearly is one of the Drudge travelers. I guess he doesn't know what he's supposed to cover any more. Compare this silliness to someone like Josh Marshall who has broken actual stories, like the politicization of the Justice Department or the many Abramoff-related scandals. that's journalism. It's alos leadership, which isn't what happens when you worry what a closet case sourced by GOP indisers is saying.

Posted by: Rich | September 17, 2008 3:07 PM | Report abuse

First off, Phil Gramm was actually in favor of a Sub-Prime crisis. This is a known, and very well publicized fact. He knew that if US banks were able to diversify without any government regulation, that a sub-prime crisis could be created through inevitably loose lending policies.

He's on record as the sponsor of the bill that created it, and he continues to support that same bill today, as it achieved precisely what he set out to accomplish: An economic climate that would artificially increase the asset wealth of America's poor and through the use of a deliberate campaign of misinformation, encourage these same individuals to carry more debt. Once this had been achieved, the bill was designed to then create the economic environment (through rapid deregulation) that we have seen over the past several years; a rapid loss of available credit and available jobs leading directly to an enormous loss of wealth amongst the poor that would lead them to remain on the bottom with low education and poor skill sets. The end game? Simply the creation of an environment wherein more major corporations (the primary backers of Gramm and McCain for decades) could abandon American workes for cheap foreign labor, thus providing maximum profits for the very top 1% of society. These 1% have been further protected by the Bush-McCain tax cuts, which actually increased taxes on 95% of Americans (the bottom 95%).

This is so basic, and so well known that only a complete fool would argue against it. Why else would it be news?! Honestly... Plan and simple facts.

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 3:06 PM | Report abuse

Nick Collins III caught in provable repeated lies is going ape-shtt now. The poor little goat cant seem to even be in touch with reality. This is the type if retardation that believes in the Obama vain promises.

Nothing on earth will help the likes of Nick Collins III come to a grip with truth and reality.

The problem with idiots like Nick comes only in their numbers. There seem to be too many of these doped up liars running around.

With morons like him and the leftist lapdogs in the media we need to really press hard and be vigilent in spreading the real truth, and of course, in getting out the conservative vote.

Posted by: KMichaels | September 17, 2008 3:06 PM | Report abuse

While the Drudge Report might lean a bit to the right, Drudge reports ALL THE NEWS unlike the Democrat Socialist Party--controlled MSM that censors all the news that might damage the Democrat Socialist Party politically. This election has proven without a shadow of doubt that what the Republicans have been saying for the last 50 or so years is true--the MSM is nothing more than the Democrat Socialist Party's propaganda arm. They're the Democrat Socialist's gatekeepers of all news reporting. Thank god the American people have a few other sources of getting the news of the day like Drudge, Fox News and guys like Rush Limbaugh who report on all news rather than the censored version the rest of the MSM is giving us. Small wonder the liberals; the Democrat Socialists, and the rest of the MSM hates them. They report the news that they want to suppress.

Posted by: madhatter | September 17, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

I love this. Even in the process of you exercising your political bias, you openly deny it. It just proves that truth and socialism don't mix. How could it when you accept lies as the truth.

Posted by: Craig | September 17, 2008 3:04 PM | Report abuse

Drudge does this every cycle -- he aims right early, when it hardly matters, and aims left in the homestretch, when it does. Then he's got those "aim right" statistics to claim the site is relatively even-handed.

The man doesn't have a "nose for news" -- he fills a gap created by newsroom cuts in print and media. He makes the jobs of producers and staff reporters easier -- and in return he gets a lot of free press and a measure of influence on the flow of information in our society.

Sad, sad, sad.

Posted by: Deficits Dont Matter | September 17, 2008 3:03 PM | Report abuse

The surge is working. McCain/Palin have surged in the polls. It was not a BOUNCE by the way.

Minnesota, Michigan and Colorado are in play and McCain/Palin are up in Ohio, Florida and gained big in Penn.

Independents and undecided voters and women are choosing McCain/Palin.

She was a great choice and has as much experience as OBAMA

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 3:03 PM | Report abuse

Exact and complete quote from Carly Fiorina, no matter what consumate Right Wing partisan liars would have you believe. On the record, and fact checked:

Carly: "Well, I don't think John McCain could run a major corporation, I don't think I could run a major corporation, I don't think you could run a major corporation,"

Carly continues (this part conveniently left out by the Right Wing McCain lap-doggers) "It is a fallacy to suggest that the country is like a company. So, of course, to run a business, you have to have a lifetime of experience in business, but that's not what Sarah Palin, or John McCain have. Businesses are held accountable for poor business practices, bad investments, and breaking the law. Sarah Palin and John McCain simply would not have to answer to any of those three concerns were they in the White House."

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Washington Post-OLOGY 101.

The Washinton Post has become a joke over the last decade. The Graham's would be firing all of you. It is a disgrace.

How many Post employees are republican and how can they report fairly when they are tingling up their legs for Obama.

Why don't you ever report information like I list here below. Because you want to blame the Republicans defeat them.

This is just one example of daily bias by the Post, CNN and the NY Times.

These numbers were before the surge.

Did you know that 47 countries' have reestablished their embassies in Iraq ?

Did you know that the Iraqi government
currently employs 1.2 million Iraqi people?

Did you know that 3100 schools have been renovated,364 schools are under rehabilitation, 263 new schools are now under construction; and 38 new schools have been completed in Iraq ?

Did you know that Iraq 's higher educational structure consists of 20 Universities, 46 Institutes or colleges and 4 research centers, all currently operating?

Did you know that 25 Iraq students departed for the United States in
January 2005 for the re-established Fulbright program?

Did you know that the Iraqi Navy is operational? They have 5 - 100-foot patrol craft, 34 smaller vessels and a naval infantry regiment.

Did you know that Iraq ' s Air Force consists of three operational squadrons,
Which includes 9 reconnaissance and 3 US C-130 transport aircraft (under Iraqi operational control) which operate day and night,and will soon add 16 UH-1 helicopters and 4 Bell Jet Rangers?

Did you know that Iraq has a counter-terrorist unit and a Commando Battalion?

Did you know that the Iraqi Police Service has over 55,000 fully trained and equipped police officers?

Did you know that there are 5 Police Academies in Iraq that produce over 3500 new officers every 8 weeks?

Did you know there are more than 1100 building projects going on in Iraq ?

They include 364 schools, 67 public clinics, 15 hospitals, 83 railroad stations, 22 oil facilities, 93 water facilities and 69 electrical facilities.

Did you know that 96% of Iraqi children under the age of 5 have received the first 2 series of polio vaccinations?

Did you know that 4.3 million Iraqi children were enrolled in primary school by mid October?

Did you know that there are 1,192,000 cell phone subscribers in Iraq and phone use has gone up 158%?

Did you know that Iraq has an independent media that consists of 75 radio stations, 180 newspapers and 10 television stations?

Did you know that the Baghdad Stock Exchange opened in June of 2004?

Did you know that 2 candidates in the Iraqi presidential election had a
televised debate recently?


OF COURSE WE DIDN'T KNOW!

WHY DIDN'T WE KNOW?

BECAUSE OUR MEDIA WON'T TELL US!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, Drudge tends to ignore stories that are totally ridiculous, make no sense, or are just outright lies -- like most of the stuff the Democrats are slinging out there. Unfortunately, the mainstream media loves those types of stories!

Posted by: Dan Zee | September 17, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

The surge is working. McCain/Palin have surged in the polls. It was not a BOUNCE by the way.

Minnesota, Michigan and Colorado are in play and McCain/Palin are up in Ohio, Florida and gained big in Penn.

Independents and undecided voters and women are choosing McCain/Palin.

She was a great choice and has as much experience as OBAMA

Posted by: NickinPortland | September 17, 2008 3:00 PM | Report abuse

Deregulation or adherence to loose lending policies? Which caused our current problem?

1) Cause has been well known for years to be loose lending policies. Even before the housing bust wise economists stated that loose lending policies would lead to business failure and house loan defaults.

2) The law allowed loose lending policies well before the Gramm 1999 law. These issues are not connected.

3) The Gramm law was in regards to US banks being able to diversify. Something the foreign banks have been allowed to do for decades.

4) Gramm himself, along with other republicans warned Clinton and democrats that we needed to tighten loose lending policies.

5) Clinton refused saying that tight lending policies would hurt the minorities and the poor. Hmmm, dem pandering at its finest.

6) Obama, Dodd, Franks, Bill, Hill are all on record as being in favor of sub-prime loans in order to pander to their base.

7) Deregulation is a standard red-herring that dems like to bring up. They have been successful in the past due to a stupid electorate.

8) If the Gramm bill was bad, then why not blame Clinton who signed it into law? He had the power to veto the bill and win. Reps did not have enough votes to overcome a veto.

9) Recapping: It was reps against loose lending policies and it was democrats in favor of loose lending policies.

10) Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac both failed because of loose lending policies. Obama and Chris Dodd were #2 and #1 recepients of lobbying money coming from, guess who, Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.

11) Repeating the key issue. Obama was for loose lending policies and it was exactly loose lending policies that caused our current banking problem.

Posted by: KMichaels | September 17, 2008 3:00 PM | Report abuse

Bruce Springsteen -Born In The U.S.A.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPudiBR15mk

Obama/Biden '08

Posted by: New Jersey Girl | September 17, 2008 2:59 PM | Report abuse

With all due respect, this story sounds like the whining of a spoiled, petulant child. For years the liberals had a virtual monopoly on the news. As this bias tends to work against those who view themselves as traditional Americans, most Americans didn't like the bias.

So, when viable alternatives presented themselves, such as talk radio, and most especially the Internet, people flocked to where they feel their values and concerns are taken seriously.

Fate did NOT decree Drudge's popularity. He really did earn it be giving large segments of the American people what they want.

I would include myself in this number. Back in the late eighties and early nineties--before I had ever heard of talk radio or the Internet--I would listen to the talking heads on the TV make blanket statements such as: Everybody knows... or The American people want... and I would find myself thinking, that's not who or what I am. These people speak neither to me nor for me. Consequently, I threw out my TV in 1992, when talk radio came into its own, and haven't watched TV since. And I don't miss it one bit.

I think one reason Drudge in particular is so popular is that he only vaguely leans right, without siding with the neocons. Talk radio has come to be dominated by neocons, and it too will go the way of the MSM unless things change. Now talk show hosts march in a lockstep march that would be the envy of a Marine Corps drill team. No thanks.

Unless very restrictive legislation is passed governing what can be published on the Internet, the Internet is a far superior medium to either talk radio, TV, or the print media. It used to be quipped that freedom of the press was for those who could afford to own one. No longer. The internet is the huge equalizer. It is democracy in action. And the elitist liberals and neocons don't like it one bit. But they can whine themselves right into the arrogant irrelevance they so richly deserve. We owe them nothing, especially when they pit themselves against our traditions and values.

Good riddance.

Posted by: Dunnyveg | September 17, 2008 2:58 PM | Report abuse

Once again the comments were out of context. Firoina also said that neither Obama, Palin nor Byden would be able to run a company. That is why there are advisors to all those people. Yes, Drudge is a conservative. Whithout him who would we hear Matthews, Oberman, and all the other liberal talking heads who get so much more time on the tv or the radio. Or should we listen to the likes of Al Franken. As for the movie stars, they are not in touch in any way with normal people who go to work every day to feed their families and to make ends meet. They don't even know what that means.

Posted by: joannejpb | September 17, 2008 2:58 PM | Report abuse

Exact and complete quote from Carly Fiorina, no matter what consumate Right Wing partisan liars would have you believe. On the record, and fact checked:

Carly: "Well, I don't think John McCain could run a major corporation, I don't think I could run a major corporation, I don't think you could run a major corporation,"

Carly continues (this part conveniently left out by the Right Wing McCain lap-doggers) "It is a fallacy to suggest that the country is like a company. So, of course, to run a business, you have to have a lifetime of experience in business, but that's not what Sarah Palin, or John McCain have. Businesses are held accountable for poor business practices, bad investments, and breaking the law. Sarah Palin and John McCain simply would not have to answer to any of those three concerns were they in the White House."

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 2:57 PM | Report abuse

LONG LIVE THE DRUDGE REPORT!!!! My first source of news each and every day.

Obama has no story, no history, no anything. Racism is indeed RAMPANT in the US, as will be made evident by the number of votes that will be cast FOR Obama simply because he is a black man. Or at least he is embracing his "blackness" even though he is really half-black. Oh well, even half-black was good enough for Oprah.

Posted by: Jeff | September 17, 2008 2:56 PM | Report abuse

Washington Post-OLOGY 101.

The Washinton Post has become a joke over the last decade. The Graham's would be firing all of you. It is a disgrace.

How many Post employees are republican and how can they report fairly when they are tingling up their legs for Obama.

Why don't you ever report information like I list here below. Because you want to blame the Republicans defeat them.

This is just one example of daily bias by the Post, CNN and the NY Times.

These numbers were before the surge.

Did you know that 47 countries' have reestablished their embassies in Iraq ?

Did you know that the Iraqi government
currently employs 1.2 million Iraqi people?

Did you know that 3100 schools have been renovated,364 schools are under rehabilitation, 263 new schools are now under construction; and 38 new schools have been completed in Iraq ?

Did you know that Iraq 's higher educational structure consists of 20 Universities, 46 Institutes or colleges and 4 research centers, all currently operating?

Did you know that 25 Iraq students departed for the United States in
January 2005 for the re-established Fulbright program?

Did you know that the Iraqi Navy is operational? They have 5 - 100-foot patrol craft, 34 smaller vessels and a naval infantry regiment.

Did you know that Iraq ' s Air Force consists of three operational squadrons,
Which includes 9 reconnaissance and 3 US C-130 transport aircraft (under Iraqi operational control) which operate day and night,and will soon add 16 UH-1 helicopters and 4 Bell Jet Rangers?

Did you know that Iraq has a counter-terrorist unit and a Commando Battalion?

Did you know that the Iraqi Police Service has over 55,000 fully trained and equipped police officers?

Did you know that there are 5 Police Academies in Iraq that produce over 3500 new officers every 8 weeks?

Did you know there are more than 1100 building projects going on in Iraq ?

They include 364 schools, 67 public clinics, 15 hospitals, 83 railroad stations, 22 oil facilities, 93 water facilities and 69 electrical facilities.

Did you know that 96% of Iraqi children under the age of 5 have received the first 2 series of polio vaccinations?

Did you know that 4.3 million Iraqi children were enrolled in primary school by mid October?

Did you know that there are 1,192,000 cell phone subscribers in Iraq and phone use has gone up 158%?

Did you know that Iraq has an independent media that consists of 75 radio stations, 180 newspapers and 10 television stations?

Did you know that the Baghdad Stock Exchange opened in June of 2004?

Did you know that 2 candidates in the Iraqi presidential election had a
televised debate recently?

OF COURSE WE DIDN'T KNOW!

WHY DIDN'T WE KNOW?

BECAUSE OUR MEDIA WON'T TELL US!


Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 2:56 PM | Report abuse

I don't have to tell you things are bad. Everybody knows things are bad. It's a depression. Everybody's out of work or scared of losing their job. The dollar buys a nickel's worth, banks are going bust, shopkeepers keep a gun under the counter. Punks are running wild in the street and there's nobody anywhere who seems to know what to do, and there's no end to it. We know the air is unfit to breathe and our food is unfit to eat, and we sit watching our TVs while some local newscaster tells us that today we had fifteen homicides and sixty-three violent crimes, as if that's the way it's supposed to be! We know things are bad - worse than bad, They're crazy! It's like everything everywhere is going crazy, so we don't go out anymore. We sit in the house, and slowly the world we are living in is getting smaller, and all we say is, 'Please, at least leave us alone in our living rooms. Let me have my toaster and my TV and my steel-belted radials and I won't say anything. Just leave us alone!' Well, I'm not gonna leave you alone! I want you to get MAD! I don't want you to protest. I don't want you to riot - I don't want you to write to your congressman because I wouldn't know what to tell you to write. I don't know what to do about the depression and the inflation and the Russians and the crime in the street. All I know is that first you've got to get mad! You've got to say, "I'm a HUMAN BEING, GODDAMNIT! My LIFE has VALUE!!" So, I want you to get up now. I want all of you to get up out of your chairs. I want you to get up right now, and go to the window, open it, and stick your head out and yell: "I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!!"

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

McRumi - You humble me. You are, of course, quite correct. In my anger and pride I get carried away too often. God's message is to love and walk humbly before Him and our fellow man. God bless you for your small bright light of sanity here.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | September 17, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

I guess the next article will be how the Daily Kos or Democrat Underground is balanced? Oh, yeah, it's liberal. never mind.

Posted by: former democrat | September 17, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

Thank you Drudgereport, for posting a link to this article on 'Drudge-ology 101'! I'm sure that's how 90% of us have found it!

Posted by: Sudhir | September 17, 2008 2:53 PM | Report abuse

KMichaels,

Carly Fiorina failed at her own job. By all accounts she sucks. You wanna look up to a failure? What, you're going to be a slacker for your whole LIFE? Jeez, no wonder we're behind China.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 2:53 PM | Report abuse

it's funny now a consistently liberal newspaper like the post would point at Drudge's selective emphasis on certain articles. The post, nytimes, LAtimes are imfamous for the stories they don't cover or bury in the back pages. Now they don't list in the headline the party filiation of a democrat arrested, etc. But they always do when it is a replubican,

Posted by: alfred hussein newman | September 17, 2008 2:52 PM | Report abuse

It seems to me that media bias can in part be recognized by the presence in a particular piece of "reporting" of deliberate mischaracterizations of events that may in turn reflect badly on the "other guy". For instance, why does Mr. Cillizza obscure the nature of these two McCain "gaffes": Ms. Fiorina's comments were simply a statement that she does not think presedential qualifications are the same as business qualifications (a comment which she clearly applied to Mr. Obama as well), and McCain's policy adviser did not say that McCain invented the Blackberry, he merely claimed that during McCain's time on the Senate Commerce Committee he showed a supportive attitude towards encouraging the development of new technology (all subsequent referrals to the term "invented" have been made up by these incredibly impartial journalists). Like or hate McCain all you want, and debate the ACTUAL claims of these two statements as well, but you should actually engage with the comments that were made, instead of these willful distortions. These are the two most clearly manufactured "gaffes" I've seen in the campaign so far.

Posted by: Media Bias | September 17, 2008 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Yes thats exactly correct. Every owner of every radio station has independently made the same choice: ratings be damned! I'm not going to air liberal talk radio because I dont want to be TOO SUCCESSFUL at running a radio station.
Your understanding of the radio industry is a benefit to us all. Next, can you tell us how to fix this sub-prime crisis?"
When you own hundreds of stations like Clear Channel does, you don't have to worry that much about ratings of indiviual stations - but stroking the Republican hands that allowed you to buy all of those stations (as when Reagan's FCC eliminated ownership limits) is good business practice.


Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Why do the Libs feel disenfranchising legitmate voters with votes from dead people, felons, and people who don't exist is less important than fictitious "disenfranchised" who would be affected by "motor voter" laws? Why is it that the State of WI (a battleground State) couldn't get a vote in their legistlature on a motor voter bill, despite the fact that 90%+ of the people want it? Why is it ACORN is most active only in battleground States? Iraq's election was more honest...

Posted by: Voterregistrationfraud... | September 17, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Even if Drudge and FOX News are not giving equal time and for the sake of your argument If you were right that they both ran only positive stories on McCain and negative stories on Obama, they wouldn’t even scratch how far in ‘the tank’ the rest of the media is for Obama. So save me you’re crying about drudge, and learn something from it. We do not care about your opinions, just give us the news! Ever since reporters became journalists, the press has gone downhill.

Posted by: me | September 17, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Or it could be that, like many others on the far right, Mr.Drudge did not like John McCain until he picked a wacko, rightwing, "Christian" extremist to run as his VP.

Now that neocon Palin is on board, Drudge--like other McCain skeptics, Limbaugh, Kristol, and Dobson--has jumped onto the straight to rapture express with both feet.

Posted by: S.L. | September 17, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

We often forget that Carly Fiorina is a failure at life herself.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Poor baby. For at least as long as I can remember (and I'm 61) you Drive-Byes have been sticking it to conservatives. And you've been doubling down during this campaign. You have abandoned all pretense of fairness to promote your current leftist candidate for president and now you're complaining about media bias? Do you think we're stupid? What you're really complaining about is your loss of your monopoly over the news Americans receive. Get used to it. Your monoploy is now over and done with. You just don't realize it yet.

Posted by: CallMeIshmael | September 17, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

Wash Post is to Wash Times what Huff Post is to Drudge. This is not complicated, EVERYONE is slanted, it is just a matter of which direction.

Posted by: Persk | September 17, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

Freddie and Fannie better not be making .01 in political contributions to either party or any candiadate as long as it is under government control. Period. Maybe the Post should do a story about ACORN and rampant voter registration fraud.

Posted by: Jomama | September 17, 2008 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Idiot lying Obama lap-dog Nick Collins III writes:

"First off, Phil Gramm was actually in favor of a Sub-Prime crisis."

No, dimwitted liar nick. He was in favor of US banks being able to diversify. A sub-prime crisis is in loose lending policies. Phil Gramm is on record as being against loose lending policies.

His bill helped strengthen US banks and fight unfair advantage of foreign banks that were allowed to diversify. Foreign banks are still doing quite well for the most part and have been allowed to diversify for decades. Nick, you nitwit, you are too stupid for words.

Idiot Nick Collin continues his idiotic blather:

"He's on record as the sponsor of the bill that created it, and he continues to support that same bill today"

That is what we call an unrelated fact, Nick the dope. The bill allowed bank diversification. What caused the current problem is sub-prime loans that has nothing to do with banks diversifying.

Obama, as big of a clueless nitwit as you are, was in favor of sub-prime loans. He wanted to kiss up to his base and did so at the risk of their economic future.

Posted by: KMichaels | September 17, 2008 2:47 PM | Report abuse

Clinton admin where big advocates, in the name of diversity, for subprime loans. Franklin Raines, head of the white house budget office in clinton admin, ran Fannie mae into the ground. He not only ran Fannie into the ground he left with 100 million golden parachute. Then had civil charges filed against him in an attempt for Fannie to get some of its money back. Then he was chosen by Obama to head his vp search committee. Amazing how this is barely mentioned in the main stream media. How do i know this? because i read drudge. This is an example of the stories the MSM chooses not to highlight and exam. Can you image if Mcain had ties this close to the person who deystroyed Fannie mae?

Posted by: Jorge | September 17, 2008 2:46 PM | Report abuse

MiBrooks wrote:
OrlandoRican - The Apostle Paul wrote, Romans, about the damned, who took pride in their sin and ignorance. No more apt a description of present day GOPers was ever written.

---------------

Actually, it's pretty descriptive of Americans in general. Republicans and the Christian right would crucify Christ because he was too tolerant and preached too loudly against their hypocrisy and pride; Democrats and the Far Left would betray him because he spoke too much of loving one's enemy and the importance of moral integrity and respecting the law.

McCain suffers from a reckless and selfish pride, Obama suffers from an arrogant and sexist pride. Biden is a narcissistic politician and Palin is unbridled ignorant ambition.

I guess the guiding principle now is do as little harm as possible.

I give the edge to Obama. He's the only one with a solid balancing force: Michelle.

Does it really matter which becomes President given the increasing ignorance, laziness, and incompetence of the American populace as a whole??

Let us look to ourselves if we truly want change.

Posted by: McRumi | September 17, 2008 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Chris,

Sometimes the "easy" explanation really is the truthful one. Drudge IS a conservative mouthpiece. Letting anyone "rule your world" like that shows you, and the rest of the traditional media, are spineless.

Chris: "But, those who follow the news choices that Drudge makes on a day in and day out basis -- Democrats and Republicans alike -- argue that the shift in focus by Drudge is in keeping with a long time strain of his site: a healthy disdain for the mainstream media and their perceived biases."

Then the only guy Chris quotes on the record is a GOP hitman (Tim Griffin) who loves the way Drudge pushes the conversation in his party's favor.

BTW, Chris, McCain thinking the economy is dandy, Fiorina thinking her bosses aren't qualified to run a company into the ground as she did, and Palin deciding to stonewall her ethics investigation would ALL be bigger stories than striesand in a sane world. The fact that YOU don't think so shows which side of the samity divide you fall on.

Posted by: howie | September 17, 2008 2:45 PM | Report abuse

Good point about Drudge. No problem though - we have the Washington Post to ensure everyone loves Obama.

Why is someone who works for McCain saying something stupid deserving Drudge headlines and not stuff about Bill Ayers on Washington Post.

Sour grapes?

Tom Desrosier
http://www.dare2believe.com

Posted by: Tom Desrosier | September 17, 2008 2:44 PM | Report abuse

NEWS FLASH Obama/Biden
Democratic team breaks foreign experience sound barrier ....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=annkM6z1-FE


NEWS FLASH Palin a heartbeat away from flying
Sarah Palin graduates from McCain's foreign experience flight simulator ....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Es8Kqq74GsQ


Posted by: Ruth | September 17, 2008 2:43 PM | Report abuse

To be clear; Fiorina said that *none* of the candidates was qualified to lead a major US corp. The lamestream media simply seized on the Palin/McCain aspect of the comment.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/michael-m-bates/2008/09/17/cnnpolitics-com-mccain-adviser-fiorina-palin-not-ready-run-corporat

Drudge biased? Healer; heal thyself.

Posted by: Sparqi | September 17, 2008 2:43 PM | Report abuse

"if not for the handful of quasi-monopolies that own most of the radio stations in the US who choose not to air liberal-slanted shows to see just how big that audience could be."

Yes thats exactly correct. Every owner of every radio station has independently made the same choice: ratings be damned! I'm not going to air liberal talk radio because I dont want to be TOO SUCCESSFUL at running a radio station.

Your understanding of the radio industry is a benefit to us all. Next, can you tell us how to fix this sub-prime crisis?

Posted by: Arcadian Del Sol | September 17, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

Guess who the top three recipients of Fannie and Freddie were in the US Senate?

1). Christopher Dodd, Democrat - Connecticut - $133,900 (Dodd has been a Senator for 27 years)

2). John Kerry, Democrat - Massachusetts - $111,000 (Kerry has been in the Senate 23 years)

3). Barack Obama, Democrat - Illinois - $105,849 (Obama is a first term Senator, who only served 150 days before launching his Presidential Campaign)

As the Church Lady would say: "Isn't THAT special.....".

Posted by: Nobama | September 17, 2008 2:40 PM | Report abuse

Dernon Ruton - Not bad. An educated conservative. Pigs can fly! I don't have an umlout on my keyboard and never remember the escape sequence for those letters. I am fluent in Swedish, German, Greek, and Korean, and get by pretty well in French. You are obviously fluent in Swedish (or, maybe it's Danish, because your syntax is?), too. Mine is "Goteborg Swedish". We lived in Vastra Frolunda (you add the umlouts) for several years.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | September 17, 2008 2:40 PM | Report abuse

Exact and complete quote from Carly Fiorina. (no matter what consumate liars like Obama and local Nick Collins III would have you believe)

Carly: "Well, I don't think John McCain could run a major corporation, I don't think Barack Obama could run a major corporation, I don't think Joe Biden could run a major corporation,"

Carly continues (this part conveniently left out by the idiot leftist Obama lap-doggers) "It is a fallacy to suggest that the country is like a company. So, of course, to run a business, you have to have a lifetime of experience in business, but that's not what Sarah Palin, John McCain, Joe Biden or Barack Obama are doing."

Posted by: KMichaels | September 17, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

and, by the way,

drudge doesn't really "cover" much of anything these days. MAYBE one story a week. The rest is all "gee look kids, here's another character assassination to pass on to your pals." With a link and everything. That way, the cavemen of the right wing can just point, click, and drool.

Posted by: johneee | September 17, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

THIS JUST IN:
Gail is a high dollar tart. Details after I get my change.


Since we're going to throw around personal insults instead of talking points...

Alan Colmes is NOT a registered Republican. Obviously, his radio show is not available in backwater USA where the Stuckeys' you wait tables in is obviously located.

Posted by: Arcadian Del Sol | September 17, 2008 2:38 PM | Report abuse

Ah, nice to see partisans engaging in reasonable discourse. I do like the alliteration though.

LLL

Posted by: Lying Leftist Lapdog | September 17, 2008 2:37 PM | Report abuse

WOW!!!

What an idiot.

Posted by: bleeda | September 17, 2008 2:37 PM | Report abuse

I'm just surprised this author wrote about Drudge at all. I thought that standard operating procedure among the old-media was to completely ignore him. Good for you, author (never heard of him) for pointing out Drudge's influence. It's about time. Matt Drudge had a Sunday night radio program for years, and he never came off very mean or arrogant to me. He just HATES the old media like The Washington Post, and why not?

Posted by: The Grim Reaper | September 17, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

"If you think there's an audience for liberal talk radio, then by all means, go for it."
That would be a good point - if not for the handful of quasi-monopolies that own most of the radio stations in the US who choose not to air liberal-slanted shows to see just how big that audience could be.
The Fairness doctrine scare is about distracting the public from that issue: concentration of media ownership in few hands and the overwhelming dominance of Republican-leaning owners.

Posted by: Don | September 17, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

First off, Phil Gramm was actually in favor of a Sub-Prime crisis. He's on record as the sponsor of the bill that created it, and he continues to support that same bill today, as it achieved precisely what he set out to accomplish: An economic climate that would artificially increase the asset wealth of America's poor and through the use of a deliberate campaign of misinformation, encourage these same individuals to carry more debt. Once this had been achieved, the bill was designed to then create the economic environment (through rapid deregulation) that we have seen over the past several years; a rapid loss of available credit and available jobs leading directly to an enormous loss of wealth amongst the poor that would lead them to remain on the bottom with low education and poor skill sets. The end game? Simply the creation of an environment wherein more major corporations (the primary backers of Gramm and McCain for decades) could abandon American workes for cheap foreign labor, thus providing maximum profits for the very top 1% of society. These 1% have been further protected by the Bush-McCain tax cuts, which actually increased taxes on 95% of Americans (the bottom 95%).

This is so basic, and so well known that only a complete fool would argue against it. Why else would it be news?! Honestly... Plan and simple facts.

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

When McCain leads in the polls, it's a major headline on Drudge. When Obama's ahead, it's buried if posted at all.

Posted by: Tampa Jim | September 17, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Everything is to the right when you are all the way on the left.

Posted by: Rob | September 17, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

This article is hysterical. Lefty's are bringing pea shooters to a gunfight... I love it.

Posted by: Nobama | September 17, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

"Alan Colmes is going to vote Republican?? I bet that will come as a shock to him. Maybe somebody should tell him. "
Arcadian, this may come as a shock to you, but Alan Colmes is a republican- a moderate republican. That is why the Calamity/Holmes show is such a joke - the deranged conservative versus the milquetoast "liberal."
If you think that Colmes is a liberal democrat you've been suckered.
Hey, I think the turnip truck is heading back out to Bugtussle - better git yurself on board!

Posted by: gail | September 17, 2008 2:34 PM | Report abuse

You idiot leftists want to quote Carly Fiorina?

Look at how she says that Obama is more like Bush III than McCain.

Come on, dimwitted bafoons. Do tell us more.

Posted by: KMichaels | September 17, 2008 2:34 PM | Report abuse

Nick Collins III (assinine liar that his is, continues lying faster as fast as his few remaining braincells can explode):

"First, Fiorina says that McCain and Palin are unfit to run a company. Any company! She cited the local corner store as being out of their league. Then, she explains that Biden and Obama have clearly exhibited the skill set to run a company, or act in a Executive of Government role. Realizing what she had said, she then stumble over her words for about 15 seconds before saying nobody is qualified to run a company.:"

Outright blatant lying on the part of Nick Collins III (what a turd)

Ahem, Nick, you are getting more and more desperate with each of your lying posts.

Posted by: KMichaels | September 17, 2008 2:32 PM | Report abuse

This is a perfect example of media bias. Carly Fiorina said that Sarah Palin nor John McCain was suited to run a major company, and in the same sentence said neither was Barack Obama or Joe Biden.
How convenient that you left that part out of your story!!

Posted by: joeyb | September 17, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

The word "media" is a plural noun. Please learn how to conjugate the verb "is" when working with nouns.

Posted by: john | September 17, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Rock on, Drudge!

Posted by: kimmer | September 17, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

"....Fannie and Freddie were creations of the congressional Democrats and the Clinton Administration, designed to make mortgages available to more people who couldn't qualify easily to buy their own homes."

(god help us)

{WHAAAAAAAA?) Come on "aspergirl"...

do your homework! what you linked to was an opinion piece with HUGE HOLES. For instance, Fannie Mae was created in 1938. by democrats, yes, but as part of FDR's efforts to end the depression. For "balance" why not check into how many republicans profited by these groups under eisenhauer (never at home) nixon (crook) ford (moron) reagan (traitor) bush(1) (latin spouting traitor) and bush(2)(biggest crook in the history of the white house).

You won't find that balance on Fox, certainly not in an opinion piece, because their mouths are glued to the GOP's brown spot.

Posted by: johneee | September 17, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

The MSM (newspapers, TV) represent the "ideal" rather than the "real", illusionaries willing to "prove" that elitism supercedes journalism, joints mediums that seem to preach doctrines of failure as opposed to reality. A President can present a Bill to the Congress for their vote or Congress can present a Bill for POTUS to sign. He can suggest economic solutions while Congress is more powerful inasmuch as they can solve but blame the President if he doesn't sign on. And which bills has GWB vetoed that would fix the economy? A fat Congressman laying on a beach in charge of Ways and Means for the whole country and he can't manage his own taxes? A Congress with a much lower approval rating than the man they lay all blame on? What's wrong with the MSM picture we get daily? Their elitist perception that they know what's best for this country while their own enterprises are hitting rock bottom.

Posted by: LL in La | September 17, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

LETS PUT THE SHOE ON THE OTHER FOOT WASHINGTON POST, YOUR NOTHING THAN A LIBERAL MOUTHPIECE TRYING TO GRAB FOR ATTENTION, AFRAID THAT PALIN ACTUALLY HAS TAKEN THE SUPERSTAR SPOTLIGHT AWAY FROM YOUR CELEB-CANDIDATE OBAMA. WHICH IS A FEAT IN ITSELF GIVEN THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE MEDIA OUTLETS ARE LEFT LEANING. I MIGHT BE INCLINED TO READ YOUR PAPER MORE OFTEN IF YOU WERE ABLE TO REPORT AN UNBIAS PERSPECTIVE OF THE NEWS, AS IT IS YOU AND EVERY OTHER MEDIA OUTLET WHO LEAN TO ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER AR A JOKE. TRUE JOURNALISM IS DEAD IN AMERICA.

