We just had a Republican running for the U.S. Senate, from Nevada, expecting the press, particular TV news networks to serve as venues for political infomercials. Now, we have Mr. Michael Steele, head of the RNC wishing to meet with foreign ambassadors, reminding them of the upcoming elections. Of course there is much denial that it has anything to do with getting money from them for the Republican races, which is illegal. Hmmm.
The Dems would never stage anything in hopes that the press would cover it that way. That is why Candidate Obama made an overseas trip to appeal to voters in Germany and Lebanon.
Has any candidate, Dem, GOP, Inde, or anything, ever staged that type of event before such a high percentage of non-voters, in hopes that it would get that type of coverage.
I suggest you look up two thing: Bush's days in D.C. and Obama's. Every other day, flies to some state for a big photo op. Georgia, Missouri, Nevada.....
All of these are multi-million dollar photo ops. Now, since you are going to get me wrong, I am not saying that the President should not address groups of Americans through out the country. But you have to admit they are all big staged events for the press.
In what way are the stories regarding Angle and Steele related to staged events of a sitting President?
BTW! I would have posted the same if they were democrats. For me, it's not about the party, but the attempt to sneak by with breaking the rules of politicking.
The gist of your post was that the GOP was using the media in some manner that seemed unprecedented, referring to using the TV news as "venues for political infomercials." (Why Steele meeting with embassies is a use of the media as an infomercial is a little beyond me, but I will accept it, arguendo.)
This also implied that there was something wrong about "using" the media that way.
In short, you seem to be complaining about the use of TV media as an expansion of campaigning in a manner that abuses the media. I think that is a fair reading of your post.
My post was intended to show that this is as common as can be, and I was wondering whether you ever complained about similar events in the past when the shoe was on the other foot.
I remember in the old days the lefties used to complain about Reagan and photo-ops. Now that they have mastered the art, they don't complain. Surely, Obama's Berlin appearance was the Mother of All Photo Ops. (I don't say that as a perjorative, just as a fairly accurate description.)
I find it humorous that some people on the left are complaining about endless campaigning, when Obama hasn't stayed at home for three days in a row, running from one tightly staged event to the other.
AGAIN, because I am going to be misunderstood on this, I am not saying he should not do it. I know that is what politicians do. It is just funny to hear the other side complain about other people using the media that way.
If I remember correctly, President Obama's campaign received money from foreigners. At the time, I thought that was quite suspect, but the money was returned, and there was no evidence that his campaign solicited that money. Again, only going on memory here. If you read the linked article, even the diplomats and a past RNC head are scratching their heads trying to understand why in the world he would be doing this.
You had a topic, an intro sentence about the use of attemping to misuse the media as an infomercial, followed immediately in the same sentence by Michael Steele and and the embassies.
It was not a terrible slip in reading comprehension to assume they were the same issue.
Even if they are not, if you were just complaining about using the media as an infomercial, my original reply was, if I may summerize, "Who doesn't? So this is new?" Or, as an old lady I knew once said, "Where's the beef?"
I read the linked article. The tenor was basically that everyone is wonder why he wants to meet with people, although I didn't read it as saying there was any serious evidence it was a solicitation for money, so I am not sure what your recent comment about Obama getting foreign money is about.
"Parameters" is plural. Regarding the news about President Obama's Presidential campaign having to return the money of foreigners, I guess you missed the memo. And, why else would Michael Steele be courting foreigners, when as the article points out, he needs to be spending his time fund-raising, if it isn't for drumming up money?
It is indeed sad that the Nevada Republican Senate candidate would so openly and brazenly expect such favorable treatment from the press. But then again she might have been watching the example set by Obama. He receives that kind of treatment much of the time without having to ask for it. Her mistake was either being so naive that she thought she might receive it if she asked or disappointingly surprised when it wasn’t forthcoming.
Obama seems to be getting criticism that was completely lacking in his first couple of years in the spotlight. People, even in the media seem to actually expecting answers to hard questions that he can't just gloss over with platitudes like "hope and change".
Now that his policies are exposed to the light of day, the luster is starting to wear off. Let's see how bright his star is still shining by the year 2012.
Unfortunately it looks like your attempt to purchase VIP membership has failed due to your card being declined. Good news is that we have several other payment options that you could try.
VIP MEMBER
, you are now a VIP member!
We thank you for your purchase!
VIP MEMBER
, Thank you for becoming VIP member!
Membership should be activated shortly. You'll receive notification!
