Relationships - World-of-Newave.info World-of-Newave.info http://www.world-of-newave.info/ 2008-10-11T22:21:03Z Latest news and articles about Relationships Copyright (c)2004-2008.§/Newave SARL. All rights reserved. {ISSUES > BIAS AND BALANCE} - Media Matters: The media's enduring pro-McCain double standard It isn't surprising that the conventional wisdom is that the news media have turned on Sen. John McCain. After all, decades of attacks from conservatives have conditioned reporters to believe that they are biased against Republicans -- even when there is scant evidence in the reporting to support such claims. And the McCain campaign has launched an all-out assault on the media, complaining relentlessly about the coverage its candidate has gotten. On top of all that, McCain historically has been the recipient of the most favorable media coverage of any politician in modern American history. Reporters spent years all but offering to peel McCain a grape. So, just as the media judge a candidate to have "won" a debate if s/he "exceeds expectations," the fact that McCain's coverage hasn't been as hagiographic as expected has led many to conclude that it has actually been unfairly negative. The truth is that when John McCain says "jump," the media still ask, "How high?" Think about this: When was the last time McCain or his campaign has wanted the news media to focus on something, and they have refused? From "lipstick on a pig" to Bill Ayers, the media have scampered after whatever mud McCain has flung, like a puppy dog chasing a stick thrown by its master. Sure, sometimes they have pointed out that McCain is lying -- and that's tremendous progress for a profession that has spent a decade flatly asserting McCain's honesty. But -- as I've explained in the past -- even as they've debunked McCain's claims, they've too often privileged the lie by allowing those claims to drive their coverage. And, increasingly, they uncritically quote McCain campaign attacks on Sen. Barack Obama for things McCain himself has done. When a campaign does something like this, the media often point out the hypocrisy, and the attack backfires. But those rules don't apply to John McCain. So when John and Cindy McCain attack Barack Obama for what they describe as a vote to "cut off the funds for the troops," the news media dutifully repeat the charge -- without noting that, by the same logic, McCain also voted to cut off funds for the troops: Obama voted against a funding bill that did not include a timeline for withdrawal; McCain voted against a bill that did include a timeline for withdrawal. The funding vote has been the subject of some of McCain's nastiest attacks recently. Cindy McCain, for example, claimed Obama's "vote to not fund my son when he was serving sent a cold chill through my body" and lectured: "I would suggest that Senator Obama change shoes with me for just one day. ... I suggest he take a day and go watch our fine young men and women deploy." You would think, then, that media reporting Cindy McCain's purported indignation would note that John McCain also voted against funding. They haven't. Indeed, some have falsely stated the opposite -- that McCain did not cast such a vote. You might even think reporters would ask the McCain campaign if Cindy McCain got a "cold chill" when her husband voted "to not fund [her] son." But there is no indication that any reporter has done so. But the best indication that McCain has not yet truly "lost his 'base,' " as The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder put it this week, is the glaring media double standard in covering the two presidential candidates' controversial relationships. Let's start with Bill Ayers, since the news media have spent much of the week obliging McCain's efforts to make him the focus of the campaign. As an activist in the 1960s -- when Barack Obama was a young child -- Bill Ayers was a member of the Weathermen, a group of radical activists who launched a series of violent demonstrations and bombings in protest of the Vietnam War. Ayers is now a professor at the University of Illinois in Chicago and a school reform advocate. During Obama's first campaign, Ayers hosted a coffee for him, and the two men have served together on the board of a school reform effort funded by a foundation chaired by Leonore Annenberg, who has endorsed John McCain. The New York Times concluded that Obama and Ayers "do not appear to have been close," and Obama has denounced Ayers' actions as a member of the Weathermen. A search* of the Nexis database found that more than 4,500 news reports so far this year have mentioned Obama and Ayers -- more than 1,800 this week alone. Now: G. Gordon Liddy. Liddy served four and a half years in prison for his role in the break-ins at the Watergate and at Daniel Ellsberg's psychologist's office. He has acknowledged preparing to kill someone during the Ellsberg break-in "if necessary." He plotted to kill journalist Jack Anderson. He plotted with a "gangland figure" to murder Howard Hunt in order to thwart an investigation. He plotted to firebomb the Brookings Institution. He used Nazi terminology to outline a plan to kidnap "leftist guerillas" at the 1972 GOP convention. And Liddy's bad acts were not confined to the early 1970s. In the 1990s, he instructed his radio audience on how to shoot Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms agents ("Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests." In case anyone missed the subtlety of his point, Liddy also insisted: "Kill the sons of bitches.") During Bill Clinton's presidency, Liddy boasted that he named his shooting targets after the Clintons. What does Liddy have to do with the presidential election? As Media Matters has noted: Liddy has donated $5,000 to McCain's campaigns since 1998, including $1,000 in February 2008. In addition, McCain has appeared on Liddy's radio show during the presidential campaign, including as recently as May. An online video labeled, "John McCain On The G. Gordon Liddy Show 11/8/07," includes a discussion between Liddy and McCain, whom Liddy described as an "old friend." During the segment, McCain praised Liddy's "adherence to the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great," said he was "proud" of Liddy, and said that "it's always a pleasure for me to come on your program." McCain even backed Liddy's son's congressional bid in 2000 -- a campaign that relied heavily on the elder Liddy's history. To sum up: John McCain is "proud" of his "old friend" Gordon Liddy -- an old friend who plotted to kill one of the most respected journalists in American history, and who urged listeners to kill federal agents and advised them on how to do so. McCain campaigned for Liddy's son, and Liddy has even hosted a fundraiser for McCain at his home. So McCain's relationship with Liddy is pretty much a direct parallel to Obama's relationship with Ayers. Except that McCain and Liddy have apparently spent time together more recently than Obama and Ayers. And Liddy's extremist activities continued well into the 1990s, at least. And Liddy says he and McCain are "old friends," while The New York Times says Obama and Ayers aren't close. And Obama has never said Ayers adheres to "the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great." Other than all that, it's a direct parallel. Yet even as they obsess over Barack Obama and Bill Ayers -- just as the McCain campaign tells them to -- the news media have all but ignored John McCain's close ties to Gordon Liddy. A Nexis search** finds fewer than 100 news reports that have mentioned McCain and Liddy this year. As Chicago Tribune columnist Steve Chapman -- who has criticized Obama's relationship with Ayers -- has noted: Liddy, now a conservative radio host, has never expressed regret for this attempt to subvert the Constitution. Nor has he developed any respect for the law. ... Yet none of this bothers McCain. Liddy has contributed thousands of dollars to his campaigns, held a fundraiser for McCain at his home and hosted the senator on his radio show, where McCain said, "I'm proud of you." Exactly which part of Liddy's record is McCain proud of? While Obama has gotten lots of scrutiny for his connection to Ayers, McCain has never had to explain his association with Liddy. If he can't defend it, he should admit as much. And if he thinks he can defend it, let him. To repeat: 2008 news reports that mention Obama and Ayers: more than 4,500. 