Posted by: INDEPENDANT 08 | September 17, 2008 2:29 PM | Report abuse

Jealousy.. not very becoming. Even from a lefty.

Posted by: jona | September 17, 2008 2:29 PM | Report abuse

You morons who believe the "run a company" line DO in fact realize she stated that NONE of the candidates could run a company (different skill sets involved), and that the quote was butchered beyond all recognition? Right?

Posted by: OsoRojo | September 17, 2008 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Drudge is the closest thing to real journalism this country has seen in decades.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 2:28 PM | Report abuse

The Drudgereport belongs to Matt Drudge. He is beholden to no one, he can and will, continue to present stories in a way that pleases him and his own political beliefs. He is an avowed conservative and his presentment of news meets that end. To complain about it or to criticize it, is pointless.

Posted by: Jaemes | September 17, 2008 2:27 PM | Report abuse

No media bias, huh? Then why did the author willfully neglect to mention that HP Chief Carly Fiorina stated that, in her opinion, Obama & Biden also are not qualified to be CEO of a major US Company and that PMS-NBC edited that footage out of its broadcast.

If the Liberal Media senses any bias in what Drudge is posting to his website, its only because Drudge isn't buying the BS that they're selling.

Drudge is an independent source of news & information and he's holding the old media's feet to the fire...and the editorial staff @ Washington Post don't like it much, do they.

Posted by: Whyte Narf | September 17, 2008 2:27 PM | Report abuse

The Wshington Post is now complaining about biased coverage?

Some people truly have no shame.

Posted by: Art | September 17, 2008 2:27 PM | Report abuse

Almost all media is biased to the left wing agenda. Go Drudge! Keep doing what you are doing.

Posted by: RLW | September 17, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

Uhhh, wow. Chris here is talking about media bias as if he has none of his own. By the way, Holtz-Eakin was referring to telecommunications as a whole, he never mentioned the Blackberry specifically. secondly, Fiorina also said that neither Obama nor Biden would be fit to be CEO, which you conveniently left out.

Posted by: David | September 17, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

IF DRUDGE "DRIVES THE MEDIA COVERAGE"

AND YOU STATE, MEDIA COVERAGE IS BIASED.

DOESN'T THAT MAKE DRUDGE THE SOURCE OF THE BIAS?

Cizilla you and the WAPO editorial board are a cancer on the body politic.

Ommitting negative stories to "balance" the news is evil and un-american.

Why read the Fix when you can get the information directly from Drudge, without the BS representation of being a fair truth based news source?

You and the Cable news are a bunch of chumps

Posted by: feckless | September 17, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

Yet another lying leftist Obama lapdog writes:

"What Phil Gramm did leading to the Enron collapse,"

Nothing Phil Gramm did lead to the Enron collapse. Phill Gramm did not control their bogus bookeeping tactics.

"and what he did again leading up to the current financial meltdown"

Phil Gramm was against sub-prime lending policies. Guess again, LIAR. The bill he passed had bipartisan support and BILL CLINTON (you idiots) was the one that signed it and made it law.

What Phil Gramm did was make US banks more competitive against foreign banks. So quit showing how absolutely clueless you leftists are.

"he wants to do yet again to your healthcare."

He wants healthcare to be cheaper, still maintaining high standards and reduce government waste. These are not bad things, dopey leftists.

Obama was the idiot supporting sub-prime loans you liars. It was he that got lobby money from the now failed Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.

It was Bill Clinton that signed the Gramm bill into law.

It was dem politicians pandering to poor and minorities with loose lending policies that brought on this current problem.

Posted by: KMichaels | September 17, 2008 2:23 PM | Report abuse

The only reason this was a story at all is because the author perceived a shift from favorable Obama coverage to favorable McCain/Palin coverage. It wouldn't have been a story at all had the shift been the reverse.
While the author writes a well-balanced article, I believe there is an underlying anger that someone else (Drudge) controls part of the narrative sometimes, instead of Big MSM. It wouldn't be so bad though if Drudge was more left-learning in his views.
I've never understood how the left and Big MSM protests when some reporting seems, to them, slanted to the right, but never say a thing when it is slanted to the left.
I think it betrays their moral incompetence.
Don't they wonder why people are turning away from Big MSM? It isn't too hard to see the leftward Big MSM bias.

Posted by: Joe | September 17, 2008 2:23 PM | Report abuse

To mibrooks27: Please, some civility. Your harsh tone is oppressive. And that would be "nicht wahr?". The paper is the "Göteborgs-Posten"; that would be "German-language newspaper", with a hyphen. And your question would more properly read, "Och vilken språk taller du? Javisst, inte engelska!" My English, German and Swedish are all not bad, and your standing to lecture is not good. A gratuitous, insulting tone is unwelcome, in any language.

Posted by: Dernon Ruton | September 17, 2008 2:23 PM | Report abuse


Any column on Drudge that doesn't include the phrase "propaganda outlet for the Republican Party" is dumb or dishonest.

I'd hate to see you go the ignominious way of rent-a-bum Dana Milbank, Chris Cillizza.

Posted by: deben | September 17, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Matt Drudge is an unscrupulous pitbull at the service of the GOP. If the drudg-ologists think that he is castigating Obama and favoring McCain, all they have to do is to become drudg-phobists and disregard Drudge's biased reporting. Easy! Who's going to listen then? The moose in the tundra? We don't need any more rabblerousers; we already have McCain and his Lobbyist campaigners.

Posted by: JoeG. | September 17, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

"I always tell my freinds that when I make political predictions, I imagine what my WAllace Democrat Parents, South Side Roseland relatives and freinds would think.

Their hands would wither and fall off before they cast an Obama Vote because he is....um.... not like them...

Posted by: poorrichard | September 17, 2008 12:53 PM

You can take the racist out of the old south, but you can't get the old south out of the racist's progeny.

Posted by: MLK | September 17, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

OK, you all had me doubting myself, so I went back and watched the interview of Fiorina again. Here are the facts, just as they happened:

First, Fiorina says that McCain and Palin are unfit to run a company. Any company! She cited the local corner store as being out of their league. Then, she explains that Biden and Obama have clearly exhibited the skill set to run a company, or act in a Executive of Government role. Realizing what she had said, she then stumble over her words for about 15 seconds before saying nobody is qualified to run a company.

Priceless! Fiorina is a key McCain adviser, and she doesn't even have basic faith in her people! Have we ever seen a less competent campaign?! Obama's gonna take this thing in a landslide.

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

To claim that McCain, who has more houses than he can count and will never have even think about making ends meet, is more in touch than a man that had to pay his own way through life is wrong. Whether you like Obama or not he has a better understanding of blue collar struggles than McCain ever has or will.

Posted by: Jaemes | September 17, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

YOU WROTE : Drudge failed to include the story that "a statement by McCain surrogate Carly Fiorina that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company."

TRUTH: Carly Fiorina said she feels that NONE of the candidates; Obama, Biden, Mccain, Palin, are equipped to serve as CEO of a major US Company.

So, she said the same thing about Obama/Biden and Mccain/Palin. However, you failed to include that in your article. And you complain that drudge did not tell this story. So you can therefore say the same thing about any of your liberal media outlets that failed to tell the same story.
I'm sure you did not know she said it about all 4 candidates, as I can only imagine what blogs you get your "research" from.


You may want to do some actual research, you know, the basis to real journalism. You complain about Drudge, that personal opinion may decipher what makes it to the page as headlines... in a blatant and obvious article with your bias and personal opinions loud and clear. At least the stories on Drudge are complete and not edited for content to suit a certain taste.
If you want to read a story that is not on Drudge's page, go find it elsewhere. THAT, sir, would be called RESEARCH.

Posted by: FEDUP | September 17, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

You've just wasted a lot of ink or computer time. DRUDGE is the only site I find that is non-biased and reports actual NEWS! Where have YOU been? Your theory that
DRUDE doesn't cover Obama ss much; he doesn't have to, "O" gets much more coverage on networks 2-1!!

Posted by: Cathy T | September 17, 2008 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Wow - Seems Drudge is really got the liberal media up in arms. Very odd - a lopsided article about lopsided media.

Posted by: USSA | September 17, 2008 2:20 PM | Report abuse

You've just wasted a lot of ink or computer time. DRUDGE is the only site I find that is non-biased and reports actual NEWS! Where have YOU been? Your theory that
DRUDE doesn't cover Obama ss much; he doesn't have to, "O" gets much more coverage on networks 2-1!!

That's okay...go Sarah!!

Posted by: Cathy T | September 17, 2008 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Mlbrooks,

The reason we oppose the Fairness Doctrine is because in itself, its biased. We believe in the First Amendment, and it's Freedom of Speech, not just liberal speech. If you think there's an audience for liberal talk radio, then by all means, go for it. Whether you agree that there's a media bias or not, millions of people believe there is, and thus you have a market for conservative talk radio. If you want to pretend that MSNBC, NY Times or PBS (Moyers?) is balanced, then there is no reason to continue this conversation. You get to CHOOSE who you watch and what you listen to, nobody is FORCED to watch Fox News or listen to Rush, we

Posted by: TexasProud | September 17, 2008 2:19 PM | Report abuse

hope none of you mccain apologists have any "pre-existing conditions"

Posted by: wordup | September 17, 2008 2:19 PM | Report abuse

igotmarriedtothewidownextdoorandshe'sbeenmarriedseventimesbeforeandeveryonewasanhenery

henery!

henerytheeightiamiamhenerytheeightiam.

Posted by: Henerytheeighthiamiam | September 17, 2008 2:19 PM | Report abuse

OrlandoRican - The Apostle Paul wrote, Romans, about the damned, who took pride in their sin and ignorance. No more apt a description of present day GOPers was ever written.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | September 17, 2008 2:19 PM | Report abuse

Hah! Laughable! When the going gets tough, the Republicans leave for Crawford, or Aspen. No worries there, as its a Democrat's job to save the country. Again.

The correlation between hard work and success is limited. Obviously, Obama is where he is because he worked hard and earned it. Bush and McCain are where they are because their fathers and grandfathers worked hard.

McCain has never even paid a bill in his life, so why should we trust him to protect our money? I don't think we need another silver spoon republican trying to run the economy. Just look at what happened under Bush: 56 million Americans who were middle class in 2000 are now out of work and considered below the poverty line. 23 million Americans who had health insurance in 2000 now do not.

McCain actually wrote the bills that caused this. Look it up! This is so basic that it hardly gets any attention. Obama is from a food stamps family, and federal assistance combined with his drive and natural ability helped him pull himself up by the boot straps. McCain was a bottom of the barrel student, mediocre officer, and quickly corrupted legislator. Had he not been born with high social status he would have never been able to land back asswards where he has.

Maybe you missed this. McCain owns at least seven houses and counting. It strikes me that these uber-rich Republican elitists who own so many houses are a real problem for the rest of us in that they drive up real estate values by gobbling up land and hoarding away homes. We wouldn't have had a banking meltdown if we hadn't had a subprime meltdown. We wouldn't have had a subprime meltdown if the average American had been able to afford a single home. The average American can't afford a single home because these chablis swilling country club loving Republican elites collect homes like the rest of us collect credit card bills.

Just so these crazy Bushies and McCainiacs don't pull the wool over your eyes on de-regulation... Here is the basic low down on what's behind it. Simple. Straight forward. Factual.

The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 established the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) in the United States and included banking reforms, some of which were designed to control speculation. Some provisions such as Regulation Q that allowed the Federal Reserve to regulate interest rates in savings accounts were repealed by the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980. Other provisions which prohibit a bank holding company from owning other financial companies were repealed in 1999 by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. Yes, that Gramm.

First repeal of the Glass-Steagall act allowed banks to determine what interest rates they could pay on savings, thus eliminating from our society sensible government oversight by the the Federal Reserve banks.

Second part repealed by the Gramm-Leahy act was that of the idea that a bank should be FORCED to not be able to invest in other forms of business. This was yet another portion of the bill aimed at preventing the government from protecting average Americans by maintaining a strong and balance economy by preventing companies over reaching.

The entirety of this bill is correctly attributed to our current sub-prime mortgage problem. This problem started on the banking side through de-regulation and led directly to predatory lending practices.

The Gramm-Leahy-Bliley act was signed into law by a Bill Clinton, who did not have the votes in Congress to prevent it.

It had positive economic results, allowing some finanacial companies to consolidate their resources and operate more efficiently, thereby saving money and increasing the value of their companies and increasing the value of the shareholders holdings in those companies.

Prior to the repeal of this law, foreign bankers held a financial edge against US banks because they were free to diversify their investments. Repealing this law allowed US banks to catch up with foreign banks and increase their value as a company. Again, increasing the value of their stocks to their stock-holders, but also removing necessary regulation to prevent predatory schemes.

Yes, it did allow companies the freedom to make good and or bad investments, just like any other company, but without necessary regulation to prevent abuse of the system.

The vast majority of banks are at risk, but are currently stable because they made wise investments. Some are not doing so well because they got caught up in too risky of deals, such as interest-only loans. They took a risk, they lost.

Buyers were duped into accepting these risk terms on their loans. That is the fault of predatory lenders.

Democrat president Bill Clinton had the option of veto-ing this bill but chose not to. He supported the bill and signed it into law in 1999 because the Republicans had the votes in Congress to ignore the veto.

One of the prime sponsors of the bill was this man, also a REPUBLICAN.
John McCain

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 2:19 PM | Report abuse

"Carly Fiorina stated that NONE of the candidates, including Obama and Biden would be qualified to be CEO. The original sound bite cut the Obama/Biden comment out - which is typical negative, biased reporting. Tell the whole story next time!!"

I'm not sure if I've read anything more truculently ignorant in the last couple of months (which is saying something).

So McCain's top adviser says he'd be incapable of running a corporation that's not a major gaffe, because, see, she also said Obama and Biden weren't capable either.

Let me explain something to you: she's on the campaign payroll to say such things about Obama and Biden. About her own candidate, not so much...

Posted by: ibc | September 17, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Here's some facts: Since 1948 there have been Democratic presidents for 24 years, Republican presidents for 36 years. Under Democratic Presidents the economy created 53.8 million jobs, under Republican presidents, the economy created approximately 36 million jobs. No Republican president has ever created more jobs in his first term than his Democratic predecessor did in the preceding term. Under Clinton, the American economy created 22 million jobs. Under Bush, the economy created 5 million jobs. The job loss in the last year alone has been over 600,000 jobs.

Posted by: mrgavel | September 17, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

What Phil Gramm did leading to the Enron collapse, and what he did again leading up to the current financial meltdown, he wants to do yet again to your healthcare. Remember the fawning coverage that was being peddled on that one?

Posted by: K | September 17, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

I think Chris is getting paranoid. If the Drudge had the intent he alludes to, then the Headline for the day would have been ............."Obama Camp ectatic over AIG and Merrill Lynch failures" ....................according to the reliably pro-Obama CNN's reporter Candy Crowley.

Posted by: johs | September 17, 2008 2:16 PM | Report abuse

milbrooks27:

Yadda, yadda, yadda. And also, yadda, yadda, yadda!

You still want to buy the bridge?

Posted by: OrlandoRican | September 17, 2008 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Chris Cillizza is the reason newspapers are going out of business. Go back to school and get an education!

Posted by: New York Minute | September 17, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Actually, in the full unedited version, Carly Fiorina stated that NONE of the candidates, including Obama and Biden would be qualified to be CEO. The original sound bite cut the Obama/Biden comment out - which is typical negative, biased reporting. Tell the whole story next time!!

Posted by: Bill | September 17, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

I don't know why Carly was getting so upset yesterday. Just because the news media routinely takes her comments out of context and rush's them over to the Obama camp for deceptive advertising. It's just business as usual for the leftist elite in the media. If Obama wins, half the so called objective journalist will be standing in line to be his press secretary. In fact they are already acting that way anyway.

Posted by: Bill | September 17, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

What Phil Gramm did leading to the Enron collapse, and what he did again leading up to the current financial meltdown, he wants to do yet again to your healthcare. Remember the fawning coverage that was being peddled on that one?

"[E]conomic conservatives should take heart. McCain's chief economic adviser - and perhaps his closest political friend - is the ultimate pure play in free market faith, former Texas Senator Phil Gramm. If McCain follows Gramm's counsel, and most of his current positions are vintage Gramm indeed, his policies as president would represent not just a sharp departure from the Bush years, but an assault on government growth that Republicans have boasted about, but failed to achieve, for decades. [...]"

"On the economy, McCain's most daring manifesto is his healthcare plan. Not surprisingly, it bears the Gramm imprint. In fact, McCain has been heeding Gramm's "power-to-the-consumer" approach for more than a decade. The two senators bonded when they linked arms to fight Hillary Clinton's ill-fated healthcare program in 1993. "We couldn't get any press coverage in Washington, DC, so we traveled all over the country, to the regional media markets," says Gramm. In 150 meetings at hospitals and clinics, McCain and Gramm relentlessly pounded the Clinton plan, helping fire the voter outrage that killed the plan in 1994."
.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/18/news/newsmakers/tully_gramm.fortune/index.htm
.


Yep. McCain and Gramm were prime movers behind killing health insurance reform in the 1990's -- but no worries. They've got a great grasp of the current situation. According to McCain and Gramm, the problem is that we need more deregulation, and some tax rebates and stuff. You know, just like for everything else.


Gramm, you may recall, famously blamed the current economic woes on Americans being a "nation of whiners". You'll be happy to know that here, too, the McCain camp is consistent: healthcare costs are your own damn fault, America.


In July, McCain's healthcare architect Al Hubbard (an architect of Bush's failed healthcare proposals, which have now adopted by McCain in a fit of the usual non-maverickiness) laid the blame for healthcare costs on Americans "consuming" health care like "caviar":

"[W]e consume it as if it was free...It’s interesting, if you would think about, the employers rather than providing health care insurance they provided food insurance. So every time you go to the grocery store you just take out your food insurance card, you give it to the cashier, she scans it, and you’re outta there. Pretty soon, you would start buying caviar, expensive steak, and you start buying more than you need..."
.
http://thinkprogress.org/wonkroom/2008/07/22/mccain-caviar/
.


Yep. You consumers are being spoiled -- you want to be too healthy. You want too much care. A lot of people live rich, full lives with, say, blinding cataracts, or with a piece of construction rebar lodged in their skulls -- why do you want to be such a prima donna about it? So you're having a heart attack -- you don't have time to shop around a little, get some quotes"?


Makes me feel sheepish, now, for taking all that expensive medicine just so I can "breathe".


Of course, we can go further still. There's no problem that conservatism can't solve by simply altering the fabric of reality until the problem goes away. This is known as the "lampshade principle", as discovered by George W. Bush: when something is bad is happening, stick a lampshade over your head so you can't see it anymore. Problem solved!


Yet another McCain healthcare advisor, John Goodman:


Mr. Goodman, who helped craft Sen. John McCain's health care policy, said anyone with access to an emergency room effectively has insurance, albeit the government acts as the payer of last resort. (Hospital emergency rooms by law cannot turn away a patient in need of immediate care.)

"So I have a solution. And it will cost not one thin dime," Mr. Goodman said. "The next president of the United States should sign an executive order requiring the Census Bureau to cease and desist from describing any American – even illegal aliens – as uninsured. Instead, the bureau should categorize people according to the likely source of payment should they need care."
"So, there you have it. Voila! Problem solved."
.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/stories/DN-Uninsured_27bus.ART.State.Edition2.4dce428.html
.


Given what's happened to everything else this crew has touched -- and Gramm, especially, seems to have the reverse-Midas touch to an uncanny degree -- I'm almost looking forward to the idea of John McCain and Phil Gramm possibly being in charge of my health insurance. It would be nothing if not exciting.


Heck, with Gramm's "magic touch", I'm confident we can all look forward to a resurgence of the Black Death.

Posted by: DrainYou | September 17, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Actually, in the full unedited version, Carly Fiorina stated that NONE of the candidates, including Obama and Biden would be qualified to be CEO. The original sound bite cut the Obama/Biden comment out - which is typical negative, biased reporting. Tell the whole story next time!!

Posted by: Bill | September 17, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Hats off to Mr. Cillizza for hitting the nail on the head. One thing that fascinates me is that those like Drudge and Limbaugh (whose entire show prep consists of reading what's on Drudge) embody the very thing that they claim to be against: media bias.

Posted by: Colin C | September 17, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

How about this Drudge move: For about a week after Biden was announced, Drudge ran the photo when both families came out on stage, and the candidates kissed the others' wife. Obama kissing a white woman! Biden kissing a black woman! It was so blatant... and it works.

Posted by: Matt | September 17, 2008 2:12 PM | Report abuse

First off, posting as 'anonymous' means you lack the courage to stand up next to your own opinions. coward.

As for the notion that "everyone at Fox News is voting Republican", you're a dumbass. Greta Van Susteran's entire family is made up of Democratic operatives and Democratic Electorates. She herself is a staunch Democrat and makes no secret of that.

Alan Colmes is going to vote Republican?? I bet that will come as a shock to him. Maybe somebody should tell him.

The "Fox Contributors" who regularly appear as panelists on several different shows consist of four regulars, three of whom are declared Democrats and supporters of Democrat initiatives.

Shepherd Smith, Bill O'Reilly, and Sean Hannity have all registered as Independants. While their personal voting preferences are no secret (they are conservatives), they offer NO funding or monetary support to any candidates or to either parties.

The same can NOT be said of CNN, MSNBC, and CBS anchors, producers, and other staffers.

Posted by: Arcadian Del Sol | September 17, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

And something your blog fails to mention, Chris: that Fiorina said all four candidates were not fit to run a major corporation, not just McCain and Palin. Funny how you "forgot" to mention that.

Just like the mainstream media "forgot" to mention that Karl Rove accused both Obama and McCain of going too far with their ads, not just McCain. Guess you all overlooked that, too.

Sounds to me like the pot calling the kettle black.

Posted by: Brian W. | September 17, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

OK, Chris...we get it: you think media bias is a conservative delusion.
But you quote Fiorina questioning McCain and Palin, when she ALSO questioned Obama and Biden--IN THE SAME BREATH. (This is also what the Obama campaign website did in editing the tape for YouTube and steering the media to it--but CNN hasn't cited this in its new campaign "truther" spot.) You think the Drudge emphasis on Hollywood is proof of bias--it is! But you think cutting Fiorina's comments in half to favor Obama is just fine--it's not; IT TOO IS BIAS!
Can't you just admit Drudge is on the other side from you--but you're on a side as well? And there's a lot more people viewing CNN and the MSM and reading the NYT and WaPo than there are hitting the Drudge Report or tuning in to Fox News.
In the aggregate, there is bias; but by the sheer numbers, the bias pro-Obama is daunting. And obvious. (Tune in to Campbell Brown on any given night at CNN.)
And since we take sides too, we're not gonna take it anymore...

Posted by: Vox Populi | September 17, 2008 2:07 PM | Report abuse

Dopey strikes again, with this idiotic and false blather:

"Why trust any of those hippie-liberal main stream professional economists who tell us through the use of extensively vetted data that the Bush-McCain theories governing their economic policies have been a disaster in both the long and short term for our nation, when we can just keep saying the (undefined) funadamentals are strong?"

Fundamentals of an economy are hardly undefined. Here is the list most economists would refer to as fundamentals. You can look up our current status on each if you gave a damn about truth.

1) Inflation (currently on the good side of things)
2) Unemployment rate (currently well below the USA average. Higher than it has been but substantially lower than bad rates found under Jimmy Carter (DEMOCRAT)
3) GDP (currently doing fine. Not the best it has ever been but rather good nevertheless)
4) Economic growth (currently slowing somewhat but still on the positive side. It has been on the positive side for over 10 years)
5) Inovation and hard work of the general working public. (doing quite well in general, still producing way above average. Still very effective in work output)

So, McCain is accurate in saying that the economy fundmentals are good. Of course, it serves democrats and their politicians to speak gloom and doom concerning the economy because this sort of talk serves their political agenda. It is also known that gloom and doom talk, even if true, tends to hurt the economy, not help it. It hurts because some listeners are misinformed. Some fall for scare tactics. McCain has been rightly positive on the economy, balanced with fixing weaknesses. Obama is leftly negative about the economy, claiming that only he, the chosen messiah will fix it.

Finally, the cause of our current problem. First note, we dont have widespread economic problems. We have one main problem that has haunted us since the housing bust. That is about it. Sure, we have other issues that go in cycles but our current problem again is limited.

That problem stems from sub-prime loans. In general it stems from loose lending practices. Now, loose lending practices dont hurt you unless the housing boom ends. Then, so to speak, you have to pay the piper.

Now, who is on record as supporting the loose lending policies and who is against it.

Bush, McCain, most republicans are against loose lending policies.

Clinton, Bill and Hill, Kerry, Obama, Dodd, Franks and most other dems were fore against loose lending policies. Of course, now that the crap has hit the fan they will claim that they were never for them. This is called LYING.

Clinton was the one that signed in the Gramm bill that allowed banks to diversify. This bill is the current Obama headfake. Their supposition is that this bill caused the problem. Well, it did not. If anything this bill allowed free competition and allowed companies like CitiGroup and others to compete better against foreign banks and become much better off (helps the stockholders and 401k holders) and helps them be MORE financially stable.

In fact, when getting ready to sign this bill, Bill Clintons only threat of a veto (which he did not do) was in the event that the republicans went ahead with their plan to TIGHTEN lending policies.

According to Bill, Hill, Obama and all the other idiot dems, TIGHT lending policies hurt their base, the minorities and the poor. So, in their constant pandering to their base they insisted that loose lending policies remain in effect.

Obama and Chris Dodd are in the #2 and #1 slots as to recieving lobby money from Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac. Bush repeatedly said that these orgs should quickly tighten up their loose lending policies.

Who came to their rescue? Yep, Obama and Chris Dodd stepped up and defended Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac. Why? Obviously that is what they were paid to do. Why else? Because pandering to the poor and minorities is part of their platforms.

So, who caused the main economic problem right now? DEMOCRATS. I can name them, list their motives and show you when how and why they did it. Just read above.

Posted by: KMichaels | September 17, 2008 2:06 PM | Report abuse

OF COURSE every network except for FoxNews wants Obama to win -- It's the same reason that every other country in the world wants Obama to win (recent poll of 20-or-so countries showed that every single one preferred obama). It's because the incumbent party has run arguably the most INCOMPETENT and CORRUPT administration in the history of democratic civilizations!

It's half of America and Fox News who think killing embryos is a sin versus the rest of the entire world who think people's day to day lives and futures matter.

Posted by: mike | September 17, 2008 2:06 PM | Report abuse

That Anon post is mine

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

This guy will soon be reduced to writing copy for restaurant menus.

And if there is anything "fragrant" around here, its the stink from this dungheap of an article.

Posted by: Arcadian Del Sol | September 17, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

Memo to Chris Cillizza: Please, please, please stop being such a wanker.

Posted by: Regular American | September 17, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse

It's accurate. I noticed the same thing. McCain was getting dissed and Obama praised. Now the tables seem to be turning. I'm a Democrat and despite my affiliation it does not have to ruin one's objectivity. I think it has much to do with a national mood. Also I noticed Obama is not as relaxed and confident anymore especially during the O-Reilly interview, oh boy!

This was one of the first times in recent years that the media has not been against the democratic candidate which really surprised me. I think it's because Obama is black and whites are afraid to appear racist so they treat Obama like glass. Maybe that fear is wearing off.

Posted by: Pat | September 17, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse

A few days back I stopped into Salina, Kansas off I-35 headed south to Guthrie, Oklahoma. I got to talking to some people about the what these GOP people are trying to pull on us.

This is pretty simple:

1) Why trust one of those hippie-liberal MSM professional journalists who might report something you didn't want to hear when you can just slap lipstick on a GOP operative and stick him in front of a camera and have him say what you need him to say?

2) Why trust one of those hippie-liberal main stream professional scientists who tell you the fundamental nature of the universe is as yet beyond our technological level of sophistication to understand when you can just roll out some Neo-Creationists who manage to give a nice tidy seven day explanation of the cosmos?

3) Why trust any of those hippie-liberal main stream professional CIA operatives or spy sats when you can just wheel in some loon from the American Enterprise Institute and have them say definitively that a targeted nation had weapons worth starting a war over?

4) Why trust any of those hippie-liberal main stream professional economists who tell us through the use of extensively vetted data that the Bush-McCain theories governing their economic policies have been a disaster in both the long and short term for our nation, when we can just keep saying the (undefined) funadamentals are strong?

GOP Political Theory: The best science fiction in town.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse

Cillizza is plain wrong. Drudge has made it his mission to destroy Democrats. Just look at his site today. He finally covers the market meltdown but you won't find a photo of "no regulation" Bush, "don't know economics" McCain, or "free-market" Palin. You will find a photo of Obama putting on a cowboy hat, Pelosi looking sheepish, and Hillary looking surprised. It's obvious that he wants readers to associate Dems with the meltdown. He adds a photo of a Bentley at the Obama-Streisand fundraiser. But he never showed the Rolls Royces at the McCain-Beverly Hilton Hollywood fundraiser. What a crock.

Posted by: Proud American Liberal | September 17, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse

Kmicheals - is clueless and a follower of delusion..he has his head right up the u know where...dumb.

Posted by: nolovlost | September 17, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse

It actually balances out. Drudge is no more biased toward the conservatives than MSNBC, ABC, CBS, etc. are toward the liberals. That's modern broadcast news, people.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

One more time for those of you too slow to get it. Fiorina works for McCain, of course she is going to say unflattering things about Obama and Biden. The fact that she lumped her bosses in with them is NEWSWORTHY.
I'll help you with an analogy. Let's say David Axelrod, Obama's campain chairman, said in response to a reporters question, "Joe Biden is not qualified to babysit my infant child" . Later in the day, when asked for clarification, Mr. Axelrod says, "None of the candidates are qualified to babysit my infant child, including McCain, Palin and Obama."
Can you see what the newsworthy part of that quote would be? It would not be that he doesn't think Palin/McCain is unqualified, it is that he thinks OBAMA and BIDEN, the two people he works for are not qualified!! Can we please move on?

Posted by: NM Moderate | September 17, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

There is simply no such thing as objectivity in journalism or anything else in life.

We all filter out information which doesn’t conform to our beliefs, and embrace information that supports our beliefs. We engage in activities and behaviors which demonstrate our values; and refuse to participate in activities and behaviors which do not demonstrate our values.

In truth, there is nothing wrong with bias itself. What is wrong is to deny one’s bias when engaged in discourse—especially when one is a journalist.

Journalists show their bias in subtle ways: the stories they select and reject; the information they omit and emphasize is determined by their bias.

Journalists need to own-up to their bias—-there is no such thing as “just reporting the facts.”

Posted by: socalgal59 | September 17, 2008 2:02 PM | Report abuse

Barbarat - You really are a moron, you know that? Der Spiegel, which you likely cannot read, nicht var?, becasue you are an ignorant moron, is a German language newspaper. The Gotborg Posten is Swedish (un vad taller du fur sproak? Taller du inte Engleska!) and I suspect you cannot read Swedish, either. None of these newspapers has endorsed any candidate, They merely comment about U.S. politics and the immaturity and ignorance of the average American voter. What you did, like a kindergarten student, was to cut and paste from an earlier post of mine and attach your moronic endorsement of Fixed News to it. You are an embarrassingly ignorant and shallow twit - typical white trash.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | September 17, 2008 2:02 PM | Report abuse

Cillizza, you missed the "local boy makes good" angle in your story about Drudge. He's from Takoma Park.

chsw

Posted by: chsw | September 17, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Bias in the news?

This is so simple I fell asleep twice while typing this. As a big rig driver, I've been all over this country, and I know first hand that the nation is ready to throw the GOP bums out. Let me break it down for you:

Studies show that MSM are 80% Republicans and or Right Wing leaning.

Studies show that at the moment McCain continues to get 60% of the press articles compared to 40% for Obama.

In the past, McCain was getting 80% of the coverage compared to just 20% for Obama.

Of the current 40% of coverage allotted to Obama by the MSM, the vast majority are negative.

Of the current 60% of coverage allotted to McCain by the MSM, the vast majority are positive.

The reason Limbaugh and Drudge are able to get such a large audience is that the MSM depends on them to propagate fringe issue stories that the MSM can then report on as "news".

When objective leftists claim that there is no MSM leftist bias we can trust these claims because they are proven arbiters of truth. Of course there is Right Wing bias in the MSM. We see it consistently.

For example, go visit CNN and view any political stories. Majority are about fringe wedge issues engineered to make Right Wing candidates competitive, and thus provide a horse race for political reporters to create a compelling narrative geared to garner regular readership, thus boosting advertising revenue. The few credible policy stories in there are all flimsy at best.

The MSM sold their souls a long time ago. Chris, the current MSM guru wannabe is yet another example of some idiot aspiring to be the next GOP prostitute, doing the bidding of his nationalist masters.

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 1:58 PM | Report abuse

You just wrote this article so you can have it linked on Drudge. Can't blame you though at least Drudge has a following.

Posted by: n2dubes | September 17, 2008 1:58 PM | Report abuse

I can see a day not too far out in the future where shareholders will demand a change of Leadership at the Leftist News organizations.

NBC, CBS, ABC, New York Times, Washington Post.

FOX had more viewers than the Leftist loosers combined during the Republican Convention.

This translates into Advertising revenue dollars.

The Loosers revenues are dwindling.

The market will demand it as in any other industry because these outfits are so far out of touch.

It's just a matter of time....

Posted by: Obama2012 | September 17, 2008 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Cillizza,

I am sorry to say that grade school journalism, as you have taken part in here in this article, is the reason many people have had to turn to other sources of information. Many people do not only read your theatrical works of attempted witticism, but must now read wide and various others to find a grain of fact in the sea of opinion and low standards the U.S. journalists use to 'report' news today. We, of course, do this willingly (using the vast amounts of idle time we have) to make sure that the media elitists, such as yourself cannot assert such unregulated influence in the running of America. To make my case, I would just like to add, if you were an unbiased journalist, you would have also let the full context of the Carly Fiorina statement be made...she also said Senator's Obama and Biden were also NOT qualified, in her opinion. This was very one-sided reporting and you have no-one but journalists, like yourself, to blame for 'We The People' looking for the whole story, even if just one of our sources takes us to the dark corners of the Drudge Report to check and recheck facts. The internet is a wonderful source for all, Mr. Cillizza. May God Bless you and the fighting men and women of the U.S., who give you the opportunity to 'play journalist' and get paid for it!

