Hillary won the NH primary because she is the New World Order's chosen candidate. It wasn't Republicans or Democrats per se who monkeyed with the Diebold machine tallies in New Hampshire, it was NWO operatives, Illuminati stooges.

The NH results where machine counts were used exactly flipped the poll prodictions, but where counts were conducted by hand, the polls proved accurate. NH actually chose Obama, but he's not the NWO choice, Hillary is.

Don't believe me? Look at how Tony Blair just got the first installment of his reward for being a good boy and taking the UK to war for no real reason as instructed: a $1-million a year no-show job at JP Morgan Chase! Like Tony is some big genius at banking and finance.

Morgan, Chase, Goldman, Rockefeller, Loeb, Rothschild, and others you've heard of and others you've not. These are the same peole who OWN the Federal Reserve, the Bank of England, the European Central Bank, and all the central banks. These are the New World Order people, the so-called one-worlders, aka Bilderbergers, CFR, Tri-Lats, etc, the same people Bush kowtows to, and Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton and Poppy Bush, too.

Obama's not theirs. Yet. When he has become of a mind with them, he will be their candidate too. Why does the media ignore Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich? Because Paul and Kucinich are not owned by the Illuminati. Most in Congress are owned. That's why there is no opposition party in the US. That's why Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid do what their masters order and not what their constituents want of them. Those who cannot be bought can all too often be compromised.

The fly in the Illuminati ointment is the US Constitution which formalizes the sovereignty of the citizen over the state. That is why it is under attack and that is why the average US citizen, if he or she cares anything at all about the founding principles of this nation, must get involved and take a stand for liberty and civil rights, must demand that the Constitution be honored, must if necessary -- and it may well be necessary -- be willing to somehow reconstitute the government in the best interests of the people.

The alternative is a new world order with a one-world government, and you can bet it won't be "elected" by the people of New Hampshire, Iowa, or any other state.

How can the press cover the candidates' positions on "the issues." Modern political campaign philosophy clearly militates for candidate silence on issues. As I sit here, I have only the vaguest notion where any of the candidates stand on issues important to me. (Well, if religion were important to me, I guess I'd understand some candidates' positions).

I don't know, Rick, a 'Sacred Heart University Poll' -- did they just call people on campus?

I'd also like to know who the 22.3% was who thought Fox News was "mostly or somewhat liberal." I mean, talk about being to the right of Attila the Hun...

For the Blowhards Who Insist It's a Two-Way Race….
Check out the article at Huffington Post -
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/for-the-blowhards-who-ins_b_81400.html

"For those of you who think the Democratic presidential nomination fight is just a two-way race between Obama and Clinton, check out this brand new poll from the Reno Gazette-Journal. Yup, that's right - it shows the Nevada caucus race a three-way, dead heat with John Edwards right in the mix."

Here is a link to the Reno Gazette-Journal poll -
http://www.rgj.com/blogs/inside-nevada-politics/2008/01/new-poll-democratic-race-in-nevada-dead.html
EDWARDS '08

Poll: Fox Most Trusted News for Americans

Sunday, January 13, 2008 3:05 PM

Fox News has supplanted CNN as the 'most trusted' news source for Americans, a new nationwide poll finds.

The poll conducted by Sacred Heart University, found that the most trusted national TV news organizations, for accurate reporting, in declining order included: Fox News (27.0%), CNN (14.6%), and NBC News (10.90%). These were followed by ABC News (7.0%), local news (6.9%), CBS News (6.8%) MSNBC (4.0%), PBS News (3.0%), CNBC (0.6%) and CBN (0.5%).

In 2003, CNN led Fox News on "trust most for accurate reporting" 23.8% to 14.6%.

The Sacred Heart University Poll also found significantly declining percentages of Americans saying they believe all or most of media news reporting.

In the current national poll, just 19.6% of those surveyed could say they believe all or most news media reporting. This is down from 27.4% in 2003. Just under one-quarter, 23.9%, in 2007 said they believe little or none of reporting while 55.3% suggested they believe some media news reporting.

"The fact that an astonishing percentage of Americans see biases and partisanship in their mainstream news sources suggests an active and critical consumer of information in the U.S." stated James Castonguay, Ph.D., associate professor and chair of SHU's Department of Media Studies & Digital Culture. "The availability of alternative viewpoints and news sources through the Internet no doubt contributes to the increased skepticism about the objectivity of profit-driven news outlets owned by large conglomerates," he continued.

The perception is growing among Americans that the news media attempts to influence public opinion – from 79.3% strongly or somewhat agreeing in 2003 to 87.6% in 2007.