2008 news reports that mention McCain and Liddy: fewer than 100. Incredibly, The Atlantic's Ambinder today suggests that the media have not covered Ayers: "To truly drive Ayers into the public conversation, to trick what they consider an irredeemably biased press corps into biting, McCain has three vehicles gassed up and ready to go. ... So far, McCain has done none of those things." There are 1,800 Nexis hits for Barack Obama and Bill Ayers in the past week, and yet Marc Ambinder thinks the media have not bitten on the Ayers "story" -- and that McCain, who is running ads about Ayers, isn't "really serious" about pushing it, anyway. Even Steve Schmidt would likely be too embarrassed to try to claim that the media have not covered Bill Ayers. Incidentally, Ambinder doesn't seem to have ever mentioned McCain's relationship to Liddy. Not only have the media avoided stand-alone reports on McCain and Liddy, they consistently fail to bring up the connection when reporting on McCain's attacks on Obama's ties to Ayers, or in interviews with McCain staff who bring up Ayers. The McCain/Liddy relationship is such an obvious parallel -- except arguably much worse -- that it's hard to imagine how any evenhanded journalist could possibly justify ignoring it. Yet it happens again and again. And, needless to say, McCain aides do not get badgered about Liddy the way Time's Mark Halperin badgered Obama aide Robert Gibbs about Ayers. Just this morning, NBC's Chuck Todd said he is "sure" Ayers will come up during the final presidential debate next week, adding that moderator Bob Schieffer "may feel no choice but to bring it up" in light of the "TV ads" the McCain campaign and Republican National Committee are running. Setting aside the absurdity of the suggestion that a debate moderator is compelled to bring up a topic simply because John McCain is running ads about it, if Schieffer does ask about Ayers, basic fairness demands that he ask McCain about Liddy as well. OK ... moving on. How about controversial religious figures? Earlier this year, Media Matters showed that The New York Times and The Washington Post had published a total of 161 articles, editorials, and opinion pieces that mentioned Barack Obama and Jeremiah Wright -- and only 12 that mentioned John McCain and John Hagee. That disparity wasn't unique to the Times and the Post -- and it hasn't evened out over time. 161 to 12. Land deals? Barack Obama once bought a parcel of land from a controversial donor named Tony Rezko. Obama paid more than the land's assessed value -- but that hasn't stopped the news media from suggesting Obama had an improper relationship with Rezko. Comparatively little attention has been paid to John McCain's relationship with real estate developer Donald Diamond. Diamond, a co-chair of McCain's campaign finance committee, has raised more than $250,000 for McCain's presidential bid and is a "close personal friend" and longtime political patron. For his part, McCain has sponsored two bills sought by Diamond that helped the developer gain what The New York Times described as "millions of dollars and thousands of acres" of land. And McCain helped Diamond buy another parcel of land from the U.S. Army -- a deal that helped Diamond turn a $20 million profit. The Washington Post and USA Today have identified other land deals McCain has facilitated as senator that have benefited some of his biggest donors and fundraisers. Yet a Media Matters review last month found that five national newspapers had run a total of 39 articles, editorials, and opinion pieces that mentioned Obama and Rezko -- but only seven that mentioned McCain and his donors' land deals: [S]ince The New York Times' initial April 22 article [about McCain and Diamond], the land deals have been mentioned in only six additional news articles, editorials, or opinion pieces in the Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, or The Washington Post, and have yet to be mentioned on any evening network news program. By contrast, during the same time period, 39 news articles, editorials, or opinion pieces in those papers have collectively mentioned Obama and Rezko; and the evening news broadcasts have collectively mentioned Obama and Rezko in five reports. 39 to 7. And, of course, there's always Charles Keating. The news media have done their best to ignore McCain's involvement in the Keating Five -- and, when they have mentioned it, they've done so by parroting the McCain-friendly storyline that the scandal turned the Arizona senator into the World's Greatest Reformer. Even this week, after the Obama campaign drew attention to McCain's involvement in the Keating Five with a Web page and a 13-minute documentary featuring one of the regulators McCain pressured on behalf of his political benefactor, the media have paid far more attention to Obama's relationship with Bill Ayers than to McCain's relationship with Keating. And when they have mentioned Keating, they have often questioned the propriety of the Obama campaign's decision to bring up the subject. Remember: Barack Obama didn't have anything to do with Bill Ayers' wrongdoing. He was a young child at the time. McCain did have something to do with Keating's wrongdoing -- without McCain, the scandal would have been called the Keating Four, not the Keating Five. And yet the media are quick to dismiss the Keating matter. When the topic came up on MSNBC earlier this week, Andrea Mitchell dismissed it as having occurred 20 years ago. Well, sure. But McCain was involved in it 20 years ago, unlike Bill Ayers' controversial activities, which occurred closer to 40 years ago, and which Barack Obama didn't have anything to do with. The American people have made clear that they think the most important consideration in deciding who to vote for is the economy. An astounding 52 percent of Americans call "the economy and jobs" the "most important" issue to them in this election, according to the latest CBS/New York Times poll. Terrorism and national security came in a distant second, with only 11 percent. John McCain and his campaign have made clear that they do not want the last few weeks of this campaign to be about the economy, the war in Iraq, Afghanistan, health care, the housing crisis, or the Constitution. They want it to be about personal associations. Incredibly, much of the news media have sided with John McCain in treating Bill Ayers and ACORN as the most important topic facing the nation. Even worse, they are scrutinizing only Obama's relationships, not McCain's. It's bad enough that they're letting McCain, rather than the American people, set the parameters of the debate. The fact that they aren't applying those parameters to both candidates equally is an inexcusable double-standard. And it's evidence that John McCain retains the support of his "base" -- the media. * Conducted 10/9/08 using the search terms Barack Obama and ((Bill or William) w/2 Ayers ** Conducted 10/9/08 using the search terms John McCain and Gordon Liddy http://articles.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/bias-and-balance/media-matters-the-media-s-enduring-pro-mccain-double-20081050515.htm 2008-10-10T22:43:36Z 2008-10-10T22:43:36Z Mediamatters.Org http://mediamatters.org/items/200810100015 Media Matters: The media's enduring pro-McCain double standard {new window}   Mediamatters.Org - It isn't surprising that the conventional wisdom is that the news media have turned on Sen. John McCain. After all, decades of attacks from conservatives have conditioned reporters to believe that they are biased against Republicans -- even when there is scant evidence in the reporting to support such claims. And the McCain campaign has launched an all-out assault on the media, complaining relentlessly about the coverage its candidate has gotten. On top of all that, McCain historically has been the recipient of the most favorable media coverage of any politician in modern American history. Reporters spent years all but offering to peel McCain a grape. So, just as the media judge a candidate to have "won" a debate if s/he "exceeds expectations," the fact that McCain's coverage hasn't been as hagiographic as expected has led many to conclude that it has actually been unfairly negative. The truth is that when John McCain says "jump," the media still ask, "How high?" Think about this: When was the last time McCain or his campaign has wanted the news media to focus on something, and they have refused? From "lipstick on a pig" to Bill Ayers, the media have scampered after whatever mud McCain has flung, like a puppy dog chasing a stick thrown by its master. Sure, sometimes they have pointed out that McCain is lying -- and that's tremendous progress for a profession that has spent a decade flatly asserting McCain's honesty. But -- as I've explained in the past -- even as they've debunked McCain's claims, they've too often privileged the lie by allowing those claims to drive their coverage. And, increasingly, they uncritically quote McCain campaign attacks on Sen. Barack Obama for things McCain himself has done. When a campaign does something like this, the media often point out the hypocrisy, and the attack backfires. But those rules don't apply to John McCain. So when John and Cindy McCain attack Barack Obama for what they describe as a vote to "cut off the funds for the troops," the news media dutifully repeat the charge -- without noting that, by the same logic, McCain also voted to cut off funds for the troops: Obama voted against a funding bill that did not include a timeline for withdrawal; McCain voted against a bill that did include a timeline for withdrawal. The funding vote has been the subject of some of McCain's nastiest attacks recently. Cindy McCain, for example, claimed Obama's "vote