Posted by: Michaela | September 17, 2008 1:58 PM | Report abuse

What a laugh. A junior McCaine campaign aide mentions that he served on a committee that enabled Blackberry technology, and you try to twist it around that way.

You clip out selected pieces of Carly's statement, and conveniently forget she mentioned Obama and Biden, and wonder why he won't repeat the lie.

Oh - and that's just humorous - the media is "in the tank" for the Republicans...

Drudge doesn't report lies - he can see through them, JUST LIKE THE REST OF US CAN. And if you keep trying to play us (AKA non-Harvard, bitter gun-and-bible-clinger types) for stupid fools, Obama is likely to lose this election in the biggest landslide ever seen in the United States - 50 to 0.

Just keep spinning out all those absurd whoppers and deliberate misquotes - photoshop up a few more Atlantic Magazine type spinoffs - we're actually having a great laugh at the expense of the elite crowd, who seem to be UNABLE TO FIGURE OUT WHY WE AREN'T FALLING FOR THEM.

Posted by: Jinny Beresford | September 17, 2008 1:57 PM | Report abuse

The MSM obsession with little ol' Drudge reminds me of the old African adage about the frustration of the mighty leopard when the monkey gets away.

Posted by: BGarcía | September 17, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

How about your media bias that you said that Carly Fiorina said that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company when she said that she believed that NONE of the candidates would be able to run a major corporation. Your biased omission says more to people like myself that watch, read, and listen to more news then a soundbite or paraphrased sentence are wise to your lies and misinformation. Your are a very poor journalist.

Posted by: Jeff from Chicago | September 17, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

Wow ... the stupid is strong in these comments.

What stuns me is how Cillizza and all the Drudge fans totally ignore the paradox they present: Drudge is rebelling against the "liberal" media, yet his site drives coverage in a great number of media outlets.

Sorry, folks, but you can't have it both ways -- either the media is so liberal that Drudge must keep fighting the "good" fight (a claim that would need to ignore all discernible reality to become true) ... or the media pays attention to Drudge and lets him run the news cycle because it's not actually liberal.

It's one or the other folks.

Posted by: Mark D | September 17, 2008 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Two other stories never merited attention from Drudge: a claim by a senior aide to John McCain that the Arizona senator had invented the BlackBerry and a statement by McCain surrogate Carly Fiorina that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company.

WELL ACTUALLY Fiorina included Obama in her statement as well. So trying to prove Drudge dishonest this Author Lies by not publishing all the facts.

Posted by: Mike Brown | September 17, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Be a drudge hater... its all good. He is just listing the articles he likes. He isn't writing articles with "people who can't be named" because those nameless people are soooooo reliable. I wish we could get some journalists capable of finding people that will actually stand behind what they say...

Posted by: AG | September 17, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Its sad that any media relies on Drudge for its reporting.

I'm tired of rumors being treated as news. Facts no longer matter - the news shows search for the emotional heart of the story.

I stopped taking broadcast journalism seriously a long time ago. Only entertainment shows seem to take it seriously (Daily Show, Colbert, the View)

Posted by: MrEddieFather | September 17, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Fiorina is the only one of the bunch that has a proven track record of not being qualified to run a corporation.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse


Poor Chris, do you need a hug? You sure seem to be whining and crying alot.

It must be rough being a liberal in a liberal media world.

Posted by: reason | September 17, 2008 1:53 PM | Report abuse

OMG NOW I'VE HEARD EVERYTHING! Fox news FAIR????? I don't know who's side Brian Williams is on but I sure as heII know who EVERY Fox newsperson is voting for! And you don't see that? How sad!

________________________________

If you watch real closely when they roll the credits at the end of NBC Nightly News you will see that it is acutally Brian Hussein Obama Williams. Or you just have to listen to him for 30 seconds. Give me a break.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 1:53 PM | Report abuse

"Barry O looks pretty silly hobnobbing with the rich and famous while trying to "stay connected" to the common people... "

It's called fundraising. I noticed McCain doesn't mind taking it anywhere he can get it. Including the American taxpayer.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 1:52 PM | Report abuse

I guess I should be thrilled the author waited until the 3rd Paragraph to lie by omission on the Carly Fiorina statement. She included Obama. This author did not.Wapo just proved Drudge is more credible.

Posted by: Dennis D | September 17, 2008 1:52 PM | Report abuse

""Fiorina also said Biden and Obama couldn't run a corporation"
"
yet you skipped that Fiorina said Obama was theleast qualified to run a corporation of the 4 ..

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Now isn't that calling the KETTLE BLACK.
DRUDGE draws traffic to his site by posting articles he would like to post.

Posted by: Sammy CLEMENTS | September 17, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Pelosi says Democrats innocent in present mess?
See the following that the MSM did not make you aware of.


Thank you for using Congress.org Mail System

Message sent to the following recipients:
Senator Clinton
Message text follows:

June 10, 2003

[recipient address was inserted here]


[recipient name was inserted here],

Good Morning,

Clear back in January, I made you and Rep. Pelosi aware of a very serious
flaw in over a decade's worth of financial statements filed by a certain
Corporation. To refresh your memory I reprint the paragraph at the heart
of the matter:

Posted by: Lionheart | September 17, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

THIS WEEK, OBAMA KEEPS CLAIMING, IRRATIONALLY, THAT MCCAIN CAUSED WALL STREET PROBLEMS.


WHERE DID FANNIE & FREDDIE COME FROM? (DEMOCRATS)

Fannie and Freddie were creations of the congressional Democrats and the Clinton Administration, designed to make mortgages available to more people who couldn't qualify easily to buy their own homes.

Fannie and Freddie have also been places for big Washington Democrats to go to work in the semi-private sector and pocket millions. The Clinton administration's White House Budget Director Franklin Raines ran Fannie and collected $50 million. Jamie Gorelick — Clinton Justice Department official — worked for Fannie and took home $26 million. Big Democrat Jim Johnson, recently on Obama's VP search committee, has hauled in millions from his Fannie Mae CEO job.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,423701,00.html

CAMPAIGN DONATIONS

"Obama is the largest individual recipient [of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac donations] at about $112,000, federal campaign finance reports show...Republican nominee John McCain has taken $16,400 from Freddie and Fannie employees since 2005."

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-trailmoney9-2008sep09,0,1969729.story

LATEST OBAMA CAMPAIGN EXEC:

Jim Johnson, Fannie Mae CEO, chaired Obama's VP search committee.

THIS MESS STARTED DURING THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION

The bloat of the financial sector started during the Clinton years with his sweeping deregulation of commodity trading and investment banking that make things like the Enron loophole and the investment bank expansion into conflict of interest business areas possible. The Alan Greenspan print-money-to-drive-growth inflationary monetary expansion policies also started during the Clinton years. In essence, Clinton abandoned Rob Reich's labor-and-strong-infrastructure approach to building a strong economy and he went with Bob Rubin's use-finance-and-money-supply to inflate the economy via a fat financial sector. Bush inherited and continued these policies, and, moreover, contributed more grossly inflationary and damaging problems by driving the federal deficit to massive, historic levels and completely ignoring the corrupt and greedy excesses and abuses of the financial sector.

Our problems were caused by the Clinton-era bubble-inducing deregulation & commodity trading loopholes, Bush-era negligence & huge federal deficits, and the immense bubble of speculation dollars created by our sending hundreds of billions of dollars abroad because we are so dependent on foreign oil. \

In reality, all of these programs were created by Democrats during the Clinton Administration: they created Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, they deregulated the investment banking sector and commodity trading to allow the (Enron) loopholes and other excesses Wall Street has been exploiting in recent years, they have been blocking drilling for oil, nuclear power and other energy-independence initiatives so that we must go deep into deficit buying foreign oil.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 17, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Chris -- you have -- officially -- jumped "the MSM reporting shark."

Take a vacation.

Posted by: Louise | September 17, 2008 1:50 PM | Report abuse

WashintonPOSTology

Carly Fiorina also said OBAMA could not run Hewlett Packard. The Author Omitted this.

Posted by: Dennis D | September 17, 2008 1:49 PM | Report abuse

Um, hello...you people do realize that Drudge is not a journalist..he does not write articles, he just links to articles of his choosing. In fact, I would go so far as saying his readers are more informed than any of you libs watching MSNBC. He links to stories from hometown newspapers to the MSM media, international stories, etc. I love Drudge and here in Washington, DC I can tell you there is not a single person who works on the hill that does not look at drudge to see what is going to happen today in the political arena. In fact, it is in my job description to check it.

Posted by: Lots of libs are just stoopid | September 17, 2008 1:49 PM | Report abuse

I wonder if MS Fiorina thinks that Mitt Romney or Ross Perot are unfit to run a corporation?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 1:48 PM | Report abuse

nolovlost just posted a list of what he considers clever differences between party followers. His list is known in communications and logic fields is known as the strawman attack. It is where you post lies and misrepresentations then make yourself look the hero when you point out a better way of doing things.

One such example is novolost making the false claim that Obama is considered unbalanced because he went to Harvard and that Palin is considered normal because she lives in Alaska.

No, liar novolost, the reason Obama is unbalanced is because of his core beliefs. There are also leftists up in Alaska and they are wrong not because of locale but because of their idiotic core beliefs.

Harvard did not force Obama to become an extreme leftist. Obama chose to become an extreme leftist early on. And he then made further choices in life that your typical extreme leftist is prone to taking.

novolost is yet another illogical leftist with no clue as to why people are either for or against any candidate.

This illogical behavior of his is why he is an Obama supporter. They tend to get things arse backwards. Much like Nick Collins III (sounds like an elistist name, eh) What crackpots Obama supporters tend to be.

Posted by: KMichaels | September 17, 2008 1:47 PM | Report abuse

Drudge is one of the very few remaining islands of media objectivity. The fact the above article is even being viewed is thanks to Drudge, proof positive of that objectivity.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 1:46 PM | Report abuse

YOU THINK I'M GONNA BELIEVE 'ANYTHING' THAT A MSN OUT OF DATE BIAS 'IN-THE-TANK- JURASSIC PARK, SO-CALLED BLOGGER THAT IS PAID TO WRITE THIS CRAP.
HORRRREAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY DRUDGE.

YOU GUYS DIDN'T BREAK THE NEWS OF THE 'BLUE DRES' DID YOU????

GIVE SOME UN-BIASED 'NON=AP' NEWS AND WE MIGHT JUST READ IT... YOUR TRACK RECORD IS DISMAL.

YOU ARE LOOSING READERSHIP, TRUST AND BELIEVIBILITY AND IT IS YOUR OWN FAULT.

POINT AN ACCUSING FINGER AT DRUDGE IS LAFFABLE AND DESPERATE. YOU GUYS ARE SO LEFT IT 'SICKENS ME; ... JUST LIKE THE RIV WRIGHT... 'SICKENS ME AND YOUR CHICKENS ARE COOOOMING HOOOOOME TO ROOOOST!'.

EAT UT.

Posted by: Jezzika | September 17, 2008 1:46 PM | Report abuse

This is pretty simple:

1) Why trust one of those hippie-liberal MSM professional journalists who might report something you didn't want to hear when you can just slap lipstick on a GOP operative and stick him in front of a camera and have him say what you need him to say?

2) Why trust one of those hippie-liberal main stream professional scientists who tell you the fundamental nature of the universe is as yet beyond our technological level of sophistication to understand when you can just roll out some Neo-Creationists who manage to give a nice tidy seven day explanation of the cosmos?

3) Why trust any of those hippie-liberal main stream professional CIA operatives or spy sats when you can just wheel in some loon from the American Enterprise Institute and have them say definitively that a targeted nation had weapons worth starting a war over?

4) Why trust any of those hippie-liberal main stream professional economists who tell us through the use of extensively vetted data that the Bush-McCain theories governing their economic policies have been a disaster in both the long and short term for our nation, when we can just keep saying the (undefined) funadamentals are strong?

GOP Political Theory: The best science fiction in town.

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 1:46 PM | Report abuse

Fox is the only really fair news that gives equal time to both candidates...MSNBC, CNN (and all its affiliates)ABC,NBC,the BBC, Der Spiegel, Goteborg Posten, Der Zeitung, the Washington Post, all are Obama supporters. I thought the news was suppose to be equal, sure you can vote for who you want but its not right to use the public broadcasting system to campaign for one party. I guess Oprah owns them all!!!

******************************************

OMG NOW I'VE HEARD EVERYTHING! Fox news FAIR????? I don't know who's side Brian Williams is on but I sure as heII know who EVERY Fox newsperson is voting for! And you don't see that? How sad!

Posted by: Kathy5 | September 17, 2008 1:46 PM | Report abuse

Since Drudge breaks so little news under his own byline, any notion that he has a bias one way or another must center around what types of stories he links to and which he does not. In other words it's as much about what doesn't get reported as what does, something the author even alludes to. This has been a central complaint of conservatives speaking about the Leftist bias in the MSM for a long time now. And the conservative side is routinely pooh poohed and dismissed for it.

Like many things, it apparently takes a "conservative" site like Drudge to bring out complaints/accusations of this type of selective reporting. Considering the recent overthetop Palin coverage and the fact the WaPo has been the quasi official communications arm of the DNC for decades now, I think it's fair to say the irony meter is clanging wildly at this OpEd.

Also ironic that the New York Times used to set the tone for what gets covered nationally and now it appears more and more to be driven by Drudge. It would be sad development indeed if the NYT hadn't already been disgracing itself for years now with it's poorly hidden Leftist agenda.

By and large however, conservatives know from experience that most national and large metropolitan print and TV news outlets are all going to see things one way. The performance of the national media in its misty doe eyed reverence for Obama during the DNC convention was particularly blatant followed by the race to publish and say the most incredibly idiotic and nakedly dismissive reports on Palin, a cinderella success story governor with an 80% approval rating in her own state, all of this has done nothing to disabuse moderates and conservatives that things havent really changed, much as the author might have us believe, the influence of Drudge notwithstanding.

And for this reason Drudge and Limbaugh will continue to flourish and as has happened become powerful forces in the industry.

Posted by: Dan Scerpella | September 17, 2008 1:46 PM | Report abuse

It's pretty simple really. The favorable McCain coverage began when McCain started purchasing the advertizing photo at the very top of the drudgereport webpage.

The earlier favorable Obama coverage and unfavorable McCain coverage were designed to drive up the price.

Money makes the World go around!

Posted by: Observer | September 17, 2008 1:45 PM | Report abuse

Who cares what mainstream media says.. I don't watch TV; I don't have cable, I and millions of others get ALL our news from the internet where we can bounce around to several sites and get different takes on what's happening. I don't subscribe to any newspapers either. Who needs'em?
The internet will make or break these candidates... not the opinions of Oprah or Whoopie or Barbara WaWa on the View or the Hollywood elite who have chosen to abandon the ideals America used to stand for. Barry O looks pretty silly hobnobbing with the rich and famous while trying to "stay connected" to the common people...

Posted by: LJ in San Diego | September 17, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Dear Nick Collins III. I think your tin foil hat fell off. You should put it back on.

People that believe the MSM are right-wing belong in a straight jacket.

You, no doubt, belive that 9/11 was an "inside job" and that UFO's frequently visit the earth.

Posted by: George | September 17, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Give us a break you liberal whiner. Just because a "senior aide" and "surrogate" made the Blackberry & CEO comment, respectively, what does that mean? So what!? McCain/Palin didn't say it themselves unlike Gore who said he himself invented the internet. Get real...

Posted by: Eric O.-Peoria, IL | September 17, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Bias is a concern when it comes from a few critical news outlets. If all the news came from one TV or newspaper outlet and most people had no choice but to get their news from that outlet, I could see cause for alarm.

But to get uptight because the Drudge Report has a bias is rather pointless. Does it matter? Are you forced to read Drudge? If it influences people, maybe they really agree with it. If they don't, they won't be reading it. If Drudge is the top site - that might suggest that a lot of people favor the news. Does that make it bad? Or is the problem that people just don't like to accept it?

It just seems dumb to worry about bias on the internet when anyone on the internet can read what ever they want.

Posted by: WhyReadIt | September 17, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

The fact that everyone has an opinion about Drudge just shows how effective his website is, in fact, every major columnist, left or right, has a link on his page. Sure he seems to over-promote something that should have its 15 minutes of fame and disappear, but there is no denying the effectiveness, this article is about his effectiveness, not about political talking points

Posted by: TexasProud | September 17, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

"Fiorina also said Biden and Obama couldn't run a corporation"
Repeat repeat repeat repeat repeat repeat repeat repeat repeat repeat repeat repeat
Is there an echo?

Posted by: Maurizio | September 17, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

"ALL presidential and vice presidential candidates are unqualified to run a company"

Have you seen the financial news lately? The CEO's themselves are not ready to run a major U.S. company -- they've run them into the ground!!!

Posted by: caterina | September 17, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

The Drudge Zombies (tm) are out full force.
That's one Drudge Effect you forgot to mention Mr. Cilliza. One link on his page on any story and the comments get inundated with Rush Limbaugh approved flying monkeys coming out of his butt.

It says plenty when Ms. Fiorina is fatheaded enough to think everyone running for POTUS or VPOTUS is unqualified to run a company. It would seem, then that her choice of horse in this race is based on other factors and somehow I don't think it's McCain's good looks. But it is damning very damning to the McPalin ticket. No one expected her to say anything nice about Obama or Biden anyway, did they?

When Carly Fiorina was at HP/Compaq half its stock value disappeared and she was FIRED, yet in this GOP "meritocracy" we live, where you can buy "merit", she was able to walk away with a $40 million bonus. It would seem she, herself is unqualified to run a corporation. Much like the GOP supporting CEO's at Countrywide, BearSterns, MerrilLynch, Lehman, AIG and who knows how many other companies who received obscene payment packages for destroying wealth and jobs and gaming the deregulation for all it was worth under a GOP Congress of 12 years and a GOP President of 8, who gave them a wink and looked the other way. Smae bunch who gave us the ENRON slimeballs, Tyco, WorldCom and an enterprising fella by the name of Jack Abramoff.

I guess you should mentioned the rest of Fiorina's statement here, but here's what the Drudge Zombies don't understand: THey don't have an original bone in their bodies and they're the peons and pissboys (and girls) and minions of people like Drudge and Limbaugh and Hannity and Rove and FOx who wouldn't cross the street to piss on them if they were on fire, let alone be their actual "friend."

Another thing, and this is obvious from anyone who's been following the Presidential election through the primaries: Drudge doesn't like McCAin, never did. Anything he's doing now to help the ticket is simply to retain his Republican bona fides and his bottom feeder audience. We would all do well to ignore the Drudge Report, but sleazy yellow journalism has always done well in this country.

Posted by: PMM | September 17, 2008 1:41 PM | Report abuse

As someone who is not a member of a party, I think I watch the news a lot more objectively than those who are already in love with McCain or Obama. I can tell you that CNN and MSNBC are in the tank for Obama. It is very clear. FoxNews is in the tank for McCain...that is very clear. So, how is FoxNews biased and CNN and MSNBC not? Just wondering because I don't follow the logic here. I mean, sure FoxNews is conservative, but it's the only network for conservatives...nothing wrong with that. It's called balance, and if I were a conservative I wouldn't be able to stomach watching MSNBC. If I were a democrat I wouldn't be able to watch FoxNews. Good thing for me I am neither, I watch CNN and Fox (NBC just sucks) and that is how I actually get the truth. :)

Posted by: Fox news is just the alt. | September 17, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

Another thing; It is soooo clear that all you posters here that are griping about Drudge being "gossip" or whtever, have not the foggiest clue of what you are speaking. DRUDGE JUST POSTS STORIES FROM OTHER NEWS SOURCES! Therefore, the arguement can easily be made tht "Drudgies" are more informed from more points of view than ANY other source. People b*tch when their "home site" gets posts from Drudge. That just shows tht you Narrow-minded, blinded liberals refuse info that you do not agree with. All information MUST come from your preapproved sites. HMMMMM, and wich side is truely prejudice?! Trust me its the left! The right is FAAARRRR more accepting of other points of view.

Posted by: hd4lyf | September 17, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

What I think is, most posters miss is the main undercurrent of this election. This election is not about McCane or OBama, rather it is much more elemental than that.

What we have in this country is a great devide that is growing wider between the large metropolitan cities and the Small town America.

The people of New York City, Boston, Washington D.C., San Francisco have a completely different frame of experiences and individual histories than the people of, Oh lets say Buhl Idaho.

The people of above mention cities say, who the hell cares about Buhl Idaho, but they should be reminded that the Rainbow Trout that they buy at the market, or the can of Nibletts Corn they eat at dinner omes from Buhl Idaho.

On the other hand the people of Buhl Idaho say who the hell cares about New York City. But they should be reminded that the 401K plan there are invested in is probably managed by a New York investment bank.

The way I see it, is this County is made up of two groups of people who really don't have much in common other than a language but are drawn together by economic necessity. Small town ameria is more self relient, and independent than the people of the large cities where the shear mass of people do not allow one to be self relient or for that mater much of an independent.

This lack of knowledge and understanding does not bode well for the future of this republic.

Posted by: Jim D | September 17, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

Can somebody PLEASE show me the law that says that the media must be fair ?

Didn't think so.

Private media companies are entitled to show whatever bias they choose...liberal OR conservative.


That's why it's called FREE SPEECH.


Posted by: MBW | September 17, 2008 1:39 PM | Report abuse

The problem with Nick Collins III is that he is a provable liar. Notice that his response to my posting actual studies showing the leftist bias was simply to reverse the numbers.

Yep, Nick, your typical dopey little leftist liar, whining like a wounded school-girl when faced with the facts.

Anyone with brains knows the truth of the Media Bias. Heck, just look at that idiot twit Chris Saleeza.

Posted by: KMichaels | September 17, 2008 1:39 PM | Report abuse

interesting summary*************************

If you grow up in Hawaii , raised by your grandparents, you're 'exotic, or different.'
But, if you grow up in Alaska "eating mooseburgers" you're the quintessential American story.

If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.
But, name your kids Willow , Trig and Track, you're a maverick.

Graduate from Harvard Law School and you are unstable.
But, attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're well grounded.

If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works, and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience.

But, if your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the City Council and 6 years as the Mayor of a town with fewer than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive.

If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 beautiful daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a real Christian.
But, if you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a stellar Christian.

If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.
But, if, while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state's school system, while your unwed teen daughter becomes pregnant, you're very responsible.

If your spouse is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of inner city communities, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values don't represent America .
But, if your husband is nicknamed 'First Dude', with at least one DWI conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until age 25, and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.

OK, much clearer now

Posted by: nolovlost | September 17, 2008 1:39 PM | Report abuse

"My friends, the fundamentals of the economy are strong"
.
MCCAIN - 09/16/08


Isn't it awesome how McCain invented the Blackberry? And here I always thought it was some Canadian company...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhCLO3lNP6A


Posted by: Bush + McCain = | September 17, 2008 1:38 PM | Report abuse

Pretty sad that in an article about media bias, you mention that Fiorina is quoted as saying McCain and Palin couldn't run a business. Of course, you omitted the part of the statement where she said Obama and Biden couldn't run a comany either. Then after you omit the reference to Obama and Biden, you label it a negative for McCain. How long will it take to figure out that you don't increase readership when you treat the readers like idiots?

Posted by: GR | September 17, 2008 1:24 PM

It is not newsworthy that John McCain's top economic advisor thinks that Obama and Biden are not capable of running HP. It is, however, very newsworthy that she thinks McCain and Palin (her current bosses) are not qulaified - Get it! It's not like Carly Fiorina is some impartial observer of this election. If she was, the entire comment would not have been newsworthy.

Posted by: NM Moderate | September 17, 2008 1:38 PM | Report abuse

So what does it smell like in Matt Drudge's rectum., Chris?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 1:38 PM | Report abuse

Chris's story on Drudge bias is in itself biased. What a laugh. For example, the Fiorina story headlined on Drudge said "Palin couldn't run a corporation", but if you clicked the link the full story mentioned neither could McCain, Biden, or Obama. Chris forgot to mention this nor did he balance this with the bias from MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, NY Times, and of course, the Washington Post....to name a few. And to suggest Drudge is somehow dictating what the news channels run suggests Chris is on drugs. The Post can do better than this dribble.

Posted by: Mark | September 17, 2008 1:37 PM | Report abuse

The ridiculous thing is to imagine that Drudge is less biased than Sean Hannity. Both are mock-journalists looking to corral eyeballs and drive up profits.

The fact is that McCain had a major Hollywood fundraiser only a few days ago, so the Obama fundraiser is no big deal.

The real news is that McCain continues to blunder in his response to the financial crisis. He now claims that he is in favor of deregulation. He is lying. His chief economic adviser, Phil Gramm is the author of the major legislation which deregulated Wall Street 10 years ago. If McCain is elected he will appoint Phil Gramm as treasury secretary to continue their efforts to dismantle our economy in the name of greed.

When will the MSM draw the connection between McCain's participation in the Keating 5 savings & loan scandal and today's financial meltdown?

McCain is not fit morally, physically, or intellectually to be president of the United States.

Posted by: dee | September 17, 2008 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Chris
Neither of the two stories you are complain are not listed on the Drudge Report are ALSO not listed in the Washington Post. Are you also claiming that the WP is in the tank for McCain?

Posted by: WP | September 17, 2008 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: scrivener | September 17, 2008 1:35 PM | Report abuse

All I can say as a true independent who has yet to make up her mind on who to vote for. (I like things about both of them, but neither really get me excited)

All I can say is if I were working for the Obama campaign I would tell the MSM media (esp. MSNBC) to shut up already. The average american that a lot of you liberals seem to think are uneducated hillbillies are not stupid, we see right through the medias bias and we are SICK of it. I want the news, not who you think will do a better job.

I have taken the interviews given by the same journalist and let's just say Obama got fluff questions and they seemed to want to punch McCain in the face. This is not what America wants to see, and it def. has made me think about who Obama is in bed with.

Remember the media loved McCain until he was running against Obama. They called him a maverick, who is willing to buck his own party and now he is 4 more years of Bush? Sorry media...your bias is very much apparant in Ohio, which matters in this election. I want to hear Obama answer tough questions and if he doesn't win you can blame it on the media...and the media alone!

Posted by: An actual Independent | September 17, 2008 1:35 PM | Report abuse

The comments I heard was "McCain, Palin, Obama and Biden were unfit to run a major corporation...All four not two butof them all four of them, AND I AGREE.
None are fit but, I do believe McCain & palin would do a better job at running the COUNTRY!

Posted by: Richard of JAX | September 17, 2008 1:34 PM | Report abuse

You are wrong, I saw links to both of those stories yesterday on Drudge. That is how I was aware of them.

Posted by: Chris Love | September 17, 2008 1:34 PM | Report abuse

you idiots. Carly Fiorina said that ALL presidential and vice presidential candidates are unqualified to run a company, not just the Republicans. You can't even get your hate piece story correct with the basics.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 1:34 PM | Report abuse

Post after post on this blog from Drudge fans using the same right wing echo chamber tactics heard every day on talk radio. To paraphrase our Great Leader, His Excellency George W. Bush: "Is the American people this stupid?"

Yes, Georgie, thankfully yes.

Posted by: Steve Bonser | September 17, 2008 1:34 PM | Report abuse

OrlandoRican- okay, then why do you right wing nuts oppose the equal time laws? Anyone with a brain can see that the great evil MSM makes a serious attempt at journalistic integrity, while Fixed Noise, Limbaught, Drudge, etc. are GOP and far right controlled trash that invent stories out of thin air. You can peddle your victim game somehwere else. Oh, and the current "sexism" charge? When did you oafs discover that one? The movement of idiots, immoral vermin, hicks, and traitors known as the GOP is so phony, so dishonest, so dispicable, that I am amazed that the voters haven't decided to criminalize membership in it. Ronald Reagan is rlling in his grave right now. The genuine patriotic conservative movement he founded has been expropriated by a collection of luney NeoMarxists and treasonous swine operating under the banner of NeoConservativism. Genuine conservatives, liberals, patriots, people with integrity and brains, will vote for Obama.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | September 17, 2008 1:34 PM | Report abuse

Up until recently mainstream media was my primary source for news and I had never visited Drudge. I've turned the 6:30 network news off and have locked off CNN / MSNBC on my TVs. I may return to mainstream but in my view a tipping point has been reached. The Emperor has no clothes.

Posted by: sludge | September 17, 2008 1:33 PM | Report abuse

The Drudge Report, as all blogs and commentaries, most of the time has a decided bias and should not be considered as objective. It, as almost all blogs and commentaries, will at times offer a seemingly balanced and objective insight into a particular issue on a given day.

Posted by: Byron | September 17, 2008 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Awwww, ain't that sweet.

Chris has a crush on Palin.

Posted by: Steve | September 17, 2008 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Okay - first the stories probably didn't appear because they were wrong or incomplete. For instance, the story where the advisor said that mccain couldn't run a company -- they did not use the WHOLE clip, in which she said NONE of the candidates could run a company and that there is a big mistake in thinking that running the government is equiv. to running a major industry.
I don't know why people give Drudge such a hard time ... yes his radio show is very right leaning, but I find that he has just as many con-republican stories as he does con-democrat.

Posted by: ginger | September 17, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Bias in the news?

This is so simple I fell asleep twice while typing this.

Studies show that MSM are 80% Republicans and or Right Wing leaning.

Studies show that at the moment McCain continues to get 60% of the press articles compared to 40% for Obama.

In the past, McCain was getting 80% of the coverage compared to just 20% for Obama.

Of the current 40% of coverage allotted to Obama by the MSM, the vast majority are negative.

Of the current 60% of coverage allotted to McCain by the MSM, the vast majority are positive.

The reason Limbaugh and Drudge are able to get such a large audience is that the MSM depends on them to propagate fringe issue stories that the MSM can then report on as "news".

When objective leftists claim that there is no MSM leftist bias we can trust these claims because they are proven arbiters of truth. Of course there is Right Wing bias in the MSM. We see it consistently.

For example, go visit CNN and view any political stories. Majority are about fringe wedge issues engineered to make Right Wing candidates competitive, and thus provide a horse race for political reporters to create a compelling narrative geared to garner regular readership, thus boosting advertising revenue. The few credible policy stories in there are all flimsy at best.

The MSM sold their souls a long time ago. Chris, the current MSM guru wannabe is yet another example of some idiot aspiring to be the next GOP prostitute, doing the bidding of his nationalist masters.

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Can someone please explain why a corporate media would support an anticapitalistic candidate?
Please avoid using the words "Hollywood," "New York," or "journalism professors."
Or maybe just give up on constantly whining about the media?

Posted by: Maurizio | September 17, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

I learned from the Drudge site that over the past 20 years Obama collected more money from Fannie and Freddy Lobbyists than all senators except 1 (Chris Dodd) even though Obama's only been there 3 years. I thought Obama wanted to clean up Washington and do away with Lobbyists... what a liar!

Good site for Anti Obama:
http://www.FRedStates.com

Posted by: Well Informed | September 17, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

read the HuffingtonPost if you want stories from the other side.

HuffingtonPost.com

Posted by: WillS | September 17, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Hey DCFred:

Not voting for Obama doesn't mean someone is racist

BUT

Not voting for Hillary doesn't make someone sexist either.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

H.L Mencken the sage of Baltimore once opined that "no-one ever went broke under-estimating the stupidity of the American people".

The posts from liberals prove he was right.

Anyone who cannot see that electing a fool like obama will be the downfall of this society is either blind or completely ignorant.

The man is clueless and weak and we are in a war with people who want to kill us. Are you going to trust this clown with your children's lives?

On the economy he wants among many other stupid policies to bring back the inheritance tax at 45% to "insure that no family can amass a fortune to leave to their children", so sayeth is financial guy last week...I heard him.

That children is communism, right out of the manifesto...look it up since you didn't learn it in school.

This guy is dangerous!

Posted by: Seawolf | September 17, 2008 1:29 PM | Report abuse

Ryan, Great point!! I thought it deserved repeating!!

What a rediculous article. #1 The Drudge report simply is a midway point to OTHER news outlets stories. Very few are actually written by Matt Drudge so your point that Drudge is driving the media is rediculous. #2, your weak claim that there is media bias towards the GOP is just plain silly, even a recent Harvard study (a bastion of liberalism mind you) says the media is HEAVILY librally biased (http://www.deadfishwrapper.com/node/115).
I am afraid all you have done Sir is show whos team you're cheering for.

Posted by: S Connor | September 17, 2008 1:29 PM | Report abuse

THIS WEEK, OBAMA KEEPS CLAIMING, IRRATIONALLY, THAT MCCAIN CAUSED WALL STREET PROBLEMS.

LET'S TAKE A CLOSER LOOK

WHERE DID FANNIE & FREDDIE COME FROM? (DEMOCRATS)

Fannie and Freddie were creations of the congressional Democrats and the Clinton Administration, designed to make mortgages available to more people who couldn't qualify easily to buy their own homes.

Fannie and Freddie have also been places for big Washington Democrats to go to work in the semi-private sector and pocket millions. The Clinton administration's White House Budget Director Franklin Raines ran Fannie and collected $50 million. Jamie Gorelick — Clinton Justice Department official — worked for Fannie and took home $26 million. Big Democrat Jim Johnson, recently on Obama's VP search committee, has hauled in millions from his Fannie Mae CEO job.

Now remember: Obama's ads and stump speeches attack McCain and Republican policies for the current financial turmoil. It is demonstrably not Republican policy and worse, it appears the man attacking McCain — Sen. Obama — was at the head of the line when the piggies lined up at the Fannie and Freddie trough for campaign bucks.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,423701,00.html

CAMPAIGN DONATIONS: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

"Obama is the largest individual recipient at about $112,000, federal campaign finance reports show...Republican nominee John McCain has taken $16,400 from Freddie and Fannie employees since 2005."

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-trailmoney9-2008sep09,0,1969729.story

LATEST OBAMA CAMPAIGN EXEC:

Jim Johnson, Fannie Mae CEO, chaired Obama's VP search committee.