And, 86.0% agreed (strongly or somewhat) that the news media attempts to influence public policies – up from 76.7% in 2003.

"Americans know bias and imbalance when they see it and they don't like it. When most service organizations strive for consumer satisfaction ratings in the high eighties to low nineties, an overall positive rating of 40.7% is dismal," said Jerry C. Lindsley, director of the Sacred Heart University Polling Institute. He added, "Americans know that it's just not that hard to present both sides and keep personal bias at home."

By four-to-one margins, Americans surveyed see The New York Times (41.9% to 11.8%) and National Public Radio (40.3% to 11.2%) as mostly or somewhat liberal over mostly or somewhat conservative.

By a three-to-one margin, Americans see news media journalists and broadcasters (45.4% to 15.7%) as mostly or somewhat liberal over mostly or somewhat conservative.

And, by a two-to-one margin, Americans see CNN (44.9% to 18.4%) and MSNBC (38.8% to 15.8%) as mostly or somewhat liberal over mostly or somewhat conservative.

Just Fox News was seen as mostly and somewhat conservative (48.7%) over mostly or somewhat liberal (22.3%).

The Sacred Heart University Polling Institute completed 800 interviews with residents nationwide between November 26 – December 5, 2007. The sample was generated proportional to population contribution in all 50 states. Statistically, a sample of 800 completed telephone interviews represents a margin for error of +/-3.5% at a 95% confidence level.

Much Ado About Nothing

And Nader may run again this time, if Hillary get the Dem nomination. He might feel compelled to just to keep pissing off Alterman, who will only have begun plumbing the depths of his irrational Nader hating.

Good comments here, especially Cecilbothwell's -- Hillary did win by a relatively slim margin compared to her former lead.

One thing that's bothered me and I think deserves more investigation -- besides the anomalies between the hand-counted paper ballots and the Diebold votes, Kucinich eliminated from the debates, and the NH polling showing Obama ahead by as much as 15 points -- is John McCain's resurrection. A month ago, he was out of money and flying economy class, his campaign all but washed up. Suddenly, he's holding rallies in New Hampshire and his bus is back on the road -- where did the money come from to pay for all of this from a candidate who was broke?

As far as Alterman, there is no defense of his hatred of Nader and willingness to twist facts to 'prove' that Nader cost Gore the election. (Gore won, both in the popular vote and, if a Florida recount had taken place according to state law, in the Electoral College as well.) Days before the election in 2000, the Nader campaign was sending out emails telling his supporters to vote for Ralph in the states where Gore was ahead and for Gore in the 'battleground' states, contrary to Alterman's assertion that Nader was trying to sabotage Gore's chances in close states. Although he occasionally makes some good points, his irrational hatred of Nader is his biggest blind spot.

On the subject of Left Gatekeepers like The Nation (Max Holland, Left gatekeeper in chief) and Alter-rhetoric-but not -reality-man, WHERE THE HECK IS THE MEDIA REFORM MOVEMENT. STILL INVISIBLE. I suspect it is the victim of its own foundation grants. Sound paranoid?? Read Harvard U.'s new book The Mighty Wurlitzer on CIA and left gatekeeping in CIA media ops. ALso there is the perenial need to google Operation Mockingbird Spartacus

and also toe google Ben Bradlee Spartacus!

Covering and comparing actual candidate positions would be like helping to teach the public to think, and then where would creeps like Tim Russert be? 99% of people in the media cannot even write correct English, certainly cannot think for 60 straight seconds, are generally more stupid and intimidated by anything "outside the box" than the citizenry...why in the world would they want people to start actually thinking and deciding for themselves? Instead they're trying to figure out Oprah's power so they can have it too....They are an OBSTACLE to democracy, and if you don't think they know it, watch them sneer and growl and cry when anybody criticizes them---like a teenager who refuses to do homework but wants an "A" anyway....

"I, for one, would be interested in learning how the union leaders made that decision, by what criteria they decided that an Obama presidency would be superior to a Hillary Clinton or John Edwards presidency from the standpoint of culinary workers and their concerns."

Yes, it would be interesting to hear the rationale for that one, especially since DENNIS KUCINICH is still a Presidential Candidate and a card-carrying union member who has defended union workers of the U.S. and other countries his entire life. ?????

Good article and folks like Eric Alterman should never stop reminding us about the media's part in the Orwellian cover up.

Is he preaching to the choir? Who cares!? Maybe the choir needs to hear it over and over and over.