to not fund my son when he was serving sent a cold chill through my body" and lectured: "I would suggest that Senator Obama change shoes with me for just one day. ... I suggest he take a day and go watch our fine young men and women deploy." You would think, then, that media reporting Cindy McCain's purported indignation would note that John McCain also voted against funding. They haven't. Indeed, some have falsely stated the opposite -- that McCain did not cast such a vote. You might even think reporters would ask the McCain campaign if Cindy McCain got a "cold chill" when her husband voted "to not fund [her] son." But there is no indication that any reporter has done so. But the best indication that McCain has not yet truly "lost his 'base,' " as The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder put it this week, is the glaring media double standard in covering the two presidential candidates' controversial relationships. Let's start with Bill Ayers, since the news media have spent much of the week obliging McCain's efforts to make him the focus of the campaign. As an activist in the 1960s -- when Barack Obama was a young child -- Bill Ayers was a member of the Weathermen, a group of radical activists who launched a series of violent demonstrations and bombings in protest of the Vietnam War. Ayers is now a professor at the University of Illinois in Chicago and a school reform advocate. During Obama's first campaign, Ayers hosted a coffee for him, and the two men have served together on the board of a school reform effort funded by a foundation chaired by Leonore Annenberg, who has endorsed John McCain. The New York Times concluded that Obama and Ayers "do not appear to have been close," and Obama has denounced Ayers' actions as a member of the Weathermen. A search* of the Nexis database found that more than 4,500 news reports so far this year have mentioned Obama and Ayers -- more than 1,800 this week alone. Now: G. Gordon Liddy. Liddy served four and a half years in prison for his role in the break-ins at the Watergate and at Daniel Ellsberg's psychologist's office. He has acknowledged preparing to kill someone during the Ellsberg break-in "if necessary." He plotted to kill journalist Jack Anderson. He plotted with a "gangland figure" to murder Howard Hunt in order to thwart an investigation. He plotted to firebomb the Brookings Institution. He used Nazi terminology to outline a plan to kidnap "leftist guerillas" at the 1972 GOP convention. And Liddy's bad acts were not confined to the early 1970s. In the 1990s, he instructed his radio audience on how to shoot Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms agents ("Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests." In case anyone missed the subtlety of his point, Liddy also insisted: "Kill the sons of bitches.") During Bill Clinton's presidency, Liddy boasted that he named his shooting targets after the Clintons. What does Liddy have to do with the presidential election? As Media Matters has noted: Liddy has donated $5,000 to McCain's campaigns since 1998, including $1,000 in February 2008. In addition, McCain has appeared on Liddy's radio show during the presidential campaign, including as recently as May. An online video labeled, "John McCain On The G. Gordon Liddy Show 11/8/07," includes a discussion between Liddy and McCain, whom Liddy described as an "old friend." During the segment, McCain praised Liddy's "adherence to the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great," said he was "proud" of Liddy, and said that "it's always a pleasure for me to come on your program." McCain even backed Liddy's son's congressional bid in 2000 -- a campaign that relied heavily on the elder Liddy's history. To sum up: John McCain is "proud" of his "old friend" Gordon Liddy -- an old friend who plotted to kill one of the most respected journalists in American history, and who urged listeners to kill federal agents and advised them on how to do so. McCain campaigned for Liddy's son, and Liddy has even hosted a fundraiser for McCain at his home. So McCain's relationship with Liddy is pretty much a direct parallel to Obama's relationship with Ayers. Except that McCain and Liddy have apparently spent time together more recently than Obama and Ayers. And Liddy's extremist activities continued well into the 1990s, at least. And Liddy says he and McCain are "old friends," while The New York Times says Obama and Ayers aren't close. And Obama has never said Ayers adheres to "the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great." Other than all that, it's a direct parallel. Yet even as they obsess over Barack Obama and Bill Ayers -- just as the McCain campaign tells them to -- the news media have all but ignored John McCain's close ties to Gordon Liddy. A Nexis search** finds fewer than 100 news reports that have mentioned McCain and Liddy this year. As Chicago Tribune columnist Steve Chapman -- who has criticized Obama's relationship with Ayers -- has noted: Liddy, now a conservative radio host, has never expressed regret for this attempt to subvert the Constitution. Nor has he developed any respect for the law. ... Yet none of this bothers McCain. Liddy has contributed thousands of dollars to his campaigns, held a fundraiser for McCain at his home and hosted the senator on his radio show, where McCain said, "I'm proud of you." Exactly which part of Liddy's record is McCain proud of? While Obama has gotten lots of scrutiny for his connection to Ayers, McCain has never had to explain his association with Liddy. If he can't defend it, he should admit as much. And if he thinks he can defend it, let him. To repeat: 2008 news reports that mention Obama and Ayers: more than 4,500. 2008 news reports that mention McCain and Liddy: fewer than 100. Incredibly, The Atlantic's Ambinder today suggests that the media have not covered Ayers: "To truly drive Ayers into the public conversation, to trick what they consider an irredeemably biased press corps into biting, McCain has three vehicles gassed up and ready to go. ... So far, McCain has done none of those things." There are 1,800 Nexis hits for Barack Obama and Bill Ayers in the past week, and yet Marc Ambinder thinks the media have not bitten on the Ayers "story" -- and that McCain, who is running ads about Ayers, isn't "really serious" about pushing it, anyway. Even Steve Schmidt would likely be too embarrassed to try to claim that the media have not covered Bill Ayers. Incidentally, Ambinder doesn't seem to have ever mentioned McCain's relationship to Liddy. Not only have the media avoided stand-alone reports on McCain and Liddy, they consistently fail to bring up the connection when reporting on McCain's attacks on Obama's ties to Ayers, or in interviews with McCain staff who bring up Ayers. The McCain/Liddy relationship is such an obvious parallel -- except arguably much worse -- that it's hard to imagine how any evenhanded journalist could possibly justify ignoring it. Yet it happens again and again. And, needless to say, McCain aides do not get badgered about Liddy the way Time's Mark Halperin badgered Obama aide Robert Gibbs about Ayers. Just this morning, NBC's Chuck Todd said he is "sure" Ayers will come up during the final presidential debate next week, adding that moderator Bob Schieffer "may feel no choice but to bring it up" in light of the "TV ads" the McCain campaign and Republican National Committee are running. Setting aside the absurdity of the suggestion that a debate moderator is compelled to bring up a topic simply because John McCain is running ads about it, if Schieffer does ask about Ayers, basic fairness demands that he ask McCain about Liddy as well. OK ... moving on. How about controversial religious figures? Earlier this year, Media Matters showed that The New York Times and The Washington Post had published a total of 161 articles, editorials, and opinion pieces that mentioned Barack Obama and Jeremiah Wright -- and only 12 that mentioned John McCain and John Hagee. That disparity wasn't unique to the Times and the Post -- and it hasn't evened out over time. 161 to 12. Land deals? Barack Obama once bought a parcel of land from a controversial donor named Tony Rezko. Obama paid more than the land's assessed value -- but that hasn't stopped the news media from suggesting Obama had an improper relationship with Rezko. Comparatively little attention has been paid to John McCain's relationship with real estate developer Donald Diamond. Diamond, a co-chair of McCain's campaign finance committee, has raised more than $250,000 for McCain's presidential bid and is a "close personal friend" and longtime political patron. For his part, McCain has sponsored two bills sought by Diamond that helped the developer gain what The New York Times described as "millions of dollars and thousands of acres" of land. And McCain helped Diamond buy another parcel of land from the U.S. Army -- a deal that helped Diamond turn a $20 million profit. The Washington Post and USA Today have identified other land deals McCain has facilitated as senator that have benefited some of his biggest donors and fundraisers. Yet a Media Matters review last month found that five national newspapers had run a total of 39 articles, editorials, and opinion pieces that mentioned Obama and Rezko -- but only seven that mentioned McCain and his donors' land deals: [S]ince The New York Times' initial April 22 article [about McCain and Diamond], the land deals have been mentioned in only six additional news articles, editorials, or opinion pieces in the Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, or The Washington Post, and have yet to be mentioned on any evening network news program. By contrast, during the same time period, 39 news articles, editorials, or opinion pieces in those papers have collectively mentioned Obama and Rezko; and the evening news broadcasts have collectively mentioned Obama and Rezko in five reports. 