THIS MESS STARTED DURING THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION LAWS

The bloat of the financial sector started during the Clinton years with his sweeping deregulation of the trading and finance markets that make things like the Enron loophole and the investment bank expansion into new business areas possible. The Alan Greenspan print-more-money-to-drive-growth inflationary monetary expansion period also started during the Clinton years. In essence, Clinton abandoned Rob Reich's labor-and-strong-infrastructure approach to building a strong economy and he went with Bob Rubin's use-finance-and-money-supply to inflate the economy via a fat financial sector. Bush inherited and continued these policies, and, moreover, contributed more grossly inflationary and damaging problems by driving the federal deficit to massive, historic levels and completely ignoring the corrupt and greedy excesses and abuses of the financial sector.

Our problems were caused by the Clinton-era bubble-inducing deregulation & commodity trading loopholes, Bush-era negligence & huge federal deficits, and the immense bubble of speculation dollars created by our sending hundreds of billions of dollars abroad because we are so dependent on foreign oil.

The financial sector bloat has moreover been fed by the large amount of money we've been sending abroad to buy foreign oil -- massive amounts in the hundreds of billions a year, that has been coming back to us in the form of sovereign wealth funds and international hedge funds plowing excessive speculation money into these mortgage-backed securities, commodity future index funds and other investment schemes, driving up a real estate bubble & other asset inflation. The massive spending on foreign oil, mostly on credit, has created a huge "liquidity bubble" that fed the financial sector bloat. Well, even though we are still sending money abroad, the international interest in buying our credit-backed derivatives and other investment schemes has evaporated. With the loss of liquidity, asset values that were inflated, like stock and home prices, are falling as they should.

Who is obstructing Republican efforts to drive energy-independence programs so that every year we go deeper into debt as a society and send hundreds of billions of dollars of our wealth abroad to buy foreign oil? Democrats have been blocking domestic drilling for oil, nuclear power plants, clean coal and a host of other initiatives, using outdated environmental and anti-energy arguments that are no longer technically meaningful.

In reality, all of these programs were created by Democrats during the Clinton Administration: they created Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, they deregulated the investment banking sector and commodity trading to allow the (Enron) loopholes and other excesses Wall Street has been exploiting in recent years, they have been blocking drilling for oil, nuclear power and other energy-independence initiatives so that we must go deep into deficit buying foreign oil.

Bush led us farther down the path of problems by ignoring the developing abuses on his watch, by running up massive federal deficits that exacerbated the problems caused by our energy trade deficits and other causes of inflation, and by failing to modernize the marketplaces for globalization. But if any party can be pointed to as creating and causing the problem programs and deregulations, it was the Democrats in the Clinton Administration and Congress, and by consistently blocking domestic energy programs.

OBAMA'S PARTISAN, DYSFUNCTIONAL AND SHRILL FINGER-POINTING

This week, Obama is spending a lot of money on attempts to make this all out to be a Bush-caused Republican problem somehow linked to McCain. He's part of the dysfunctional partisan hack culture, engaging in finger-pointing attacks, and not tuned into solutions. He's been lying and fear-mongering.

Barack Obama would rather win an election than provide a leadership voice in this crisis.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 17, 2008 1:28 PM | Report abuse

Speaking of media bias: CNN's Cafferty said that if you do not vote for Obama that makes you a racist. In his mind, there is no other possible reason why people would choose not to vote for him. Kool-aid anyone?

http://www.mccain08-hillary2012.blogspot.com

Posted by: DCfred | September 17, 2008 1:27 PM | Report abuse

How did Drudge/Limbaugh work out for the Republicans in 2006? A-THUMPIN'. Drudge is "important" because the people paid by media outlets need something to discuss daily and Drudge is the Cliff Notes for the "Media". Period.

Posted by: CoolBreeze | September 17, 2008 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Fox is the only really fair news that gives equal time to both candidates...MSNBC, CNN (and all its affiliates)ABC,NBC,the BBC, Der Spiegel, Goteborg Posten, Der Zeitung, the Washington Post, all are Obama supporters. I thought the news was suppose to be equal, sure you can vote for who you want but its not right to use the public broadcasting system to campaign for one party. I guess Oprah owns them all!!!



Posted by: Barbarat | September 17, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Whether we realize it or not,

AS LONG AS THE MEDIA IS PRODUCED BY HUMANS, IT WILL HAVE A BIAS.

Let's just accept that life isn't always fair and learn to think for ourselves.

Posted by: MBW | September 17, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

I know Drudge needs advertisers but have you noticed that most of them are for the RNC???

Posted by: Tia, OKC | September 17, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Deep breaths everyone. There's no need to disagree on this with the facts laid out publicly. Here's what actually went down according to the actual transcript.

First, Fiorina says that McCain and Palin are unfit to run a company. Any company! She cited the local corner store as being out of their league. Then, she explains that Biden and Obama have clearly exhibited the skill set to run a company, or act in a Executive of Government role. Realizing what she had said, she then stumble over her words for about 15 seconds before saying nobody is qualified to run a company.

Priceless! Fiorina is a key McCain adviser, and she doesn't even have basic faith in her people! Have we ever seen a less competent campaign?! Obama's gonna take this thing in a landslide.

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 1:25 PM | Report abuse

"The Liberal Media slow walked the Rev.Wright story for months allowing Obama to beat Hillary... how can you not know that..."
---------
Name one person in the United States and most of any other media accessible countries that DON't know who Rev. Wright is and can't quote him verbatim and I'll believe you.

How about the "slow walk" on Todd and Sarah Palin's affiliation with the AIP, you know, the fringe group that wants to secede from the union who's founder said he had no use for "god damned America"?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 1:25 PM | Report abuse

Amazing how you talk about the slant of Drudge when you failed to give the full quote from Carly Fiona when she mentioned all of the President and Vice President candidates do not have the skills to run a corporation. Those rocks can hurt when you are in a glass house. Check all your facts before turning on your computer. You are the reason people don't trust Media or the blogosphere.

Posted by: patrick | September 17, 2008 1:25 PM | Report abuse


FROM THE FOLKS WHO BROUGHT JOHN EDWARD'S, THEY NOW BRINGS YOU: "TRACK PALIN"
THE COKE HEAD WHO BEAT GOING TO JAIL BY GOING IN THE MILITARY AND HIS WONDERFUL PARENTS WHO RAISED SUCH A FINE FAMILY.


The NATIONAL ENQUIRER’S exclusive ongoing investigation of GOP VP Nom Sarah 'Barracuda' Palin’s goes far beyond a mere teen pregnancy crisis this week!

The Enquirer’s team of reporters has combed the Alaskan wilderness to discover the hidden truth about Gov. Palin’s family, which has become a central part of her political identity.

The ENQUIRER has learned exclusively that Sarah's oldest son, Track, was addicted to the power drug OxyContin for nearly the past two years, snorting it, eating it, smoking it and even injecting it. And as Track, 19, heads to Iraq as part of the U.S. armed forces, Sarah and her husband Todd were powerless to stop his wild antics, detailed in the new issue of The ENQUIRER, which goes on sale today.

THE ENQUIRER also has exclusive details about Track's use of other drugs, including cocaine, and his involvement in a notorious local vandalism incident.

“I’ve partied with him (Track) for years,” a source disclosed. “I’ve seen him snort cocaine, snort and smoke OxyContin, drink booze and smoke weed.”

The source also divulged the girls would do anything for Track and he’d use his local celebrity status to manipulate other guys “to get them to steal things he wanted.”

“He finally did what a lot of troubled kids here do,” the source divulged. “You join the military.”

And as Gov. Palin has billed the state of Alaska for various expenses related to her children, as reported by The Washington Post, The ENQUIRER's investigation reveals that she was so incensed by 17-year-old Bristol's pregnancy that she banished her daughter from the house.

Another family friend revealed pre-prego Bristol was as much of a hard partier as Track was.

“Bristol was a huge stoner and drinker. I’ve seen her smoke pot and get drunk and make out with so many guys. All the guys would brag that the just made out with Bristol.”

When Sarah found out the teen was pregnant by high schooler Levi Johnston, she was actually banished from the house. As part of the cover-up, Palin quickly transferred Bristol to another high school and made her move in with Sarah’s sister Heather 25 miles away!

And the ENQUIRER also learned that Levi Johnston, the baby mamma’s future wedded dada, who was glad handed by John McCain at the GOP Convention, isn’t too happy about his impending shotgun nups either.

“Levi got dragged out of the house to go to Minnesota,” Levi’s friend told The ENQUIRER. “Levi realizes he’s stuck being with Bristol because her mom is running for Vice President.”

The friend also confided that both Bristol and Levi “broke up a few times and they definitely messed around with other people.”

Meanwhile, as members of the Palin family’s war viciously over “Trooper-Gate” and claims of Sarah’s extramarital affair have turned the political race into a chaotic arena of threats, denials and vicious attacks by political black ops, The ENQUIRER has discovered shocking new details about the red-hot affair scandal!

For the full story of the secrets Sarah Palin is trying to hide – pick up the new ENQUIRER!

------------

REMEMBER SPIRO AGNEW?

Am I the only one who sees what is going on here with Palin? We all know she has no qualifications and she was just picked as window dressing and as a stooge to say what ever they put in her mouth. No candidate in their right mind would really want her on their ticket. This is what I think will happen and may already be secretly in the plan.

If Mccain manages to get elected, they will get rid of Palin as soon as they can, using all of the scandal surrounding her as the reason. There is already information of drug use by her son and both daughters and Enquirer has eluded to something coming out about Palin and her husband are regular drug users. Once rid of her, Mcain then will put in Lieberman like he wanted to all along and that is how it will play out. What do you think, make sense?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 1:25 PM | Report abuse

Guess you missed the joke about the blackberry...

Posted by: 2CavVet | September 17, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Pretty sad that in an article about media bias, you mention that Fiorina is quoted as saying McCain and Palin couldn't run a business. Of course, you omitted the part of the statement where she said Obama and Biden couldn't run a comany either. Then after you omit the reference to Obama and Biden, you label it a negative for McCain. How long will it take to figure out that you don't increase readership when you treat the readers like idiots?

Posted by: GR | September 17, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Don't worry. We'll get a fair and balanced perspective on Sean Hannity's interview with Palin tonight. No doubt he'll be diving face first into the truth.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 1:23 PM | Report abuse

Let's see. Vote for a tax and spend Liberal or vote for a decorated war hero.

This is a very tough decision. I'm going to have to vote for the war hero..

After all I'm just a mind numbed robot.

Posted by: Mind Numbed Robot | September 17, 2008 1:23 PM | Report abuse

This article is just garbage. Chris failed to mention that Carly Fiorina also said that both Biden and Obama were unqualified to run that same company. Who's biased really? There's a reason Drudge has more hits that any other news outlet! Thank God there's some balance to the left wing MSM.

Posted by: James | September 17, 2008 1:22 PM | Report abuse

Gregg: Google these words EXACTLY "liberal media bias UCLA study" regarding a UCLA study on the matter. Even a mindless liberal hysteric like you can have eyes opened. Then again, maybe not. You morons on the left let your emotions and feelings run the way you people "think."

Posted by: Strolb77 | September 17, 2008 1:22 PM | Report abuse

This article is spot on. I had noticed the dramatic shift (by Drudge standards) in the site's treatment of McCain and Obama, but I hadn't thought of the site traffic rationale. I'm not convinced, though, that Drudge smart enough to manipulate coverage for maximum traffic--I have to imagine that his anti-MSM bent is the driving factor.

Posted by: Henry | September 17, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

People need to get a grip.

Any look back at the history of the news media in this country will show you that we've ALWAYS had media bias.

People need to quit acting as though there was some golden age of objective media.

AS LONG AS THE MEDIA IS PRODUCED BY HUMANS, IT WILL HAVE A BIAS.

Posted by: MBW | September 17, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

What a rediculous article. #1 The Drudge report simply is a midway point to OTHER news outlets stories. Very few are actually written by Matt Drudge so your point that Drudge is driving the media is rediculous. #2, your weak claim that there is media bias towards the GOP is just plain silly, even a recent Harvard study (a bastion of liberalism mind you) says the media is HEAVILY librally biased (http://www.deadfishwrapper.com/node/115).
I am afraid all you have done Sir is show whos team you're cheering for.

Posted by: Ryan Petersen | September 17, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

NEW BUMPER STICKERS:


POW-WoW '08


Prisoner of War-Wonder Woman

OBAMA bin BIDEN '09

Dumb & Dumber


Posted by: ms helga | September 17, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

People, people, people!
Of course Fiorina included the Dems in her condescension of government! Do you think a McCain surrogate would say "Obama can run a corporation but McCain can't?"
The NEWSWORTHY part of the quote is that she dissed HER OWN CANDIDATES!
Please take a moment and think... what makes an event "news"?
Rove also called Obama a liar. The newsworthy part is that he called McCain a liar! Of course Rove is gonna dis Obama! Again, it's a big culture of victimization over there on the right that finds any possible angle to paint the media as "liberal" even when it makes absolutely no sense.
Remember, conservatives- you've basically been in power for 28 years. You will soon see what it's like to be on the other end of the stick- and man, is it gonna be a bellyache firestorm!

Posted by: Maurizio | September 17, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

mibrooks27 and all you bleeding heart liberals. Of course there is no media bias! When Ms. Fiorina said that neither McCain nor Palin could run a major corporation, that's not the only thing she said. She continued to say that neither Obama nor Biden could run major corporations either. She was trying to make a point regarding the economy! You don't hear this in the MSM! You only hear that McCain's economic advisor said he couldn't run a major corporation. Her comment was taken out of context to attack McCain. No, the MSM isn't bias. You want to buy the Brooklyn Bridge? I'll sell it to you.

Posted by: OrlandoRican | September 17, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

Bias in the news?

Here are the real facts from the No Sh*t Zone:

Studies show that MSM are 80% Republicans and or Right Wing leaning.

Studies show that at the moment McCain continues to get 60% of the press articles compared to 40% for Obama.

In the past, McCain was getting 80% of the coverage compared to just 20% for Obama.

Of the current 40% of coverage allotted to Obama by the MSM, the vast majority are negative.

Of the current 60% of coverage allotted to McCain by the MSM, the vast majority are positive.

The reason Limbaugh and Drudge are able to get such a large audience is that the MSM depends on them to propagate fringe issue stories that the MSM can then report on as "news".

When objective leftists claim that there is no MSM leftist bias we can trust these claims because they are proven arbiters of truth. Of course there is Right Wing bias in the MSM. We see it consistently.

For example, go visit CNN and view any political stories. Majority are about fringe wedge issues engineered to make Right Wing candidates competitive, and thus provide a horse race for political reporters to create a compelling narrative geared to garner regular readership, thus boosting advertising revenue. The few credible policy stories in there are all flimsy at best.

The MSM sold their souls a long time ago. Chris, the current MSM guru wannabe is yet another example of some idiot aspiring to be the next GOP prostitute, doing the bidding of his nationalist masters.

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

There might be something to this media bias, liberals tend to be better educated so they are better mentally equipped to make decisions based on facts rather than dogma. So naturally, they arrive at the conclusion that most of what the Repubs say is bullsh!t.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 1:19 PM | Report abuse

Duh... if everyone else were not such poor newsmen !!! .... get a clue.

Posted by: Freemon Sandlewould | September 17, 2008 1:19 PM | Report abuse

Hey conservative think tank, here's a thought for you. The reason that nobody cares that Fiorina also said that Obama and Biden would be unable to be a CEO of a Fortune 500 company is becuase she is a MCCAIN/REPUBLICAN SURROGATE! She is on the RNC payroll! She is expected to say that the Democrats are unqualified. The only newsworthy portion of her quote is when she admits her OWN GUY isn't qualified. Get it? And BTW, since she ran HP into the ground and then took a 21 million dollar parachute for herself, why does anybody put any value on her opinion about being a CEO at all?

Posted by: bs | September 17, 2008 1:19 PM | Report abuse

The Liberal Media slow walked the Rev.Wright story for months allowing Obama to beat Hillary... how can you not know that...

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 1:19 PM | Report abuse

I was thinking about this yesterday! I've noticed that Drudge Report has become decidedly more pro-McCain/Palin. I attributed it to republican donors to the site. Even the advertisements are shoving Palin gear down my throat. I thought I could expect something more balanced. What a shame.

Posted by: Alexys Vasstrom | September 17, 2008 1:19 PM | Report abuse

Let's not forget that Barack voted for the 70million before he voted against it... Oh sorry wrong liberal. Same difference.

Posted by: JRod | September 17, 2008 1:18 PM | Report abuse

Leave it to you mindless liberals to deny that there is a MASSIVE liberal bias in the mainslime media and then go after Drudge. You pathetic left wing liberal cretin RATs are pathetic! I expect nothing less from the Washington Compost.

Posted by: Strolb77 | September 17, 2008 1:18 PM | Report abuse

Nick, woudl you care to provide links to these so called studies that show there is not left wing media bias. ANYONE can use the words "Studies show" san any back up proofs.

Show me the money!

Posted by: Gregg | September 17, 2008 1:18 PM | Report abuse


Settle down. Settle down. Here's what really happened, according to the transcript:

First, Fiorina says that McCain and Palin are unfit to run a company. Any company! She cited the local corner store as being out of their league. Then, she explains that Biden and Obama have clearly exhibited the skill set to run a company, or act in a Executive of Government role. Realizing what she had said, she then stumble over her words for about 15 seconds before saying nobody is qualified to run a company.

Priceless! Fiorina is a key McCain adviser, and she doesn't even have basic faith in her people! Have we ever seen a less competent campaign?! Obama's gonna take this thing in a landslide.

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

"Bunch of mrons that read this guy. Media is 90%Liberal Democrat. Fact
Go Palin!!!

Posted by: ultra1000 | September 17, 2008 1:13 PM"
0----
The same "liberal" media that ran Rev. Wright day-in and day-out and substituted McCain's answers in the Katie Couric interview so he didn't look like a fool.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

" Tomorrow morning, take a minute to look at the stories Drudge is highlighting. Then, later in the day, watch a few cable channels to see what stories they are talking about. It will open your eyes."

Try this .... NOT TURNING ON THE CABLE NEWS STATIONS ..... that has opened my eyes.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

JB - The obvious answer to these right wing nuts' claims of bias is to ask why they oppose the Fairness Laws. That would fix any real problem of media bias. They wont, of course, becasue the only overwhelming bias is right wing bias and they get far too much mileage playing victims. And, you need to note, these are the same people who regularly attack others for "playing the victim game". The right wingers ar the most vicous and successful game players and scammers to have come down the pike in many a year. Their reign of terror is about to end.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | September 17, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

How about you acknowledge the fact that Carly Fiorina said the same of Obama and Biden, but it was cut?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

What a dumb article.

The only way to fairly judge the coverage a site is giving the election is to take into account ALL the articles it's run.

Instead, the author picks and chooses various headlines from the past month, in order to make his point.

**Yawn** more of the same....

Posted by: The Fix 2.0 | September 17, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse


Why is there very few minorities at these republican rallies? The rest of us Americans(black,red,white ,yellow and brown)are just looking and waiting for Nov.Why do the republicans look so angry and tell lies with a straight face? Could the underline cause be racism.

Posted by: cairo131 | September 17, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

poorrichard blathers:

"And whoever the Democrat was at the head of the ticket would be up by 25 points given the economic disasters of the past week."

He is yet another of your typical Obama supporters. Again, clueless as ever.

He has bought into the MSM slant because, well frankly, he is too stupid to know better.

Anyone that cares about the facts could find what I quickly and easily found.

1) Our current economic problem is not all that diverse as to the reasons. Most correctly point out that it is due to unwise loan policies handing out risky loans known as sub-prime and or interest only loans.

2) Obama (Pelosi, all the other idiot dems) falsely accuses republicans for this current problem. They point to a Phil Gramm bill (circa 1999) that they claim made this thing happen.

3) Obama claims McCain is in deep with these financial institutions

4) Gramm bill in question was during Clinton. It was passed in order to allow more competition with US banks against foreign banks. The past "regulation" disallowed banks to diversify. This "regulation" was unwise, unjustified and anti-capitalism. Most likely why some dems love regulations.

5) The Gramm bill had bipartisan support.

6) Bill Clinton had the option to veto the bill but chose not to. Some Obama claim he did not veto because his veto would be over-ridden. That turns out to be blatantly false when checking the actual numbers. Clinton in fact threatened to veto the bill (obviously showing that he could kill it if he wanted) but only under one condition.

7) Clintons condition for a possible veto of this rep bill was only if the reps included their desired section on making loan policies tighter (doing away with risky loans). Clinton was adamant that tight loan policies would hurt minorities that, as usual, dems love to pander to.

8) Clinton, Dodd, Kerry, Hillary, Franks and Obama (DEMOCRATS) all are on record supporting sub-prime loans (loose lending policies) primarily for the false assumption that it would help minorities. Them losing their homes is hardly help but heck, as long as it sounds warm and fuzzy then do it.

9) Bush (oh how evil) stated in the past that Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac are in dire need of tightening their loan policies. Obama, Chris Dodd and other blowhard democrats resisted. Obama and Chris Dodd resisted for one primary reason. They were on the number 1 and number 2 slots of receiving lobbying money from Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac. We know what happened next. Sub-prime loans caused several banks to crash and burn. Bush was right. Freddy Mac and Fanny may had to be bailed out by the government. Obama was wrong. Dodd was wrong. Hillary, Kerry and Bill were all wrong to force loose lending policies. Pelosi, in answer to whether dems were involved stated with all the force of an idiot blowhard, "no, not us."

10) The cause of our current problem can be traced truthfully and accurately not to deregulation but to democrat politicians insisting that minorities be given to buy homes that they could no, in reality, afford to buy. This caused the current economic mess. Now dems are more than happy to hope that Americans are misinformed. Of course, dems are correct. Look at all the idiot Obama supporters. However, we must get the word out to the true Americans about the sham that the dems are hoping to pull off yet again.

9)

Posted by: KMichaels | September 17, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

Chris your ignorance ( I hope it is ignorance for surely you would never be biased) is astounding. It seems you choose to report half truths and to me that means you may as well be lying. When fully reported you will realize that the reason Drudge would not highlight Carly Fiorina's statement is that when not truncated it is not news. She also said that Obama, Biden, and even McCain would not be qualified to head a US corporation. Since none of them have a business or back ground or experience this statement is not news. It is a statement of the obvious. Does that mean none of them are qualified to be president of the US? On your or other point, McCain himself never claimed to have invented the balckberry. for that matter neither did the person associated with him. I hope you can still claim ignorance here. If not than please admit that Drudge has a much higher standard of reporting actual news than you do. The senior sides statement was that McCain has worked on legislation allowing the development of new communications technology. That is a fact. it is also not a new one and not interesting. it is therefore not news. You seem to be implying that Drudge has a bias because he will not highlight no-news and half truths of your choosing?

Posted by: Colleen Brennan | September 17, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

Maybe? You should start your own website, anti-Drudge or can you not compete in the arena of ideas?

Posted by: Dan, St. Louis USA | September 17, 2008 1:14 PM | Report abuse

Bunch of mrons that read this guy. Media is 90%Liberal Democrat. Fact
Go Palin!!!

Posted by: ultra1000 | September 17, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

Hello!??!? i saw botht he blackberry and the fiorina stories on drudge. IS the author of this article blind or hasty or both?

Posted by: GetTHEfactsJACK | September 17, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Cillizza:

Ordinarily, I respect your views, but your "Drudge-ology 101" is simply stupid. It assumes without evidence or analysis that the chickens all followed the eggs.

You claim that the media follows Drudge because he has a "nose for news" yet it is equally plausible that Drudge headlines are widely covered because the "news" media assumes the stories are "news" because they appear on Drudge. Or, equally possible, the media and Republican flaks are sheep following the corporate shepherd.

Posted by: Ken Bley | September 17, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

Obama put a statement this morning regarding AIG calling it the "American Insurance Group" it's the American International Group! What a fool!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 1:12 PM | Report abuse

Fiorina was hysterical yesterday. First she says that McCain and Palin are unfit to run a company. Any company! She cited the local corner store as being out of their league. Then, she explains that Biden and Obama have clearly exhibited the skill set to run a company, or act in a Executive of Government role. Realizing what she had said, she then stumble over her words for about 15 seconds before saying nobody is qualified to run a company.

Priceless! Fiorina is a key McCain adviser, and she doesn't even have basic faith in her people! Have we ever seen a less competent campaign?! Obama's gonna take this thing in a landslide.

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 1:11 PM | Report abuse

Don't tell us "studies show".

Show us the studies.

Why should we believe your biased statistics.

Posted by: JB | September 17, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

There is certainly media bias when part of what McCain's economic advisor said was conventiently shortened. She said that none of the four, not just McCain and Palin were capable.

Posted by: gloria | September 17, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

How interesting - you didn't use Carly's whole quote. She stated NONE OF THE FOUR could be CEO including your thinly veiled favorite B. Hussein Obama. You are a hypocrite even more guilty of what you are accusing Matt Drudge to be. It's so pathetically obvious. Grow up!

Posted by: Jim K | September 17, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

TR must be turning in his grave hearing all this talk of Obama as "reformer". The MSM has been the major agent involved in keeping the Obama lie puffed up with hot air and shrouded in fog. Now that lie is beginning its collapse. Thankfully we have Matt Drudge and others to help us see through the MSM smokescreen.

Posted by: Bill Andersen | September 17, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Tell me the last time OlberFurher said something nice about anybody but ObamaChrist/Superstar?

Posted by: Pfffttt | September 17, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

This is such a LIE! Fiorina said that McCain, Palin AND OBAMA AND BIDEN couldn't run a corporation. You are such a LIAR!!!!! You are the problem, you degenerate, sorry excuse for a journalist.

Posted by: T.Bear | September 17, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

In a twisted sort of way I almost want McCain to win this election because four more years worth of failed Bush/McCain policies would for all intents and puposes be the end of the Republican party as we know it today. They would become the 4th party gadflies that they deserve to be.


The only question is, would this country survive it?


You people out there who live in economic downtrodden states like Ohio, Pa and Michigan, if you are stupid enough to vote for McCain this fall then you will deserve all of the continued economic hardship that you will get from a "President McCain"....


McCain economics 101:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mHsuL6FfY4
.

Posted by: JennyinOhio | September 17, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

Poorrichard- this is satire. I am pointing out that, to conservatives, "liberal" is used interchangeably with "anti-capitalistic." So they're basically always whining about an anticapitalistic media that is run by General Electric, Disney, etc. etc.
They've been doing this for years and otherwise intelligent people buy into it because it feeds their sense of victimization.

Posted by: Maurizio | September 17, 2008 1:08 PM | Report abuse

NPR is "conservative"? What planet are you on?

What happened, did your subscription to Pravda run out?

Posted by: JB | September 17, 2008 1:08 PM | Report abuse

Bias in the news?

Here are the real facts from the No Sh*t Zone:

Studies show that MSM are 80% Republicans and or Right Wing leaning.

Studies show that at the moment McCain continues to get 60% of the press articles compared to 40% for Obama.

In the past, McCain was getting 80% of the coverage compared to just 20% for Obama.

Of the current 40% of coverage allotted to Obama by the MSM, the vast majority are negative.

Of the current 60% of coverage allotted to McCain by the MSM, the vast majority are positive.

The reason Limbaugh and Drudge are able to get such a large audience is that the MSM depends on them to propagate fringe issue stories that the MSM can then report on as "news".

When objective leftists claim that there is no MSM leftist bias we can trust these claims because they are proven arbiters of truth. Of course there is Right Wing bias in the MSM. We see it consistently.

For example, go visit CNN and view any political stories. Majority are about fringe wedge issues engineered to make Right Wing candidates competitive, and thus provide a horse race for political reporters to create a compelling narrative geared to garner regular readership, thus boosting advertising revenue. The few credible policy stories in there are all flimsy at best.

The MSM sold their souls a long time ago. Chris, the current MSM guru wannabe is yet another example of some idiot aspiring to be the next GOP prostitute, doing the bidding of his nationalist masters.

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 1:07 PM | Report abuse

I saw Fiorina's full comments in context. She also said Obama could not run a major corporation but somehow you manage to leave that out of your snide remarks. Why exactly is that?

Posted by: buzzfuzzel | September 17, 2008 1:07 PM | Report abuse

drudge doesn't deserve the attention he gets here or elsewhere in the media. you all need to get over your infatuation with him.

Posted by: jb, new orleans, la | September 17, 2008 1:07 PM | Report abuse

This is a good article,Chris. When Hillary complained media bias,she was dubbed a whiner.Even Palin jumped on that band wagon before VP pick. Yet now she is trying to woo Clinton supporters. McCain just about cried before Palin arrived. Yet, I heard no such label for him.

Obama has taken the high road. I haven't heard or seen any complaints from him that were not legitimate,such as the lipstick on a pig comment,which was a McCain campaign lie. We know about the sound bites played over and over which had nothing to do with the issues.

It is unfortunate that people see and hear what the want regardless of the facts. McCain has run the most negative and dishonest campaign that I have seen;worst than Bush's campaign. That campaign was dreadfully negative,nasty,dishonest and divisive to win the election. Look at the condition of our Nation now. Mired in a war in Iraq based on deceptive reasons.

People forget that US involvement in IRAQ is based on lies from Bush and Chaney. Over 4,000 Americans died based on a lie. McSame voted for that war just as he voted 90% of the time with Bush. The majority of Americans are not better off than eight years ago because of the ineptness and poor judgment of this Administration. Our economy is crumbling and our military stretched to its limits making the US security at its highest risk in history.

McCain has admitted he knows nothing about the economy and has had to modify statements which proved it. He has shown poor judgement on foriegn policy numerous times. Even former Secretaries of Defense agree with Obama's foriegn diplomacy policy from Kissinger to Colon Powell. So where is the repetition of these sound bites? McCain and Palin are lying themselves all the way to the White House. This is another area where McCain is the same as Bush. So where are these sound bites of his lies? How many times does he have to tell the one about Obama wanting to raise taxes when in fact Obama's plan will reduce taxes for about 90% of Americans? Where is that sound bite?

Posted by: Carolyn207 | September 17, 2008 1:07 PM | Report abuse

Why didn't you finish that quote...she said the neither McCain nor Palin could run a corporation nor could Obama nor Biden. Its amazing how you only print what you want the public to read, but sorry this true story has already appeared on tv and so did the coment about you only printing the McCain/Palin part. I thought the news was suppose to be based on the truth, not just what you want it to be.

Posted by: Barbarat | September 17, 2008 1:06 PM | Report abuse

The Drudge Report is not a "Report" it's a "links" page with clever, salacious headlines. I've yet to see an article written by Matt Drudge or any of his staff members.

The WAPO at least publishes material written by journalists from both the right and left.

Drudge's goal is to tantalize the viewer in order to shepherd "eyeballs".

Oh, and Sean (the hatchet) Hannity ought to know a lot about the death of journalism.

Personally, I like to get my news from multiple sources.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 1:06 PM | Report abuse

Drudge is a clown. Entertaining, but a clown. Anyone who's positions on issues, candidates or the news is swayed by Drudge is a mindless "Dittohead."

Posted by: MRE | September 17, 2008 1:06 PM | Report abuse

Want a clear example of overwhelming bias in high-visibility media outlet? Check out the monologues in the late night talk shows. Bush is routinely mocked. McCain is mercilessly pilloried about his age. Hilary Clinton, at least, comes in for the occasional barb. But not a glove is landed on Obama. Check it out.

Hollywood - a powerful, influential mover of public opinion - is solidly in Obama's camp. That's a story, and Drudge was on it.

Posted by: JB | September 17, 2008 1:06 PM | Report abuse

I just saw Mauizio's post...

Who you kidding man?

With the consolidation of the Media under the Bush Administration, the Big four news outlets are owned BY CONSERVATIVES. Fox does note even count as news...all Conservative opinion..

And lest we forget the next time NPR and your local PBS station come to you with their hands out in exchange for some Irish Music and self-help shows during pledge month (year? century? epoch?) listen to their broadcasts under their Bush appointed management and ads from every military airplane vendor, oil and megafood producer.....They mouth the Conservative Party line and provide reality for 'balance'.

Liberal Media is Baloney. The conservatives set out in 1990 to take the media over and have done it.

NewsSpeak ala '1984' is here and very effective.

Posted by: poorrichard | September 17, 2008 1:04 PM | Report abuse

What a culture of victimization modern conservatism has become. Always always always always always always BLAME THE MEDIA!

Posted by: Maurizio | September 17, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse

News bias? Well, when the whole world reports stories one way and you hicks and your distorted home grown "media" (Fox, Limbaugh, Drudge) sees it the other way, that is the classic definition of insanity! MSNBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, the BBC, Der Spiegel, Goteborg Posten, Der Zeitung, the Washington Post, all make a serious attempt to report the news as accurtaely as possible. They recognize that people, even reporters, have biases and, so, they try to have reporters with different view points and politics report on and comment on news stories. This sometimes results in angry exahanges, such as the one that Drudge and the right jumped all over recently, when Obermann and Scarborough got into heated on the air debates. You will NEVER see anything remotely like that on Fox, because they do not make any attempt at all for fairness. This is why, most liberals WANT to bring back the equal time laws. It really wouldn't effect the Post, ABC, NBC, etc. It would put Fox off the air and it would shut Limbaugh down for good.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | September 17, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse

I think that "The Fix" gives too much credit to Drudge's influence. I think Drudge _used_ to be way influential, but not as much anymore.

Check out this quote from http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/overstating_drudges_influence.php

=====
This strikes us as an unfortunate example, particularly in a column arguing (as Cillizza does) that the source of Drudge's power lies in his influence over the cable networks. Because one of the stories ignored by Drudge actually got a whole lot more coverage on cable yesterday than the one Drudge pushed all day in that supposedly hypnotic banner headline of his.

We followed cable coverage pretty closely yesterday at TPM World Headquarters. And a quick Nexis search by TPM's own Eric Kleefeld verified our suspicions. As best as we can determine, the Streisand story was only the focus of episodes on Fox. Neither CNN nor MSNBC did episodes focused on it. On those two networks, it only came up in passing when brought up by GOP operatives (a no-brainer) or when subjected to ridicule by a few others.

By contrast, all three networks devoted repeated stand-alone episodes to the Fiorina mess -- even though (Heaven forfend) Drudge ignored it! She appeared on all the nets again and again throughout the day.

Look, far be it from me to question the notion that Drudge has influence over network producers. Of course he does. But if we're really going to devote so much time to flacking Drudge's influence, how about a real and nuanced discussion of it?
=======

Posted by: A DC Wonk | September 17, 2008 1:02 PM | Report abuse

I like your columns usually Chris. But this one is frustrating. Its not new that Drudge drives some of the editorial decisions in TV land. But that's the problem... not because of Drudge but because of the news directors are prone to follow... I understand your larger point but as a journalist, shouldn't you care that the news day is being driven like in this way?