As Jon Stewart said on Crossfire: Stop hurting America. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFQFB5YpDZE. The main stream media is hurting America and it is hurting democracy and it is hurting freedom. This fact we should never lose sight of because as long as this is true, democracy and freedom will take a back seat to corporate fascism.

Also, and most importantly - until we, the jaded and cynical people, stop pitting the perfect against the good, we will keep losing. Until we get off our soft and ever-widening asses and do what we can (and what each of us does is a totally personal and individual decision), nothing of substance will change.

Good luck.

Wishing to cover candidates' stands on issues goes only so far. I remember all too well Mr. Alterman's insistence in 2000 that the Democratic Party enjoyed a proprietary claim on the votes of all potential supporters of Ralph Nader.

Which candidates are we allowed to see and hear, Mr. Alterman?

"Obama sounds more like JFK than MLK"

The JFK of 1960 campaign OR the JFK of 1963. Don't believe the Chomsky and Cockburn conflation of JFK based solely on his Cold War pronouncements. This is an oversimplification. The Bay of Pigs and the Cuban Missile Crisis had chagneged Kennedy's thinking. Yes he CONSTANTLY HAD TO SAY AND DO THINGS TO appease the far right. Chomsky and Cockburn consistenly ignore this context. But had always had a two track policy, whether it be for Laos, Cuba, or Yes Vietnam.

I watched PBS's Bill Moyers Journal when he interviewed Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich.

One hour of the interview told me more about candidates' positions on issues than all of the debates so far.

I'm angry at the media, including CNN, for their dramatic, albeit meaningless, "debates". They are without substance.

Issues. What wishful thinking. We have products to sell, we can't alienate any consumers!

"Although it's not clear why so many New Hampshire voters turned to Clinton, obliterating Obama's double-digit lead in the polls"
That is the $64,000 question isn't it.

Seems to me that one part of the story here that even Alterman gets wrong is "Hillary won NH." Actually, if we hadn't heard anything from pollsters, the story would be, "Hillary squeaked by in NH."

A twelve point lead evaporated and Hillary had to pull out all the stops to claim a narrow victory. The race that Obama "lost" was a race with pollsters who had too short a time frame to accurately assess voters' intent.

And then there are the odd results, with paper votes going for Obama and machine votes for Clinton ... but we'll wait for the Kucinich recount to figure that one out.

It's the BURGERS:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1070329053600562261

It becomes apparent that the media here in this country is helping the spiraling decline of anything representing real democracy.

Screaming masses whipped to frenzy by blowhards spouting meaningless but inflamatory rhetoric, while those with calm reasoned voices are marginalized...

Reminds me of the 30's in Europe.

Anyone study up on the difference between democracy, republics, and fascism?

Umm ......... if the media was limited to only covering candidates positions on the issues, then we would only read reportage of 3 candidates: Paul, Kucinich and Edwards.

THE DONOR WHISPERER$

(HILLAREE-DILLAREE / OBAMIATE O' THE MASSES?)

AYE! ~WELCOME "THEIR" HATRED

Would Clinton? would Obama? --have/SHOW the SPINE? maybe. But at this early point all bets are off for any but Edwards in 'measurably' Lifting-&-Walking with Our Day's Water, as it were.

Alas Obama & Clinton aren't (obviously) sure enough it's worth it--the public laying on of hand...

(the jittery Boardroom Toadia of 'Hou$e Bushelzebub' --with peeled Stay-On-R-GOOD$ide-DonorMind's-Eye-Political-Neighborhood-WATCHing every move by gingerly focu$-grouped recipients)...

...the uncomfortable weight & cold spill...the growing domestic emergencies and dire thir$t of "Mainstream" America LOSING, LOSING, IMAGINE how idiotic to ALLOW it--Losing the spiritual infrastructure of the world's greatest Democracy:

to the HuntBlackWateredHalliburtonated MAW of Chickenhawk WARpharisee$...could it be more PATHETIC?!

DUH-Factor TEN

Now Obama did at least loose a [ringing pea-]shot across the bow in reminding that Big Pharma, for example, couldn't buy "ALL" the "Seats @ the Table"...

I confess to liking ever more the Rule O' LAW approach of Edwards: tough on crimes against humanity, and the middle & working class.

He says in effect "Busted: you're under arrest."

Clinton in effect: "Just get out, take what you already took with you."

Obama: "Look, I feel your blind-trusted, hedge-funded pain--but put the family jewels back now! and...well, okay...whatever you have in that duffle bag, just take it & GO...