39 to 7. And, of course, there's always Charles Keating. The news media have done their best to ignore McCain's involvement in the Keating Five -- and, when they have mentioned it, they've done so by parroting the McCain-friendly storyline that the scandal turned the Arizona senator into the World's Greatest Reformer. Even this week, after the Obama campaign drew attention to McCain's involvement in the Keating Five with a Web page and a 13-minute documentary featuring one of the regulators McCain pressured on behalf of his political benefactor, the media have paid far more attention to Obama's relationship with Bill Ayers than to McCain's relationship with Keating. And when they have mentioned Keating, they have often questioned the propriety of the Obama campaign's decision to bring up the subject. Remember: Barack Obama didn't have anything to do with Bill Ayers' wrongdoing. He was a young child at the time. McCain did have something to do with Keating's wrongdoing -- without McCain, the scandal would have been called the Keating Four, not the Keating Five. And yet the media are quick to dismiss the Keating matter. When the topic came up on MSNBC earlier this week, Andrea Mitchell dismissed it as having occurred 20 years ago. Well, sure. But McCain was involved in it 20 years ago, unlike Bill Ayers' controversial activities, which occurred closer to 40 years ago, and which Barack Obama didn't have anything to do with. The American people have made clear that they think the most important consideration in deciding who to vote for is the economy. An astounding 52 percent of Americans call "the economy and jobs" the "most important" issue to them in this election, according to the latest CBS/New York Times poll. Terrorism and national security came in a distant second, with only 11 percent. John McCain and his campaign have made clear that they do not want the last few weeks of this campaign to be about the economy, the war in Iraq, Afghanistan, health care, the housing crisis, or the Constitution. They want it to be about personal associations. Incredibly, much of the news media have sided with John McCain in treating Bill Ayers and ACORN as the most important topic facing the nation. Even worse, they are scrutinizing only Obama's relationships, not McCain's. It's bad enough that they're letting McCain, rather than the American people, set the parameters of the debate. The fact that they aren't applying those parameters to both candidates equally is an inexcusable double-standard. And it's evidence that John McCain retains the support of his "base" -- the media. * Conducted 10/9/08 using the search terms Barack Obama and ((Bill or William) w/2 Ayers ** Conducted 10/9/08 using the search terms John McCain and Gordon Liddy
Media Matters - Media Matters: The media's enduring pro-McCain double standard {...}
Published: October 10, 2008, 10:43 pm - Indexed: October 11, 2008, 10:39 am - Page Size: 27KB
Category: Society > Issues > Business > Media > Bias and Balance

]]> {INTERNET > W} - Memeorandum Colors: Visualizing Political Bias with Greasemonkey Like the rest of the world, I've been completely obsessed with the presidential election and nonstop news coverage. My drug of choice? Gabe Rivera's Memeorandum, the political sister site of Techmeme, which constantly surfaces the most controversial stories being discussed by political bloggers. While most political blogs are extremely partisan, their biases aren't immediately obvious to outsiders like me. I wanted to see, at a glance, how conservative or liberal the blogs were without clicking through to every article. With the help of del.icio.us founder Joshua Schachter, we used a recommendation algorithm to score every blog on Memeorandum based on their linking activity in the last three months. Then I wrote a Greasemonkey script to pull that information out of Google Spreadsheets, and colorize Memeorandum on-the-fly. Left-leaning blogs are blue and right-leaning blogs are red, with darker colors representing strong biases. Check out the screenshot below, and install the Greasemonkey script or standalone Firefox extension to try it yourself. Note: The colors don't necessarily represent each blogger's personal views or biases. It's a reflection of their linking activity. The algorithm looks at the stories that blogger's linked to before, relative to all other bloggers, and groups them accordingly. People that link to things that only conservatives find interesting will be classified as bright red, even if they are personally moderate or liberal, and vice-versa. The algorithm can't read minds, so don't be offended if you feel misrepresented. It's only looking at the data. For example, while Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight may be a Democrat, he has a tendency to link to stories conservative bloggers are discussing slightly more often than liberal bloggers, so he's shaded very slightly red. (Geeks can read on for more details about how this works.) Install it! Greasemonkey users: memeorandum_colors.user.js Standalone Firefox Extension: memeorandumcolors.xpi After it's installed, go to any page on Memeorandum and wait a second for the coloring to appear. I hope you like it! How It Works (Nerds Only) The first challenge was getting the data. I emailed Gabe Rivera, and he graciously gave offered a full dump of every blog listed on Memeorandum. This didn't include relationship data, showing which blogs linked to which stories, so Joshua and I crawled the site instead. Using the historical archives, we took a snapshot of the site's homepage for every six hours for the last three months — about 360 total. With a Python script, Joshua scraped the links from the saved HTML to get the link data. Armed with the spreadsheet of over 50,000 blogger-to-article relationships, we needed to somehow find correlations in the data. We used a method called Singular Value Decomposition (SVD), a method to break down complex data in matrices to its component parts. It's extremely flexible, used in applications as diverse as weather prediction, movie recommendations, genome modeling, clustering search results, and image compression. Inspired by GovTrack's use of SVD to visualize the political spectrum for members of Congress, we attempted to do the same thing for political blogs. Here's how Joshua describes the methodology: I created an adjacency matrix, with discussion sites as the rows and the discussed articles as the columns. When a site discusses an article on Memeorandum, we fill in a 1 in that cell; everything else is left as zero. Every site becomes a very high dimensionality vector into link-space. This is very difficult to visualize. (Unless your monitor displays many dimensions. Mine only has two.) Since a bunch of sites tend to link to the same groups in the same way, we don't need all those dimensions. So, very roughly, what SVD lets us do is reproject the points in space into a new coordinate system, so that the points that are similar are near each other and we know which dimensions are most important. We can take just the most significant ones. We could use two or three for a nifty visualization, but we wanted to show the bias as a spectrum, which is just a single dimension. In this case, the second most significant dimension (v2) ends up corresponding to linking similarity. The first dimension (v1) corresponds to how much linking they do in general. Curiously, when running the exact same analysis on Techmeme, the second most significant dimension ends up being Business vs. Technology. (The conservatives/liberals of the geek world?) Did you get all that? If you'd like to try to figure out what the other dimensions represent, take a look at columns v3-v5 on the full spreadsheet below and let us know if you come up with anything. (We didn't have much luck.) Once we'd realized that the second dimension (v2) highly correlated with political leaning, we uploaded the spreadsheet into Google Spreadsheets and created a new column with a normalized score, scaled between a range of -1 and 1. The spreadsheet, with all of the sources and their respective scores, is below. (Download the Excel document or CSV, if you want to sort or filter the data.) After deriving the scores, writing the Greasemonkey