Posted by: losdela | September 17, 2008 1:02 PM | Report abuse

"fragrantly"

Love it. Just love it. The jackasses are out!

(Guys, we might pay more attention when your RUSH dittos at least use proper english).

Posted by: rb | September 17, 2008 1:02 PM | Report abuse

Report: Obama attempted to delay Iraq withdrawal
WorldNetDaily16/09/2008 00:00:00

Did candidate try to manipulate policy to later claim credit for ending war?


While touring Iraq in July and publicly calling for troop withdrawal, Sen. Barack Obama was reportedly trying in private to delay plans for an American draw-down until after the next president took office.


New York Post columnist Amir Taheri writes that he interviewed Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, who confirmed the Democratic presidential candidate met with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad to demand delay in the withdrawal of American forces.


"He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the U.S. elections and the formation of a new administration," Zebari reportedly said.


The column states that Obama insisted it was in Iraq's best interest to avoid an agreement negotiated by the Bush administration in its "state of weakness and political confusion."


Such a position in private negotiations would be a stark contrast with Obama's public record on the issue.


"The best way to protect our security and to pressure Iraq's leaders to resolve their civil war is to immediately begin to remove our combat troops," Obama said last year at a university in Iowa. "Not in six months or one year – now."


In January of last year, Obama offered legislation on the floor of the Senate called the Iraq War De-escalation Act of 2007, which called for troop withdrawals to begin in May 2007 and to conclude by March 2008.


And in his New York Times editorial released the same month the senator toured the Middle East, Obama wrote, "The call by Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki for a timetable for the removal of American troops from Iraq presents an enormous opportunity. We should seize this moment to begin the phased redeployment of combat troops that I have long advocated."


Taheri reported that Iraqi President Jalal Talabani's advisers wonder if Obama is privately working to delay troop withdrawal until after the election in order to claim credit – should Obama win the presidency – for ending the war.


"Indeed, say Talabani's advisers," reports Taheri, "a President Obama might be tempted to appropriate the victory that America has already won in Iraq by claiming that his intervention transformed failure into success."


The Obama campaign has not responded to WND's request for a response to the Post column.


© 2008 WorldNetDaily

WorldNetDaily16/09/2008 00:00:00

Posted by: Scott | September 17, 2008 1:02 PM | Report abuse

So It's news when Joe Biden says during the primaries that Obama is not ready to lead but it's "media bias" when a McCain aide says that he nor Sarah Palin could manage a corporation.

It is news because the GOPsters continually say that the Government should be run like a business.

Posted by: jr | September 17, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

The Washington Post and AP should merge then they could both collapse at the same time.

Posted by: Ralph | September 17, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

You and your liberal fish wrap are pieces of crap. (and going bankrupt) Drudge fills a tremendous void in the media being left by Democrat prostitutes like yourself. Do you have to shower after writing these articles?

Posted by: Alan | September 17, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

yea, and WashPost can only get traffic to their site it there is a link on drudge ... maybe you shouldn't bite the hand that feeds ...

Posted by: sac | September 17, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

Oblahblah/Obiden frightens the daylights out of me.
Can you just imagine???

*shivers*

Posted by: rjb | September 17, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

Bias in the news?

Studies show that MSM are 80% Republicans and or Right Wing leaning.

Studies show that at the moment McCain continues to get 60% of the press articles compared to 40% for Obama.

In the past, McCain was getting 80% of the coverage compared to just 20% for Obama.

Of the current 40% of coverage allotted to Obama by the MSM, the vast majority are negative.

Of the current 60% of coverage allotted to McCain by the MSM, the vast majority are positive.

The reason Limbaugh and Drudge are able to get such a large audience is that the MSM depends on them to propagate fringe issue stories that the MSM can then report on as "news".

When objective leftists claim that there is no MSM leftist bias we can trust these claims because they are proven arbiters of truth. Of course there is Right Wing bias in the MSM. We see it consistently.

For example, go visit CNN and view any political stories. Majority are about fringe wedge issues engineered to make Right Wing candidates competitive, and thus provide a horse race for political reporters to create a compelling narrative geared to garner regular readership, thus boosting advertising revenue. The few credible policy stories in there are all flimsy at best.

The MSM sold their souls a long time ago. Chris, the current MSM guru wannabe is yet another example of some idiot aspiring to be the next GOP prostitute, doing the bidding of his nationalist masters.

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

One thing's for sure: The Fix is no where near the quality of Drudge...nice try though.

Posted by: Ed | September 17, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Sorry but Barry O is Un-electable:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UAFbMLZm4g&feature=related

Peace out.

Posted by: Solomon | September 17, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Of course Cilliza neglects to mention that Fiorina ALSO stated that neither Obama nor Biden were qualified to run H-P either!

Posted by: Stewpified | September 17, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

What a hoot! The Wash Post whining about media bias. Hell, they wrote the book.

Drudge is biased and that bias serves as a counterbalance to that of the establishment media.

Like Paul Winchell (sp?), he tells "the rest of the story" that rags like the post don't want you to know.

Posted by: Crabjuice | September 17, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

I live in Europe and from here I see Drudge as being almost as biased as the rest. But he is a good aggregator so I look at his site as much as possible to find out what left wing journalism I want to read to see how the socialist feminist Americans are doing.

Posted by: Jack Sanderson | September 17, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Has the phrase, don't throw stones in a glass house ever registered with Chris Cillizza (or perhaps S-leezy). The Washington Post should not be critiquing Drudge when they have a far worse problemd when it comes to being unbiased. And by the way, I read this article thanks to Drudge.

McCain never invented the blackberry and has never claimed to have. The Post by the same token claims to be impartial, but never has been.

Posted by: Mr. Reality | September 17, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Another liberal/Obama smear merchant of MSM here
Fiorina said McCain, Obama, Palin and Biden, were not qualified to run a company not just McCain and Palin as this poor excuse for a journalist says.

Posted by: sharris | September 17, 2008 12:58 PM | Report abuse

That was hilarious. There's nothing quite like the Wash Post accusing Drudge of being media biased.

Thanks for making me spit my soft drink all over my monitor.

Hilarious!

Posted by: rsted222 | September 17, 2008 12:58 PM | Report abuse

Jealous, Chrissy?

Posted by: Tom | September 17, 2008 12:58 PM | Report abuse

The 'Blackberry" comment [McCain invented theBlackerry] was A JOKE. The Aid was kidding, goofus.

Carly F did mean to say that neither of the candidates have run a business....


sheeesh


McCain Palin 2008 ~

Posted by: Rosemary | September 17, 2008 12:58 PM | Report abuse

what's your point?

Posted by: ricky roame | September 17, 2008 12:58 PM | Report abuse

shorter Cilizza: "Drudge tries to shiv Obama. we help because we have decided he is important."

Posted by: SDM | September 17, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Wow, a very biased blog entry about a another blog's bias ... and trying to speak about fairness. The blinders that keep you media folks at loss to see your own biases is so incredibly illuminating. It makes your postings laughable to anyone capable of seeing both sides.

Posted by: jim-h, florida | September 17, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Umm, Carly Fiorina also noted that neither Obama or Biden were qualified to run a major corporation. Sure, it is fair to report something against McCain, but lets be fair and not conveniently leave things out.

Oh, wait, Obama's campain already did that.

Wonder if she'd say that about Perot.

Posted by: Mike P | September 17, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

when do people like Drudge put country first instead of traffic on their site?
The mere thought of Palin as the POTUS (which is what she will be, McCain will be a figure head since he will owe it to her to win)sends shivers down my spine...I am truly scared.

Posted by: jaleh | September 17, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

I'm glad you give me permission to analyze the total unworthliness of Cillizza's contention that if cable news leads with a bag of garbage from Matt Drudge waste bin, it must be newsworthy stuff. Who am I to argue with Matt Drudge, right? Poor Cillizza. He must be blinded by a power greater than the zeal that broke Watergate.

Posted by: WenG | September 17, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

how ironic- write a story about drudge and then drudge includes it on his site. no one wld ever come to this sophmoric blog if not for the drudge link. chris, you're smarter then we realize- a biased and poor writer but smart. I need to comment on a couple of items that illustrates your bias. "Palin was immediately greeted with a series of tough stories about her background." You mention just three (with the trooper moron story a complete hack non-story). What about the other "tough stories" that were biased/false? The US Weekly cover, the banning of books, the baby w/D.S. was her daughters, etc. C'mon, liberal cheerleader- get some integrity and stop being jealous of Drudge. Be ethical and write something worth reading and then people will come to your sorry blog... HRC 2012!!!

Posted by: pudge drudge | September 17, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Washpost reporter acts as Drudge's fluffer. The spiral continues.

Posted by: Media Browski | September 17, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Has the phrase, don't throw stones in a glass house ever registered with Chris Cillizza (or perhaps S-leezy). The Washington Post should not be critiquing Drudge when they have a far worse problemd when it comes to being unbiased. And by the way, I read this article thanks to Drudge.

McCain never invented the blackberry and has never claimed to have. The Post by the same token claims to be impartial, but never has been.

Posted by: Mr. Reality | September 17, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

A member of the "Macaca" media whining about unfair treatment from a blog?

CLASSIC!

Posted by: ChuckySchmucky | September 17, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Palm G is the One we have been waiting for, listen to "it" describe who is anointed and who is mentally challenged. It knows what is best for us all, and all we have to do is follow his Lord and Savior, the One that will lower the waters and heal the Earth - Barack Obama, Savior of the Universe. Oh, that we could be in His presence now, we would all see His wisdom and love.

Phe!

Posted by: Jim | September 17, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

You have to be kidding me. Are left wingers really complaining about media bias from the Drudge Report? Give me a break. But I guess this is a typical...liberals seem to cry about everything...

Posted by: andrew | September 17, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Obama is going to lose. He's going to lose, and there is nothing anyone can do about it.--Jack Cafferty is especially desperate as of late; he has dropped any pretense of even masquerading as a journalist. Others will follow as it sinks in that McCain has won and the first female VP will be a Republican.

Posted by: gmundenat | September 17, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

"Are you honestly giving Drudge legitimacy here? Cilliza, this is the Washington Post! Get it together. This is like using Karl Rove's personal diary as an objective reporting of events.

Posted by: Nick Collins III"

Nick continues to whine like a wounded school girl that cant seem to get a date.

His conclusions are moronic at best and definitely nothing to do with reality or truth.

In other words, Nick represents your typical Obama supporter. As clueless as the day he was born.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

From Obama's Hometown Paper-

"Obama Sidesteps Reform in Illinois
By Dennis Byrne

For those of you who still cling to the fantasy that Barack Obama is "about change," you should note how he, or his minions, want nothing to do with reforming politics in Illinois, perhaps the most corrupt state in the Union.

"Throughout his political career, Barack Obama has fought for open and honest government," proclaims his campaign Web site. Apparently, no longer. When the Democratic presidential candidate--now his party's industrial-strength voice for our deliverance from political corruption everywhere--was asked by a reformer if he would help get his political mentor back home to get off the dime and move the most minimal of state ethics legislation toward passage, the Obama campaign sent word back that amounted to a "no."

State Sen. Emil Jones (D-Chicago) is the Chicago machine politician who might have been most instrumental in jump-starting Obama's political career. Now, as Illinois Senate president, Jones is the one sitting on the reform legislation, refusing to call it for an expected favorable vote before it officially dies of neglect.

Jones is the pal of Gov. Rod Blagojevich, no friend of reform, who used his amendatory veto power to change the legislation after it passed both houses so that Jones would get another chance to kill it.

If all that's confusing, welcome to Illinois politics, where intricacy is the best camouflage for chicanery. Suffice to say, neither Blagojevich nor Jones is working for reform.

So, along comes Cindi Canary, director of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform, thinking that now might be a good time for Obama to parlay his friendship with Jones to do a good deed: Won't you intervene with Jones and try to get him to call the Senate back into session to get this law passed? "[T]his is a place [Obama] could come in and quickly clean up some of the damage and serve his state," she told the Chicago Sun-Times. After all, her group and Obama worked together during those halcyon days when he actually supported reform in Illinois, so maybe he'll be receptive to a plea to intervene on behalf of Illinois folks who have been getting gouged for years by the likes of Jones. "A 30-second phone call to the Illinois Senate president could yield huge dividends to this state," she said.

In response, Obama's campaign issued an oozy statement reaffirming Obama's alleged commitment to reform, while getting no more specific than urging everyone to get together and love one another right now. What Canary was asking Obama for wasn't all that much. Maybe a 30-second phone call to back up his usual pap of, "Look, ah, I've, ah, always been for, ah, reform." For most people, the reform that we're talking about is so basic that they might ask, "You mean it's not illegal already?"

The legislation would make illegal the widespread abuse called pay-to-play politics, by which companies doing business with the state contribute to the state official in charge of ladling out contracts. The new law wouldn't let you do it if you have more than $50,000 in state contracts, which, even at that, leaves open a nice loophole. In Illinois, this is a huge leap forward from how things are done. Blagojevich, who has reaped bundles of cash from state contractors, could be one of the pols most jolted by the prohibition. That explains why he rewrote the legislation in a way that would make it ineffective and why the House overwhelmingly rejected his changes.

Jones now is the only one standing in the way of the reform, with Obama abetting.

Here's another example of how Obama has revealed himself to be a creature of the Chicago machine. Who can forget his silence when he could have affirmed his reformer credentials by endorsing Democrat Forrest Claypool over machine creature Todd Stroger as Cook County Board president? When things got too hot, Obama severed his ties from his racially inflammatory pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. That's not too hard; you can always find another pastor.

But betraying your political godfather(s) in Chicago and Illinois is an entirely different matter. Especially if you lose the presidential election and return to being just another senator from Illinois. Cutting his ties with the corrupt Chicago machine is one bridge you will not see Obama burn. Not now, not ever.

Agent of change, my foot."

Dennis Byrne is a Chicago Tribune op-ed columnist. dennis@dennisbyrne.net

Posted by: scott | September 17, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

face it.

If Barack weren't Black, Sarah would be just another ill-equipped political climber, with radical gun ideas, no foreing policy experience who would never have gotten introduced to McCain. McCain would be another Bushesque sacrificial lamb with an alienated right wing and excessively reprised POW story.

And whoever the Democrat was at the head of the ticket would be up by 25 points given the economic disasters of the past week.

I always tell my freinds that when I make political predictions, I imagine what my WAllace Democrat Parents, South Side Roseland relatives and freinds would think.

Their hands would wither and fall off before they cast an Obama Vote because he is....um.... not like them.

And there goes much of the nation

Posted by: poorrichard | September 17, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Remember: A) Liberals hate capitalism B) The corporate media is liberal; therefore C) General Electric hates capitalism. Now you understand the conservative worldview. Talkingpointsmemo . com has a very good refutation of the above fluff.

Posted by: Maurizio | September 17, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Bwa ha ha ha ha....

Turn about is fair play. Quit yer belly-aching! You have a platform! You could have a readership as big as Drudge's...he has one little ole' website, and if I'm not mistaken, you have a little ole' website too. Don't go blaming Drudge because a majority of Americans find his website a heck of alot more valuable and entertaining than we find yours. Drudge is where we go to get news. You "newspapers" used to do that, back in the day. That day is over, you have lost credibility with the average American. Quit whining about it and go get another line of work if it ain't payin' the bills for you.

Posted by: rightmight | September 17, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

anti obama/liberal bias in drudge?
then why did he link to the facts like following
Top Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Campaign Contributions
1) Chris Dodd $133,900
2) Barack Obama $105,849

some change!

Posted by: sfernando | September 17, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Obama, McCain, Biden, Palin, does it really matter? George Wallace said it best, "there's not a dime's worth of difference between" Republicans and Democrats. The Democrats willingly went along with the War in Iraq, suspension of Habeas Corpus, Patriot Act, banning books like "America Deceived' from Amazon, Wikipedia and Facebook, warrant-less wiretapping and opening private mail. They are both guilty of treason.
Clean them all out and save this great nation.
Last link (before Google Books bends to gov't Will and drops the title):
http://www.iuniverse.com/Bookstore/BookDetail.aspx?BookId=SKU-000083883

Posted by: Jack D | September 17, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

September 16, 2008
Prominent Clinton backer and DNC member to endorse McCain
Posted: 10:07 PM ET

From CNN Political Editor Mark Preston, Extra


A prominent backer of Hillary Clinton is endorsing McCain.
WASHINGTON (CNN) — Lynn Forester de Rothschild, a prominent Hillary Clinton supporter and member of the Democratic National Committee’s Platform Committee, will endorse John McCain for president on Wednesday, her spokesman tells CNN.

The announcement will take place at a news conference on Capitol Hill, just blocks away from the DNC headquarters. Forester will “campaign and help him through the election,” the spokesman said of her plans to help the Republican presidential nominee.

Forester was a major donor for Clinton earning her the title as a Hillraiser for helping to raise at least $100,000 for the New York Democratic senator’s failed presidential bid.

In an interview with CNN this summer, Forester did not hide her distaste for eventual Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama.

“This is a hard decision for me personally because frankly I don't like him,” she said of Obama in an interview with CNN’s Joe Johns. “I feel like he is an elitist. I feel like he has not given me reason to trust him.”

Posted by: Scott | September 17, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone else find it ironic that for a website that is allegedly so biased toward the right, Drudge actually provided a link to this "article"? Does anyone else find it ironic that for a website that is allegedly so biased toward the right, Drudge provides links to liberal columnists like Dowd, Estrich, Helen Thomas, etc. and to left-leaning media like MSNBC, NY Times, and the Wash(ed up) Post?

Headline today on Drudge is about financial bailouts. Is this biased?

Posted by: Dagnar | September 17, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Bias in the news?

Just read other samples of Saleeza's articles and any blind fool can tell what side he favors.

And not only him. Studies show that MSM are 80% democrats and or left leaning.

Studies show that at the moment Obama continues to get 60% of the press articles compared to 40% for McCain.

In the past, a few months back, Obama was getting 80% of the coverage compared to just 20% for McCain.

Of the current 40% of Coverage that McCain is getting from the MSM the vast majority are negative.

Of the current 60% of coverage from the MSM the vast majority are positive.

The reason Limbaugh and Drudge are able to get such a large audience is that they come up with the rest of the news that the MSM refuses to print.

When idiot leftists claim that their is no MSM leftist bias it is like saying that night is day and day is night. Of course their is leftist bias in the MSM. We see it consistently.

For example, go visit CNN and look at Jack Cafferties articles. Majority are about Obama and all positive. The few McCain and Palin stories in there are all negative.

The MSM sold their souls a long time ago. Chris, the current MSM guru wannabe is yet another example of some idiot aspiring to be the next DNC prostitute, doing the bidding of his socialist masters.

Posted by: KMichaels | September 17, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Funny how the Washington Post points to a blog, as a source of reference for "media bias" for McCain. This is ridiculous for several reasons:

(1) the blog isn't "mainstream media" in the way, say, the Post is, so any bias it has is not as relevant as the Post's bias,

(2) the blog is much more balanced than the Post

(3) the Post is criticizing the blog for not leading with the frivolous-aide-gaffe articles that its own biased, "gotcha" coverage consists of

(4) the blog is better than the Post.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 17, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

So Drudge makes editorial decisions just like the MSM... What's the point?

http://warskill.blogspot.com/
--Nietzsche is Dead

Posted by: foutsc | September 17, 2008 12:49 PM | Report abuse

You DO realize that 95% of what Drudge does is link to OTHER media sources

I know that ALGORE's miraculous fantabulous INTRAWEB can be kind of intimidating...but seriously...check out Drudge and click on one of the links...you'll be amazed at what you find

Posted by: Uncle Bouncy | September 17, 2008 12:49 PM | Report abuse

Are you honestly giving Drudge legitimacy here? Cilliza, this is the Washington Post! Get it together. This is like using Karl Rove's personal diary as an objective reporting of events.

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 12:49 PM | Report abuse

The media is fragrantly biased.

The Washington Post is fragrantly biased.

The fact that Drudge and Fox irks the media elites so much, only confirms that they simply can't stand any competition to their liberal filtering of the news.

I lived in D.C. and had to put up daily with the standard bias the Post put out every day.

The main stream press is losing readership because it is biased, boring and oh so predictable.

Posted by: Texasdav | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

The media is fragrantly biased.

The Washington Post is fragrantly biased.

The fact that Drudge and Fox irks the media elites so much, only confirms that they simply can't stand any competition to their liberal filtering of the news.

I lived in D.C. and had to put up daily with the standard bias the Post put out every day.

The main stream press is losing readership because it is biased, boring and oh so predictable.

Posted by: Texasdav | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

You're attacking Drudge!!! You have to be an idiot to not realize the liberal media bias and how Obama has been treated with kid gloves by CNN, ABC and such. How about you critique your own liberal puke newspaper!! The fix is you do your job, stuff your opinion and report the news unbiased.

Posted by: Dan Dwyer | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Bias in the news?

Studies show that MSM are 80% democrats and or left leaning.

Studies show that at the moment Obama continues to get 60% of the press articles compared to 40% for McCain.

In the past, a few months back, Obama was getting 80% of the coverage compared to just 20% for McCain.

Of the current 40% of Coverage that McCain is getting from the MSM the vast majority are negative.

Of the current 60% of coverage from the MSM the vast majority are positive.

The reason Limbaugh and Drudge are able to get such a large audience is that they come up with the rest of the news that the MSM refuses to print.

When idiot leftists claim that their is no MSM leftist bias it is like saying that night is day and day is night. Of course their is leftist bias in the MSM. We see it consistently.

For example, go visit CNN and look at Jack Cafferties articles. Majority are about Obama and all positive. The few McCain and Palin stories in there are all negative.

The MSM sold their souls a long time ago. Chris, the current MSM guru wannabe is yet another example of some idiot aspiring to be the next DNC prostitute, doing the bidding of his socialist masters.

Posted by: KMichaels | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

"John McCain did serve boldly in the Navy, but his military career would be relatively unknown if he hadn't been shot down and captured in Vietnam."

The fact is he served boldly, was shot down and behaved honorably, he has led a life of public service committment to the public good.

If Obama has been a mayor, and then a governor, instead of a one term senator with a voting record of present, he'd have some administrative experience. You can always wish.

John McCain has been making national headlines for the last ten years. Where have you been?

Posted by: southernmaid | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Chris--

Less fawning and begging for Drudge links, puhlease. And how about some earnest analysis about Drudge's role in journalism and whether it is a good or bad thing?

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/overstating_drudges_influence.php

Posted by: Iowa Boy | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

The media is fragrantly biased.

The Washington Post is fragrantly biased.

The fact that Drudge and Fox irks the media elites so much, only confirms that they simply can't stand any competition to their liberal filtering of the news.

I lived in D.C. and had to put up daily with the standard bias the Post put out every day.

The main stream press is losing readership because it is biased, boring and oh so predictable.

Posted by: Texasdav | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

The media is fragrantly biased.

The Washington Post is fragrantly biased.

The fact that Drudge and Fox irks the media elites so much, only confirms that they simply can't stand any competition to their liberal filtering of the news.

I lived in D.C. and had to put up daily with the standard bias the Post put out every day.

The main stream press is losing readership because it is biased, boring and oh so predictable.

Posted by: Texasdav | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

"John McCain did serve boldly in the Navy, but his military career would be relatively unknown if he hadn't been shot down and captured in Vietnam."

The fact is he served boldly, was shot down and behaved honorably, he has led a life of public service committment to the public good.

If Obama has been a mayor, and then a governor, instead of a one term senator with a voting record of present, he'd have some administrative experience. You can always wish.

John McCain has been making national headlines for the last ten years. Where have you been?

Posted by: southernmaid | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

The media is fragrantly biased.

The Washington Post is fragrantly biased.

The fact that Drudge and Fox irks the media elites so much, only confirms that they simply can't stand any competition to their liberal filtering of the news.

I lived in D.C. and had to put up daily with the standard bias the Post put out every day.

The main stream press is losing readership because it is biased, boring and oh so predictable.

Posted by: Texasdav | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

The media is fragrantly biased.

The Washington Post is fragrantly biased.

The fact that Drudge and Fox irks the media elites so much, only confirms that they simply can't stand any competition to their liberal filtering of the news.

I lived in D.C. and had to put up daily with the standard bias the Post put out every day.

The main stream press is losing readership because it is biased, boring and oh so predictable.

Posted by: Texasdav | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

The media is fragrantly biased.

The Washington Post is fragrantly biased.

The fact that Drudge and Fox irks the media elites so much, only confirms that they simply can't stand any competition to their liberal filtering of the news.

I lived in D.C. and had to put up daily with the standard bias the Post put out every day.

The main stream press is losing readership because it is biased, boring and oh so predictable.

Posted by: Texasdav | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

The media is fragrantly biased.

The Washington Post is fragrantly biased.

The fact that Drudge and Fox irks the media elites so much, only confirms that they simply can't stand any competition to their liberal filtering of the news.

I lived in D.C. and had to put up daily with the standard bias the Post put out every day.

The main stream press is losing readership because it is biased, boring and oh so predictable.

Posted by: Texasdav | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

You're attacking Drudge!!! You have to be an idiot to not realize the liberal media bias and how Obama has been treated with kid gloves by CNN, ABC and such. How about you critique your own liberal puke newspaper!! The fix is you do your job, stuff your opinion and report the news unbiased.

Posted by: Dan Dwyer | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Chris, you are such a butt wipe. You are just a lying, misleading fake journalist like Dowd and Quinn. You all would have made great propagandists for the Third Reich. You would not know the truth if it ripped off your head. I don't have to worry long. The Post and NY Times will go the way of the dodo soon.

Posted by: Les Ismore | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Chris, you are such a butt wipe. You are just a lying, misleading fake journalist like Dowd and Quinn. You all would have made great propagandists for the Third Reich. You would not know the truth if it ripped off your head. I don't have to worry long. The Post and NY Times will go the way of the dodo soon.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Chris, you are such a butt wipe. You are just a lying, misleading fake journalist like Dowd and Quinn. You all would have made great propagandists for the Third Reich. You would not know the truth if it ripped off your head. I don't have to worry long. The Post and NY Times will go the way of the dodo soon.

Posted by: Les Ismore | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Chris--

Less fawning and begging for Drudge links, puhlease. And how about some earnest analysis about Drudge's role in journalism and whether it is a good or bad thing?

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/overstating_drudges_influence.php

Posted by: Iowa Boy | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

You're attacking Drudge!!! You have to be an idiot to not realize the liberal media bias and how Obama has been treated with kid gloves by CNN, ABC and such. How about you critique your own liberal puke newspaper!! The fix is you do your job, stuff your opinion and report the news unbiased.

Posted by: Dan Dwyer | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone else find it ironic that for a website that is allegedly so biased toward the right, Drudge actually provided a link to this "article"? Does anyone else find it ironic that for a website that is allegedly so biased toward the right, Drudge provides links to liberal columnists like Dowd, Estrich, Helen Thomas, etc. and to left-leaning media like MSNBC, NY Times, and the Wash(ed up) Post?

Headline today on Drudge is about financial bailouts. Is this biased?

Posted by: Dagnar | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

"Tomorrow morning, take a minute to look at the stories Drudge is highlighting. Then, later in the day, watch a few cable channels to see what stories they are talking about. It will open your eyes."

It will open my eyes if you can prove a causative relationship, otherwise don't waste my time.

After years of the liberal stranglehold of the mass media it's a hoot to watch liberals in a snit over the alternative media that has broken the monopoly. Schadenfreude, anyone?

Posted by: Big Jer | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

The media is fragrantly biased.

The Washington Post is fragrantly biased.

The fact that Drudge and Fox irks the media elites so much, only confirms that they simply can't stand any competition to their liberal filtering of the news.

I lived in D.C. and had to put up daily with the standard bias the Post put out every day.

The main stream press is losing readership because it is biased, boring and oh so predictable.

Posted by: Texasdav | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

"John McCain did serve boldly in the Navy, but his military career would be relatively unknown if he hadn't been shot down and captured in Vietnam."

The fact is he served boldly, was shot down and behaved honorably, he has led a life of public service committment to the public good.

If Obama has been a mayor, and then a governor, instead of a one term senator with a voting record of present, he'd have some administrative experience. You can always wish.

John McCain has been making national headlines for the last ten years. Where have you been?

Posted by: southernmaid | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Chris--

Less fawning and begging for Drudge links, puhlease. And how about some earnest analysis about Drudge's role in journalism and whether it is a good or bad thing?

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/overstating_drudges_influence.php

Posted by: Iowa Boy | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

The media is fragrantly biased.

The Washington Post is fragrantly biased.

The fact that Drudge and Fox irks the media elites so much, only confirms that they simply can't stand any competition to their liberal filtering of the news.

I lived in D.C. and had to put up daily with the standard bias the Post put out every day.

The main stream press is losing readership because it is biased, boring and oh so predictable.

Posted by: Texasdav | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Are you honestly giving Drudge legitimacy here? Cilliza, this is the Washington Post! Get it together. This is like using Karl Rove's personal diary as an objective reporting of events.

Posted by: Nick Collins III | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

You DO realize that 95% of what Drudge does is link to OTHER media sources

I know that ALGORE's miraculous fantabulous INTRAWEB can be kind of intimidating...but seriously...check out Drudge and click on one of the links...you'll be amazed at what you find

Posted by: Uncle Bouncy | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Tim Griffin? Seriously?

Posted by: wordup | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

So Drudge makes editorial decisions just like the MSM... What's the point?

http://warskill.blogspot.com/
--Nietzsche is Dead

Posted by: foutsc | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Washington Post: kettle, meet pot.

Posted by: WP_LOSERS | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

The bias in this article symbolizes the failure of the news print in it's entirely,

The Washington post is bias with anything written about the pubs.

You the Fix research and analyzes about someone who copies links from other sources
And then you waste your companies time in writing about the person who does this and
How this affects the news.

So what, so how does writing about this effect my life??

With the downsizing of the news print media, Good luck in the unemployment line.

Posted by: Unemployment for the Fix | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Spiro T. Palin, an unknown Governor of a small State, is called upon to carry baggage for a second-time Presidential candidate absent either personality or ethical perspective. Her first assignment is to attack the Media, and she comes up with something that sounds like "Nattering Nabobs of Negativism."
Republicans never change, as they chant "Four More Years," and turn their heads when the whacko is indicted.
The Fix is in.

Posted by: rcrtr | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

By internalizing Drudge's clear and constant bias in favor of Republicans and against anything bad for them is a good example of how the media has lost it's way. (For instance, not covering Fiorina putting her foot in her mouth? Bad business, bad journalism, good partisan hackery.)

The country's in trouble and pretending Streisand should be story #1 is making it worse, but you don't seem to have anything but respect for Drudge. Hate to say it Chris, but you're part of the problem.

Posted by: Bullsmith | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

September 16, 2008
Prominent Clinton backer and DNC member to endorse McCain
Posted: 10:07 PM ET

From CNN Political Editor Mark Preston, Extra


A prominent backer of Hillary Clinton is endorsing McCain.
WASHINGTON (CNN) — Lynn Forester de Rothschild, a prominent Hillary Clinton supporter and member of the Democratic National Committee’s Platform Committee, will endorse John McCain for president on Wednesday, her spokesman tells CNN.

The announcement will take place at a news conference on Capitol Hill, just blocks away from the DNC headquarters. Forester will “campaign and help him through the election,” the spokesman said of her plans to help the Republican presidential nominee.

Forester was a major donor for Clinton earning her the title as a Hillraiser for helping to raise at least $100,000 for the New York Democratic senator’s failed presidential bid.

In an interview with CNN this summer, Forester did not hide her distaste for eventual Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama.

“This is a hard decision for me personally because frankly I don't like him,” she said of Obama in an interview with CNN’s Joe Johns. “I feel like he is an elitist. I feel like he has not given me reason to trust him.”

Posted by: Scott | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

September 16, 2008
Prominent Clinton backer and DNC member to endorse McCain
Posted: 10:07 PM ET

From CNN Political Editor Mark Preston, Extra


A prominent backer of Hillary Clinton is endorsing McCain.
WASHINGTON (CNN) — Lynn Forester de Rothschild, a prominent Hillary Clinton supporter and member of the Democratic National Committee’s Platform Committee, will endorse John McCain for president on Wednesday, her spokesman tells CNN.

The announcement will take place at a news conference on Capitol Hill, just blocks away from the DNC headquarters. Forester will “campaign and help him through the election,” the spokesman said of her plans to help the Republican presidential nominee.

Forester was a major donor for Clinton earning her the title as a Hillraiser for helping to raise at least $100,000 for the New York Democratic senator’s failed presidential bid.

In an interview with CNN this summer, Forester did not hide her distaste for eventual Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama.

“This is a hard decision for me personally because frankly I don't like him,” she said of Obama in an interview with CNN’s Joe Johns. “I feel like he is an elitist. I feel like he has not given me reason to trust him.”

Posted by: Scott | September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

If you would get YOUR facts correct, the average American would not have to double and triple check YOUR sources. For instance, the third sentence in your article only gives partial information . . . Carly Fiorina also said that Barack Obama and Joe Biden are not qualified to run the same corportation.

Why do YOU not say that? Why not tell the truth???

Posted by: Joe C | September 17, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

To the people that keep slamming Chris for not mentioning Fiorina's dismissal of Obama and Biden, you're missing the point. The story is that she said it about the people that she supports. It would be like Bernake saying that President Bush couldn't balance a checkbook...it's damaging to the McCain/Palin campaign.

Posted by: John | September 17, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Please!, the Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius played the race card yesterday about Obama's recent misfortune could have something to do with race. Well, this is one Afro-American who is looking at the content and say No-Way does he get my vote. The guy is the most unqualified candidate to ever run for the White House and most unpatriotic in my opinion. I'm hoping that White America will not allow them selves to be baited with the whining racism stuff, in fact it is an insult to say you can't reject him based on his lack of experience and far left, socialist agenda. Jesus once said' "what profits a man if he gains the whole world and looses his soul"; it seems 90% of Black America have sold theirs for Obama. What will they get if he is elected, a temporary rush of validation (Got mine else where) and then 4 years of the first black unqualified president destroying every bit of the high and sink us lower; give me a Colin Powell. It is good that Drudge isn't in the tank like most of the MSM for an Obama presidency; a bad experience waiting to happen.

Posted by: Laymen | September 17, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Wow, the left wingers complaining about unfair bias. Nice try clown boy!

