Obama Sycophant Karen Hunter Criticizes Jodi Cantor Over Obama Book She Never Read

Mediaite.com:

On Saturday mornings’s Up with Chris Hayes, journalist and MSNBC contributor Karen Hunter challenged The New York Times‘ Jodi Kantor over her motivation for writing the buzzed-about tome The Obamas. Hunter leveled a highly-charged criticism at Kantor, mentioning her “seven figure” payday, and wondering “What was your motivation for doing it?”


Kantor’s response seemed to be leading to a crackling exchange, but host Chris Hayes swooped in and changed the subject.


Upon publication last month, The Obamas dominated the news cycle on the strength of a few anecdotes that captured the media’s imagination, which resulted in some pushback from the White House, and from Mrs. Obama. While Hayes and Salon‘s Joan Walsh each said they had read the book, and that the First Lady comes off sympathetically, the bits that he media focused on painted a picture of dissension between the East and West Wings. The White House line has generally been that these anecdotes have been blown out of proportion, without proper context, and don’t properly represent the truth.


As with previous books about this White House, discussion in the media has often turned to the ways in which authors can polish up the mundane in order to hype book sales, and perhaps justify their time and expense.


This seemed to be on Karen Hunter’s mind when she engaged Kantor. “I haven’t read the book,” she began, adding “No disrespect, don’t plan on reading it, but as the only publisher on this set, I also understand kind of the pressures to produce — you got seven figures for this. You got a lot of money to write this book, which means that you had to deliver certain things that I, quite frankly, don’t think you could have, you know, given the amount of money that you were offered to do this book.”


“What was your motivation,” Hunter continued, “if you didn’t have personal interviews with the President or the First Lady, to produce something called The Obamas, which was an in-depth look at this power couple, what was your motivation for doing it?


Kantor began by explaining that she’s been on the Obama beat for five years, that she had the cooperation of the White House (more on that from Jay Carney here), and that “the entire book was fact checked with its sources and cross-checked with other people in the White House. Nobody has challenged the reporting in the book. Nobody has come forward to say, Michelle Obama didn’t do that, she didn’t have that dispute.”


Hunter interjected, “But there is a tone.”


“Excuse me,” Kantor scolded. “Please let me finish. I think that, first of all, you never do your work as a reporter based on how much you’re being paid for it.”


That statement elicited a laugh from Hunter.


“Whether you’re being paid a lot or a little, you always try to ascertain the same standards of fairness and accuracy.”

It's no secret that liberals can't stand any criticism of their dear High Lord and Master Barack Obama. Even if the criticism is legitimate (such as on scandals like Fast & Furious, the epic failure of Solyndra and continued record-high unemployment), liberals will either dismiss the criticism as biased or even worse paint the critique as "RACIST!!!" It's who they are and their obsession with protecting Barry at any cost so he can get re-elected is something that's rooted in their DNA. So Karen Hunter, a longtime black liberal, Obamabot and book publisher criticizing a Jodi Kantor for writing a tome, that she admits to have never reading, because fellow liberals feel that it doesn't flatter The One enough? No irony there. None at all. Especially on the "Obama's Re-election Campaign Network" aka MSNBC.

Failed "American Idol" Judge Ellen DeGeneres Hired As JCPenney Spokeswoman

It's no secret that morally bankrupt social liberals and gay activists love Ellen DeGeneres, a now "gay" woman who gets off on turning normally heterosexual women into lesbians (both ex-girlfriend Anne Heche, who has returned to having sex with men and current "wife" Portia de Rossi both had longterm relationship with men before hooking up with Ellen. DeGeneres, a longtime average-at-best comedian and actress, has used her chosen sexuality, love from the biased, liberal media and a passive-aggressive wit (that speaks to her narcissism) to achieve super-stardom despite having little talent to match it. And in a corrupt business where female comedians struggle mightily to achieve a quarter of the fame and fortune DeGeneres has, it's a shame that despite her many fails (including, most recently, a short stint on "American Idol" that the Left would like for everyone to forget about) that DeGeneres continues to sucker people into hiring her for major gigs:

Supporters are rallying to counter a conservative group's campaign urging JC Penney to fire Ellen DeGeneres as a spokeswoman because she is openly gay.


