L.A. Times on the Important News from Yesterday’s Elections: Democrats Won a Couple of Races!!!!
So, did anything important happen yesterday? Let’s mosey over to the L.A. Times web site for the latest. Here’s their top headline as of 11:12 p.m. last night:
Ah, so the Big News is that Democrats won victories in California and New York!!!!1!1!!
(And, oh yeah, Virginia and New Jersey elected Republican governors. Minor point, that. Hardly worth mentioning, really.)
Thanks to JVW.
I know that I accuse the Left of projection all the time, but how often have we had to hear that Fox News is biased…from people like the folks at the LA TIMES.
They are the perfect examples of bias, and rather than “own” it, they accuse their opponents of what they themselves do.
You would think that they would have been embarrassed to write that column title. Apparently not.
Eric Blair (dd11cc) — 11/4/2009 @ 7:09 amThat’s classic. It is the real life version of the old NYT joke: “World ends – Women and children affected the most.”
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/4/2009 @ 7:10 amInteresting parsing of words in the lede. Democrats “win victories” while Republicans merely elect governors.
I’m surprised it didn’t say, “Republicans suffer defeat in key congressional races.”
Steve B (5eacf6) — 11/4/2009 @ 7:12 amThere are some sick puppies running the media. They can’t see what fools they are.
PCD (1d8b6d) — 11/4/2009 @ 7:19 amMeanwhile, Obama’s approval index under Rasmussen is just 1 point above its (to date) nadir.
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows that 28% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-one percent (41%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -13. That’s just one point above the lowest Approval Index rating yet recorded for this President.
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 11/4/2009 @ 7:19 amThe campaigns where the Republicans ran from the right and pulled in the teabagger contingent, lost. Palin, Limbaugh and Beck, lost.
Hoffman was a loon who knew nothing about local politics and didn’t care. And in Virginia McDonnell ran away from his past as a religious nutjob.
Meanwhile the Democrats picked up two house seats.
bored again (d80b5a) — 11/4/2009 @ 7:34 amAnd what is that photo? Is it a Muslim praying?
Any excuse will do to PC preen teach us rubes a lesson!
Patricia (b05e7f) — 11/4/2009 @ 7:36 amRight the winner in the election was such a genius, right,
bishop (4e0dda) — 11/4/2009 @ 7:38 am;http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20091027/NEWS03/310279938
Meanwhile the Democrats picked up two house seats.
Yeah, and one of those seats will be immediately up for re – election in a year. Time to ask the Dems the obvious question – “other than that, how’d you like the play, President Lincoln?”
I read that Chrissy and Olberdouche made not one metion of the two 800 lb. Gorillas in their midsts last evening. Talk about whistling past the graveyard.
Dmac (a964d5) — 11/4/2009 @ 7:44 ambored again still seems to be nothing but a name caller.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/4/2009 @ 7:48 amI’m not sure why I bother, but here goes.
First, your comment is not worded in a way that doesn’t seem to be consistent with your point: “The campaigns where the Republicans ran from the right and pulled in the teabagger contingent, lost. Palin, Limbaugh and Beck, lost.”
Did you mean: “The campaigns where the Republicans ran to the right and pulled in the teabagger contingent, lost. Palin, Limbaugh and Beck, lost.” ?
A major issue in NY was whether the electorate or party bosses would pick the candidate. They chose the “Chicago Way” and the party bosses picked a person who was to the left of Arlen Specter, from what I understand. That is not who the majority of Republicans want to elect, let alone Conservative Repubs or Independents. If you prefer living in a oligarchy where others who know better than you make decisions for you, be my guest.
And while the Dems and others to the Left like to speak of “tolerance” and “diversity” and “anti-hate”, it seems anyone who is not pro-choice or who is for US sovereignty in world affairs (what a thought; shocking, simply shocking!) now qualifies as part of the “far right extremists”.
Years ago we learned of the coming “Newspeak” and the dangers of it, I just wish we had a more effective way of showing it for what it is.
I will not bother with any replies from bored again unless it is logically consistent and intellectually honest.
MD in Philly (8b02c7) — 11/4/2009 @ 7:51 amIt is the real life version of the old NYT joke: “World ends – Women and children affected the most.”
SPQR, that’s not even close to being right.
It wasn’t The New York Times who originally told the joke, it was comedian Mort Sahl. His version was usually, “WORLD ENDS: WOMEN AND MINORITIES HIT HARDEST.”
Consider yourself debunked.
