How far in the tank is the media* for Obama?  We need to create a new standard. The system can be based on how much in the national interest a story is, and how far the media tanks for it.

An example: 

On scale of one-to-ten, the Governor Palin wardrobe story was a two (in the national interest) and it received a medium amount of coverage - in the six range.  (2/6)

On the other hand, the Senator Biden gaffe of stating Obama’s inexperience, and possibly slipping with national secrets, was clearly a ten, but received coverage of approximately one (relative to its importance).  (10/1)

Therefore, if the first number matches the second, or is close, than the press has been even-handed, otherwise the difference is the quantifiable press bias, hereby named the Shotgun Scale of Press Bias.  A perfectly balanced score of 5/5, 6/6 or 3/3 etc. is what we should demand of non-editorial reporting.

In this particular case the press bias is a huge factor of 2/6 (-4) negative for Palin and the inexperience/national calamity story was biased 10/1 (+9) in favor of Senator Biden. (We must compare apples to apples, so the stories compared should both be either possibly harmful or possibly helpful.)

It may take some tinkering; I am looking forward to input.

* http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Story?id=6099188&page=1

It would not be appropriate to attack someone who may have a medical issue, but it may be a convenient way for the Obama campaign to get rid of Joe Biden.  The very recent headline, “No brain scans in released Biden medical records*” may be an honest way for Obama to rid himself of this huge liability.

It is becoming clearer that Biden is a burden to the Obama campaign, but it may be less obvious, to those who are not paying attention, that Biden is a threat to national security.  He may have to be removed from the senate also. I, personally, hope he is well, and maybe this explains his erratic behavior.

Read this excellent blog: http://unequal-time.blogtownhall.com/2008/10/21/us_intelligence_estimates_iranian_nuke_by_february_2009.thtml

* http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/lifestyle/health/chi-biden-health-21-oct21,0,3034472.story

Joe Biden recently made a very revealing speech; it should worry every American.  The most worrisome statement is the one that comes near the end of this particular rant.  It is troubling because it either shows his complete ignorance of where he is, who he is and what is going on in his life, or he may actually be letting loose with a national secret.

As it appears on abcnews.com:

After speaking for just over a quarter of an hour, Biden noticed the media presence in the back of the small ballroom. "I probably shouldn't have said all this because it dawned on me that the press is here," he joked.

The next part of the speech makes it sound as if Biden knows something we don’t (he is Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee).  This is worrisome, once again, because he may be telegraphing an action that is planned by Israel, by the United States or known to be in the works by a terrorist organization.  If not, then he is just way too dim-witted to be Vice President because he is instilling fear of Obama’s inexperience and assuring us that the world will take advantage of that.

From abcnews.com:

"Mark my words," the Democratic vice presidential nominee warned at the second of his two Seattle fundraisers Sunday. "It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We're about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don't remember anything else I said. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy."

The following statements are way too specific, particularly the line, “Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right."  Can he really be this much of a blowhard? Or, is he more dangerous than that?

From abcnews.com:

"I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate. And he's gonna need help. And the kind of help he's gonna need is, he's gonna need you - not financially to help him - we're gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right."

The bizarre diatribe continued to assure us that something epic was going to occur.

From abcnews.com:

“Because I promise you, you all are gonna be sitting here a year from now going, 'Oh my God, why are they there in the polls? Why is the polling so down? Why is this thing so tough?' We're gonna have to make some incredibly tough decisions in the first two years. So I'm asking you now, I'm asking you now, be prepared to stick with us. Remember the faith you had at this point because you're going to have to reinforce us."

It’s apparent that some decision as already been made, or Joe’s a little more crazy than we thought.  I think the American public has a right to know which it is.  This final section should scare us all.

From abcnews.com:

"There are gonna be a lot of you who want to go, 'Whoa, wait a minute, yo, whoa, whoa, I don't know about that decision'," Biden continued. "Because if you think the decision is sound when they're made, which I believe you will when they're made, they're not likely to be as popular as they are sound. Because if they're popular, they're probably not sound."

I am worried.  What do they have planned? Or, is Biden really this dumb?

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/10/biden-to-suppor.html

Joe Biden is a dangerous and erratic man.  His recent statements may be putting Americans and/or allies in danger. 

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/10/biden-to-suppor.html

The Obama campaign has recently tried to paint McCain as man whose temperament is unstable.  Do they believe Biden is steadfast? Palin would be much better to step in should something happen to the respective Presidential candidate. 

Palin is much more serious, thoughtful and capable of keeping a secret (much of her family found out about her place on the ticket from the news).  She is also more likely to rally the country behind her and work across party lines.

Check these out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmRXH7RkCZQ&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ll_goH-aivU&feature=related

This post followed his selection:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TBNeNHHXEY

Is the colossal ego that is Joe Biden (Chair - Senate Foreign Relations Committee) giving away information that is not for public dissemination?  I would not put it passed him; he is a fool and he would do anything to get elected (and seem prescient.)

If he is giving away an attack on Iran he should end up in jail!