["accountability"? let's just-let-$leeping-dogs-lie...yeswecan]

And Beholed, O Memory! Our fatuous M$M, an over-indulged, efete multi-millonairy $hrill-yapping lapdoggery

barking at all the wrong things at the wrong times.

Drooling vacantly
on the weigh to pre-emptive war, their talkin' heads "abob", their tale$-a-WAG...full of themselves Tellin' Us over and O-vurrrr...

i.e., "Papertrail Fighters" ("Politcs" link: http://artistgeneral.com

Eric Alterman: 2002 is over. We saw how reliable the mainstream media and, for that matter, their politicians were that year. They haven't had much credibility around these here parts for some time. I suspect many Guardian readers feel the same way.

alterman is an obnoxious nader-hater. this is like shooting fish in a barrel. pathetic.

Did the Diebold machine counts pick the AIPAC candidate?

The candidates are hobbled. Besides Gravel and Kucinich who can't afford teams of consultants, they can't say what they really think. The other candidates who can afford them will not go against carefully prepared consultant's speeches lest they are paying these handlers big bucks for nothing.

Naaah, those post-mortems always sound like nothing so much as sports reports. They've reduced political news to a sports report, catchy lingo, numbers, overexcited delivery, inane cross-patter and all.

And like professional athletes, these corporate lackeys maybe ought to be wearing their sponsors' logos all over their uniforms.

It made me laugh out loud to read Alterman demanding the media cover the issues. If I recall my history correctly, this is the same Democrat flack that spread such slander and lies and Ralph Nader's 2000 campaign. Alterman is a brown-noser for the Democrats, and those that take him seriously as a essayist would be equally pleased with Rush Limbaugh's tripe. As in: lots of bellowing to cover up for lack of substance and to cover up bs.

It's so easy for the Ministry of Information to snooker the public. It's neck and neck! He's ahead by a nose! Now she's ahead! So what? Doesn't matter who wins, we lose. Issues? There are no issues. Just empty promises. Where are we headed? Look where we've been and where we are now. The word change means nothing when you don't define it. And above all keep anyone who wants to talk about what the public wants to hear away from the microphone.

kathyodat

Yeah, why a union would want to support the master triangulator, Obama, over Edwards makes no sense.

No wonder the left gets nowhere. So easily divided by celebrity fascination.

The scary Mrs. Clinton called MLK a talker like Barack Obama, but likened LBJ to herself as a doer. To me Obama sounds more like JFK than MLK and I'm sure Hillary would never attack her husband's hero as a talker. He lit the fire under a generation of young Americans without doing anything. We are the doers, politicians are the talkers who inspire the rest of us to better things. We have had seven years of uninspired brown shirt thugs on Pennsylvania Avenue. It is time for some inspiration.

Hee Hee Hee ... hee hee hee...

Isnt this the same Alterman that attacks Nader for Gore's election loss?

Talk about blowhards and windbags.

It's bad enough that campaigns give media companies a steady windfall of campaign-ad revenues, but they also provide fodder for endless bickering banter that the public eats up as smackdown taunts--right before this message from another hawker of prescription drugs.
We're a too-dumb public, and we're not wising up even the least bit. We're buying what they're selling. That's why they're selling it.

Trivial and blowhard-ish.

RichM is right. irony is in order.

This deep-thinking by Prof. Alterman is
as trivial as what it critiques.

I belong to many groups but that does not mean I would automatically follow their endorsements...but labor needs extra protection against the corporatists.

Well, this kind of criticism is like shooting fish in a barrel. It's just too easy. He's right, of course, but it's hardly news that the US media serves not to "enlighten" the public, but rather to brainwash it on behalf of the prevailing power structure.

Ironically, one of the very best expositions of the real function of the corporate media was Chomsky & Herman's Manufacturing Consent. (I say "ironically," because Alterman himself has written some laughable & blowhard-ish attacks on Chomsky.)

Whirling tornado's and gusting campaign narratives are the stuff of fluff.

Kucinich was nixed from the NBC debate in Las Vegas. That was after he had been invited because he met all the criteria set up by NBC. NBC just decided Friday to change the criteria for participation. Kucinich got "uninvited". So much for the media's responsibility to educated the electorate.

P.S. Kucinich and a Repug candidate are calling for a recount in NH because of the Diebold machine counts. So much for "wind at your back" Hillary.

I would hope that this criticism is much too obvious, but is it really?

It is so infuriating to constantly see this dialog of whip-sawing emotions going on among the pundits. Hillary won by a few thousand people in NH, and those few people have supposedly resurrected a campaign that shouldn't have been close to being written off within the space of a few days in the first place! They are playing us and playing us.