was straightforward. Google offers XML feeds for Spreadsheets, so I queried this public feed of our data using XMLHttpRequest, parsed it, and colored it based on the score. If you have any improvements to the code, please pass them on by emailing me or IMing me using my contact information at the top of the page. Conclusion I'd love to know what dedicated Memeorandum fans think of this. For me, it makes the site much easier to skim. At a glance, I can see what left-wing and right-wing bloggers each find interesting and, more importantly, when there's an article that's of genuine interest to both parties. It's also interesting to quickly see which bloggers cross party lines, willing to link to stories that don't favor their own candidates. I hope you like it, and please contribute your changes to make it better! Further Reading Puffinware's SVD tutorial is one of the most concise, coherent explanations of SVD I could find for the layman. Ilya Grigorik applied SVD to build a recommendation system in Ruby, with great explanations and source code. Simon Funk explains how he used SVD to tie for third in the Netflix Prize leaderboard (for a short time). This was my first Greasemonkey script, and I found Mark Pilgrim's Dive into Greasemonkey invaluable. I highly recommend writing a couple scripts yourself; it's incredibly empowering to modify other people's websites. A special thanks to Gabe Rivera for building Memeorandum and Techmeme and for supporting this little project. Update: J. Chris Anderson built a bookmarklet for use with non-Firefox browsers, or by anyone who just wants to test it out without installing an extension. This also has the benefit of working on sites beyond Memeorandum, like Google News. (Though, of course, it will only color sites that appear in our spreadsheet.)  http://articles.world-of-newave.info/computers/internet/on-the-web/weblogs/personal/w/memeorandum-colors-visualizing-political-bias-20081062114.htm 2008-10-10T17:19:00Z 2008-10-10T17:19:00Z Waxy.Org http://waxy.org/2008/10/memeorandum_colors/ Memeorandum Colors: Visualizing Political Bias with Greasemonkey {new window}   Waxy.Org - Like the rest of the world, I've been completely obsessed with the presidential election and nonstop news coverage. My drug of choice? Gabe Rivera's Memeorandum, the political sister site of Techmeme, which constantly surfaces the most controversial stories being discussed by political bloggers. While most political blogs are extremely partisan, their biases aren't immediately obvious to outsiders like me. I wanted to see, at a glance, how conservative or liberal the blogs were without clicking through to every article. With the help of del.icio.us founder Joshua Schachter, we used a recommendation algorithm to score every blog on Memeorandum based on their linking activity in the last three months. Then I wrote a Greasemonkey script to pull that information out of Google Spreadsheets, and colorize Memeorandum on-the-fly. Left-leaning blogs are blue and right-leaning blogs are red, with darker colors representing strong biases. Check out the screenshot below, and install the Greasemonkey script or standalone Firefox extension to try it yourself. Note: The colors don't necessarily represent each blogger's personal views or biases. It's a reflection of their linking activity. The algorithm looks at the stories that blogger's linked to before, relative to all other bloggers, and groups them accordingly. People that link to things that only conservatives find interesting will be classified as bright red, even if they are personally moderate or liberal, and vice-versa. The algorithm can't read minds, so don't be offended if you feel misrepresented. It's only looking at the data. For example, while Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight may be a Democrat, he has a tendency to link to stories conservative bloggers are discussing slightly more often than liberal bloggers, so he's shaded very slightly red. (Geeks can read on for more details about how this works.) Install it! Greasemonkey users: memeorandum_colors.user.js Standalone Firefox Extension: memeorandumcolors.xpi After it's installed, go to any page on Memeorandum and wait a second for the coloring to appear. I hope you like it! How It Works (Nerds Only) The first challenge was getting the data. I emailed Gabe Rivera, and he graciously gave offered a full dump of every blog listed on Memeorandum. This didn't include relationship data, showing which blogs linked to which stories, so Joshua and I crawled the site instead. Using the historical archives, we took a snapshot of the site's homepage for every six hours for the last three months — about 360 total. With a Python script, Joshua scraped the links from the saved HTML to get the link data. Armed with the spreadsheet of over 50,000 blogger-to-article relationships, we needed to somehow find correlations in the data. We used a method called Singular Value Decomposition (SVD), a method to break down complex data in matrices to its component parts. It's extremely flexible, used in applications as diverse as weather prediction, movie recommendations, genome modeling, clustering search results, and image compression. Inspired by GovTrack's use of SVD to visualize the political spectrum for members of Congress, we attempted to do the same thing for political blogs. Here's how Joshua describes the methodology: I created an adjacency matrix, with discussion sites as the rows and the discussed articles as the columns. When a site discusses an article on Memeorandum, we fill in a 1 in that cell; everything else is left as zero. Every site becomes a very high dimensionality vector into link-space. This is very difficult to visualize. (Unless your monitor displays many dimensions. Mine only has two.) Since a bunch of sites tend to link to the same groups in the same way, we don't need all those dimensions. So, very roughly, what SVD lets us do is reproject the points in space into a new coordinate system, so that the points that are similar are near each other and we know which dimensions are most important. We can take just the most significant ones. We could use two or three for a nifty visualization, but we wanted to show the bias as a spectrum, which is just a single dimension. In this case, the second most significant dimension (v2) ends up corresponding to linking similarity. The first dimension (v1) corresponds to how much linking they do in general. Curiously, when running the exact same analysis on Techmeme, the second most significant dimension ends up being Business vs. Technology. (The conservatives/liberals of the geek world?) Did you get all that? If you'd like to try to figure out what the other dimensions represent, take a look at columns v3-v5 on the full spreadsheet below and let us know if you come up with anything. (We didn't have much luck.) Once we'd realized that the second dimension (v2) highly correlated with political leaning, we uploaded the spreadsheet into Google Spreadsheets and created a new column with a normalized score, scaled between a range of -1 and 1. The spreadsheet, with all of the sources and their respective scores, is below. (Download the Excel document or CSV, if you want to sort or filter the data.) After deriving the scores, writing the Greasemonkey was straightforward. Google offers XML feeds for Spreadsheets, so I queried this public feed of our data using XMLHttpRequest, parsed it, and colored it based on the score. If you have any improvements to the code, please pass them on by emailing me or IMing me using my contact information at the top of the page. Conclusion I'd love to know what dedicated Memeorandum fans think of this. For me, it makes the site much easier to skim. At a glance, I can see what left-wing and right-wing bloggers each find interesting and, more importantly, when there's an article that's of genuine interest to both parties. It's also interesting to quickly see which bloggers cross party lines, willing to link to stories that don't favor their own candidates. I hope you like it, and please contribute your changes to make it better! Further Reading Puffinware's SVD tutorial is one of the most concise, coherent explanations of SVD I could find for the layman. Ilya Grigorik applied SVD to build a recommendation system in Ruby, with great explanations and source code. Simon Funk explains how he used SVD to tie for third in the Netflix Prize leaderboard (for a short time). This was my first Greasemonkey script, and I found Mark Pilgrim's Dive into Greasemonkey invaluable. I highly recommend writing a couple scripts yourself; it's incredibly empowering to modify other people's websites. A special thanks to Gabe Rivera for building Memeorandum and Techmeme and for supporting this little project. Update: J. Chris Anderson built a bookmarklet for use with non-Firefox browsers, or by anyone who just wants to test it out without installing an extension. This also has the benefit of working on sites beyond Memeorandum, like Google News. (Though, of course, it will only color sites that appear in our spreadsheet.) 
