Investing In Obama

Jonah Goldberg, semi-savant:

Imagine the media invests as heavily in [Barack Hussein Il Jong Obama] as I think we all know they will if he's the nominee —  and then imagine he loses.

[The media and the Nutroots are "negroes"?  What else does Atrios see in the mirror?]

Why does he think the press will wait until Barack is the nominee to invest heavily in him?  Per this Harvard study from last fall:

Overall, Democrats also have received more positive coverage than Republicans (35% of stories vs. 26%), while Republicans received more negative coverage than Democrats (35% vs. 26%). For both parties, a plurality of stories, 39%, were neutral or balanced.

• Most of that difference in tone, however, can be attributed to the friendly coverage of Obama (47% positive) and the critical coverage of McCain (just 12% positive.) When those two candidates are removed from the field, the tone of coverage for the two parties is virtually identical.

And the Times is investing heavily in this, the new day dawning in America:

Daring to Believe, Blacks Savor Obama Victory

By DIANE CARDWELL

For Sadou Brown in a Los Angeles suburb, the decisive victory of Senator Barack Obama in Iowa was a moment to show his 14-year-old son what is possible.

For Mike Duncan in Maryland, it was a sign that Americans were moving beyond rigid thinking about race.

For Milton Washington in Harlem, it looked like the beginning of something he never thought that he would see. “It was like, ‘Oh, my God, we’re on the cusp of something big about to happen,’ ” Mr. Washington said.

How Mr. Obama’s early triumph will play out in the presidential contest remains to be seen, and his support among blacks is hardly monolithic.

But in dozens of interviews on Friday from suburbs of Houston to towns outside Chicago and rural byways near Birmingham, Ala., African-Americans voiced pride and amazement over his victory on Thursday and the message it sent, even if they were not planning to vote for him or were skeptical that he could win in November.

Picture the Times' reaction if New Hampshire Democrats crush the hopes and aspirations of million of America's blacks.  Do you suppose they will re-interview Sadou Brown and give us a picture of the fourteen year old with tears in his eyes, battered by the realization that Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff or Supreme Court Justice is the most he can ever hope for?

Comical - Obama has not run as a grievance candidate and has not polled better than Hillary in the black community (well, as of September/October, anyway)  Yet the Times, affirmative action champions, are determined to push him into that box.

YOU WANT HIM IN THAT BOX.  YOU NEED HIM IN THAT BOX! Ridiculous - Greenwald pretends that that Reynolds and Goldberg are discussing blacks rather than the Florida/Ohio/BDS left in wondering, per Goldberg, about the impact of an Obama defeat:

I seriously think certain segments of American political life will become completely unhinged.   I can imagine the fear of this social unraveling actually aiding Obama enormously in 2008.

Hmm - how can this nation ever heal its wounds if it can't unite behind a forty-six year old black guy with no discernible resume?  OTOH, an Obama-McCain match-up would be a real generational tussle - at 70, McCain is almost too old (almost!) to qualify as a baby-boomer.  However, count these points in McCain's favor:

- Reagan polled well amongst the young;

- McCain has a track record as a maverick agent of change - I am thinking of McCain-Feingold but he was a leader on the Militart Commissions Act (and immigration reform - shh...);

- Based on animosities fueled in part by the anti-war Kerry, there seems to have been a time when an anti-baby killer soldier mentality infected some portion of the left.  With McCain in the race it is a possibility that this faction will re-emerge, and not to their credit or the credit of their party.

STILL INVESTING:  Bob Herbert on Obama:

The Obama Phenomenon

The historians can put aside their reference material. This is new. America has never seen anything like the Barack Obama phenomenon.

...

If the Clintons are going to stop Mr. Obama, they need to do it now. If he wins the New Hampshire primary Tuesday, the news media will go nuts and he will head toward the Jan. 19 caucuses in Nevada and the Jan. 26 primary in South Carolina (where half the voters are African-American) with incredible momentum.

I expect that African-Americans, under those circumstance, would view his campaign with almost religious fervor. All those questions about whether he’s black enough would be history. Mr. Obama would be perceived by many as within striking distance of the presidency, and there will be very few blacks in favor of stopping that train.

And in the unkindest cut, Gail Collins on Hillary, former voice for passion and change as the commencement speaker at Wellesley:

But if she were around right now, Hillary Rodham the commencement speaker would probably be an Obama girl.

Comments

[Other Tom]

Speaking of investing, Obama is now at 52.5 on Tradesports; the Coarse Fishwife is at 46.4.

[steveaz]

Tom,
"Yet the Times, affirmative action champions, are determined to push [Obama] into that box."

Totally!

The Democrat Party machine needs to tie the person Obama to their preferred, archival Sharpton/Jackson racialism and its aggregate policy prescriptions. Or else Harlem's, East LA's, South Seattle's and Oakland's urban voting-blocs may jump ship.*

And the NYT is, of course, first to "record" the supposed link.
-Cheers!

