Crossposted from Flopping Aces

Byron York reports on a conference call with McCain campaign staffers and were they right on in their assessment of the NYT’s and the MSM:

Let me first say we are First Amendment absolutists on this campaign. The press and anybody who wishes to cover this race from a blogosphere perspective or from a media perspective is of course constitutionally protected with regard to writing whatever they want to write.

But let’s be clear and be honest with each other about something fundamental to this race, which is this: Whatever the New York Times once was, it is today not by an standard a journalistic organization. It is a pro-Obama advocacy organization that every day attacks the McCain campaign, attacks Sen. McCain, attacks Gov. Palin, and excuses Sen. Obama. There is no level of public vetting with regard to Sen. Obama’s record, his background, his past statements. There is no level of outrage directed at his deceitful ads. This is an organization that is completely, totally, 150 percent in the tank for the Democratic candidate, which is their prerogative to be, but let’s not be dishonest and call it something other than what it is. Everything that is read in the New York Times that attacks this campaign should be evaluated by the American people from that perspective, that it is an organization that has made a decision to cast aside its journalistic integrity and tradition to advocate for the defeat of one candidate, in this case John McCain, and advocate for the election of the other candidate, Barack Obama.

The public sees this also, except for the Obama supporters who swear there is no media bias towards Obama.

No media bias indeed:

The wholesale descent into Swift Boat campaigning has been blocked — for now — by a federal judge in Virginia. But voters should not rest easy. A group calling itself The Real Truth About Obama is appealing the ruling.

The group aims to block federal regulations so it can spend unlimited money on a commercial smearing the Democratic nominee as a zealous proponent of any and all abortion on demand —“at any time during pregnancy, as many times as a woman wants one.”

If the group were to win on appeal, it would signal open season for countless stealth groups to flood the remaining weeks of the campaign with underhanded attack ads. The courts must uphold the law, heeding the Federal Election Commission’s warning of “serious harm to the public” if the attack group prevails.

Posing as a mere “issue advocacy” operation, the group’s ad attacks Mr. Obama’s character and accuses him of “lying” about his abortion record. In truth, it trashes the candidate’s nuanced position. It even employs an Obama-like voice pledging to make taxpayers pay for abortions, help minors conceal abortions from their parents, and legalize late-term abortions.

Lies?

The first thing I’d do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act.

Read the bill and you will find that it gets rid of restrictions on public funding for abortions, gets rid of any laws requiring parental notifications and gets rid of the Partial-birth Abortion Ban Act.

Lied indeed….by the MSM.

also:

Origins of the “Swiftboating” of Sarah Palin?

So Obama is a “new kind of politician”, representing hope and change; setting a new tone for Washington that rises above lipstick smears and the dirty tactics of character defamation?

From the Jawa Report:

Extensive research was conducted by the Jawa Report to determine the source of smears directed toward Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin. Those smears included false allegations that she belonged to a secessionist political party and that she has radical anti-American views.

Our research suggests that a subdivision of one of the largest public relations firms in the world most likely started and promulgated rumors about Sarah Palin that were known to be false. These rumors were spread in a surreptitious manner to avoid exposure.

It is also likely that the PR firm was paid by outside sources to run the smear campaign. While not conclusive, evidence suggests a link to the Barack Obama campaign. Namely:

• Evidence suggests that a YouTube video with false claims about Palin was uploaded and promoted by members of a professional PR firm.

• The family that runs the PR firm has extensive ties to the Democratic Party, the netroots, and are staunch Obama supporters.

• Evidence suggests that the firm engaged in a concerted effort to distribute the video in such a way that it would appear to have gone viral on its own. Yet this effort took place on company time.

• Evidence suggests that these distribution efforts included actions by at least one employee of the firm who is unconnected with the family running the company.

• The voice-over artist used in this supposedly amateur video is a professional.

• This same voice-over artist has worked extensively with David Axelrod’s firm, which has a history of engaging in phony grassroots efforts, otherwise known as “astroturfing.”

• David Axelrod is Barack Obama’s chief media strategist.

• The same voice-over artist has worked directly for the Barack Obama campaign.

This suggests that false rumors and outright lies about Sarah Palin and John McCain being spread on the internet are being orchestrated by political partisans and are not an organic grassroots phenomenon led by the left wing fringe. Our findings follow.

Read the rest of Dr. Rusty Shackleford’s extensive research at The Jawa Report

Also blogging:
Bookworm Room
Brutally Honest
Confederate Yankee
Old War Dogs
The Anchoress
The Radio Patriot