Posted by: mrpearso | September 17, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Hey, GOP crybabies! Here's something to help wipe away your tears:

http://www.thelaceshop.com/fanhan.html

I understand Drudge is a regular, if you know what I mean!

Posted by: Bill in Chicago | September 17, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Democrats and Obamacans's courting all Republican and Independent Voters!

Obama’s message rings of a “Beautiful day coming to America” which is similar to Reagan’s “Its morning in america again”

Beautiful day coming to America

U2 - beautiful day
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omFdpnSu57U

Over 70 retired generals and admirals have endorsed Obama/Biden '08

Hope and Change backed by strength.

Our World
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlfKdbWwruY

Obamacan's - “The best defense against usurpatory government is an assertive citizenry.”
William F. Buckley, Jr. quote

The real change team for the last 19 months
Change we need

Vote Obama/Biden '08

Posted by: Cooday | September 17, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse

Glenn Reynolds takes a close look at Barack Obama’s response to Amir Taheri and doesn’t see any daylight between them. Yesterday, Taheri accused Obama of attempting to derail a status-of-forces agreement between the US and Iraq by telling the Iraqis to wait until after the American elections and stop negotiating with the Bush administration. Obama responded by essentially confirming Taheri’s account:
In the New York Post, conservative Iranian-born columnist Amir Taheri quoted Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari as saying the Democrat made the demand when he visited Baghdad in July, while publicly demanding an early withdrawal.
“He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington,” Zebari said in an interview, according to Taheri.
“However, as an Iraqi, I prefer to have a security agreement that regulates the activities of foreign troops, rather than keeping the matter open,” Zebari reportedly said. …
Obama’s national security spokeswoman Wendy Morigi said Taheri’s article bore “as much resemblance to the truth as a McCain campaign commercial.”
In fact, Obama had told the Iraqis that they should not rush through a “Strategic Framework Agreement” governing the future of US forces until after President George W. Bush leaves office, she said.
Which is exactly what Taheri wrote. Barack Obama went to Iraq and interfered with the diplomatic efforts of the elected United States government, in a war zone no less, by telling the Iraqis to stop negotiating with the President. How exactly does that make Taheri’s column untruthful?
It wasn’t enough for Obama to fail at forcing the nation into a defeat in Iraq when he opposed the surge. Now he has interfered with our efforts to stabilize Iraq and provide for its security after the surge succeeded in keeping Iraq from falling into a failed state. And when he got caught working for failure and defeat, he tried making it into a smear against John McCain.
That’s not leadership America needs from a Senator, let alone a President. The Senate should investigate this as a gross violation of the Constitution and the separation of powers between the branches of government.

Posted by: Mark Garnett | September 17, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse

LOL!!! The AUDACITY of self-righteousness! If not for Drudge, NOBODY would have read your column. Reading just a portion of your column reveals your blatant bias. Of all the things being said, no one is talking about Obama's past accomplishments. Why? BECAUSE THERE ARN'T ANY!!! Republicans are not investigating Obama because there isnt anything to investigate. He hasnt done ANYTHING! He promises change, but hires the entire good ol' boy network to work on his staff. How can you have change with Biden as your running mate? Biden was in the senate when McCain was still in a POW camp!

Posted by: David, Lemoore, Ca | September 17, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

With all due respect, Chris, you are a hack.

Posted by: K Morgan | September 17, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

well well another obama fan boy of the media repeats the obama smear that fiorina said mccain and plain are not qualified to run a company. she said all four ( mccain , obama , palin and the other one ) were not qualified.
no wonder drudge did not find that catch all interesting enough to link.
this writer has no clue, he, unlike drudge, is a based liberal fool doing obama's dirty work

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Speaking of media bias, how about Soledad O'brien from CNN. She actually used her news show to spread false rumors about Palin, using viewer emails as "her sources". Are we talking 8th grade journalism here?

http://www.mccain08-hillary2012.blogspot.com

Posted by: DCfred | September 17, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

Wow, there are some DUMB people in the world. No wonder Drudge is so popular, lol. Clearly most of these posters are either illiterate or retarded. This was NOT an agenda-driven article, it was an observation piece. And it was factually accurate. Btw, to the dummies who keep with the "Fiorina also said Obama and Biden couldn't head a company." DUH, that's not the newsworthy part, idiots! The newsworthy part is that she said it about her own candidates! That's why Ciliza included that. That was a HUGE story yesterday, it sidelined one of McCain's most visible supporters. Now do you get it dummies? Geez. But anywho, Chris is right about how Drudge drives the news of the day, he absolutely does. Like he says, if you don't believe him, read Drudge one day, then watch the nightly news programs. There are clearly A LOT of "reporters" who rely on this guy to determine the "big" news of the day. I think even Drudge would admit how much power he wields. And to that end, this "liberal bias" nonsense is just that. FauxNews, oftentimes CNN, 99% of talk radio, and the most popular website, Drudge, all have right-wing bent. MSM, in its fear of being called the "l word" has compromised solid journalism. So the right-wing has a monopoly on our news filters rather dummies like the commenters of this article realize it or not. So thank God for alternative media, Huffington, Olbermann, and only a few others. They are a catharsis for those of us who could care less about Repub or Demo, who just want the truth. And that's MY opinion, not the writer's. Read people, before spewing your hatred. Idiots.

Posted by: PalmG | September 17, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

Blah, blah, blah. How lazy are you as a 'journalist?'

Hmmm. I use Drudge for my story ideas, so let's write a piece on how influential he is to others (by others, I mean me).

Posted by: Dude | September 17, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

In regard to Mac and Palin not being ready to lead HP. Fiorina also said Obama and Biden wouldn't be qualified either. So, when you want to pontificate about bias, why don't you check your own bias at the door. Anyway, who cares. These people are running to be Commander-in-Cheif not CEO of HP. Commander-in-Chief... McCain or Obama? Not a hard call - McCain.

Posted by: pc | September 17, 2008 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Cillizza's post is itself a perfect example of the media bias at work.

Consider his reference to comments by McCain supporter Carly Fiorina, a business executive. Fiorina was asked about Palin by on KTRS Radio: "Do you think she has the experience to run a major company, like Hewlett Packard?"

"No, I don't," Fiorina responded. "But you know what? That's not what she's running for."

Later, she added "that the question is a red herring."

"'I don't think Barack Obama could run a major corporation. I don't think Joe Biden could,' she said. 'But it is not the same as being the president or vice president of the United States. It is a fallacy to suggest that the country is like a company, so of course, to run a business, you have to have a lifetime of experience in business, but that's not what Sarah Palin, John McCain, Barack Obama or Joe Biden are doing.'"

In other words, Fiorini was saying that NONE of the political candidates -- who may very well be suited to hold high political office -- are necessarily qualified to run a major business corporation.

But spinmeister Cillizza frames this as "a statement by McCain surrogate Carly Fiorina that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company." Excuse me, but what happened to her inclusion of Obama and Biden, and her broader caveat?

Meanwhile, "The Trail" article in the Post to which Cillizza links is headlined: "Fiorina: Palin Lacks Experience to Run a Company."

Nah, no media bias here. None at all.

Posted by: Robert Bidinotto | September 17, 2008 12:38 PM | Report abuse

"Wah, Matt Drudge is bringing to light that our candidate is a socialist, and he still has strong ties to damn near every radical in the country -- including known communists and commie sympathizers! Wah, that's not fair. I'm taking my ball and going home!"

Nice 'article' you hack of a journalist! Don't bother doing any point-counterpoint or anything that requires actually having to do some research -- you are what's wrong with this country you lazy halfwit.

Posted by: Dave Null | September 17, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

McCain in April declared that there had been "great progress economically" during the Bush years. On more than one occasion, he diagnosed Americans' concerns over the dismal U.S. economy as "psychological." (Phil Gramm, McCain's close friend and adviser supposedly excommunicated over his "whiners" remarks, was back with the campaign last week.) McCain, a man who owns eight homes nationwide, in March lectured Americans facing foreclosure that they ought to be "doing what is necessary -- working a second job, skipping a vacation, and managing their budgets -- to make their payments on time." And when all else fails, McCain told the people of the economically devastated regions in Martin County, Kentucky and Youngstown, Ohio, there's always eBay.


In his defense, McCain's shocking tone-deafness may just be a matter of perspective. When you're as well off as he is, anything below a $5 million income (a figure exceeding that earned on average by the top 0.1% of Americans) seems middle class.


*The $100 Million Man*
Courtesy of his wife Cindy's beer distribution fortune (one her late father apparently chose not to share with her half-sister Kathleen), the McCains are worth well over $100 million. (In the two-page tax summary she eventually released to the public, Cindy McCain reported another $6 million in 2006.) As Salon reported back in 2000, the second Mrs. McCain's millions were essential in launching her husband's political career. Unsurprisingly, the Weekly Standard's Matthew Continetti, who four years ago called Theresa Heinz-Kerry a "sugar mommy," has been silent on the topic of Cindy McCain.


*The Joys of (Eight) Home Ownership*
While fellow adulterer John Edwards was pilloried for his mansion, John McCain's eight homes around the country have received little notice or criticism. His properties include a 10 acre lake-side Sedona estate, euphemistically called a "cabin" by the McCain campaign, and a home featured in Architectural Digest. The one featuring "remote control window coverings" was recently put up for sale. Still, their formidable resources did not prevent the McCains from failing to pay taxes on a tony La Jolla, California condo used by Cindy's aged aunt.


*The Anheuser-Busch Windfall*
As it turns out, the beauty of globalization is in the eye of the beholder. While John McCain apparently played a critical role in facilitating DHL's takeover of Airborne (and with it, the looming loss of 8,000 jobs in Wilmington, Ohio), Cindy McCain is set to earn a staggering multi-million dollar pay-day from the acquisition of Anheuser-Busch by the Belgian beverage giant, In Bev. As the Wall Street Journal reported in July, Mrs. McCain runs the third largest Anheuser-Busch distributorship in the nation, and owns between $2.5 and $5 million in the company's stock. Amazingly, while Missouri's politicians of both parties lined up to try to block the sale, John McCain held a fundraiser in the Show Me State even as the In Bev deal was being finalized.


*McCain's $370,000 Personal Tax Break*
Earlier this year, the Center for American Progress analyzed John McCain's tax proposals. The conclusion? McCain's plan is radically more regressive than even that of President Bush, delivering 58% of its benefits to the wealthiest 1% of American taxpayers. McCain's born-again support for the Bush tax cuts has one additional bonus for Mr. Straight Talk: the McCains would save an estimated $373,000 a year.


*Paying Off $225,000 Credit Card Debt - Priceless*
That massive windfall from his own tax plan will come in handy for John McCain. As was reported in June, the McCains were carrying over $225,000 in credit card debt. The American Express card - don't leave your homes without it.


*Charity Begins at Home*
As Harpers documented earlier this year, the McCains are true believers in the old saying that charity begins at home:
.
Between 2001 and 2006, McCain contributed roughly $950,000 to [their] foundation. That accounted for all of its listed income other than for $100 that came from an anonymous donor. During that same period, the McCain foundation made contributions of roughly $1.6 million. More than $500,000 went to his kids' private schools, most of which was donated when his children were attending those institutions. So McCain apparently received major tax deductions for supporting elite schools attended by his children.
.
Ironically, the McCain campaign last week blasted Barack Obama for having attended a private school in Hawaii on scholarship. That attack came just weeks after John McCain held an event at his old prep school, Episcopal High, an institution where fees now top $38,000 a year.


*Private Jet Setters*
As the New York Times detailed back in April, John McCain enjoyed the use of his wife's private jet for his campaign, courtesy of election law loopholes he helped craft. Despite the controversy, McCain continued to use Cindy's corporate jet. For her part, Cindy McCain says that even with skyrocketing fuel costs, "in Arizona the only way to get around the state is by small private plane."


*Help on the Homefront*
In these tough economic times, the McCains are able to stretch their household budget. As the AP reported in April, "McCain reported paying $136,572 in wages to household employees in 2007. Aides say the McCains pay for a caretaker for a cabin in Sedona, Ariz., child care for their teenage daughter, and a personal assistant for Cindy McCain."


*Well-Heeled in $520 Shoes*
If clothes make the man, then John McCain has it made. As Huffington Post noted in July, "He has worn a pair of $520 black leather Ferragamo shoes on every recent campaign stop - from a news conference with the Dalai Lama to a supermarket visit in Bethlehem, PA." It is altogether fitting that McCain wore the golden loafers during a golf outing with President George H.W. Bush in which he rode around in cart displaying the sign, "Property of Bush #41. Hands Off."


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N38Ug_ugzXs
.

Posted by: McCain = Bush's third term | September 17, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Chris is a man without a clue.

Posted by: Gary | September 17, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

WOW talk about being taken out of context.... McCain's advisor also said "I don't believe Obama or Biden could run a company either." so thanks MR. Reporter for not telling the whole truth. Maybe you should pull your head out of tour ass and stop campainging for Obama.

Posted by: josh | September 17, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

You don't get it. The old media is dead! You and your friends just don't know it yet. Your profs at Columbia don't know it yet. Drudge WAS the next wave. However, since the old media, like you, are now reporting Drudge, it means Drudge is getting old. What is the new wave of media?

The tough part for you old media types it that you no longer get to tell the people what to think.

Posted by: nonein2008 | September 17, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

No wonder it was reported yesterday that Obama is now using teleprompters at livestock yard stops...

Have you seen how Obama's eloquent talk gets when his teleprompter goes out?

It's not pretty, and he doesn't look, well, very eloquent.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDJSVPAx8xc

Posted by: Mark | September 17, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

No wonder why print media and the major networks are dying! I need a talking head to tell me what I just read or heard means?
I can figure it out myself!
I wouldn't trust the commie(Obama) to watch my dog!!! As far as McCain, a great American, but by NO means a conservative. I don't like his politics, but he's the lesser of two evils. So another step backward for this country. Most people have been conned into believing
that he'll be more BUSH. Nitwits, he'll be part Ted "drunken-pant-load" Kennedy,and part Arnold Swarzenegger(so middle of the road he'll help no one). What a country. This is the BEST we have to offer? We're in serious trouble. Hold on to your hats!!!
OH by the way, Obama is Arab, not black!!
NITWITS! So much for the guardians of democracy.

Posted by: Ray | September 17, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

KMichaels - You revisionist history and lack of knowledge of what you wite about is truly astonishing. How is it that you rifght wing nuts can chew gum and talk at the same time?

ARPANET was a DOD project. No one was on any band wagon. Al Gore, then a U.S. Senator, had been approached by a group of computer futurists, including Steve Wozniak (a friend of mine, by the way), the guy who designed and built the Apple I and II PC's. They convinced Gore that ARPANET could change the way information was transferred, making most of what we see today possible. They, and Mr. Gore, were opposed to commercial use of the internet, FYI. They saw commercial use as leading to piracy and abuses just like we see happening. I want you to understand something...I was THERE. Your silly blathering about something that you neither know about nor understand makes you like like a complete hick.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | September 17, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for the incite on how a two-bit GOP hack (of the Larry Craig variety, if you know what I mean) is playing the Washington media establishment like puppets on a string.

The fact that you have to go to Karl Rove's illegitimate step-child, Tim Griffin, to justify your actions really tells us all we need to know.

Posted by: Bill in Chicago | September 17, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Would you be writing this article if Drudge covered your boy BO the same way you claim he is covering McCain & Palin? NOT!

Posted by: USA-USA-USA | September 17, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Hey, would it be ok to quote this article in my Media Ethics course, you know, to demonstrate bias and hypocrisy?

Oh yeah, for the sake of fairness, I am a conservative, I do support McCain/Palin and I do plan on promoting conservative values...

Until i decide to be objective, you know, like journalists should be?

Posted by: OK Journalism Student | September 17, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Reporters should do some "reporting" for a change instead of sitting around reading Drudge. Is journalism dead?

Posted by: JoeBob | September 17, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, Fiorina eventually said it about all of the candidates, but her initial statement was only about Palin. In a later interview she said McCain, Obama, and Biden, but that was after receiving blowback from the McCain campaign. It is also crucial to mention that Fiorina is a member of the McCain campaign and thus it is a little more important that she said it about the ticket she supports. Please stop with the usual liberal media bias nonsense because it wasn't until McCain's dishonorable actions over the past few weeks (lies and smears) that the media has finally given him the same scrutiny that they have given Obama for months. How any good Republican could consider supporting a ticket that has lied repeatedly on a number of topics is beyond me. I thought it was country first but I guess it really means party first. And by the way, Drudge is a hack and always has been.

Posted by: Belle | September 17, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

It is a little unseemly for one publication that has long dominated the political commentary with its own agenda to whine about another publication that has achieved national significance to the political discussion.

For too long, news entities have assumed a lack of intelligence among the public. Now, there is a myriad of choices for news information. Most people utilize several sources. The availability of information has tipped the scales. Get used to it.

Oh, and quit whining about it.

Posted by: southernmaid | September 17, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

NEWSWEEK

Palin favorable rating dropping like a rock. The novelty seems to be wearing off.
This may turn out to be one of the fastest "Flash in the pans" in history.
Move over Taylor Hicks.

The polls reflected the early success of her strategy. In the three days after Palin joined Team McCain--Aug. 29-31--32 percent of voters told the pollsters at Diageo/Hotline that they had a favorable opinion of her; most (48 percent) didn't know enough to say. (The Diageo/Hotline poll is conducted by Financial Dynamics opinion research; it's the only daily tracking poll to regularly publish approval ratings.) By Sept. 4, however, 43 percent of Diageo/Hotline respondents approved of Palin with only 25 percent disapproving--an 18-point split. Apparently, voters were liking what they were hearing. Four days later, Palin's approval rating had climbed to 47 percent (+17), and by Sept. 13 it had hit 52 percent. The gap at that point between her favorable and unfavorable numbers--22 percent--was larger than either McCain's (+20) or Obama's (+13).

But then a funny thing happened: Palin seems to have lost some of her luster. Since Sept. 13, Palin's unfavorables have climbed from 30 percent to 36 percent. Meanwhile, her favorables have slipped from 52 percent to 48 percent. That's a three-day net swing of -10 points, and it leaves her in the Sept. 15 Diageo/Hotline tracking poll tied for the smallest favorability split (+12)** of any of the Final Four. Over the course of a single weekend, in other words, Palin went from being the most popular White House hopeful to the least.

What happened? *First, it's important to note that Palin's approval rating hasn't tanked. Far from it. And we should hold off on drawing any hard and fast conclusions until more polling comes out.* That said, I suspect that we're starting to see Palin's considerable novelty wear off. In part it's the result of a steady stream of controversial stories: her apparent unfamiliarity with the Bush Doctrine during last Thursday's interview with Charles Gibson (video above); her refusal to cooperate with the Troopergate investigation; her repeated stretching of the truth on everything from earmarks to the "Bridge to Nowhere" to the amount of energy her state produces. That stuff has a way of inspiring disapproval and eroding one's support. (Interestingly, Palin's preparedness numbers--about 50 percent yes, 45 percent no--haven't budged.) But I'd argue that it's the start of an inevitable process. Between now and Nov. 4, voters will stop seeing Palin as a fascinating story and starting taking her measure as an actual candidate for office. Some will approve; some won't. It remains to be seen whether Palin's recent slide will continue, or hurt John McCain in the polls. But it's hard to argue that the journey from intriguing new superstar to earthbound politician--a necessary part of the process--doesn't involve a loss of altitud

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

"Not qualified to serve as a CEO of an American company"--what on earth is negative about that? Not qualified to be a bloodsucking thief who steals from the poor so the rich stockholders can pay $500,000 for a golf membership?

To hell with the Hollywood elitists. They get that $28,500 a plate from crappy movies that only a thirteen-year-old would find entertaining. Drudge probably hit a sore spot because the CEO of WaPost was at that dinner. (But we'll never know because "news" crews were barred from from the event)

Posted by: Heather | September 17, 2008 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Bias in the press?

Stay tuned ...

Posted by: KMichaels | September 17, 2008 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Ummmm, Drude also did not post (at least not yet) the whole bru-haha over Obama being the #2 recipient of Fannie/Freddie lobbyist money. Dodd was #1 on the lobby money and he got the sweetheart mortgage deal. Obama has the whole Rezko situation. Coincidence?

Posted by: Balance | September 17, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

John McCain did serve boldly in the Navy, but his military career would be relatively unknown if he hadn't been shot down and captured in Vietnam.
Serving in Congress, he was relatively unknown again until he burst onto the national scene because of his role in the Savings & Loan scandal. Other than the few times he's gone against his party (for which they trashed him), he's been the poster child of neoconservatism that brought on the Iraq war and this financial crisis.
For the most part he's kept in line and stuck to the right-wing talking points, and when he goes out on his own all he does is crash and burn (literally and figuratively).
Do you really want to put this guy in the White House?
Thanks but no thanks.
Let him retire to Phoenix.

Posted by: get it? | September 17, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

This guy's a hack!

Posted by: Vinnie | September 17, 2008 12:05 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, and the author conveniently failed to mention how the Post has been publishing a "hate McCain" page each day for months and never publishing a single disparaging article about Saint Obama. The worst example was an article that ran a few months ago slamming McCain's grandfather. What on earth does McCain's deceased grandfather have to do with McCain's qualifications? Conversely, we've seen nothing in the way of independent investigative journalism regarding Obama's African family, who is big-dollar donors are as well as his campaign staff's ties to lobbyists, corporations and the like. Obama wrote two memoirs to preempt the media from doing any serious investigations and it has largely worked. When will everything come out? After Obama is sworn in? And the Post wonders why its subscription base is dwindling. Perhaps it should scrutinize its own coverage or lack thereof to determine whether it is truly providing the public with the most accurate, extensive, impartial information rather than choosing sides and failing to scrutinize both parties' candidates. The Post damages its own credibility and stature by going after McCain and Palin while leaving Biden and Obama largely untouched. After all of the jabs at McCain for "having a temper" why haven't we seen any extensive reports on how Biden conducts himself in the Senate? He's been there 30 years. Surely there are stories to be reported regarding his leadership style, diplomacy (or lack thereof) and his temperament. There must be dozens of former staffers to talk to, many of which are in the DC area. Why haven't they been interviewed? The void of reporting says it all.

Give the public all of the information on both candidates, good and bad, investigate both sides equally and devote comparable resources and intensity and let us make up our own minds regarding whom to support.

Posted by: Undecided Centrist | September 17, 2008 12:05 PM | Report abuse

I don't think the author of this article has a clue whatsoever. First of all, the Blackberry thing was a joke by one of McCain advisors, and secondly Fiorina's comments were awfully and disgracefully clipped by Obama's campaign. She said that neither Obama or McCain could run a big business because they don't have the right experience for that. yeah, right, big deal, what's new. And Fiorin did come out on most channels yesterday saying that what obama campaign did, clipping the part when she said that Obama is not cappable of running a big business either - was unethical and a ridiculous distortion.

Posted by: dana garner | September 17, 2008 11:56 AM | Report abuse

So, the "liberal" media is actually getting their talking points from Matt Drudge?

Um...Drudge is not that smart, you know? Plus, the Drudge Report is mostly links to other pages, other people's writing. So, we know now that the media is a conundrum, a snake eating it's own tail.

What happened to chasing your own stories? Too much work?

Posted by: RoxTex | September 17, 2008 11:56 AM | Report abuse

You write: "a statement by McCain surrogate Carly Fiorina that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company."

She also said that neither Obama nor Biden was so qualified. Your "reporting" is out-and-out Democrat pandering. Why should I be surprised?

Posted by: Jay Peake | September 17, 2008 11:55 AM | Report abuse

The author's observation is right on point. It is so alarming to read the above comments and see how some are refusing to accept the truth. Additionally, McCain and Palin continously lie and people ignore it amd support them. What happen to integrity and honor?

GOD HELP AMERICA!

Independent for Obama08

Posted by: lSMaryland | September 17, 2008 11:54 AM | Report abuse

I will repeat what has been said and needs to be said again. Carly Fiorina said all the candidates, Obama, Biden, McCain, and Palin were not equipped to be CEOs of a major corporation. If you aren't biased, then why would you only state McCain and Palin weren't up to handling the position? She made the point the running the country is not the same as a major corporation. I love how you "journalists" take someone's words out of context. Could you be biased????????????????????

Posted by: Pam | September 17, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Oh, now here's the pot calling the kettle black. McCain and Palin can't be CEOs? She also said that's not the job they were trying to get. Also, according to the San Francisco Chronicle, "She then suggested that neither Barack Obama nor Sen. Joe Biden, his vice presidential pick, have the experience for that job as well."
You seem to have left that out. Why not tell the whole story? Why not tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

Posted by: JSmith | September 17, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse

The #1 source for Anti Obama and Pro McCain Palin merchandise -

http://www.UpYoursObama.com

I wish Drudge would mention that!

Posted by: FRedStates | September 17, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse

DRUDGE DOESN'T GO AROUND PROMOTING OBAMA'S INCOMPETENT, DESTRUCTIVE AND SELF-SERVING-POLITICS HYPE IN THE MIDDLE OF A BANKING CRISIS:

THE SKY IS FALLING!
THE SKY IS FALLING!
IT'S ALL MCCAIN'S FAULT!
IT'S ALL MCCAIN'S FAULT!
SELL! SELL! SELL!
THE ECONOMY'S FUNDAMENTALS ARE BROKEN!
THE ECONOMY'S FUNDAMENTALS ARE BROKEN!

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 17, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse

The only way to get people to your lame site is to put "Drudge" in the headline of your article. Washed up Post is pathetic.

Posted by: Dan | September 17, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse

life surely stinks these days in the very liberally BIASED print media. how low can your subscription levels go? obviously, very low. so, no surprise for your hostility.

obama is a joke. so is your paper.

Posted by: c. moore | September 17, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Are you jealous? You are boring and arrogant to think that people who read the Drudge report are drones and cannot think for themselves. Hello! Wake up! There is a silent majority in this country and they are not the ones who can afford $28,500 dinners. The more I listen to liberals, the more I am sickened. Your kind does nothing but complain.

Posted by: Ces | September 17, 2008 11:52 AM | Report abuse

Chris-

You forgot to mention in your article that Carly Fiorina ALSO said Obama and Biden could not run a major coroporation. She didnt just say it about McCain/Palin.

How can you slam bias when you leave out something like that in your article?

Posted by: cnote | September 17, 2008 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Drudge has never been anything but a glorified gossip columnist. It's depressing that supposedly professional journalists allow this biased hack to drive the narrative.

Get serious Cilizza; it's way past time for you and your colleagues to stop reading Drudge and start doing your own homework.

Posted by: A Hermit | September 17, 2008 11:51 AM | Report abuse

HERE'S A STORY THAT YOU WON'T SEE ON DRUDGE...
AND ONE THAT HAS YET TO SHOW UP IN "MAINSTREAM MEDIA"

TARGETING OF AMERICAN CITIZENS BY GOVERNMENT AGENCIES:

A ROOT CAUSE OF THE MORTGAGE / CREDIT / WALL ST. MELTDOWN?


Victims of so-called "organized gang stalking" claim that multiple government agencies, including intelligence, law enforcement, and revenue collection agencies, have established a network of secret, extra-legal programs aimed at destroying the financial well-being of "targeted" individuals -- who are denied due process of law as their financial resources are systematically confiscated from them.

These programs allegedly involve the interception of mail; surveillance, interception and alteration of telecommunications, including telephone and internet communications; fabrication of bank, credit card, mortgage and billing statements; surreptitious manipulation of personal and business bank and mortgage accounts. This system apparently is an outgrowth of past controversial government programs such as Cointelpro and "Total Information Awareness."

In effect, a secret parallel system of transaction processing has been established for these persons, a system allegedly intended to destroy their capacity to earn a living and to support themselves and their families. These "mechanics of personal destruction" closely resemble the tactics employed by Nazi Germany in its campaign against the Jews and other targeted groups.

Victims charge that these programs also are designed to degrade their physical health, with health care professionals pressured by undercover agents to cooperate. Citizen vigilantes affiliated with government-funded community policing and "watch" groups are employed to harass and intimidate targeted persons, victims charge. These vigilantes are equipped with high-tech instruments capable of causing adverse health effects, victims have alleged.

Officials in the private sector know about some of these programs, it is alleged, since their cooperation is required to effect confiscatory transactions. Victims charge that the government is using national security and the "war on terror" as a pretext to secure the cooperation of corporations and businesses. But it is also possible that civilian overseers have been kept in the dark about the most nefarious of these programs.

The government takeover of more than half of the nation's mortgage market, and government supervision of failed investment houses such as Bear Stearns and Lehman Bros. help effectuate these programs of personal destruction, according to some of those who have been targeted.

These programs apparently have existed in one form or another for many years, but have become codified under the banner of the "war on terror" since the 9/11 terrorist attacks seven years ago, victims charge.

Victims of these "programs of personal destruction" are calling upon Congress to immediately convene hearings on these alleged unconstitutional, extra-legal abuses of power, which they say represent a great crime against humanity and a descent into a neo-fascist police state.

A mainstream media journalist who counts himself among the victims of these programs has written several articles on the subject of domestic terrorism and extra-legal targeting of American citizens:

TO: Mssrs. CHERTOFF, MUKASEY, PAULSON, GATES, McCONNELL, MUELLER "GOV'T AGENCIES SUPPORT DOMESTIC TERRORISM"

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/government-agencies-support-domestic-torture-and-gang-stalking-says-noted-nowpublic-com-columnist

Gentlemen: What do you know about this, and what are you doing about it?

Posted by: scrivener | September 17, 2008 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Yo Chris - Did Matt Drudge ever get a tingle up his leg?

Chevy - Educated Redneck

Posted by: Chevy | September 17, 2008 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Many people have already stated the following. You as well as the other Democrat-biased media are perpetuating a falsehood about Fiorina's statement. Those of us who read the complete quote and not the edited version you promote know that she states the obvious: none of the presidential or vice presidential candidates is trained or qualified to manage a large corporation. They are not running for this position. Intelligent and informed people on both sides know you are twisting the truth for your own ends, and this is why you get no respect and you will never get any for your faux journalism.

Posted by: xlangerhans | September 17, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

You are correct sir. I've noticed for many years now that stories that appear on Drudge... no matter how dumb (ducks that fall in love with dogs etc) become the topic of discussion on not only TV News... but most radio talk shows... Rush, George Noory, Phil Hendrie, Hannity... all seem to use Drudge as show prep. Good for Drudge...

Now if he would just mention that in 2005 McCain wanted strict new regulations on Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae in order to avoid a financial meltdown... but Democrats killed the bill (s.109)before it came up for a vote... and if he would mention that Obama is the number 2 money getter from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae lobbyists over the past 20 years... even though Obama's only been in the Senate 3 years! He needs to mention that then the ms medial might mention it too!

Posted by: UpYoursObama.com | September 17, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

Chris it sounds like you are crying a little bit and slamming Drudge at the same time. People know that the Washington Post is a left leaning liberal bird cage liner and you will not admit it. Drudge is all that you would like to be but are not and that is #1. Take your Xanax and change your Depends, maybe in a few years circulation will increase. NOT!!!!!

Posted by: Ken Taylor | September 17, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

Wow,

This seems like a crybaby article to me.

Drudge..please keep up the good work to keep these so-called journalists honest!!!

Posted by: smartsy66 | September 17, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

hey, liberal jerk-off:
how is it that you (just like all other so-called mainstream media elites) left out the rest of Carly's comment? You know, the part where she said that Nobama and NoBiden weren't qualified to run a company either.
Jeez...Sean Hannity is right about one thing:
Journalism in this country is dead, dead, dead

Posted by: tino valenti | September 17, 2008 11:49 AM | Report abuse

drudge rules - me thinks the boys at the washington post are jealous! If you sold half as many papers as he had hits you'd still be making a profit!!!

Posted by: nh man | September 17, 2008 11:49 AM | Report abuse

This is the problem with you libs...you report HALF the story. Why don't you mention that Carly ALSO list Obama and Biden as people who couldn't run a company? Why don't you mention that when McCain heard about the advisors "Blackberry" comment...he said it was a stupid thing to say. McCain NEVER took credit for inventing the Blackberry. We do not only read and hear what you libs want us to...we are smarter than that. This is yet one more reason Obama will lose. We see through your bias.

Posted by: Greg in NJ | September 17, 2008 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Hey Chris, I know you like sticing your dickk in Drudges arze but this is too much

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Another case of "anything against Obama is bad." What investigative work has you paper done on Obama?? None?? Just like the rest of the media. You're all simply cheerleaders for your man. On CNN, they are saying Obama will only lose because of racism. Wow, We can't vote against his socialist views?

Posted by: Ben | September 17, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Michael yesterday you innanely posted that you did't see anything wrong with the folks at Enron either. Why don't you bother to visit someof the those folk at our local federal pen who you unbelievably want to defend when thousands of Houstonians lost their entire life savings over what you sickly conclud is just normal business practices and fair market competition. Incidentally CNBC reported this morning that there may in fact be indictments coming down against some of tody's CEO market manipuators who you ad your igh wing adica party so valiantly defend.

"Although some of these companies are doing poorly business wise(da you and McCain think Leahman Brothers and AIG JUST MIGHT be doing porly) there was no evidence of illegal behavior(that hasyet to be detrmined by a Federal Grnd Jury). But Leichtmans comments are much like Chris. Full of your typical braindead emotion and not bothering with actual facts."

Thank you for comparing my comments to Chris' that is a true compliment.


Posted by: Lechtman | September 17, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse

You granted anonymity to a source so they could praise Matt Drudge? Are you kidding me?

Posted by: Glenn | September 17, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Many people have already stated the following. You as well as the other Democrat-biased media are perpetuating a falsehood about Fiorina's statement. Those of us who read the complete quote and not the edited version you promote know that she states the obvious: none of the presidential or vice presidential candidates is trained or qualified to manage a large corporation. They are not running for this position. Intelligent and informed people on both sides know you are twisting the truth for your own ends, and this is why you get no respect and you will never get any for your faux journalism.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse

I didnt see anyone complaining about MSNBC until ORielly started fighting with them.... are you guys able to think for yourselves.... then you wouldnt even care about the media bias, because you could see the issues for what they are. The GOP party slogan "Any problems, BLAME THE MEDIA!"

Posted by: Kyle | September 17, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse

pcnav - Fiorina would be expected to say Obama and Biden couldn't run a corporation. The gaffe was saying it about her own candidates. Man bites dog is news. Dog bites man isn't.