*Which would spell B-I-G trouble for local urban politicians in '08

[Chris]

I see the press as being levered to Democrats and short Republicans. Think of it as a trading strategy. You can go long both oil (Clinton) and nat gas (Obama). Thus you are leveraged to the energy (Democrat) complex. Then you short the autos (Republicans).

That scenario is not an investment so much as a prescription for disaster should anything not go the press' way. What if energy prices drop, Iraq succeeds, etc? Not a perfect analogy but somewhat apropos.

[Crew v1.0]

Question for Obama tonight, or any of the rest. If a candidate places any credence or stock in the NIE's finding that Iran in 2003 dropped its secret nuclear weapon program in response to "international pressure," he or she should be asked to put on his or her historian hat and answer: what happened in 2003 to cause maximum and dreadful pressure to be brought to bear on the Iran mullahs, to persuade them ever so unwillingly to drop that secret and illicit program?

If it stands to reason that the correct answer is "the invasion of Iraq," and if that candidate in fact believes and places stock in that NIE finding and further believes that Iran to this day truly desists in re-starting said illegal program, does that cause said candidate to alter even by an IOTA his or her pre-NIE talking-point to the effect that the bipartisan invasion of Iraq was the worst mistake or [fill in your favorite word pregnant with calumny, and combine it with your favorite Italian hand gesture] [e.g., "... blunder"] in U.S. foreign policy history, or the like? In fact, if you believe the NIE is accurate, then why shouldn't I view it as a remarkable axis-of-evil two-fer?

[Sara]

Romney wins Wyoming caucus.

[BumperStickerist]

There exists the chance that Greenwald isn't pretending.

-

[M. Simon]

Re: Rezko. Heavy ties with Nation of Islam. And Obama's church is not exactly progressive when it comes to race relations. Or Jews.

BTW Fred and Duncan (Who?) Hunter each picked up a delegate in Wyoming.

Fred may come in as the consensus candidate.

[Steve]

Great site!

Would you like a Link Exchange with The Internet Radio Network? At the IRN you can listen to over 50 of America’s top Talk Shows via Free Streaming Audio! In addition you can email the President, VP and Congressional Leaders!!
http://netradionetwork.com

[SteveMG]

There exists the chance that Greenwald isn't pretending.

How can one tell when he's faking it and when he's not?

He is well skilled in taking a quote, an anecdote, a single event and weaving this vast tale of sturm und drang. "This", holding the item up for all to see, "I say This! is who they are and This, This! is what they do."

Add another 3,000 words or so and, presto, instant Greenwald.

'Course, we all enjoy that exercise. Taking a comment or action by an opponent and using it to indict everyone who belongs with that opponent.

Fun; but not really worth much.

[Jane]

Okay, I've got a house full of people, I'm halfway thru dinner but I am here to blog the debate.
I'll do it here: This Is A New Day. This Is A New State."

[Porchlight]

Thanks, Jane. I'm in the middle of cooking dinner myself but I'm going to try to jump back and forth.

[Ann]

Jane, you are the BEST!!!!!

[JM Hanes]

Huckabee competently summarized the Democrat position on Bush foreign policy.

Take it away, Jane!

[clarice]

Isn't this a different universe than the dog and pony shows which preceded it? CNN should hang its head in shame!!

[JM Hanes]

Finally, a discussion of issues that's worth watching. Kudos to Charlie Gibson.

[M. Simon]

Obama's Church which lays out church theology.

It talks about the gypsy curse of materialism. Give us your money. And the rest to the government. The community will look after you.

BTW saw a slice of the debate. Fred said the right things about foundational principles. The Constitution.

[Jeff]

Gee, isn't there some other party running some kind of candidate-selection process other than the Democratic? I don't know, I seem to remember another one. Can't imagine why there's nothing on this here rightwing website about it. Maybe it doesn't exist.

[clarice]

Maybe because this thread is about Obama, Jeff. Just a thought.

[sbw]

Look around, Jeff.

[sbw]

... Active comments listed in the right column.

[Jeff]

this thread is about Obama

Yeah, and the one before that, and the one before that, and the one before that, and the one before that, and the one before that . . .

Just a thought.

Reading Tom's posts, you'd never know there even was a Republican caucus in Iowa, much less that it was won by an ignorant, thin-skinned, under-funded kook who scares the devil out of the Republican party establishment, who was roundly attacked by much of that establishment, and yet nevertheless managed to trounce his competition, notably including a competitor who spent - what? - four hundred million dollars in Iowa. You'd think that a noteworthy event that might prompt some insight.

Just a thought.

[sbw]

Jeff, if you could apply your powers of observation on the Democrats, you might see the greater danger.

And, yes, you are right, a small man took the small event in Iowa. The best news about Iowa is that it is over.