Memeorandum Colors: Visualizing Political Bias with Greasemonkey - Waxy.org {...}
Published: October 10, 2008, 5:19 pm - Indexed: October 11, 2008, 9:45 am - Page Size: 78KB
Category: Computers > Internet > On the Web > Weblogs > Personal > W

]]> {ISSUES > BIAS AND BALANCE} - Ignoring its own reporting, NY Times did not point out falsehoods in Corsi's smear books on Obama, Kerry In an October 7 article on author Jerome Corsi's detention in Kenya that day, New York Times reporter Jeffrey Gettleman wrote that Corsi's recent book smearing Sen. Barack Obama, The Obama Nation: Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality, "raises pointed questions about Mr. Obama's history of drug use, his 'extensive connections' to Islam and his relationships with Kenyan politicians, among other things -- allegations that Mr. Obama's campaign and others have widely disputed." However, the Times did not point out that The Obama Nation in fact contains numerous proven falsehoods -- not simply "widely disputed" allegations -- as Media Matters for America has documented and as the Times itself has noted. The factual problems with Corsi's smear book are most recently evidenced by the author's publication in a September 7 "WorldNetDaily Exclusive" of 11 "corrections to the next printing of The Obama Nation." In an August 12 article by Jim Rutenberg and Julie Bosman, the Times itself pointed out that "[s]everal of the book's accusations, in fact, are unsubstantiated, misleading or inaccurate." The article continued: For instance, Mr. Corsi writes that Mr. Obama had "yet to answer" whether he "stopped using marijuana and cocaine completely in college, or whether his drug usage extended to his law school days or beyond." "How about in the U.S. Senate?" Mr. Corsi asks. But Mr. Obama, who admitted to occasional marijuana and cocaine use in his high school and early college years, wrote in his memoir that he had "stopped getting high" when he moved to New York in the early 1980s. And in 2003 The State Journal-Register of Springfield, Ill., quoted him responding to a question of his drug use by saying, "I haven't done anything since I was 20 years old." Indeed, one of Corsi's corrections addresses the "pointed question[] about Mr. Obama's history of drug use" that Gettleman reported and that Rutenberg and Bosman previously discredited: 6. Page 77 now reads: "Still Obama has yet to answer questions whether he ever dealt drugs, or if he stopped using marijuana and cocaine completely in college, or whether his drug use extended into his law school days or beyond." It will be corrected to read: "Obama told several reporters that he stopped taking drugs sometime during his college years." Additionally, Gettleman wrote that "Mr. Corsi's attacks on Mr. Obama are similar to what Mr. Corsi did in 2004 when he co-authored a sharp-edged book about [Sen.] John Kerry ("Unfit for Command") that helped derail Senator Kerry's presidential bid." But Gettleman did not note that Corsi's earlier smear book, Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry, contains false and baseless attacks on Kerry's military service. Indeed, Rutenberg and Bosman noted in their August 12 article that Unfit for Command "included various accusations that were ultimately undermined by news reports pointing out the contradictions." Additionally, Susannah Meadows, who covered the Kerry campaign for Newsweek and reviewed the book for the Times, found that Unfit for Command "is totally unconvincing." She wrote in an October 10, 2004, review: The problem is that John O'Neill, who is the driving force and public face of the book, is so curdled with hatred for Kerry that, as though he were an unreliable narrator in a Nabokov novel, you can't trust what he says. [...] While O'Neill's anger is real, his claims appear to be faulty. He wrongly asserts, for example, that Kerry branded him (and every other Vietnam veteran) a war criminal. From Gettleman's October 7 New York Times article, "Kenya Detains U.S. Author Critical of Obama": On Tuesday morning, Jerome R. Corsi was all set to bash Senator Barack Obama on his ancestral soil. Mr. Corsi, a right-wing author who specializes in attack books, came to Kenya to publicize his newest work, "The Obama Nation," which raises pointed questions about Mr. Obama's history of drug use, his "extensive connections" to Islam and his relationships with Kenyan politicians, among other things -- allegations that Mr. Obama's campaign and others have widely disputed. [...] Mr. Corsi was looking forward to presenting evidence of close ties between Mr. Obama and [Kenyan Prime Minister Raila] Odinga, Mr. Corsi's aides said, and some suggested that this may have been what led Mr. Corsi to the door. Kenya's minister of immigration, for one, is a political ally of Mr. Odinga. "I'm not going to name names," said Mr. [Peter] Mbae, the publicist [for Corsi in Kenya]. "But let's just say that a certain section of the government didn't want this press conference." Mr. Corsi was also planning on visiting a relative of Mr. Obama who lives in a slum and giving him money, Mr. Mbae said. Mr. Corsi's attacks on Mr. Obama are similar to what Mr. Corsi did in 2004 when he co-authored a sharp-edged book about John Kerry ("Unfit for Command") that helped derail Senator Kerry's presidential bid. By 8 p.m., Mr. Corsi was at the airport, waiting for a flight out of Kenya, Mr. Mbae said. From Rutenberg and Bosman's August 12 article, "Book Attacking Obama Hopes to Repeat '04 Anti-Kerry Feat": Almost exactly four years after that campaign began, Mr. Corsi has released a new attack book painting Senator Barack Obama, the Democrats' presumed presidential nominee, as a stealth radical liberal who has tried to cover up "extensive connections to Islam" -- Mr. Obama is Christian -- and questioning whether his admitted experimentation with drugs in high school and college ever ceased. Significant parts of the book, whose subtitle is "Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality," have already been challenged as misleading or false in the days since its debut on Aug. 1. Nonetheless, it is to make its first appearance on The New York Times best-seller list for nonfiction hardcovers this Sunday -- at No. 1. [...] In its timing, authorship and style of reporting, the book is strikingly reminiscent of the one Mr. Corsi wrote with John O'Neill about Mr. Kerry, "Unfit for Command," which included various accusations that were ultimately undermined by news reports pointing out the contradictions. (Some critics of Mr. Kerry quoted in the book had earlier praised his bravery in incidents they were now asserting he had fabricated; one had earned a medal for bravery in a gun battle he accused Mr. Kerry of concocting.) [...] Several of the book's accusations, in fact, are unsubstantiated, misleading or inaccurate. For instance, Mr. Corsi writes that Mr. Obama had "yet to answer" whether he "stopped using marijuana and cocaine completely in college, or whether his drug usage extended to his law school days or beyond." "How about in the U.S. Senate?" Mr. Corsi asks. But Mr. Obama, who admitted to occasional marijuana and cocaine use in his high school and early college years, wrote in his memoir that he had "stopped getting high" when he moved to New York in the early 1980s. And in 2003 The State Journal-Register of Springfield, Ill., quoted him responding to a question of his drug use by saying, "I haven't done anything since I was 20 years old." In an interview, Mr. Corsi said "self-reporting, by people who have used drugs, as to when they stopped is inherently unreliable." From the October 10, 2004, book review by Meadows, " 'Unfit for Command': Hostile Fire": If John Kerry loses the presidential election, ''Unfit for Command,'' by John E. O'Neill and Jerome R. Corsi, will go down as a chief reason. The book -- a sort of companion piece to the political attack ads placed by O'Neill's group, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth -- is a furious assault on Kerry's character and service in Vietnam. Navy records have discredited the book's claim that Kerry lied to get his Bronze Star and third Purple Heart -- though only after the sensation hijacked cable news for a month. But for all the impact it's had on the race, the book itself is totally unconvincing. The problem is that John O'Neill, who is the driving force and public face of the book, is so curdled with hatred for Kerry that, as though he were an unreliable narrator in a Nabokov novel, you can't trust what he says. (His co-author, Jerome Corsi, an old friend of O'Neill's, has referred to Kerry on a conservative Web site as ''Commie Kerry.'') O'Neill, himself a Swift boat commander in Vietnam, resents Kerry for testifying before Congress in 1971 against the war. It's an understandable beef, one shared by many veterans, and it's clearly the root of the whole Swift boat controversy. While O'Neill's anger is real, his claims appear to be faulty. He wrongly asserts, for example, that Kerry branded him (and every other Vietnam veteran) a war criminal. In fact, Kerry took pains not to make such a sweeping charge: in his testimony he cited an investigation during which 150 veterans described atrocities they themselves had witnessed or had committed. Though this part of Kerry's statement is quoted in the book, the distinction is lost on O'Neill and his co-author, who bring up the war crimes issue over 50 times. [...] But O'Neill and Corsi refuse to back down, even in the face of logic or history. http://articles.