With regards to the other point, Gore never claimed to invent the internets. He talked about legislation in the same manner as the McCain aide vis-a-vis the Blackberry. What's good for the goose...

BB

Posted by: Fairlington Blade | September 17, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse


This article is a joke. The quote from Carly is that none of the candidates can run a company because running the country and running a company are completely different. It's true. It's not a knock on McCain (or Nobama for that matter). And the same is true of the Blackberry article. The quote is nothing like Al Gore actually saying that HE invented the internet. The reason people flock to Drudge is that he gives the other side of the story. CNN. MSNBC. NYT. And others are so in the bag for Nobama that what they report is not news - it's op-ed. Sadly, the Washington Post is also in the bag. And one or two pieces on McCain don't change that fact.

Posted by: Lex | September 17, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse

This effort at a Drudge hit piece is interesting in that it says he drives the selection of news headline and focus. Isn't that exactly what the NYT's does with the liberal mainstream media, including the Washington Post? What the Times reports is always the headlines of the networks, and the Post just parrots the Times.

It must be terribly frustrating to you poor Post reporters who move farther left everyday and everyday you watch your circulation and influence decline...because you really don't understand why it's happening. How sad for you.

It really isn't that difficult because Drudge's power isn't derived from reporting from the left at you do....get it WP?

Posted by: Rand | September 17, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse

"It's called Free Speech. Matt Drudge is a private citizen. He runs a very successful business.

Posted by: Uncle Sam | September 17, 2008 11:29 AM "
========================================
Best post today and as you stated being in business the best way to attract huge numbers ($$$) is to be fair to both sides.

Chevy - Educated Redneck

Posted by: Chevy | September 17, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: RJS | September 17, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

You forgot to note that Carly also said that Barack and Biden were not qualified to run a major corporation. Your omission is predictable.

There are holes in Palin's resume. There is no question about that. But that is no excuse for the savage treatment she has received from the mainstream media. Almost every story and opinion piece is negative for a governor who has an 86% approval rating. That just doesn't add up and many people can see through it.

Posted by: Jon | September 17, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

Chris has dumbface and his picture looks like Frank 'the tank' wedding photo from old school

Posted by: interesting | September 17, 2008 11:45 AM | Report abuse

Ummm, Sarah Palin is not fit to be a brain surgeon either, so what is your point? She is a proven executive in the public sector. And by the way, the assessment about her not being CEO material was atributed to all four candidates, not just Governor Palin.

Posted by: stop2think | September 17, 2008 11:44 AM | Report abuse

Obama is going down because all the idiots who are voting for him have no clue what he stands for. They just see "hmmmm he is black like me..therefore I must vote for him" (95% of blacks are voting for him) What is really great is that probably 65% aren't even registered....Read Josh Howard's latest meltdown......"I dont stand for the National Anthem and all that Sh*t. I am black and for obama"

Posted by: HEYOOOOO | September 17, 2008 11:44 AM | Report abuse

Chris I saw your picture at the top, and then read your article. Wow apparently you are as stupid as you look. Fascinating.

Posted by: Rich | September 17, 2008 11:43 AM | Report abuse

You tool. In context, Fiorina's statement was not even news.

Posted by: Jack R. | September 17, 2008 11:43 AM | Report abuse

How dare news organizations report anything bad about the GOP. Use your same old media bias agrument.... Has anyone ever turned on the radio... thats very liberal hahahah. What about Fox News,CNBC, Fox News business channel, these stations are so liberal. If Nixon was around today he would of blamed media bias, becuase thats the only argument that GOP has. Here is a thought, stop doing things that are illegal!

Posted by: Kyle | September 17, 2008 11:43 AM | Report abuse

Leaving out KEY portions of quotes to further your opinion and steer your readers left....doesn't go a long way to help your own cause.

BTW: Drudge linked this story...he's not afraid of little bugs like you.

Posted by: Haris | September 17, 2008 11:43 AM | Report abuse

You know when a website has been linked by drudge because the nut jobs come out of the woodworks. John McCain has better economic policies? Are you insane? In 2005, Ron Paul introduced an amendment in Congress to end the implicit taxpayer guarantee backing Fannie's and Freddie's debt. He said at the time: "I hope my colleagues join me in protecting taxpayers from having to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac when the housing bubble bursts." John McCain would not back the amendment. Well look what happens 3 years later. Ron Paul was right on the money and John McCain and congress was wrong again. McCain has been in congress for how long?????Our economy is where? That's right it's in the dumpster because McCain and his fellow congressman get nothing done and don't take good advice. He can't do anything in congress but he's our best bet at president? Go back to drudgewonderland and keep pretending. The facts are facts and John McCain doesn't listen to sound economic advice. He is for the rich. So if you make over $250,000 a year then go right ahead and vote for him but if you don't I don't see any reason in the world you would vote for him.

Posted by: Drudge robots | September 17, 2008 11:42 AM | Report abuse

Drudge is my main source for news. And it will be unless all these biased left leaning journalists begin to report facts and not "tingley feelings up their legs" -or - convenient snipits of information just like the "lead a corporation" bias.

Everyone gets to vote. And my vote matters as much as anyones (well, maybe not - I don't live in a swing state)...

I only read this because I view Drudge multiple times daily.
I don't know if Drudge has a bias, but I have read his web site for years...It has consistently been acurate and umbiased. It has slammed Bush as hard as Clinton.

My choice for fair news online? Drudge.

Posted by: pghall | September 17, 2008 11:42 AM | Report abuse

You are soooo wrong!

Posted by: Amy in Texas | September 17, 2008 11:42 AM | Report abuse

Chris, in the article you state "Two other stories never merited attention from Drudge: a claim by a senior aide to John McCain that the Arizona senator had invented the BlackBerry and a statement by McCain surrogate Carly Fiorina that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company."

First, McCain never claimed he invented the Blackberry. However his staffer (not McCain) was trying to explain that McCain legislation paved the way for devices like the Blackberry to come to market. When you read the statement of the staffer that is the only conclusion you can come to. Do you think the public would not check the source statement?

Second, when Carly Fiorina stated the above you left out the rest of her statement where she said that obama and biden couldn't run a company either. Her point was that running government and a company are two different things.

In other words Chris...you lied for appears to be your candidate. You twisted the Blackberry statement into something you knew it wasn't and you cut off half the truth in favor of obama.

Posted by: pcnav | September 17, 2008 11:42 AM | Report abuse

Didn't Carly Fiorina also say that neither Senators Obama or Biden were qualified to run a corporation? Why was that part of the quote excised in paragraph 3?

Posted by: Telemakos | September 17, 2008 11:42 AM | Report abuse

Here's the secret to Drudge's success. He understands what stories people care about. It is really that simple. People do not care about "Troopergate" because the guy Palin fired was an "at will" employee. That means Palin can fire him for any reason or no reason at all. There is simply no scandal there and all the hyperventilating by the mainstream media will not make it into a scandal.

Also, you are wrong when you say the mainstream media always picks up Drudge stories. Where are the mainstream stories on Obama's brother in Kenya who is living in poverty with no help from Barack? When MSNBC covers that story, then I will start contributing to the DNC.

Posted by: Ron Cram | September 17, 2008 11:42 AM | Report abuse

I thought all those pajamas bloggers were just people to be blown off according to the elites in the so called mainstream media. Now you're saying the the Drudge Report sets the national agenda for political coverage and discussion and NOT the New York Times? Wow. Imagine that.

Posted by: kens | September 17, 2008 11:42 AM | Report abuse

When someone of a particular race votes for someone of the same they are called racists - well if they are white. Looks like the MSM has been call bias so many times they only thing they can do is call any "news" outlet that is fair rasists, I mean bias

Posted by: Maryann | September 17, 2008 11:42 AM | Report abuse


I don't read Drudge, don't listen to Rush, don't watch Fox. But if so many of the MSM reporters do, this may explain why so many of us find you guys biased.

The great untold story of the campaign is that Palin is running for Vice-President in a "media silence" zone, and the MSM isn't asking the question "What does she have to hide?"

We have seen eight years of a leader who "manages" the press, and some of us don't like it.

Does the press prefer being "managed"? It must make life easier, just reprint the press releases, tell us what Drudge thinks, go for a long lunch..

Who cares about Drudge? Why won't Palin talk? What is she afraid of? Why won't McCain talk? What is he afraid of?

Posted by: PatrickInBeijing | September 17, 2008 11:42 AM | Report abuse

Don't forget that Carly Fiorina also went on to say that Obam and Biden were not qualified to be CEOs either. She then said that comparing the presidency with running a major corporation was a false one. When quoting someone, try not to cut and paste.

Posted by: C. Terrell | September 17, 2008 11:42 AM | Report abuse

This is whats going on..The Media thinks they have to spout a left wing rant to offset talk radio or Drudge,heres where they are wrong,the people choose to listen to right wing or link to Drudge,and the left wing has not done sh't for anybody..THEY DON'T DESERVE ANY ATTENTION.

If you fugs ever did a poll about how Conservative people are,you would find its not even 50/50..try 75/25 in the Conservatives favor..I MEET VERY FEW PEOPLE THAT ARE AS SICK AS PELOSI,LOHAN OR CINDY SHEMAN..IF YOU FUGS EVER GET TO 50%..EXPECT A CIVIL WAR!

Posted by: Kelly | September 17, 2008 11:41 AM | Report abuse

Drudge is the anti-dote to the drivel that appears on the pages of the Washington Post and the New York Times. You guys have ceased being objective years ago, only it is more blatant this time. Why don't you send an investigative reporter to Chicago to do some in-depth coverage of, for example, the financing of the purchase of Obama's house by Rezko, or his ties to the Weathermen, or what, exactly, he accomplished as an Illinois Senator, or how he is really part of Chicago machine politics and not a reformer, or how he was one of the largest recipients of largesse from both Fannie Mae and Lehman Bros...(despite Pelosi claiming the Democrats bear no responsibility for the state of the economy) need I go on. No, we get the so-called "Troopergate" scandal involving Palin. Pathetic.

Posted by: Charles | September 17, 2008 11:41 AM | Report abuse

Thanks Chris. I have to say I've been puzzled by Drudge's coverage of late. He definitely was the source for anti-Hillary articles during the primaries.

I immediately noticed his reporting of the pig with lipstick cover and his Obama/Barbara Streisand cover yesterday. It was drudgge that made the first connection to the pig and Palin--

I do think his coverage is probably more ideological than you give him credit for though.

And all of you who think Drudge is not biased, you're nuts. Every news source has a bias....there is no such thing as absolute objectivity.

I balance Drudge out with Huffpo and try to cover all the main MSN outlets as well to sift through what's happening. Often the same thing happens with Huffpo---it shows up there first and then drives some of the stories later in the day or the next day on the MSM.

Posted by: Nanci | September 17, 2008 11:41 AM | Report abuse

McCain was in Miami at a luxury hotel at a fundraiser where people paid $50,000 a plate...

Streissand may sound a bit sexier to the Drudge Report, but it's called the drudge report and the drudge is that McCain and Palin are total hypocrites talking about reform while taking advantage of the present system.

Posted by: LES | September 17, 2008 11:41 AM | Report abuse

Drudge didn't report these articles because they are ridiculous and have nothing to do with anything. I just read the blackberry joke of an article. There is nothing he said about inventing anything. He said McCain was on a committee that helped telecommunications. People are seriously misguided these days. As for Fiorina's comment, she said all the candidates involved (that includes Obama and Biden). Ridiculous

Posted by: Jeremy | September 17, 2008 11:41 AM | Report abuse

A surprisingly petty article.

Posted by: Rick H | September 17, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse

I noticed all that too.

On.
My.
Own.

Matt Drudge needs to understand that his audience is more politically educated and can think for themselves. If he misses that fact then we'll go to a DIFFERENT, more well-balanced site. If he keeps this up it will be his downfall.

Matt, pull your head out of your arse and quit being so biased. You're supposed to be a 'news' site, quit trying to direct what you think is 'news'.

Posted by: Jim | September 17, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse

ANOTHER REASON WHY WASHINGTON POST LAGS DRUDGE:

During an historic time of crisis, the Washington Post political coverage consists of lame, empty attack articles against McCain about aides' gaffes -- because the vacuous candidate it backs has nothing relevant to say except:

"THE SKY IS FALLING!! THE SKY IS FALLING!! IT'S ALL BUSH'S FAULT!! IT'S ALL MCCAIN'S FAULT!! OUR ECONOMY IS NOT FUNDAMENTALLY SOUND!!"

and it can only write so many articles that make that Obama sound like he utters coherent leadership in this matter.

So it posts articles about blackberries & aides' gaffes & drudge, instead.

The SEC just banned naked short selling, finally, for all stocks (not just financials). I wonder if we can get the FEC to ban the Washington Post's coverage that is nakedly selling short McCain's leadership to make Obama look better.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 17, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse

Networks and CNN and newpapers are all pro-O. 24-7, pro-O all the way. We need Drudge for the other point of view and sometimes to put things into prospective. Carly Fiorina's comment is an example of your bias - you only reference the first half of her statement. The second half was ‘Obama and Biden are not equipped to serve as a CEO of a major corporation either’.

We also need to get some truths out on the big-O tax plan. For all the single filers without dependents, there’s no tax relief within his ‘middle class’ definitions. From big-O’s own web sites – families will get tax cuts. Families are married couples or singles with dependents. Those of us who are single with no dependents can forget about any relief. And, as far as I’m concerned, a tax credit denied is the same as a tax increase. In the past, big-O has even voted for tax increases for singles making as little as 42,000 - http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/more_tax_deceptions.html. Now, why is my neighbor making 149,000 with a stay at home wife entitled to 1,000 tax credit, and myself making 79,000, by working 2 jobs to be able to afford my own home, will not get any relief? We have the same overhead (mortgage, insurance, utilities, property tax, etc). At the end of the month, they have far more disposable income per person in household than I. This big-O tax plan with 95% of the tax payers getting a tax reduction is a big-LIE. Now, why aren’t you discussing that in the networks, CNN and newspapers? This is why we need Drudge!

Posted by: Single Person Household | September 17, 2008 11:39 AM | Report abuse

I believe your envious.

Posted by: Maryann | September 17, 2008 11:39 AM | Report abuse

This whining is rich coming from the WP. The Ombudsman has written several times how the WP continuously has more stories, photos, and front page coverage of Obama than McCain. How about writing an opinion piece about that? And how the WP is trying to influence voters on behalf of Obama?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 11:39 AM | Report abuse

Hey I want some of those McCain blog dollars too! What do I have to do? I have left lots of rightwing posts all over the place...now how do i get paid? I dont see it on McCains website anymore.

Posted by: Imright | September 17, 2008 11:38 AM | Report abuse

Drudge blows. Can not beleive its that popular. If thats the only place you get news your as dumb as the Republicans want you to be. Can not wait for this country to be intelligent. Down with Drudge!

Posted by: ac | September 17, 2008 11:38 AM | Report abuse

This just in. According the latest Rasmussen poll, even after all of the economic fallout of the recent days:

"49% trust McCain more than Obama on economic issues while 45% trust Obama."

David Axelrod: what will you do about this?

Posted by: Observer | September 17, 2008 11:38 AM | Report abuse

Yo Chris, NObama, NY and Jersey 5 & 3 point lead respectively.

LOL the boy is tanking fast, that's a very ominus sign for your boy. He also dropped 25 points in Ohio.

This baby is over!

Chevy

Posted by: Chevy | September 17, 2008 11:38 AM | Report abuse

Doesn't it just burn your liberal butt, as a Washington Post peon, how your elitist media outlet has lost the influence it once wielded? The two stories on McCain that you mentioned were well publicized in the liberal rags but you complain that they were not on Drudge. Not too many years ago the Post, Times, AP et al had a relative monopoly on information people received. I guess we really need to give thanks to that Al Gore for "inventing the internet."

Posted by: John Garvey | September 17, 2008 11:38 AM | Report abuse

Never heard of you until Drudge put a link to your article. Read it, and it sounds more like an article full of jealousy over Drudges success while you remain somewhat obscure.
Drudge may have done you a favor. I now have another liberal columnist to read and at times avoid.

Posted by: Fred | September 17, 2008 11:38 AM | Report abuse

Isn't freedom great? Media bias is proven by the success of so called "alternative media".

Self righteous biased leftwingers CREATED Limbaugh and Drudge.

Posted by: Razorback | September 17, 2008 11:37 AM | Report abuse

The main reason media is failing is due to the ego and pride of reporters and journalists of today.

And where do you go to get that kind of attraction? Steer left!

I am tired of opinions and inadequate research pumped out by the media. A clear example is how the media were pumping out so many unconfirmed facts about Palin when she was thrust into the political limelight. That was absolutely unacceptable research.

I am literally tired of having these kinds of things shoved down my throat. I want well researched facts and close scrutiny of anybody running for public office period.

Posted by: JayJay123 | September 17, 2008 11:37 AM | Report abuse

http://www.overstream.net/view.php?oid=n1ronxelmtin

This video about the attack on Palin sums it up

Posted by: LYING KING VIDEO EXPLAINS IT | September 17, 2008 11:37 AM | Report abuse

ROFL.... nice column. Pot calling kettle black?

Me thinks that when YOUR internet traffic is slow, you post something Drudge-worthy so that he'll put a link to your b.s. so people will come read it. (Maybe that should be in a disclaimer some place - your traffic vs. Drudge's, or even WP traffic vs. Drudge's.)

It didn't take a genious to figure out the turning point in Drudge's coverage of the political campaign occured after Palin was picked. I wondered why Obama was getting so much coverage on Drudge, even positive coverage, before Palin came along.

I don't pretend to be a 'Drudge-ologist' like you, but one has to figure that Drudg posts articles to drive traffic to his site, but I would suspect that isn't the only reason.

Could it be that he wasn't a fan of McCain particulary, until after the Palin pick, much like the rest of the conservative base?

One last point - MSM is biased. Those within it proclaim otherwise, and think if they keep protesting or denying it those of us out in reader land will finally believe them. It is very difficult as a human to be a political reporter and report without bias. And no, I'm not saying Fox News is any better than the Washington Post, or CNN, or MSNBC, or any other news outlet. Everyone has a bias, and it's prominently displayed every day in the 'news' reports they run - both in WHAT they decide to run, and the facts they chose to report.

Posted by: flip in the zoo | September 17, 2008 11:37 AM | Report abuse

Comment on LOL's post:
Read the news THE SKY IS FALLING!! and it is Bush at the wheel. As for McSame ...90% with Bush.
If this was a dem administration with Banks failing, war, highest national debt, you would be jumping up and down looking for blood.

First a little history question for you: In the last 60 years, how many presidents were senators? When you find the answer, you will see my point. My point is that senators typically agree with things that their party stands for and that is why they are a member of a typical party. Because of their voting record, the public can criticize than more readily than they could say a governor. It's true that McCain has sided with his party 90%, but, keep in mind Obama has 97% of the time. The other thing that Senators do is create legislation. If you look at this statistic you will find that McCain sponsored legislation with Democrats more than 50% of the time and Obama sponsored legislation with Republicans a little over 10% of the time. Given the economic concerns facing America, neither Congress aka democrat representation or the president aka republican representation, has been responsible for solid regulations. In order to get America back to a functioning economy we need someone who can work with both sides and that is John McCain. As an independent voter, I see him as the candidate that will reach across the aisle. To give you an idea of how else I would vote. If Biden was running against Romney, I would vote for Biden. Biden and McCain would have been the best ticket. So try to look at the candidates as who has worked with both sides as opposed to their voting records. There is so much crap in a bill that sometimes you have to vote for a bill to get something you want at the expense of something you don't want and that is why both McCain and Obama vote for their party at least 90% of the time, but, when it comes to creating legislation John McCain is the true change agent.

Posted by: Independentthinker4 | September 17, 2008 11:36 AM | Report abuse

Other than Drudge did have the Blackberry story (it was a joke claim) and that Carly Fiorina said that neither McCain, Palin, Obama, and Biden could run a corporation, your blog is accurate.

Remember what is left unsaid says more about you than what you write.

Posted by: Larry | September 17, 2008 11:36 AM | Report abuse

Look at what the liberal media complains about because that will tell you what they are doing. America has many more choices than the Dinosaurs in the Print media and the Networks. This is why Drudge, Fox, The Weekly Standard, Newsmax, and others are so popular. We do not always get the Liberal talking Points. RIP Washington Post, NY Tomes, LA times and the rest of the dying old world media.

Posted by: Berel Sholom Tzvi | September 17, 2008 11:36 AM | Report abuse

Everyone posting here is rediculous!! Biased towards Obama??? Have you read the news??? Or you YOU only watch FOX? Read EVERYTHING and then see where you stand. Otherwise, be quiet.

Posted by: Lea | September 17, 2008 11:35 AM | Report abuse

alert('This article was written by an liberal idiot!');
Really... All libs are really brain washed.

Posted by: Yo Mamma | September 17, 2008 11:35 AM | Report abuse

Remember all of the outrage about false outrage about taking stuff out of context that the media whined about during the lipstick on a pig thing?

Now the same self righteous types who complained about lipstick on the pig are jumping on some silly statement about blackberrys and the differences between running a business and government that were not even made by a candidate.

Here is the bias: The leftist media went on for days about McCain changing the subject to lipstick on a pig. The same bias leftist types are the ones changing the subject blackberrys and business experience.

Posted by: Razorback | September 17, 2008 11:35 AM | Report abuse

Again, the Obama favoring columnists reporting only half the facts. Not only did Fiorina state that Palin and McCain couldn't operate a business, but she included Obama and Biden. But how convenient when you're trying to make a point to leave the Dems out. Palin is the only one of three to have executive experience,, like it or not. Obama is the only one to take a teleprompter everywhere he goes, including a rodeo. If you're going to leave out half the story for the sake of your argument, why even bother to call yourself a journalist.

Posted by: BJLeone | September 17, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

At least the Drudge Report provides a counter-point to the mainstream media which has not asked Obama any hard questions. Palin has taken more heat in two weeks than Obama has had in his entire run for President. Thank goodness for Drudge!

Posted by: Wanda Brown | September 17, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Drudge scares the old media. He and the National Enquirer regularly scoop the Wash. Post and NY Times. He fills in the missing news that the old media fail to report and ignores the manufactured non-news, e.g. Palin can't run HP.

Posted by: Jay | September 17, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Chirs Gizilla - Your pic matches your writing skills..

Pathetic!

Chevy - Educated Redneck

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

"and a statement by McCain surrogate Carly Fiorina that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company."

Ah---excuse me--the full quote was ALL the candidates, including Obama and Biden could not be CEO----ans you wonder why we think the media is bias?????????????

Posted by: Dr Tom | September 17, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

I think it just shocks you Chris when someone in the media actually violates the Obama love fest. I mean when you listen to most members of the MSM it sounds like they want to marry the guy. Your own newspaper is one of the worst offenders for Obamamania. I really hope the Obama campaign pays the WP for all the positive press. What does it cost to advertise on the front page of the WP anyway? Whatever the cost Obama's getting a great deal.

Posted by: RobT | September 17, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Better watch out, your blatent bias is showing again you buffoon! McCain's spokesman was holding up an electronic device and said that it was possible because of McCain's support of telecommunications infrastructure, which is true. You are truly moronic if you think that without the cell towers your little BB would work. As for the other "FACT" read BS in your statement, the person in question said none of the candidates were qualified to run that company, that includes Obama, Biden, McCain and Palin. Of course, if Palin said she could that would be HUBRIS. Report the news you oaf and not your own personal opinion. By the by, Obama has compared himself to Jesus Christ and is now criticizing the disabled. Of course, Christ healed the disabled, he did not criticize them for not using email. OH MY GOD! Your flaming ignorance is unbelievable!!

Posted by: EdGe | September 17, 2008 11:33 AM | Report abuse

Dear Kelly:

Some liberals need to get reamed? Read you own comment you Conservative s.o.b. Do you want to talk about the issues or about the crack of someones a**?

Posted by: Lea | September 17, 2008 11:33 AM | Report abuse

hey chris..you have the story wrong!

its obviouse that you don't know how to do investigative reporting. the comment by Fiorina on McCain and Palin was an edited clip on MSNBC where Fiorina said that Mccain, Palin, (msnbc then edited it the next to names) Obama and Biden were not equipped to be the CEO of a larger company.(you can check this on youtube) drudge only puts news up that is newsworthy...

so check your facts next time you write an article. It's media such as yourself that is going to lose the race for obama... he is going to get crushed in November b/c of the backlash at the media and the media will blame it on americans as still being racist... funny thing is the so called polls have it tied(but, electoral votes are now 30+ for McCain.

Posted by: coffey | September 17, 2008 11:33 AM | Report abuse

Cillizza, you are obviously full of prunes. Being a conservative myself, I often cringe at what Drudge puts on his web site. I don't get all my news from Drudge, but it is refreshing to go to him to check myself once in a while. The major three television networks are so biased that everyone should go to Drudge and maybe even Worldnet Daily regularly to ensure that they have a balanced view of current events.

Posted by: RightStuff | September 17, 2008 11:32 AM | Report abuse

The Drudge and Huffington Post are my source for news. Drudge skews to the right while Huffington skews to the left.

Posted by: Matt | September 17, 2008 11:32 AM | Report abuse

this story is just silly. This guy clearly doesnt spend any time on the drudge. He links to the cutting edge story, no matter where it is. There are some stories that are just simply dumb and clearly biased... he doesnt bother linking to those story. If i wanted to be brain washed by an Olberman diatribe, I would turn to MSNBC. It has turned into a 24x7 Obama campaign channel. If I want cutting edge news that challenges discerning minds... I look to the drudge. Drudge is refreshing and balanced. Thanks Matt.

Posted by: jdog | September 17, 2008 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Why should Drudge reprint stories already covered in the New York Times in order to be considered truly journalistic? Every newspaper and for that matter TV news outlet that has used that business model is laying off like crazy trying to avoid bankruptcy.
I may re-read a book that I have enjoyed in the past or review technical data repeatedly to better understand a concept, but the only reason in reading or listening to the news is always – learning what I don’t already know.
Drudge has mined that reality and given outlet to those with information that does not mesh with the major’s ideology. Can such a thing work? The New York Times has over 100 pages, Drudge has one page but 100 times the readership.

Posted by: chuckk | September 17, 2008 11:31 AM | Report abuse

one thing that nobody seems to mention is the fact that nobody said a word about lipstick on a pig until Drudge posted a picture of Palin next to Obamas quote.

I would say Drudge called her a pig.

Posted by: sirhotspur | September 17, 2008 11:30 AM | Report abuse

Keep it up! Once the public gets several more weeks of inaccurate, liberal dribble coming from writers like yourself (who are in the tank for Obama), they will all vote for McCain in droves fearing that he must be as stupid as those in most of the media who stump for him! I have always said, and I'll repeat it again that McCain will win this election handily, thanks to folks like you and the most far left candidate the Democrats could serve up.

Posted by: Andrew | September 17, 2008 11:29 AM | Report abuse

It's called Free Speech. Matt Drudge is a private citizen. He runs a very successful business.

Posted by: Uncle Sam | September 17, 2008 11:29 AM | Report abuse

To you left-winged lunatic Fringe NObamBOTS

Did it ever occur to you why FOX and Drudge blow the competition away?

ANSWER: Most American's believe these are the best "fair and balanced" media outlets on the planet and that's why they're #1

That's also why they command big $$$ from advertisers.

Posted by: Chevy | September 17, 2008 11:28 AM | Report abuse

I am just grateful that we have unbiased sources like the NYT, WP, LA Times, Atlanta Constipation, NBC, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, Huffington Post, Daily, Kos, etc. to turn to and not have to look at or listen to those terribly biased news sources like Drudge and FOX.

Chris, you are the joke!

Posted by: James Smithson | September 17, 2008 11:28 AM | Report abuse

lol and be sure to thank drudge for sending readers to your amateur hour article.

Posted by: arturo | September 17, 2008 11:28 AM | Report abuse

I think it just shocks you Chris when someone out their in the media actually breaks through the Obmam love fest. I mean most of the time listening to the members of the MSM you'd think they wanted to marry the guy. It'll be ok Chris. Take to Drudge Report and call me in the morning.

Posted by: RobT | September 17, 2008 11:28 AM | Report abuse

Does the Washington Post find their efforts to elect Obama a poor allocation of resources considering his inability to close the deal? Will the stock holders initiate legal action due to this mismanagement? Whom would they take to court, the Post or Obama?
All Obama has to do towin is say his election will sound the end of affirmative action (which it will). He would win in a landslide.

Posted by: JImmy Jay | September 17, 2008 11:28 AM | Report abuse

"Drudge, believing that the media had gone overboard" ... Chris: How in the world do you know what is in Matt Drudge's mind? This is why the WaPo and the NYT are losing circulation and money. You make things up.

Posted by: Edgar Sousa | September 17, 2008 11:27 AM | Report abuse

My home page was Yahoo news,but whoever writes their headlines is a flaming leftest who probably live in the crack of Obamas a**..I COULDN'T TAKE IT ANYMORE!,and the only way to respond to some of the crud they write is email,not good enough, some Liberals need to get reamed,so Drudge is my home page for now,until I find something better.

Posted by: Kelly | September 17, 2008 11:27 AM | Report abuse

Great Interview today with the Future VP Sarah Palin with Sean Hannity.

This will be one where we can hear her just talk. This interview will be a knockout.

You gotta laugh at all the little dweebs at Time, New York Times, The Washington Post running around whining about 'where's my interview'.

75% of Americans know they are biased and could care less what they think?

I could care less what the NYT or the Post think. THere just a bunch of paid off hack's chasing a paycheck, doing what their leftist leadership is asking them to publish.

Posted by: Obama2012 | September 17, 2008 11:26 AM | Report abuse

Drudge-ologist? Christ, you journos are pathetic. It's a website full of LINKS. The reason it drives coverage is because the rest of you are too pathetic to do your own research.

So, rightwingnuts, has the real economic news gotten your pants in a bunch? Nice response yesterday by Team Trivial..."we need a 9/11 Commission, you know, like after 9/11." Yeah, brillz. Try and culture war your way out of this one, fools. Bye bye, bounce!

Posted by: squintz | September 17, 2008 11:26 AM | Report abuse

The main stream media is totally biased toward Democrats. Drudge is just a pointer to stories that you'll probably never see on CNN. Watch an hour of CNN and learn next to nothing. Read an hour of stories linked to by Drudge and you may learn something useful and get a laugh at the same time.

Chris - explain your bias on the Carly Fiorina story...

You think you are a Drudge-ologist? I bet I have read more and seen more on Drudge over the years and know more about it than you, and I'm just a regular guy. I hardly ever read you.

Posted by: MSM Sucks | September 17, 2008 11:26 AM | Report abuse

The problem is that while Drudge doesn't assume we're all idiots, you do. The prism of the left wing media is astoundingly distorted. Re-quote the comment from Fiorina, please. She said she didn't think ANYONE currently running for POTUS or VPOTUS would necessarily be qualified to run a major US company. We've all seen the creative editing of the interview and footage the leftist 'media' did --and that you negligently passed along without mention. That is, we've seen it thanks to Drudge and Breitbart. Nice try, though. Don't quit to day job for the newspaper just yet, though.

Posted by: Jeff Tanner | September 17, 2008 11:25 AM | Report abuse

blah blah blah - i linked to this story from Drudge, where it is prominently displayed, so i'd say his site is pretty fair. you guys just can't stand that the country is turning against your failure to perform your duties as journalists. good riddance.

Posted by: keno | September 17, 2008 11:25 AM | Report abuse

The kettle is black!
The kettle is black!
The kettles is black!

Posted by: jimwes | September 17, 2008 11:25 AM | Report abuse

Wow. I assume Chris won't be writing any stories about how CNN (via Jack Cafferty) just dictated 2 things about this election -- 1 - the last few weeks will be steered to race and 2 - IF Obama loses, the MSM will say it is because of race. Never mind any discussion of ideology, capacity to lead or perceptions of judgment --- nope, just race!

Posted by: sagedutch | September 17, 2008 11:24 AM | Report abuse

Obviously its just like a scene out of the 2006 film "Idiocracy" by Mike Judge (a right winger himself) that a non-journalist like Matt Drudge, a headline collector really, can have this much influence over the media. Makes you realize exactly how far the standards of our news reporting organizations have fallen. When will America wake up and become part of the adult real world again? Here's a clue, folks: the GOP and horrible politicans like Dick Cheney wouldn't be able to steal elections and hijack the country if we had better reporting and a well informed citizenry. Take a look at western Europe and Canada and see how grown ups do it.

Posted by: Steve Bonser | September 17, 2008 11:24 AM | Report abuse

funny, the washington post crying because drudge is doing a better job of shaping the news then they are. what a joke, where's the stories of all the positive press from the washington post about obama? nope, that just the news to them. maybe if you diversified your newrooms you'd have a better idea of what America is all about. by diversify I mean people from both sides of the isle, middle America etc. not a bunch of liberals with different ethnicities....

Posted by: mike | September 17, 2008 11:24 AM | Report abuse

WHY DRUDGE BEATS OUT WASHINGTON POST:

Washington Post gets its news from Drudge, not vice versa

Drudge MAKES news whereas Washington Post MAKES UP news

Drudge doesn't argue that we who are part of a MARGINALIZED MAJORITY (women) must vote for an MINORITY (blacks), to show the world how America's evolved in racial voting patterns

Drudge hasn't devoted miles of column space this year belittling and ridiculing female politicians & mothers who are executives

The Washington Post really has only 2 sections culturally, "Metro", and all the rest, which can be described "Metrosexuals"

Drudge posts interesting & wide ranging news stories across the political, subject and cultural spectrum, the Washington Post publishes stories that wanna-be-elitist flunkees from state schools use as their political and social narrative bible

The Washington Post attracts frothing-at-the-mouth Obama bots who spout processed talking points; the Drudge report attracts crazy American bloggers who speak plain opinion

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 17, 2008 11:24 AM | Report abuse

Wapo (and print media) is irrelevant.

Posted by: CDogg | September 17, 2008 11:24 AM | Report abuse

long live drudge... the only fair main stream news outlet...

Posted by: joe | September 17, 2008 11:24 AM | Report abuse

Why didn't you mention that in the same sentence the McCain adviser went on to say that either is Obama or Biden? It deflates your story. The Obama campaigns clip and splice of the interview reminded me of something a teenager would do. I am sorry, a baby boomer, teenagers know how to use a computer.
Of course there is bias from the MSM, all you have to do is flip a channel, it is crazy, but your article reinforces the point. Drudge is far more even handed than any news site out there - where else can you find links to the Daily Kook, the Hufflepuff post, Susan Estrich, Maureen Dowd, Rush Limbaugh, and Susan Fields in one spot - answer, Only DRUDGE

Posted by: Jimmy Jay | September 17, 2008 11:23 AM | Report abuse

Well, we'll call it a deal then. We get Fox News and Drudge...