They are showing their support for the popular talk show host, named spokeswoman for the department store chain last week, online and through social media.


Shortly after the American Family Association's One Million Moms group launched its campaign against DeGeneres, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Discrimination launched a "Stand Up for Ellen" website; within 17 hours, more than 10,000 people signed an online petition supporting DeGeneres and JC Penney's choice. An unscientific poll in the Los Angeles Times showed that 96 percent of readers support DeGeneres.


They also expressed their outrage on Twitter. A sample tweet on Thursday protesting the campaign reads: "Dear One Million Moms "a family values group", spend more time loving your families instead of perpetuating hate."


Also read: One Million Moms to JC Penney: Ellen's Gay -- Fire Her


The AFA's "One Million Moms," a project made up of an undetermined number of mothers, is urging people to call JC Penney headquarters and demand that the Texas-based department store chain ditch DeGeneres because the Cover Girl model, former American Express spokeswoman, Peoples Choice Award winner and New York Times bestselling author is gay.


So far, it hasn't happened.


DeGeneres, incidentally, is a former JC Penney sales clerk.

Think GOP Infighting Is Ugly? Check Out The Democrats…Of 2008

Great post by John Wilson at Mediate today just to remind everyone that it's not just Republicans who get into nasty battles during primary season:

Now that the attacks have sharpened between GOP candidates, many in the media are lamenting (or outwardly championing for Democrats’ sake) the possibility Republicans will cannibalize one another and leave the nominee just a political carcass that a DNC intern could lead President Obama to victory over. Not quite.


This kind of infighting — even with negativity making up a record 95% of the ads shown leading up to the Florida primary — isn’t new to presidential politics. It was worse four years ago, which is apparently too long a time for some folks to remember what the Democratic presidential primary looked like. So here’s a reminder: Hillary Clinton didn’t just get into the muck of linking the ‘70s era terrorist organization Weather Underground with then-candidate Barack Obama, she also drew a “direct” link between Obama, Bill Ayers, and 9/11, saying during a debate:


“If I’m not mistaken, that relationship with Mr. Ayers on this board continued after 9/11 and after his reported comments, which were deeply hurtful to people in New York, and I would hope to every American, because they were published on 9/11 and he said that he was just sorry they hadn’t done more. And what they did was set bombs and in some instances people died.”


Ayers was never convicted of any crime, however he was a member of the Weather Underground group, who did accept responsibility for detonating a number of bombs in government buildings. Clinton was referring to comments Ayers made in response to regretting his violent past:


“I don’t regret setting bombs…I feel we didn’t do enough.”


Reckless, especially in the midst of 9/11? Definitely. Somehow reflective of Ayers’ relationship with Obama? Not in the least. The Washington Post fact-checked the connection between Obama and Ayers and found what Obama had stated repeatedly: aside from serving as board members of an organization together and Ayers hosting a fundraiser, they had no real relationship. Clinton was so shortsighted in her utilization of this attack that she opened herself up to a weltering retort:


“Did Hillary Clinton believe that it had been appropriate in 2001 for President Bill Clinton to have pardoned two members of the Weather Underground as he left office?,” journalist David Corn asked Howard Wolfson, Clinton’s communications director at the time.


Clinton didn’t stop her attacks at Weather Underground, though. When it came to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright controversy, she sidestepped it at first to avoid appearing opportunistic, and out of fear of angering black voters. But she wasn’t out of it for long. When she spoke with the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review editorial board in late March, as the race was heating up and the general consensus was she could actually lose, she didn’t have any qualms saying, “He would not have been my pastor. You don’t choose your family, but you choose what church you want to attend.” And just in case that wasn’t a big enough hint as to how Clinton perceived Rev. Wright’s sermons, she threw in another zinger: “You know, I spoke out against Don Imus (who was fired from his radio and television shows after making racially insensitive remarks), saying that hate speech was unacceptable in any setting, and I believe that.”


