Obama Gets New Plane, Disses New Yorker Writer, And Still Apparently Hates America

"Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others."

12 years after "The Simpsons" did it we're LIVING it.

Is it too much to ask people to oppose candidates based on issues?

reposting these commenters dumbass quotes gives them more attention than they deserve.

and yea, albany, wow at the simpsons eerie prediction.

yea, well as long as it's clearly a comedic "we're pointing and laughing at you" context. which, i suppose this is. crazy sauce indeed.

This is why democracy can't work in the long run: too many idiots.

If the chance to elect a lifelong philosopher king ever comes about I will gladly support him.

When confronted with quotes like this, people are so quick to complain about the mobocracy and how everyone who votes is functionally retarded...

but when confronted with the reality of the electoral college, the purpose of which is to protect the people from themselves, we complain that it isn't democratic enough.

Which is it?

but when confronted with the reality of the electoral college, the purpose of which is to protect the people from themselves, we complain that it isn't democratic enough.

Without a trace of snark: We're a republic, not a democracy. A democratic republic, to be sure, hence the combination of the electoral college and popular vote.

The electoral college isn't about protecting the people from themselves as much as protecting smaller states from being ridden roughshod by larger more populous ones.

Granted, the institution is rustyaround the edges and in close elections it gives us sometimes...unsatisfying results. But with a straight democratic vote California and New York set the national agenda.

Surest way to ensure a 2nd American Civil War.

I have to laugh when reading comments like that. Every time I hear about that damn flag pin I think of Kramer not wearing the Aids pin. One has to wonder if McCain and his boys are gonna rough Obama up after the first debate....

Albany:

If we had a popular vote the urban areas would dominate the rural ones. I don't think it would break down by like, largest state (although the two would certainly intersect).

Marcus: I saw that too (I think on wonkette), but Obama is really making an effort to win in states that haven't gone democratic in years, he is really running a different type of campaign so I feel that the conventional wisdom on predicting campaigns is sort of useless.

If we had a popular vote the urban areas would dominate the rural ones. I don't think it would break down by like, largest state (although the two would certainly intersect)

Yes. California has several cities with populations over 1 million (LA, San Diego, San Jose) and New York City has a population of nearly 10 million.

But what issues affect Angelinos and New Yorkers don't necessarily intersect with people in Nebraska, Iowa and Cleveland.

If politicians don't have to grub for votes in an area, they won't.

Those "rural areas" produce the food that allows cities to survive. Ignoring their needs and issues imperils the whole country.

As a Harvard graduate and as a black man, I would have thought Obama would have known a little something about probable cause & unlawful search and seizure. His pro-FISA stance makes my head spin.

That flag pin isn't a test of patriotism - just look at his FISA vote.

That's not the kind of change I can believe in.

I totally agree. I think going to a straight popular vote is a terrible idea and so should all of you judging by the comments on this board (for drastically different reasons obvs).

Populism and snobbery all in one package. Convenient.

The electoral college isn't about protecting the people from themselves as much as protecting smaller states from being ridden roughshod by larger more populous ones.

Ironically enough, the more populous states are completely screwed by the Electoral College. Wyoming has an EC vote for every 174k citizens. By comparison, Texas has one for every 703k citizens. Now consider that most states with high populations lean Democratic and most states with low populations lean Republican.

Re Ryan Lizza: weren't there 200 reporters requesting 50 spots? How are you sure that Lizza was not "denied" a seat for the same reason the other 149 were denied a seat: ie, not enough room on the plane?

I haven't read it, but from the accounts I've read, the article Ryan Lizza wrote about Obama was flattering without fawning.

That would be like completely innappropriate and totally off-topic. I am repsecting the board, as you can see through my insightful comments.

I do not need to stoop to your level. But I have the ammo and it is gross.

Hey Chicagoist.

Would kindly remove your brown nose from Obama's rear end? He doesn't sh-t gold nuggets, you know.

THE MEDIA, CONTROL AND BALANCE
By Ronn Torossian, President & CEO, 5W Public Relations

Working in public relations and, in particular, crisis management, there is a tremendous balancing act between projecting clients’ images and agendas and, at the same time, protecting them – essentially keeping the press at bay. Often, as it is, the purpose of PR and wrangling with the media is to encourage positive coverage for whomever or whatever you represent. If the story is not going to be positive, then it is best just not to do it. The job of a good PR person is to protect his clients and make them look their best in the media and in public.

It is for this reason that I found myself agreeing with the recent Obama campaign's decision to ban a reporter deemed to be from a publication believed to be less than objective for Obama from his press plane on this week’s International “foreign policy” trip. Let’s face it, there’s no shortage of reporters wanting to travel with the presidential candidate – as the campaign received 200 requests for press seats on the plane, of which they were able to grant only 40 – so why grant space to a publication who has previously hurt the campaign, and who may skew coverage in place of someone less inclined to do so? It is hard to imagine the New York Yankees allowing a Boston-minded sports reporter unfettered locker room access.

Candidates and clients as well, offer access to media with the hope, and perhaps even the expectation that media will present a positive narrative. Yet, anyone worth his salt in public relations knows all to well that media access by its very nature presents the possibility of either a good or a bad story. So, if there is choice, why ante-up with media deemed to be biased against your position when there are so many other journalists one can gamble on to better the odds?

Equally as reporters at the top tier publications want exclusive information, unique off the record comments and the like, so too must there be a very fair and real expectation for them that if they present a negative or seemingly prejudicial story then the possibility of being excluded is very real – especially when there is a major issue at stake, like a presidential election, and especially where the candidate has the luxury of choosing any media he prefers. Indeed, he cannot avoid bad coverage from someone inclined to do so, but he does not need to offer a seat on his plane.

The banned reporter in question, Ryan Lizza of New Yorker Magazine learned that Obama had earned a reputation of "'you're not going to punk me, you're not going to roll me over, you're not going to jam me.'"[i][i] This is not an issue of Freedom of the Press; Lizza can write what he wants, but Obama is not obligated to open his arms in welcome. Outrage by media over such policies is also hypocritical, as stated in The Huffington Post, “Wow. So it's gonna be like that, is it? Retribution for unfavorable coverage is a chilling thing to contemplate.” No, it is not chilling – it is valid. As journalists are arbiters of fate, they should expect that those on the receiving end of their opinions or ideals be cautious.

I find myself agreeing with this statement from Anita Dunn, an Obama advisor, “The press corps wouldn’t be doing its job it if weren’t demanding more access than we’re willing to give,” Ms. Dunn said. “We wouldn’t be doing our job if we didn’t occasionally irritate the press.”[ii][ii]

I understand those of us in the public relations business who feels that media must not be allowed to simply run rampant over clients - especially those who garner tremendous media attention. It does not mean that we should not cooperate with media – We do, but while we would love totally positive coverage, we generally seek what we can expect to be fair and objective.

[i][i] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/21/obamas-revenge-emnew-york_n_113969.html
[ii][ii] http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/19/us/politics/19campaign.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

You Chigagoist commenters are surprisingly decent and polite compared to Gothamist ones! At least from what I see. I'm really impressed.

Bravo!

And I don't see why a flag decal or pin should make someone change their vote one way or another. Anyway, we all know Obama's american, and so do all the other airplanes. Does he have to remind us every two seconds? Like we forgot?

I mean, it's not as if he's wearing another country's pin! Now that would be something to get upset about!