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/10/biden-to-suppor.html

The Washington Post claim that its endorsement of Barack Obama is mostly about Sarah Palin is boldly indefensible.

Ruth Marcus of the Washington Post said on FOX News, “This was not a choice of the lesser of two evils. We like Senator McCain and Senator Obama.” This statement was the set-up; voters are supposed to believe that the Post struggled over its decision. The Post continued the feint with, “There is any number of things to respect about what he (McCain) did.”  This line pretends to show the sincerity with which the Post admires John McCain.

In order to sell the farce that it was considering McCain, the Post needed to create a boogeyman, or in this case, a boogeywoman.  That fall gal was Governor Sarah Palin.  To construct the illusion that Palin was a disqualifier they had to ignore her accomplishments and obvious talents and concentrate on something else.  Hmm, what could that be? The editorial board of Washington’s leading paper chose to focus on some interviews by left-leaning “journalists” who should be on Obama’s payroll.

The Post doesn’t have the intellectual honesty to admit that many of the questions by Gibson/Couric were silly, a form of petty and small-minded journalism, and not typical queries asked of Vice Presidential candidates. The Post must have also ignored the debate, in which Palin did very well, answered questions more candidly than Biden, and did not make up trips to Home Depot or lunches at a restaurant that closed in the 80’s.  The Post only looked at evidence they considered damning, or they would have arrived at a different decision.

Not only did the Post use convenient and flawed logic to eliminate John McCain from consideration, it brought that consideration to the number two spot on the ticket and compared apples to oranges.  Marcus continued, “I think the difference about their inexperience is that Sarah Palin has not demonstrated what Barack Obama has on the campaign trail, which is a deep and nuanced and broad (read liberal) understanding of issues.”

So, Obama’s ability to memorize information and spew it back with flowery speech is equivalent to wisdom, but Palin’s years of executive accomplishments and efforts to fight the Alaskan Republican parties’ political machine mean nothing?  This is a strange and convoluted double standard.

The Post article stated, “Yes, we have reservations and concerns, almost inevitably, given Mr. Obama's relatively brief experience in national politics. But we also have enormous hopes.”

Are these reservations because Mr. Obama’s centrist rhetoric does not match his very liberal record?  Do the reservations come from the fact that Mr. Obama has a history of associations with extremist, America-hating radicals whom he has not had the courage to challenge?  Is hope enough of a reason to entrust the future of the country to someone whose background has not been completely vetted? Does the Post hope that Biden will not make racist comments to visiting dignitaries?

The most ridiculous claim made in the Post editorial was that Obama was “a master of substance and detail.” Not only is he often wrong, but also he deliberately lies on many occasions. So, Obama’s mistakes and lies don’t count, but Palin’s frustrations in hostile interviews count twice?

Can anyone cite an instance where the Post defended Governor Palin from the indignities that have been aimed at her?  No? That’s okay, though, the Post’s smear, and that’s what it is, is just another nail in the coffin of old-style, liberal feminism; Sarah’s the future.

The Washington Post is guilty of journalistic malpractice.

Numerous complaints of imagined racism are already starting to split the nation.  Obama must clear up these false claims or he risks beginning a new and horrible era in American race relations, especially if he should win the Presidency.

It is already inevitable that there will be numerous claims of racism by many people in the event of an Obama victory each time Obama is criticized.  The first amendment will come under considerable strain.  This is, and will continue to be, a relentless and organized attempt to stifle criticism of Obama and, more specifically, his agenda.

Are they actually saying that tying Obama to a WHITE terrorist is akin to the Willie Horton ads?*  Well, yes they are.  It’s silly, silly and shameless. (The arguments over racism in the Horton ad are also specious, but that’s for another day.)

The saddest of these pathetic and embarrassing accusations is the one by John Lewis, a Georgia Democrat and veteran of the civil rights movement, he is well aware that what he is saying is not right; it’s a shameful exaggeration at the least, and can more appropriately be called an outright incitement of racial discord.

It’s odd that when the left calls Bush a murderer, accuse our troops of (disproved) atrocities, and attacks Sarah Palin in blatantly sexist ways, that’s all fair game, but if Republicans do everything possible to bring NOT to bring race into the campaign, they are racists.  This is a VERY dangerous game and it must be stopped.

What if McCain’s VP candidate had said, on camera, to an Indian man, that it was not possible to go into a Dunkin Donuts without having an Indian accent?  How is it that Joe Biden gets away with that?**

* http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2008/10/12/2008-10-12_shameless_john_mccain_plays_the_willie_h.html

http://www.heraldonline.com/109/story/877049.html

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081012/D93OQ2SO0.html

** http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM19YOqs7hU

Check out some actual bigotry:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQalRPQ8stI

Obama is experiencing buyer’s remorse.  A quick search of youtube for Biden produced the following:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmRXH7RkCZQ&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ll_goH-aivU&feature=related

It leads to the question: Who vetted Biden?

This post followed his selection:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TBNeNHHXEY

If this were Sarah Palin there would be stories citing these posts as proof that she’s a drunken racist.