And remember this was the race that brought the term “superdelegate” into the nation’s lexicon — “designated members of Congress, governors and distinguished party leaders” who are free to change their minds on which candidate to support. Had Clinton not suspended her campaign in June (bowing to pressure from dons of the party), the superdelegates would probably have decided who the Democratic nominee was at the party convention in August, just three months before the general election. Primary voters be damned.

Joe Scarborough: The Way The Mainstream Media Covered For Obama’s Negative Ads Is ‘Shameful’

Mediaite.com:

The Morning Joe crew took a look at the fallout from — and the benefits of — using negative ad campaigns in presidential elections. The panelists agreed that Mitt Romney‘s success in the Florida primary was tied to his decision to “hit back” against Newt Gingrich‘s slew of negative campaign ads, both with his own ads and during debates.


Host Joe Scarborough was quick to remind everyone that, back in 2008, Barack Obama launched his own barrage of ultimately successful negative campaign ads:


I don’t know a lot of candidates that wouldn’t rather win ugly than lose pretty. Jon Huntsman lost pretty. Mitt Romney, this past week, won ugly. But, that’s…. I mean, Barack Obama won ugly in 2008; he ran more negative ads than anybody else in the history of television. He ran so many negative ads that he actually swung ahead of John McCain on the question of who do you trust more on taxes. ‘Cause remember the grainy, negative, false, misleading ads that he ran over and over again. [...] I mean, these negative ads worked.


Later, Mika Brzezinski noted that the President had sat himself in the driver’s seat of a sports car at the DC auto show, “as he should.” “I’m not trying to be smug,” she added.


Scarborough got a laugh out of that before turning to panelist Donny Deutsch. “Well, there’s no need to be smug,” Scarborough said. “This is going to be a tough, long campaign. But, Donny Deutsch, the man in the driver’s seat right there ran more negative ads — 30-second ads, 4 years ago — than any candidate in history.”


“The only difference,” he added, “between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney is the mainstream media — every network, The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post — they all covered for him. Nobody wrote that story because they all wanted him to him. It was shameful the way they covered for him.”


Deutsch, meanwhile, felt we should retire the term “negative ads.”


“Why?” asked Scarborough. “Because I attached it to Barack Obama?”


Brzezinski, all the while, kept trying to get Scarborough to answer a question about whether the President is “literally and figuratively in the driver’s seat.”


“No!” he said, finally.

RELATED: Obama campaign: Romney won Florida on negative ads

Obama Money Advantage Disappearing, Top Obama Fundraisers Come From Hollywood, Media

NationalJournal.com:

Every presidential election, there's a new development that changes the nature of campaigns that one party, often the one out of power, takes advantage of. In 2008, it was the Obama team's impressive use of social media to connect with new young voters and expand the electorate. In 2004, it was the Bush campaign's savvy use of micro-targeting technologies to identify narrow slices of the electorate, and get them to show up and vote Republican.


This year, it's the Republicans' adept and aggressive use of super PACs to even the financial playing field, blunting the often-massive money advantages that an incumbent president has at his disposal. With the emergence of American Crossroads, Crossroads GPS and Restore Our Future, a well-stocked Romney super PAC, the Obama fundraising juggernaut no longer looks so imposing. If Romney is the Republican nominee, he won't be overwhelmed with a wave of negative advertising, and will have the resources to fight back.


Take a look at the end-of-year numbers.