Official Internet Data Office (967528) — 11/4/2009 @ 7:52 amSPQR the guy is just an alphabetist. Something tells me he know very little about any issues. Just two letters.
Eric Blair (0b61b2) — 11/4/2009 @ 7:52 am“First, your comment is not worded in a way that doesn’t seem to be consistent with your point”
Oh boy, talking about ironic mistakes!
That should be: your comment is worded in a way that doesn’t seem to be consistent with your point.
So much for re-writing only part of a sentence.
MD in Philly (8b02c7) — 11/4/2009 @ 7:55 amIt looks like healthcare was a losing issue for Democrats yesterday.
OIDO, it was a joke about the NYT. I had not recalled it as a Mort Sahl (who I’m actually old enough to remember ) bit.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/4/2009 @ 8:05 amSPQR – bored again is an idiot, but it is interesting how his opinion mirrors that of EricPW.
Dmac at 9 – I think that question was addressed to Mrs. Lincoln.
Have Blue (854a6e) — 11/4/2009 @ 8:07 amWhat is interesting is that the new home page has changed its tune, and the headline is now the more reasonable “Voters give GOP a lift; Democrats a warning.” But this just brings up the question of why the paper ran last night’s article with the silly headline. It is hard not to conclude that either the reporter who wrote the story or the editor of the online edition last night (or both) specifically wanted to propose the idea that the night was overall pretty good for the Democrats. The lead story today is an analysis of last night, but the original story with the risible headline can still be found on the site.
JVW (d32e06) — 11/4/2009 @ 8:13 amNY23 – epic conservative FAIL
JEA (c2c213) — 11/4/2009 @ 8:21 amSPQR – The way I heard that joke was the NYTimes runs a teaser column head on the front page “World to End Tomorrow – Details on page A18”, The WashPost runs the headline “Women and minorities hardest hit.”
Have Blue (854a6e) — 11/4/2009 @ 8:22 am… and pulled in the teabagger contingent…
… ran away from his past as a religious nutjob.
What was Blood Alcohol Content’s third word in his moniker again? That word he got flayed on? Oh, yeah. Ironic, isn’t it?
John Hitchcock (3fd153) — 11/4/2009 @ 8:29 amJEA, do wake up a little bit. My comment to a pragmatic Conservative before the election:
Or look at my own site where I said “Hey Newt! CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?” I also said elsewhere that the conservatives were in a no-lose situation. All they had to do was come in ahead of the RNC- and NRCC-funded (R) candidate and they would win. Or did you forget the RNC and NRCC funded ads specifically attacking the conservative? What happened to the (R) in the race? She fell out and endorsed the (D). Not so special, eh?
John Hitchcock (3fd153) — 11/4/2009 @ 8:45 amComment by Have Blue — 11/4/2009 @ 8:22 am
Here is the version of the joke I heard:
The President goes on TV early one evening and announces that a giant asteroid is on a direct collision course with the Earth and that all life will be wiped out in two days. The next day, here are the headlines in the major papers:
USA Today — “All Life on Earth to End, more coverage page A23”
JVW (d32e06) — 11/4/2009 @ 8:47 amWall Street Journal — “Stocks Plummet on News of Earth’s End”
New York Times — “Earth to End, Women and Minorities Seen Hit Hardest”
We need a “whistling past the graveyard” icon to stick on headlines like this one from the LAT. News manipulation like this, so deeply ingrained that the paper produces a headline so obviously stupid without any conciousness of it’s lack of quality, is why the paper is dying.
MTF (17058c) — 11/4/2009 @ 8:49 am*Yeah, and one of those seats will be immediately up for re – election in a year.*
Er, both of them will be up for re-election. Just like all of the other House seats.
Tully (c2f070) — 11/4/2009 @ 8:52 am“What was Blood Alcohol Content’s third word in his moniker again?”
It was “Christian” but as with the rest it was a bit of a joke.
Religion doesn’t interest me much. When anyone refers to “the god that failed” my reply is simple:
Which one hasn’t?
The choice is between responsibility and its absence, and there’s no one to forgive us but our grandchildren.
bored again (d80b5a) — 11/4/2009 @ 9:00 amThere are several jokes, right there. Especially in your last line.
Eric Blair (0b61b2) — 11/4/2009 @ 9:03 amCornholed again does give up, does it?
nk (df76d4) — 11/4/2009 @ 9:16 amOops, does *not* give up
nk (df76d4) — 11/4/2009 @ 9:17 am“Religion doesn’t interest me much.”