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/bias-and-balance/ignoring-its-own-reporting-ny-times-did-not-point-20081061021.htm 2008-10-09T22:15:26Z 2008-10-09T22:15:26Z Mediamatters.Org http://mediamatters.org/items/200810090014 Ignoring its own reporting, NY Times did not point out falsehoods in Corsi's smear books on Obama, Kerry {new window}   Mediamatters.Org - In an October 7 article on author Jerome Corsi's detention in Kenya that day, New York Times reporter Jeffrey Gettleman wrote that Corsi's recent book smearing Sen. Barack Obama, The Obama Nation: Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality, "raises pointed questions about Mr. Obama's history of drug use, his 'extensive connections' to Islam and his relationships with Kenyan politicians, among other things -- allegations that Mr. Obama's campaign and others have widely disputed." However, the Times did not point out that The Obama Nation in fact contains numerous proven falsehoods -- not simply "widely disputed" allegations -- as Media Matters for America has documented and as the Times itself has noted. The factual problems with Corsi's smear book are most recently evidenced by the author's publication in a September 7 "WorldNetDaily Exclusive" of 11 "corrections to the next printing of The Obama Nation." In an August 12 article by Jim Rutenberg and Julie Bosman, the Times itself pointed out that "[s]everal of the book's accusations, in fact, are unsubstantiated, misleading or inaccurate." The article continued: For instance, Mr. Corsi writes that Mr. Obama had "yet to answer" whether he "stopped using marijuana and cocaine completely in college, or whether his drug usage extended to his law school days or beyond." "How about in the U.S. Senate?" Mr. Corsi asks. But Mr. Obama, who admitted to occasional marijuana and cocaine use in his high school and early college years, wrote in his memoir that he had "stopped getting high" when he moved to New York in the early 1980s. And in 2003 The State Journal-Register of Springfield, Ill., quoted him responding to a question of his drug use by saying, "I haven't done anything since I was 20 years old." Indeed, one of Corsi's corrections addresses the "pointed question[] about Mr. Obama's history of drug use" that Gettleman reported and that Rutenberg and Bosman previously discredited: 6. Page 77 now reads: "Still Obama has yet to answer questions whether he ever dealt drugs, or if he stopped using marijuana and cocaine completely in college, or whether his drug use extended into his law school days or beyond." It will be corrected to read: "Obama told several reporters that he stopped taking drugs sometime during his college years." Additionally, Gettleman wrote that "Mr. Corsi's attacks on Mr. Obama are similar to what Mr. Corsi did in 2004 when he co-authored a sharp-edged book about [Sen.] John Kerry ("Unfit for Command") that helped derail Senator Kerry's presidential bid." But Gettleman did not note that Corsi's earlier smear book, Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry, contains false and baseless attacks on Kerry's military service. Indeed, Rutenberg and Bosman noted in their August 12 article that Unfit for Command "included various accusations that were ultimately undermined by news reports pointing out the contradictions." Additionally, Susannah Meadows, who covered the Kerry campaign for Newsweek and reviewed the book for the Times, found that Unfit for Command "is totally unconvincing." She wrote in an October 10, 2004, review: The problem is that John O'Neill, who is the driving force and public face of the book, is so curdled with hatred for Kerry that, as though he were an unreliable narrator in a Nabokov novel, you can't trust what he says. [...] While O'Neill's anger is real, his claims appear to be faulty. He wrongly asserts, for example, that Kerry branded him (and every other Vietnam veteran) a war criminal. From Gettleman's October 7 New York Times article, "Kenya Detains U.S. Author Critical of Obama": On Tuesday morning, Jerome R. Corsi was all set to bash Senator Barack Obama on his ancestral soil. Mr. Corsi, a right-wing author who specializes in attack books, came to Kenya to publicize his newest work, "The Obama Nation," which raises pointed questions about Mr. Obama's history of drug use, his "extensive connections" to Islam and his relationships with Kenyan politicians, among other things -- allegations that Mr. Obama's campaign and others have widely disputed. [...] Mr. Corsi was looking forward to presenting evidence of close ties between Mr. Obama and [Kenyan Prime Minister Raila] Odinga, Mr. Corsi's aides said, and some suggested that this may have been what led Mr. Corsi to the door. Kenya's minister of immigration, for one, is a political ally of Mr. Odinga. "I'm not going to name names," said Mr. [Peter] Mbae, the publicist [for Corsi in Kenya]. "But let's just say that a certain section of the government didn't want this press conference." Mr. Corsi was also planning on visiting a relative of Mr. Obama who lives in a slum and giving him money, Mr. Mbae said. Mr. Corsi's attacks on Mr. Obama are similar to what Mr. Corsi did in 2004 when he co-authored a sharp-edged book about John Kerry ("Unfit for Command") that helped derail Senator Kerry's presidential bid. By 8 p.m., Mr. Corsi was at the airport, waiting for a flight out of Kenya, Mr. Mbae said. From Rutenberg and Bosman's August 12 article, "Book Attacking Obama Hopes to Repeat '04 Anti-Kerry Feat": Almost exactly four years after that campaign began, Mr. Corsi has released a new attack book painting Senator Barack Obama, the Democrats' presumed presidential nominee, as a stealth radical liberal who has tried to cover up "extensive connections to Islam" -- Mr. Obama is Christian -- and questioning whether his admitted experimentation with drugs in high school and college ever ceased. Significant parts of the book, whose subtitle is "Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality," have already been challenged as misleading or false in the days since its debut on Aug. 1. Nonetheless, it is to make its first appearance on The New York Times best-seller list for nonfiction hardcovers this Sunday -- at No. 1. [...] In its timing, authorship and style of reporting, the book is strikingly reminiscent of the one Mr. Corsi wrote with John O'Neill about Mr. Kerry, "Unfit for Command," which included various accusations that were ultimately undermined by news reports pointing out the contradictions. (Some critics of Mr. Kerry quoted in the book had earlier praised his bravery in incidents they were now asserting he had fabricated; one had earned a medal for bravery in a gun battle he accused Mr. Kerry of concocting.) [...] Several of the book's accusations, in fact, are unsubstantiated, misleading or inaccurate. For instance, Mr. Corsi writes that Mr. Obama had "yet to answer" whether he "stopped using marijuana and cocaine completely in college, or whether his drug usage extended to his law school days or beyond." "How about in the U.S. Senate?" Mr. Corsi asks. But Mr. Obama, who admitted to occasional marijuana and cocaine use in his high school and early college years, wrote in his memoir that he had "stopped getting high" when he moved to New York in the early 1980s. And in 2003 The State Journal-Register of Springfield, Ill., quoted him responding to a question of his drug use by saying, "I haven't done anything since I was 20 years old." In an interview, Mr. Corsi said "self-reporting, by people who have used drugs, as to when they stopped is inherently unreliable." From the October 10, 2004, book review by Meadows, " 'Unfit for Command': Hostile Fire": If John Kerry loses the presidential election, ''Unfit for Command,'' by John E. O'Neill and Jerome R. Corsi, will go down as a chief reason. The book -- a sort of companion piece to the political attack ads placed by O'Neill's group, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth -- is a furious assault on Kerry's character and service in Vietnam. Navy records have discredited the book's claim that Kerry lied to get his Bronze Star and third Purple Heart -- though only after the sensation hijacked cable news for a month. But for all the impact it's had on the race, the book itself is totally unconvincing. The problem is that John O'Neill, who is the driving force and public face of the book, is so curdled with hatred for Kerry that, as though he were an unreliable narrator in a Nabokov novel, you can't trust what he says. (His co-author, Jerome Corsi, an old friend of O'Neill's, has referred to Kerry on a conservative Web site as ''Commie Kerry.'') O'Neill, himself a Swift boat commander in Vietnam, resents Kerry for testifying before Congress in 1971 against the war. It's an understandable beef, one shared by many veterans, and it's clearly the root of the whole Swift boat controversy. While O'Neill's anger is real, his claims appear to be faulty. He wrongly asserts, for example, that Kerry branded him (and every other Vietnam veteran) a war criminal. In fact, Kerry took pains not to make such a sweeping charge: in his testimony he cited an investigation during which 150 veterans described atrocities they themselves had witnessed or had committed. Though this part of Kerry's statement is quoted in the book, the distinction is lost on O'Neill and his co-author, who bring up the war crimes issue over 50 times. [...] But O'Neill and Corsi refuse to back down, even in the face of logic or history.