The Obama campaign ended the year with $81.8 million cash-on hand - a very strong total. But the outside Democratic groups, especially the party's newly-created super PACs, haven't given him much in the way of reinforcements. The Democratic National Committee has $12.6 million cash-on-hand to assist. But Priorities USA banked a meager $1.5 million, receiving money from just 42 individual donors in the last six months. The party's congressional super PACs -- Majority PAC and House Majority PAC -- also didn't bank much, $1.3 million and $1.17 million, respectively.


Meanwhile, the Romney campaign ended the year with $19.9 million in the bank, far less than the president's cash haul. But when you add in the outside groups, he's about at even strength. Romney's super PAC, Restore Our Future, banked $23.6 million at the end of the year, thanks to funding from venture capitalists aligned with Romney. American Crossroads, which is poised to play an outsized role in the presidential race, ended the year with $15.6 million cash-on-hand. And the RNC ended the year with more cash-on-hand than the DNC, banking $20 million. All told, that adds up to $79.1 million - and it doesn't include the cash-on-hand from Crossroads GPS, which doesn't file with the Federal Election Commission. But based on Crossroads' announced fundraising totals, it's logical to assume that they have around $15 million on-hand.


That brings the combined Obama and Democratic outside group totals to $98.3 million cash-on-hand, with the GOP groups tallying $94.1 million. Take out the Democratic groups strictly devoted to congressional activities, and it's a virtual financial tie. With labor and environmental groups poised to help Obama's re-election, Democrats still could hold a narrow edge. But it's hardly the cash advantage that would allow Team Obama to run negative advertising uncontested against Romney, without an aggressive response.


It's a far cry from the vision of a billion-dollar Obama re-election campaign bankroll that Democratic strategists are now downplaying. And it shows that the amount of time Democrats spent complaining and attacking the liberalized campaign finance laws before the 2010 midterms would have been better spent preparing for an infrastructure utilizing super PACs to their advantage. Priorities USA, headed by former White House spokesman Bill Burton, hasn't yet shown it can compete with American Crossroads so far -- and time is running short.


President Obama has built up an imposing fundraising infrastructure. But thanks to the rise of the super PACs, it might not be enough to hold any kind of fundraising advantage in 2012.

RELATED: Top Obama fundraisers come from Hollywood, media

NY Mag Editor Admits On National TV He Never Reported John Kerry's Income Tax Rate in 2004

Newsbusters.org:

The ridiculous media hypocrisy concerning all the fuss over Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's wealth and income tax rate was perfectly demonstrated on MSNBC's Morning Joe Monday.


After claiming that Romney's "tax issue is not remotely" past him, John Heilemann, the National Affairs editor for New York magazine, admitted that he never reported John Kerry's income tax rate during the 2004 campaign


And there it is. What else do you need to know about the state of today's media?


Kerry's low income tax rate was not an issue for them in 2004.


But despite the immutable fact that Romney pays more in federal income taxes as a percentage of Adjusted Gross Income than 97 percent of the nation including Kerry, people like Heilemann - who totally ignored Kerry's lower tax rate in 2004 - are going to pound on this issue as long as Romney is in the race.


As NewsBusters has been reporting for months, the media are going to do anything to get Barack Obama reelected.

Politiks As Usual: In The News 1/30/12

Florida Polls Show Romney Retaining Lead; Tea Party vs. Establishment

Police Arrest About 300 Occupy Oakland Protesters

Finally, An Actual Hearing On Eligibility

Paul Ryan: Senate Democrats Haven’t Passed a Budget in 1005 Days

Starbucks: Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage ‘Is Core to Who We Are and What We Value’

NBC Asks Romney To Remove News Material From Ad

Islamic Parents Found Guilty Of Murdering Daughters

Multimillionaire Chris Matthews: Is Mitt Romney 'Just Too Damn Rich?'