...and the left gets CNN, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, PBS, the BBC, the NY Times, the Wash Post, US Weekly, most blogs, talk shows, etc, etc, etc...

Seriously - conservative bias? Since polls are saying the majority of the media is trying to take down Palin and McCain, don't you think it would be more in touch with the American people to write about bias on the left? I mean, this is a presidential race where John McCain having 7 houses makes front page news, yet Obama's ties to a non-repentant terrorist is not reported. This is a race where if McCain changes his stance, he 'flip flopped', but when Obama does it, he is described as 'adaptable'. That roar you hear is the American people laughing in unison at big media, and you're choosing the wrong side.

Posted by: Dave | September 17, 2008 11:23 AM | Report abuse

Carly Fiorina is an air head. During her tenure at HP she showed she could not run a company, but yet she got a 42 million dollar buy out for her incompetence. Now she's one of McCain's top economic advisors? Yesterday McCain said one of the things he would do if President would be to stop incompetent executives from getting exorbitant buyouts and bonuses after they wreck their companies, yet one of his top advisors falls into that category. Where is the change? He has always categorized himself as a deregulator but at this time banks and mortgage companies need regulations and oversight.

McCain said he could see all that happened this week coming several years ago. If he could see it coming several years ago why did he favor deregulation and why didn't he do something to try to stem this back then? Seeing something and not doing anything about it when he had a chance shows that he is not capable of being President. A President is someone who sees a potential problem and acts to correct the situation before it adversely affects millions of Americans.

As for Sarah Palin she is a cheerleading puppet, with all the strings being pulled by the Republican brass. She is clueless on the economy and national security issues and she would be the person who would be a heart beat away from being President. In any other Presidential campaign it wouldn't have matter as much, but given McCain's age and health concerns it does matter this time around.

Posted by: Nevadaandy | September 17, 2008 11:22 AM | Report abuse

It's funny how this article talks about bias and then mentions Fiorina's statements about McCain/Palin not being able to be CEO's, then guess what, Leaves out the part that she also said neither Obama or Biden could be CEO's either. Way to lose credibility. Your either biased or incompetent.

Posted by: voting in November | September 17, 2008 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Leichtman writes:

"Other then your insult you failed to respond to the $70,000/person and $5 million dollar contributors to McCain's gala event last week that you and the radical right conveniently ignore."

Actually, it was reported on Drudge. It was not made a big deal about because it was actually the standard kind of donations that McCain gets. He is a friend of US industry and commerce so he will get legitimate donations from them. McCain has never hidden the fact that he is a friend of free capitalism.

It is Obama that was showing the double-faced nature that he has. He talks about being a man connected to the poor then runs off and gets millions of dollars from rich celebrity types. So obviously his TWO-FACED nature is newsworthy.

Similar to Obama claiming that he is a man who is concerned about the poor then the press (obviously not the MSM press) points out that Obama's brother and Obama's grandmother are living in filthy shacks in Kenya. How can a rich person like Obama claim he loves the poor when he does not have the decency to take care of his own family first. Perhaps he can pass a new bill that has the conservatives pay for his family for him. Then he can take the claim for his kind giving nature again.

Leichtman continues to babble on:

"crooked Wallstreet buds with $100 milion dollar golden parachutes at Lehman Brothers and AIG fundng your $70,000 gala"

Although some of these companies are doing poorly business wise there was no evidence of illegal behavior. But Leichtmans comments are much like Chris. Full of your typical braindead emotion and not bothering with actual facts.

As to Lehman Brothers and such, did you notice that Obama got about 400,000 dollars from them? Are you sure these are McCain's buddy? Better fact check before you spew next time.

And did you notice that Obama had close ties to Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac? Of course, even if you deceivers did notice you would not tell. That is why your ilk are so "endearing" to us honest folk.

Posted by: KMichaels | September 17, 2008 11:22 AM | Report abuse

"Look at his claim to fame: the Lewinsky dress. The only people who gave a damn about this non-story were the idiot right-wingers who just couldn't stand the fact that there wasn't a Bible-thumping warmonger in the White House."

Nice. A president carrying out an affair in the White House, lying in a deposition about it, attempting to suborn perjury, and being impeached is now a "non-story." And it was Newsweek that had the story first, not Drudge.

Posted by: bondjedi | September 17, 2008 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Carly Fiorina said that NONE of the candidates are properly experienced to run a "for profit' organization. And why would that be wrong. None of them has run a "for profit" organization, they have all been in government most of their adult lives.

She is right. If you don't know that, perhaps you shouldn't be allowed to vote. There is a difference between "for profit" organizations, 'not for profit' organizations ' and governmental organizations'. They each have different priorities and different goals and different opertions.

Come on, let's try to stay serious here. You know the media is supposed to present the news with integrity and their opinions on the opinion pages. They seem to have forgotten that.

Carly Fiorina: to sum up, she is right. But notice, she has all that 'for profit' experience and she isn't running.

If she were, you hear the opposition claim the opposite lol

Posted by: Joe Kusnell | September 17, 2008 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Chris, you are entrenched in the Dem's pocket and you KNOW YOU ARE LYING. The blackberry comment was a joke made by an advisor due to McCain's work on behalf of telecommunications. YOU KNOW THIS. Also, you KNOW YOU LEFT OUT the part of the comment that Obama would not be able to lead a business. She meant that "politics" and "running a business" aren't the same. I guess you feel the only way DEMS can win is by lying to the people?? You feel Dems can only win by misleading people?? Why not tell the truth????? Let's call it for what it is Chris...you're a liar. You're just a parrot for the Dems (aka a parrot for Obama).

Posted by: AlaskaNana | September 17, 2008 11:21 AM | Report abuse

the wapo claiming another news outlet isn't fair? arrogant as obama.

Posted by: really | September 17, 2008 11:21 AM | Report abuse

lol

Posted by: matt | September 17, 2008 11:21 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, WAPO, NYT, CHITRIB, etc., etc. versus the Drudge Report.

I guess Matt has you outgunned. You are right the entire media is slanted to the "Far Right." Just go ask Matthews and Olbermann....

Posted by: WarEagle | September 17, 2008 11:20 AM | Report abuse

Democrats for John McCain and Sarah Palin in 2008

Posted by: Julie | September 17, 2008 11:20 AM | Report abuse

Drudge site first one i go to in A.M.!!!!!!!!!!!!Best site on internet and 1,000% better than tired old mainstream media-- except for local sports stories.Go DRUDGE!!!

Posted by: jvr0818 | September 17, 2008 11:19 AM | Report abuse

Agree with Mookie! Well said

Posted by: JBHODJ | September 17, 2008 11:19 AM | Report abuse

Wait wait wait...are you telling me that Drudge has a strong bias against Democratic candidates AND that the Washington press just lazily follows his lead in promoting gossipy substance free garbage. Wow man - that is some fine investigative reporting. You blew the lid off of that one.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 11:18 AM | Report abuse

Again, no understanding of simple supply and demand. Without Drudge there is no outlet to get "news". Plenty of places to get political hacks pushing the lefts aganda. So as in the case of fox news, this cannot be tolorated. Marginalizing these outlets as rightwing is almost as important to them as Obama winning. Just look at Hillary and what was done to her. For years they covered her backside until one day they turned on her like a pitbull. All because someone came along that was hardcore left and they were needed to help hide it. I for one refuse to let the media pick my President. There will come a day when the liars are exposed, Drudge will report it.

Posted by: saw'd off | September 17, 2008 11:17 AM | Report abuse

McCain invented the Blackberry like Al Gore invented the internet. It was a joke moron. Are all liberals this obtuse?

Posted by: Not surprised | September 17, 2008 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Will the left wing never tire of conspiracy theories? They don't get how out of touch they are with the majority of people in this country. It couldn't be Obama's elitism, or lack of experience, or tax more-spend more-expand the government socialist garbage that is dragging him down in the polls. NO! It must be (choose one):
A. The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
B. Drudge Report
C. Fox News
D. All of the above

Posted by: Ellen Mitchell | September 17, 2008 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Its funny how once people start siding with the GOP online the libs start calling out the McCain campaign as entering all these posts. Obama is the only one with a staff
who combs the internet to fill up articles like this with posts to give the illusion that anyone with a brain supports him. The conservative media haters in here are genuine, more genuine than you Obama staffers.

Posted by: Greg | September 17, 2008 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Just another leftest,,,,,how about your bias newspaper???

Posted by: paulie | September 17, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Chris, PLEASE work on your reading comprehension skills

"He did this," Holtz-Eakin informed them. "Telecommunications of the United States is a premier innovation in the past 15 years -- comes right through the Commerce Committee -- so you're looking at the miracle John McCain helped create and that's what he did."

Holtz-Eakin said McCain was on a committee that allowed technology to flourish and held up his blackberry as an example of that technology.


This is in no way the same as McCain saying "I invented the blackberry"

You are either lying, stupid or both.

Posted by: I can read | September 17, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Good column. Drudge has always viewed himself as an antidote to the MSM. If you recall correctly, he was the one who broke the Monica Lewinsky story after the MSM wanted to ignore it for obvious political reasons.

However, I disagree that the blackberry claim or the the assertion by Fiorina are important stories. The former was a stupid mistake while trying to make a valid claim and the other is largely true: none of the candidates could slip in an successfully run a large corporation because they are trained to be government officials and are inexperienced in running corporations. People running corporations spend their entire lives learning their craft. This is so obvious I can't believe idiots like Chris Matthews thought she would have to resign.

Posted by: theduke | September 17, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

If what was said in this piece is true, isn't it an admission to failure by the mainstream media, which Chris is a part of?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

This is for TJD...

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/16/dilbert.economy/index.html

Go read why the numbers are skewed towards Obama before you try your hand at deception. New Media, babay!

Posted by: RedWhiteandTrue | September 17, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Even though Drudge may be a little right,he just links to sh't like Hollywood telling Palin to suck it,Linsey Lowblow running her mouth,and my favorite link of the year Global Warming Tomatoes..lol

Just a little hint to you stupid Liberals...YOU MAKE DRUDGE,RUSH, EVEN MORE POPULAR WITH YOUR SILLYNESS...THEY WOULD BE WORKING AT MCDONALD'S IF LIBERALS DIDN'T EXIST...YOU ARE THEIR PAY-DAY...EVERY FUGGING DAY!

Posted by: Kelly | September 17, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

It continues to amaze me how much you guys in the East Coast media buy the premise that Reglar Folks give a rat's a** about Hollywood people, one way or the other. Drudge, hard-core Conservatives, and the South Park guys, yes. But I've lived in Wisconsin and Minnesota all my life, and the only places I've ever come across people even mentioning Barbra Streisand and "Hollywood types", much less reacting negatively about them, are the internet and TV. And it's usually people saying crap about how people in Middle America will react negatively to them.

Barbra Streisand is just like anyone else we see on TV -- we may agree with her or disagree with her, but why on earth would we resent somebody for associating with her? What difference does she actually make? Less than the non-famous CEO of AIG, I'd imagine. It's bizarre; the only people resenting Streisand have already drunk the Kool-Aid. The rest of us just wonder why Drudge and O'Reilly are so obsessed with somebody who has no direct influence on anything.

In case you're wondering, it is true, though, that we complain a lot about the media.

Posted by: Some Guy | September 17, 2008 11:15 AM | Report abuse

There are those that make things happen, those that watch things happen and those that wonder what happened.

Which category do you fall in?

Peace out.

Posted by: Solomon | September 17, 2008 11:14 AM | Report abuse

The Drudge Report is more fair than any of the other sources for news. MSNBC is a joke. CNN just had a story on their website blaming racism for the close polls. Race isn't an issue in this election- inexperience is the issue. The Washington Post is now trying to discredit Drudge? I am grateful to Hilary Clinton for bringing media bias to the attention of more Americans and pray that we always view the "news" with a skeptical eye. Face it, the mainstream media alienated a whole lot of people.

Posted by: skb | September 17, 2008 11:13 AM | Report abuse

The only way I noticed this piece was a link on Drudge. Fair and Balanced? He reports, I decide.

Too bad for Obama not so many million read CNN and goofy stuff like Jack What's-his-name hammers us with.

Posted by: billy stokes | September 17, 2008 11:13 AM | Report abuse

I can't believe the wingnut-controlled media isn't talking about Palin's tanning bed 24/7. It's like Benedict Arnold meets Watergate.

Posted by: Jim Treacher | September 17, 2008 11:12 AM | Report abuse

JamesCH,

Thanks for your post. My point was the author of this article leans to the left and omits facts. Yes the Zogby shows a lead for Obama today, but, the press such as CNN didn't reference other polls when McCain had clearly taken the lead then in independent polls. Now with the bad news in the economy, the American people are focusing on something besides Sara Pallin and the independent polls are pretty much even(check out electoral map on Zogby.com). This race will bounce back and forth with the next dramatic move probably occuring during the debates if there is a clear cut winner. Again, my point is that this article was slanted and the liberal media does the same thing. Drudge can seem like it is slanted to the right only because he includes articles that the mainstream media omits. To make informative decisions I hope that people are looking at as many sources of info as possible and not just focusing on one source.

Posted by: Independentthinker4 | September 17, 2008 11:11 AM | Report abuse

How egregious a lie do you dare attempt to foist upon readers? Do you not understand that such garbage merely destroys your credibility as a journalist while bringing an even greater sympathy vote to McCain/Palin?

No campaign worker of McCain seriously could have claimed the Senator had invented the Blackberry! Do you not see a tongue in cheek?? How could someone who can't even use a keyboard (hand injury from his captivity under the Viet Cong) invent a blackberry?

Even a cursory reading of the story reveals that McCain, as chairman of the Commerce Committee, helped spearhead the opening up of bandwidth which these devices need to function, McCain merely made fertile the ground which helped facilitate the development of innovative communications devices.

The campaign aide was spoofing Gore's campaign claim in 2000 of having invented the Internet. The joke's on you, Cillizza.

Is this sort of remark the best you can do to disparage McCain? What a loser!

Posted by: Robert | September 17, 2008 11:11 AM | Report abuse

You totally missed the REAL driving force behind Drudge coverage -- natural disasters! Floods, hurricanes, earthquakes, fires, if it is a natural phenomenon Drudge is on it.

Posted by: dcdoozy | September 17, 2008 11:11 AM | Report abuse

As a teacher of any 101 level classes, I would say that Chris would have to be fired for gross and obvious incompetence.

Especially since almost everyone of his key points were arse backwards.

Especialy since his truthful reporting ability seems to be zilch.

Chris is hoping that his halfwitted leftist readers will be of a large enough quantiy to actually justify failing WaPo in keeping him on the staff.

Posted by: KMichaels | September 17, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

Hey Chris!

How about fully stating WHO Tim Griffin is?!?!
...a Karl Rove protege, who was 'put up' for the AR USatty, but was never going to be confirmed, as the US Attorney Scandal broke, and he was one of the players.

Not so neutral of an observer..Ya Think?!?!

Posted by: Aynsley | September 17, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

Get your blog facts straight. Fiorina said ALL FOUR of them were not qualified to run a major corporation. The comment about the Blackberry was meant as a demonstration of what emerged from a telecommunications bill that McCain supported.

It's always been so much easier to be a liberal/leftist-facts never do matter-only what you want to hope and believe!

Posted by: Greg | September 17, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

When you mislead your readers from the get-go, it all becomes just a complete sham. You said, "....and a statement by McCain surrogate Carly Fiorina that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company." Problem is you forgot to finish her statement, bozo! You forgot (yeah right!) to complete the sentence. The sentence went on to say that neither Obama nor Biden were equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company either. So it's my new policy to just stop reading any article the moment I detect that I'm being misled in order that the writer get across his/her slanted message. Report the news accurately or shut the bleep up!

Posted by: Chris | September 17, 2008 11:08 AM | Report abuse

Dudes,
Drudge selectes DIFFERENT stories than the rest of you. That is why he has so many readers and the others do not. You can go to most any source and get the same take on everything or you can go to Drudge and get something completely different.

BTW-How many of the dinosaurs covered the stories Drudge chose?

-JW

Posted by: Jacob W | September 17, 2008 11:08 AM | Report abuse

Matt Drudge is gay in case you didn't know, for real.

Posted by: Mike R | September 17, 2008 11:07 AM | Report abuse

Waaah! Drudge (and Fox) are giving McCain too much positive coverage and Obama too much negative press! (pay no attention to the totally biased, one-sided pro-Obama/anti-McCain coverage of ABC,CBS, NBC, MSNBC and CNN)

Waaah! Liberals don't have a total monopoly on the media anymore. Liberal propaganda is not as good, not as fun and not as sexy as all this conservative stuff!

Waaah! Drudge is more popular than all the liberal propaganda web machines combined!

Waaah! FoxNews is a popular, highly rated cable news channel, with higher prime-time ratings than CNN or MSNBC!

Waaah! Rush Limbaugh is a radio rock star, and Air America has been totally deflated!

Waaah! Because of Drudge and FoxNews, the public is waking up and discovering that Obama is all talk and no walk, a recording with no leadership record!

Waaah! Obama is supposed to be "untouchable," immune to negative press because . . . well, you know!

Waaah! The 'once certain' liberal victory in November is steadily slipping away. Why won't Drudge and FoxNews just shut up and let us win this one so liberals can finally stop whining!

Posted by: Jake T. | September 17, 2008 11:07 AM | Report abuse

Um... Drudge has always had a more center right slant. Some Drudge-ologist you are?

Posted by: Denbo | September 17, 2008 11:07 AM | Report abuse

As a longtime liberal Democrat, I am very concerned about the strategy Obama is using to ttry and win. After all of his changes on Drilling, FISA, and taxes, I am considering sitting this election out.

Posted by: Robert Paulson | September 17, 2008 11:06 AM | Report abuse

Agree wrote:

"Yesterday either the whole staff left for the day or they just don't really think the economy is worth reporting about."

Ahem, idiot blind dimwit. The vast majority of Drudges key location stories on his page were about the economy. That has been the case for several days, coinciding with breaking economic developments.

You do your job of accurate reporting almost as well as that dimwitted leftist Chris.

Posted by: KMichaels | September 17, 2008 11:06 AM | Report abuse

Jim I see you have a grea vocabulary. Likly one of those Alaskan hih school drop out.

Other then your insult you failed to respond to the $70,000/person and $5 million dollar contributors to McCain's gala event last week that you and the radical right conveniently ignore. At this point I trust our entertainers' political judgement that you and the radical right are obsessed with, more then some of your crooked Wallstreet buds with $100 milion dollar golden parachutes at Lehman Brothers and AIG fundng your $70,000 gala.

Posted by: Leichtman | September 17, 2008 11:06 AM | Report abuse

And, what was the next sentence out of Carly Fiorina's mouth? Who do you think you are Charlie Gibson?

Posted by: CGOC | September 17, 2008 11:06 AM | Report abuse

The Post needs to thank Drudge for putting this on his report. If he had not there is no way I (likely many others) would have come to the Washington Post. The article shows why Drudge is beating the mess out of most other media outlets.

I look at the writer the same I would an online troll. Just looking to flame. Well he got a reaction from many which he was looking for, but at the same time only pointed out why the Drudge Report is visited by many often.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 11:05 AM | Report abuse

Gosh Chris......looks like you pretty much got your ass in a wringer here. Seems like most folks caught ya in your lies. Stupid liberal, tricks are for conservatives.

Posted by: Tomasco | September 17, 2008 11:05 AM | Report abuse

Nobody watches the main piss stream media anymore,they are not hip to that fact yet,and a lot of the Palin vote will be anti media nuts like me,so if they really wanted O-bum-a to win...THEY WOULD STFU!

Posted by: Kelly | September 17, 2008 11:05 AM | Report abuse

Matt Drudge is a right-wing shill, and a talentless partisan hack. The only reason he's so influential is because he appeals to the right-wing talk radio fanbase. He's created his own legend, because he's the source for information for under-educated Americans of all stripes.

Look at his claim to fame: the Lewinsky dress. The only people who gave a damn about this non-story were the idiot right-wingers who just couldn't stand the fact that there wasn't a Bible-thumping warmonger in the White House.

Drudge represents the worst of America, and it's easy to see this by looking at the moronic commentary that floods the comments sections of articles that he features on his pages.

Posted by: Drudgetard Antagonist | September 17, 2008 11:04 AM | Report abuse

Uh, no, Chris.

We high-information MBA/Economics voters don't even read Drudge.

I realize that in order to get a gig on the Chris Matthews et al shows, one must be "up to date" on what the latests Drudge gossip is, but most of us pay no attention whatsoever.

The fact that you and others do, speaks volumes about the current status of American "journalism."

Drudge??? Good grief, Chris.

Posted by: Mary | September 17, 2008 11:04 AM | Report abuse

RJ wrote:

"At the top of the Drudge page almost every day is an ad begging for a donation to McCain, never one for Obama. That's about as unbiased as Oprah."

Actually, drudge puts both pro dem and pro rep ads on his page. The determining factor is who is willing to pay top dollar. Since Drudge attracts more conservative readers than leftists, then it is conservatives that CHOOSE to pay the money and put their ads on Drudge to get to the audience that they think is going to be reading Drudge.

Dems place their adds on sites that they think will be read primarily by leftists.

See how the real world works, RJ? Simple supply and demand and logical demographics analysis.

Posted by: KMichaels | September 17, 2008 11:04 AM | Report abuse

Nor do you mention that she also said neither would Obama or Biden. Error on your part or biased omission?

Posted by: Joe McGovern | September 17, 2008 11:04 AM | Report abuse

.... what King Ghidora said. He summed it up perfectly.

Drudge covers things that the MSM *should* cover but does not, for ideological reasons. Since most reporters are leftists and therefore ignore anything bad about libs and anything good about conservatives, by definition Drudge will have to do the opposite.

It is simply a reaction to leftist reporters thinking that their views are "mainstream" and putting ideology into their straight-news articles. Example? Anne Kornblut here at the Post, who writes op-eds skewering Palin and is also tasked with writing straight news stories about her. Big surprise, all of her stories are negative!! Hack reporting at its worst, and that is why you guys are losing circulation big time.

Don't blame Drudge - he's just doing the job you refuse to do.

Posted by: ITA | September 17, 2008 11:03 AM | Report abuse

Bottom line is that you cannot remove bias from reporting. Drudge reports on a conservative slant and CNN reports from a liberal slant. What is the big deal?

I am intelligent enough to sort through the massive amount of information and make my own decisions on whether something is accurately portrayed.

And this is what scares the lefties. They want any and all efforts to report from a conservative slant shut down. Hence the fairness doctrine and articles like this which attack the conservative slant of Drudge.

Communism is alive and well in the United States.

Posted by: beckster | September 17, 2008 11:03 AM | Report abuse

Not only does Drudge influence the major media outlets, Jay Leno also gets his entire stand up material from the site. Watch Leno after reading drudge in the morning, you will be amazed.

Posted by: LoveDrudge | September 17, 2008 11:03 AM | Report abuse

There's an entire strata of the world population that hasn't matured beyond 14 years old. Chris, you and your fellow liberals, Democrats, Socialist, Communitst, whatever you wish to call it make up the entirity of that population.
You and yours are pipsqueaks, Chis. It's becoming quite annoying. In fact, I'd say it's become extremely aggitating. Now listen to your mother and stop it before your aggitator status gets you in trouble.

Posted by: Chris' Mom | September 17, 2008 11:02 AM | Report abuse

So, Mr. Drudge has an edge on getting news out to the public before the major networks, hhhmmmm, looks like he has found a way to do what the majors have not been able to do in many years, and we are bagging on him for this? And, Who care what Ms. fiorina has to say, she was "asked to step down from the chairman position", essentially fired, so she has no credibility here. If you think that mcCain has an advantage, then maybe he does in reality. Osama as well a Palin have very little experience, I think that they are banking on the experience of their respective running mates to carry them over.

Posted by: vern | September 17, 2008 11:02 AM | Report abuse

Wow, Drudge is inside your head!!

Amazin' that we go to Drudge to get another view apart from the MSM- and left wingnuts NYT, MsDNC and the Wash. Post.

24 negative stories Vs. Palin as opposed to 0 for Barack Husein Obama??( ABC) The Racism angle over and over again...?

Inside your head , yes Matt has done it, only a matter of time before he starts writing yopur column, oh, never mind he already is.....

Posted by: SpearsTX | September 17, 2008 11:01 AM | Report abuse

"People either Love or Hate Sarah Palin"? Why do democrats have to hate people they simply disagree with? I don't hate Obama, I just don't want a socialist USA.

Posted by: J flann | September 17, 2008 11:00 AM | Report abuse

This is what I have been telling my dem friends, Obama is in trouble if he comes across as an angry black man...


Time magazine’s Michael Grunwald says race is the elephant in the room. He says Barack Obama needs to tread lightly as he fights back against the McCain-Palin campaign attacks.

He writes, “Over the past 18 months, Obama has been attacked as a naive novice, an empty suit, a tax-and-spend liberal, an arugula-grazing élitist and a corrupt ward heeler, but the only attacks that clearly stung him involved the Rev. Jeremiah Wright - attacks that portrayed him as an angry black man under the influence of an even angrier black man.”

The angry black man, he goes on to say, doesn’t have broad appeal in White America. And even though the makeup of our population is changing, whites are still the majority in this country. How ironic that the giant step forward of nominating an African American for president may ultimately keep us mired in the past.

Posted by: Paul | September 17, 2008 11:00 AM | Report abuse

Chris:
Other posters have called the POST left-wing. It would be more accurate to describe you and your paper as Socialist bordering on Communist whose manifesto is to destroy from within. By the way, are you in this country legally?

Posted by: Dale Frazier | September 17, 2008 10:59 AM | Report abuse

I've had the very same thoughts and conveyed them to Drudge - just to say that their attempts to manipulate the news cycles and feed lines to the McCain campaign is obvious. I used to think Drudge at least could be counted on to report critical events. Yesterday either the whole staff left for the day or they just don't really think the economy is worth reporting about.

Posted by: Agree | September 17, 2008 10:59 AM | Report abuse

The overarching concern here is that the drudgereport does not satisfy minimum standards of journalism, including fact-checking. This not-at-all excellent compiler of other writers' work, who emulates gossip-monger walter winchell, should be in the entertainment section.

Posted by: lawyer in l.a. | September 17, 2008 10:59 AM | Report abuse

Carly Fiorina said neither McCain, nor Palin, NOR Obama, NOR Biden were equipped to be the CEO of a major company.

How about explaining your omission. Which was favorable to Senators Obama and Biden?

Posted by: Me | September 17, 2008 10:59 AM | Report abuse

Though I'm not an American and can't vote, I favor Obama over McCain. I also favor Matt Drudge over Chris Cillizza.

It seems that Matt Drudge has a pro-Republican bias but he surely has an instinct for fun stories and is often fast and first with serious stories.

Drudge also LINKS to a huge variety of US and world opinion across the political spectrum. Chris filters every through a weird Republicrat Beltway Received Wisdom Net. There's nothing fun or intersting ab about anything in the posts here. Which is what makes it fun for ME!

There is no country in the developed world with the kind of politics the USA has. So, even though I might prefer a Democrat, I don't mind Republicans at all. Both Obama and McCain are way too harsh on social policy and way too unclear on economic policy and quite frankly anti-business to ever be elected president of any Western country I'm aware of.

Americans are famous for being impractical, innocent, slightly dim dreamers and that's why these campaigns are always about "themes" and never about practical issues which affect peoples' lives. I've lived in a few countries yet only in America have I observed elections more about Religion and Race than about economics.

Religion surely is a huge part of Republican political strategy and tactics but boy Obama's pretty out there on the subject, too, as compared with the rest of the world. Both have wretched human rights and criminal justice policies. Obama, has a CHANCE to be different and grow more modern in his style, however. McCain's hopeless.

Posted by: DexterManley | September 17, 2008 10:58 AM | Report abuse

Drudge missed this one. MAD Magazine had a picture of Alfred E. Obama, a black Neuman. The caption, YES, WE CAN'T! I found it in the Chicago Tribune at http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/08/mads_obama_and_mccain_the_movi.html

This should be the poster child for the Republican Party. They should put it on Times Square. The democrats can't. Can't protect the country. Can't stop the morals slide (they're the leading edge). Can't stop the illegals (they're leading them), etc, etc, etc.

Posted by: Harold Reimann | September 17, 2008 10:57 AM | Report abuse

Dude, you're an idiot. Even in your column that fights the notion of media bias, you perpetuate the media bias. You conveniently leave out that Fiorina said none of the 4 candidates on the ticket could be a CEO because in her opinion, being President and being a CEO are not the same. That might be a debatable opinion, but at least report the whole opinion. Hmmm, i wonder why anyone would think there's a media bias???

Moron.

Posted by: Chris in Charlotte | September 17, 2008 10:57 AM | Report abuse

Well, someone has to offset your bias. You forgot to mention that Fiorina said that Biden and Obama were unfit as well (same Drudge link). No media bias? You just did it in your bias article.

Posted by: JRM | September 17, 2008 10:57 AM | Report abuse

What this article fails to mention is that the same is often true on other sites -- take CNN for example. There are often items that they omit from the marketplace of ideas/information. As a self-diagnosed election addict, I often look at Drudge AND CNN AND Politico AND many others on a daily basis. This very same article could have been written about others including CNN. For instance, do you see anything on CNN with regard to the fundraiser? Of course not. Did you see anything on CNN with regard to the Democrats ties to Fannie and Freddie or to Obama's rank in terms of donations from those organizations in his short time in the senate? Also no. How about anything on the Obama add on McCain's supposed net illiteracy and some possible counter arguments and realities? Nope.

Hey, no question Drudge picks and chooses his headlines. My complaint with your article is that you almost assume that others do not. What are you trying to hide?

Posted by: sagedutch | September 17, 2008 10:57 AM | Report abuse

You hit upon a point that I have long believed but have never seen mentioned in stories about Drudge. I don't see him as an ideologue. He is like an old fashioned reporter in a 1930's movie. The scoop is the thing. He wants to be first with a story, regardless of its slant. The MSM presents news as they would like it to be. Drudge just presents the news.

Posted by: Dan Lloyd | September 17, 2008 10:56 AM | Report abuse

Imagine that. A story about a presidential candidate parting with celebrities beats out a story about what an aides friends bother said about the other candidate. You’re right, the Fix is in.

Posted by: Paul | September 17, 2008 10:56 AM | Report abuse

"and a statement by McCain surrogate Carly Fiorina that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company."

It looks like went pointing to want he left out they forgot and laft out of this part that Obama and Biden were also said not to be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company!!! So before you point a finger at him you better want to get your facts clear.

It is good to see the Drudge is getting to you guys like this. Stories like your only proves he is doing what many will not.

Posted by: David | September 17, 2008 10:55 AM | Report abuse

Haha, matt - you really are the ignoramus Chris is talking to: "To all of you saying that Carly also said that about Obama and Biden...Thats not the point. She isnt a surrogate for them. She said that about the people that she works for. So, its accurate to run a story about her saying that about McCain and Palin. Wouldnt you expect her to say that about her opponent? But she said it about her own bosses. Thats the point. Stop complaining about no one reporting the full quote. Its not necessary to report it, and you know it.

Posted by: matt | September 17, 2008 8:35 AM " So, it's right to edit quotes to make them sound like what you WANT the person to mean?? Do you work for ABC, or what? Your point from the clipped quote...? Carly is against her bosses? OK, now THAT's a good one, matt! The point of the article was that people don't read the MSM anymore, but they'll go to Drudge for the full story. The writer than triumphantly reinforces WHY people don't get their news from him anymore, by committing the very offense intelligent readers will no longer let pass. He uses a clip from MSNBC that was editted to skew the preferred conclusion by the MSM. He sources a biased show ... as truth!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 10:55 AM | Report abuse

loom1775@verizon.net

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 10:55 AM | Report abuse

OMG the level of hostility and the outright lies of the left never cease to amaze me. You missed the fact that the Blackberry comment was a joke. I know liberals only believe paid smarta$$e$ on late night talk shows qualify as funny but of course that's because they toe the looney liberal line. You also failed to mention that Obama and Biden were included in that comment about running major industries. NBC snipped it just after Fiorina mentioned McCain's name but you print leftists have the luxury of lying without having to snip soundbites the way you want them. You just report them as ridiculously unfair as you feel like reporting them. And you wonder why Drudge sets the tone for the news cycle. It's because everyone recognizes how badly the New York Times and the Washington Post have been lying for decades. Thank God for the new media. It exposes the old news cycle dictators which of course is why you hate it so much because now no one bothers to believe a word you say.

You're a dinosaur and you might as well get out while the getting is good. Print and the lying left is dead as far as contol of the news cycle is concerned. Your credibility is shot for this generation and probably more. I remember being taught that you people decided what was important enough to make the news and you had for a very long time. Those days are all over. All that work and all that mastering of liberalism isn't going to pay off for you. Steam about it all you want. You have no influence at all. In fact you're a total joke and the whole world knows it. Even the Democrats are learning how rotten you are. Ask a Hillary fan how they felt about her being treated like a Republican in the news. Wow you are so last week! You have gone the way of the do-do and the almanac. Your influence is dead.

Posted by: King Ghidora | September 17, 2008 10:54 AM | Report abuse

RIiiiiiiiiight.
Drudge is the guy we're going to hold accountable for his 'percieved media bias.'
riiiiiiiiiight.
Drudge is ruining every journalists' clean and pure reputations because HE is the one using his glorified personal 'rantsite' to blow smoke up the backside of his personally selected favorite candidate.
riiiiiiiiiiight.

You just don't get it, do you? The Washington Post is losing subscriptions like a leaky bucket. Nobody is buying this newspaper because it is one of the PINNACLE EXAMPLES of bias in the media. How do they fix this? By exposing the perceived bias in OTHER SOURCES?

Do you think that America is that stupid? This is 4th grade playground defense in action. It is shameful to see grown adults borrowing the 'but everyone else is doing it' excuse from their teenage children.

It doesn't work when little children do it, and it DEFINITELY doesn't work when so called 'journalists' do it.

and no, i didn't follow Drudge here. Im a (former) WashPost reader. I cancelled 3 months ago when i became the Obama Post.

You