[kim]

So then, to what do you ascribe the victory of the 'thin-skinned, ignorant, kook'?
============================

[Sara]

Jeff, try the debate live blogging thread, that's where everyone else is. "This is a New Day"

[steveaz]

M. Simon has his eye on Fred. So do I.

Me? I'm hoping for a Fred/Condi ticket. But I'll settle for a Fred/anybody-but-Ron-Paul ticket, too.

[JM Hanes]

Gee, Jeff, if TM would just listen to you, maybe he could have a popular blog all of his own.

[To Live and Spy in LA]

Obama's Church into earthquakes too? Obama and them are going to be work.

We should just have them all made.

[Deagle]

First let me say that I am a "Friend of Fred" and hope he overcomes his lethargy and wins.

I do love the sometimes strange and "strained" statements regarding Huckabee though, not just this site, but many others. This election has caused more excitement with him involved and it has become downright fun to follow.

Watching the MSM try to figure out what the heck is going on is just downright FUN. It gets better when reading blogs spouting their anti-religious and anti-Christian comments. Combine that with the Obama mystique and it is just wonderful.

All in all, this is going to be a fun election!

Enjoy this election year while you can, this kind of excitement does not happen very often!

[kim]

Someone, please, explain those huge numbers in Iowa.
==================================

[Donald]

Kim, I think it's pretty simple. Romney put all the time and effort into Iowa. Millions of dollars and he practically live here. Giuliani who was the other big gun at the time decided to side step it so as not to look so weak. He did however spend a lot of money there. Fred (!), got in a little late and didn't see that as a strong place for him either. McCain, love him and all, he's a real man, but I dont' want him to be my president. Huckabee, well Iowa was his big shot and he took it. He doesn't come off slick like Romney, but he is. Like a used care salesman slick. Just like Bill Clinton and I'm afraid that's what we may have here. I'm not about the evangelical vote. I beleive it is why the Republican party has not buried the democratic party. No matter how tragic abortion is, it's nobody's business outside of that family. Who gives a damn what I put in my body? Those are two very strong examples of why we even have to sweat these elections.

[Deagle]

Better talk to the narcotics division about your ideas.... Not going to argue about when life begins...up to science at the moment...

Other that that, your comments are correct...hehe.

[kim]

Kinsley gags on 'change' in the NyTo; all Romney needs to change is his hair stylist. Lose the vaseline, Big Boy.

D, there were a lot more people out in Ioway than expected, bipartisanly. There is discontent; stirred by a deluded MSM.
===================================

[kim]

er, uh, Vitalis. Or does only his hairdresser know for sure?
=========================

[Donald]

It's not about me Deagle and it's not a matter of science. It's about eliminating the commie/lib/democratic party. Crushing their asses.

[Deagle]

Can't argue with that! Doing all I can - hehe...

[kim]

Ah, Donald, old, forgottten, far-off things, and battles long ago. See the Lancet article get newly debunked?
==============================

[kim]

Perhaps some journalists will figure out that their biases can be used to manipulate them even more effectively than they can manipulate others with bias.
==================================

[Donald]

I've been consumed with the Bulldogs kickin a little "a" in NOLA. Next on my list...recovery from the Bulldogs kickin a littl "a" in NOLA. After that, back to serious research!

[Semanticleo]

You guys hould be the first to know 'it's always abut money'.

Mainstream mediatypes give the viewer (listener,reader) what they want to keep ad revenue at a peak. You cut the contrarians
from the herd and focus on their anti-establishment obsessions as though it
were the norm. Just like conservatives, media outlets only want the most profitable scenario. So stop the; 'poor republicans don't get no repect from the MSM'.

[kim]

As if.
===

[Deagle]

Cleo...not in this MSM world I think...

[kim]

What's unbelievable are the lies about Bush-Cheney that the WaPo gives McGovern space for.
==================================

[PeterUK]

"You guys hould be the first to know 'it's always abut money'."

How on earth did you get to comment here Septic? I thought one had to provide bank references,is this TM's New Year's gesture to the poor?

[sbw]

Gawd, cleo, what insight. heh!

[Semanticleo]

"Gawd, cleo, what insight. heh!"

Never misunderestimate the power of denial.

[glasater]

"What's unbelievable are the lies about Bush-Cheney that the WaPo gives McGovern space for."

Ah Kim--you are once again so correct--am afraid to use "right" here.

[Donald]

My main man Hunter Thompson loved McGovern, and because of that so did I. Then I started reading...

[clarice]

Better about money than about "hope" or "change".

BTW Hill better work more on that "I've been making change for 35 years." Sounds like a cashier.

[sbw]

Never misunderestimate the power of denial.

Heh, again. Never underestimate the power of clear exposition.

[Donald]

Clarice, I don't know that a lot of people understand the concept of "taxes" and "budget". But they sure know and got a lot of "hope" that they can dig into your, my, and every other "rich" person for some well deserved "change".