Marco Rubio A Star, But Unlikely VP Pick

Pipeline Politics Derails More than Jobs

Earth Hasn't Warmed In 15 Years

U.S. Drones Patrolling Its Skies Provoke Outrage in Iraq

NYC Teacher Making $100K In Rubber Room Refuses To Retire

Sarah Palin Defends Gingrich: Establishment Fears Him Because He Leads ‘Rage Against The Machine’

Mediaite.com:

Last night, Herman Cain officially threw his support behind Newt Gingrich. Fox News covered the breaking news, and Sarah Palin was on to not just react to the endorsement, but to explain her Facebook post that Ronald Reagan would be “ashamed” of how Republicans are acting, and to defend Newt Gingrich against the attacks being leveled against him by Mitt Romney and other Republicans.


Judge Jeanine Pirro asked Palin to explain what she meant in her remark about the late Republican president. Palin noted that Reagan was never one to shy away from criticizing other Republicans, but she argued the former president never engaged in “the politics of personal destruction” that she believes has engulfed much of the 2012 campaign. She credited Gingrich with being the first to pledge to take the high road, but because of the “negative, rewritten history” being thrown out there against him, she said it makes sense for Gingrich to hit back. She also called out the Republican establishment for lining up against Gingrich in a concerted effort to keep him from winning the nomination.


However, Palin thought it better for the vetting process to be carried out this early on between the candidates so that by the time the eventual nominee faces President Obama, there will be no “October surprise” to deal with. She also bucked conventional wisdom by suggesting the race will continue on beyond Florida, and said the media should put more focus on Rick Santorum and Ron Paul, the latter of whom she gave some words of praise for.


Despite his many years of service in Washington, Palin argued he was the outsider candidate because of how mobilized the establishment has been against him. She admitted she’d rather have a candidate who will “rage against the machine” as opposed to one who won’t challenge the status quo. “If for no other reason, rage against the machine, vote Newt. Annoy a liberal, vote Newt.”


But what about Gingrich’s ambition to establish a colony on the moon? Palin ardently supported it, connecting his statement to JFK’s call for space exploration decades ago. And as a fiscal conservative, she thought this was a valuable funding opportunity for the United States.


But for all her positive comments about Gingrich (she said towards the end of the interview that Gingrich could “clobber” Obama), Palin did not make an official endorsement in the race. Pirro tried to push her towards one, but Palin just stated she wants the process to continue before she makes any decisions.

RELATED: Does Sarah Palin Want Obama Re-elected?

Herman Cain Endorses Newt Gingrich for President

MSNBC.com:

Former presidential candidate Herman Cain, who last week endorsed "the American people," announced his support on Saturday of another entity -- this time a Republican hoping to win the White House.


"I hereby officially and enthusiastically endorse Newt Gingrich for president of the United States," Cain said at a GOP fundraiser.


Speaking to supporters on the day he left the race last month, the former head of Godfather's Pizza said he would be making an endorsement. But at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference in South Carolina last week, he announced that his official endorsement would be of "we the people."


While Cain publicly promoted his endorsement last week, the one he made Saturday night came with little warning. The announcement was a surprise to Gingrich staff, and the traveling press who most frequently cover the former House speaker were not in attendance after boycotting the price the campaign was charging for chartered flights.


"There are many reasons, but one of the biggest reasons is that I know that Speaker Gingrich is a patriot. Speaker Gingrich is not afraid of bold ideas, and I also know that Speaker Gingrich is running for president and going through this sausage grinder," said Cain. "I know what this sausage grinder is all about. I know that he is going through this sausage grinder because he cares about the future of the United States of America."


Cain abandoned his presidential bid amongst accusations from women claiming he sexually harassed them while heading the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s. Describing the accusations as false attacks from the media and rivals, Cain's campaign sought to slog through the scandal. That was until a Georgia woman went public claiming to have had an affair with the former businessman for more than a decade.


On Dec. 2, Cain returned to his Atlanta home to meet with his wife and discuss the future of his candidacy. The next day he suspended his campaign.

RELATED: Fine Whine: Gingrich Campaign Accuses Romney Camp Of Packing Debate Audience