SPC Jack Klompus (c1922b) — 11/4/2009 @ 9:25 amNor would I guess does your juvenile attempt to articulate an opinion interest anyone here much.
You know, if they just discussed Cali I would defend it. i mean to californian, arguably the most important news is local. but then to mention winning in NY more prominently than losing in NJ is just a foul.
A.W. (e7d72e) — 11/4/2009 @ 9:40 amSomeone with a talent for Photoshop could have lots of fun creating mock LA Times homepages from other dates in history:
November 8, 1994
Headline: “Democrats Feinstein, Berman, Waxman, Becerra Reelected”
Subhead: “Wilson Reelected as Governor; GOP Sweeps House and Senate”
November 6, 1984
Headline: “Democrats Gain Two Senate Seats; CA House Dems Hold Seats”
Subhead: “Reagan Wins 49 States in Reelection”
November 7, 1972
Headline: “Dems Roybal, Burke, Brown Cruise to House Wins”
Subhead: “Nixon Captures 60% of Popular Vote”
November 4, 1952
JVW (d32e06) — 11/4/2009 @ 9:42 amHeadline: “Cecil King Elected to Sixth Term in House”
Subhead: “Eisenhower Wins Presidency; GOP Takes Over House and Senate”
From Readers’ Digest in the 50’s…
They held a race between a Chevrolet and Soviet-built (sorry, forgot the name) car at a horse-racing track in Budapest…
AD - RtR/OS! (9e209a) — 11/4/2009 @ 9:45 amthe Chevrolet won by a huge margin…
Pravda headline:
Soviet Champion finishes second in International Competition, American Team finishes next-to-last!
added…
AD - RtR/OS! (9e209a) — 11/4/2009 @ 9:46 amWhat else could we expect from Pravda on Spring Street?
“Soviet Champion finishes second in International Competition, American Team finishes next-to-last!”
Comment by AD – RtR/OS! — 11/4/2009 @ 9:45 am
All the news that’s fit to print, with nothing but the truth, at that.
MD in Philly (8b02c7) — 11/4/2009 @ 10:00 amIf we are talking about headlines that the Times might choose in a similar situation, how about the London Times: “Fog in channel; Continent cut off.”
I think there are still too many Koolaid drinkers voting but there is another year of disasters and f**kups to go before the next election. These people do not learn from experience.
The latest is Oakland Mayor Ron Dellums and his taxes. Dellums is an old commie so I guess they don’t pay taxes.
Mike K (2cf494) — 11/4/2009 @ 10:16 amone of those seats will be immediately up for re – election in a year
Both of them will be up for re-election in a year. I suspect that what you meant to say was that one of them will be up for a difficult re-election battle in a year. (The other one was a foregone conclusion and will be next year, as well).
aphrael (73ebe9) — 11/4/2009 @ 10:31 amNo bias to see here. Move along.
Socratease (02c2d9) — 11/4/2009 @ 11:34 amI suspect that what you meant to say was that one of them will be up for a difficult re-election battle in a year.
Thank you for clearing that up – my bad.
Dmac (a964d5) — 11/4/2009 @ 12:18 pmIt’s sort of baffling why you’re all outraged at a headline that puts the House seats above the Gov seats in importance, but then think the correct spin is to put the Gov seats above the House seats. The LA Times ran it both ways. Neither way seems balanced.
There were four big national races. Ds won two House seats, Rs won two Governor’s seats. It’s not at all clear to me what’s more important. The House seats make a difference for the health care fight. The Gov seats play into redistricting and some local budget battles.
But it does seem pretty clear that what other people think is most important is informed more by what they think looks best for their “side” than any actual analysis of impact: tells the story they decided they hoped to tell from before the elections even happened.
Drew (d587d9) — 11/4/2009 @ 12:30 pmHow does electing two Dems (to replace a very Left Dem in CA-10, and a Center-Left Rep in NY-23) effect the vote in the House on Health-Care?
AD - RtR/OS! (9e209a) — 11/4/2009 @ 12:39 pmThat vote is a slam-dunk for the Majority; whereas, the loss of two State-Houses by the Dems to the GOP makes all of those Blue-Dog Dems in the House start to look over their shoulders to try to identify the foot-steps they hear in the night, plus it all but assures that Health-Care goes absolutely nowhere in the Senate, this year or next (an Election Year).
This matter (Clinton/Obama-Care) is probably dead for another 10-15 years.
Wonder where that troll is that wanted to bet about the headlines until I called him on it?
JD (2a7d49) — 11/4/2009 @ 12:39 pm