Media Matters - Ignoring its own reporting, NY Times did not point out falsehoods in Corsi's smear books on Obama, Kerry {...} The New York Times asserted that Jerome Corsi's recent book smearing Sen. Barack Obama "raises pointed questions about Mr. Obama's history of drug use, his 'extensive connections' to Islam and his relationships with Kenyan politicians, among other things -- allegations that Mr. Obama's campaign and others have widely disputed." However, the Times did not point out that The Obama Nation contains numerous falsehoods that have been widely discredited and denounced by the media. {...}
Published: October 9, 2008, 10:15 pm - Indexed: October 10, 2008, 12:04 pm - Page Size: 25KB
Category: Society > Issues > Business > Media > Bias and Balance

]]> {SYSTEMS > NEWS AND MEDIA} - My Apple Space Makes its Debut My Apple Space has made its formal debut. Hosted in Denmark, the social networking site aims to provide Apple users around the world a place to connect, cultivate relationships, build a strong sense of community, and become the ultimate switcher machine on the Internet http://articles.world-of-newave.info/computers/systems/apple/macintosh/news-and-media/my-apple-space-makes-its-debut-20081088714.htm 2008-10-09T19:50:00Z 2008-10-09T19:50:00Z Macobserver.Com http://www.macobserver.com/article/2008/10/09.10.shtml My Apple Space Makes its Debut {new window}   Www.Macobserver.Com - My Apple Space has made its formal debut. Hosted in Denmark, the social networking site aims to provide Apple users around the world a place to connect, cultivate relationships, build a strong sense of community, and become the ultimate switcher machine on the Internet
My Apple Space Makes its Debut || The Mac Observer {...}
Published: October 9, 2008, 7:50 pm - Indexed: October 10, 2008, 12:16 pm - Page Size: 37KB
Category: Computers > Systems > Apple > Macintosh > News and Media

]]> {EUROPE > NEWSPAPERS} - Teachers who have sex with older pupils should escape court union head says Teachers who have sexual relationships with sixth formers should not face criminal action according to the head of a leading teachers union. http://articles.world-of-newave.info/regional/europe/united-kingdom/news-and-media/newspapers/teachers-who-have-sex-with-older-pupils-should-escape-2008107548.htm 2008-10-04T19:31:06Z 2008-10-04T19:31:06Z Telegraph.Co.Uk http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/education/3136399/Teachers-who-have-sex-with-older-pupils-should-escape-court-union-head-says.html Teachers who have sex with older pupils should escape court union head says {new window}   Www.Telegraph.Co.Uk - Teachers who have sexual relationships with sixth formers should not face criminal action according to the head of a leading teachers union.
Teachers who have sex with older pupils should escape court, union head says - Telegraph {...} Teachers who have sexual relationships with sixth formers should not face criminal action, according to the head of a leading teachers union. {...}
Published: October 4, 2008, 7:31 pm - Indexed: October 5, 2008, 10:30 am - Page Size: 46KB
Category: Regional > Europe > United Kingdom > News and Media > Newspapers

]]> {SCIENCE} - Nerds rejoice: Braininess boosts likelihood of sex Women looking for both short- and long-term relationships go for geniuses over dunces, according to a new study http://articles.world-of-newave.info/science/nerds-rejoice-braininess-boosts-likelihood-of-20081095212.htm 2008-10-03T15:57:00Z 2008-10-03T15:57:00Z Newscientist.Com http://www.newscientist.com/channel/sex/dn14868-nerds-rejoice-braininess-boosts-likelihood-of-sex.html?feedId=online-news_rss20 Nerds rejoice: Braininess boosts likelihood of sex {new window}   Www.Newscientist.Com - Women looking for both short- and long-term relationships go for geniuses over dunces, according to a new study
Nerds rejoice: Braininess boosts likelihood of sex - sex - 03 October 2008 - New Scientist {...}
Published: October 3, 2008, 3:57 pm - Indexed: October 4, 2008, 11:53 am - Page Size: 78KB
Category: Science

]]> {INTERNET > GOOGLE} - The intelligent cloud The Internet has had an enormous impact on people's lives around the world in the ten years since Google's founding. It has changed politics, entertainment, culture, business, health care, the environment and just about every other topic you can think of. Which got us to thinking, what's going to happen in the next ten years? How will this phenomenal technology evolve, how will we adapt, and (more importantly) how will it adapt to us? We asked ten of our top experts this very question, and during September (our 10th anniversary month) we are presenting their responses. As computer scientist Alan Kay has famously observed, the best way to predict the future is to invent it, so we will be doing our best to make good on our experts' words every day. - Karen Wickre and Alan Eagle, series editorsIn coming years, computer processing, storage, and networking capabilities will continue up the steeply exponential curve they have followed for the past few decades. By 2019, parallel-processing computer clusters will be 50 to 100 times more powerful in most respects. Computer programs, more of them web-based, will evolve to take advantage of this newfound power, and Internet usage will also grow: more people online, doing more things, using more advanced and responsive applications. By any metric, the "cloud" of computational resources and online data and content will grow very rapidly for a long time.As we're already seeing, people will interact with the cloud using a plethora of devices: PCs, mobile phones and PDAs, and games. But we'll also see a rush of new devices customized to particular applications, and more environmental sensors and actuators, all sending and receiving data via the cloud. The increasing number and diversity of interactions will not only direct more information to the cloud, they will also provide valuable information on how people and systems think and react.Thus, computer systems will have greater opportunity to learn from the collective behavior of billions of humans. They will get smarter, gleaning relationships between objects, nuances, intentions, meanings, and other deep conceptual information. Today's Google search uses an early form of this approach, but in the future many more systems will be able to benefit from it.What does this mean to Google? For starters, even better search. We could train our systems to discern not only the characters or place names in a YouTube video or a book, for example, but also to recognize the plot or the symbolism. The potential result would be a kind of conceptual search: "Find me a story with an exciting chase scene and a happy ending." As systems are allowed to learn from interactions at an individual level, they can provide results customized to an individual's situational needs: where they are located, what time of day it is, what they are doing. And translation and multi-modal systems will also be feasible, so people speaking one language can seamlessly interact with people and information in other languages.The impact of such systems will go well beyond Google. Researchers across medical and scientific fields can access massive data sets and run analysis and pattern detection algorithms that aren't possible today. The proposed Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST), for example, may generate over 15 terabytes of new data per day! Virtually any research field will benefit from systems with the ability to gather, manipulate, and learn from datasets at that scale.Traditionally, systems that solve complicated problems and queries have been called "intelligent", but compared to earlier approaches in the field of 'artificial intelligence', the path that we foresee has important new elements. First of all, this system will operate on an enormous scale with an unprecedented computational power of millions of computers. It will be used by billions of people and learn from an aggregate of potentially trillions of meaningful interactions per day. It will be engineered iteratively, based on a feedback loop of quick changes, evaluation, and adjustments. And it will be built based on the needs of solving and improving concrete and useful tasks such as finding information, answering questions, performing spoken dialogue, translating text and speech, understanding images and videos, and other tasks as yet undefined. When combined with the creativity, knowledge, and drive inherent in people, this "intelligent cloud" will generate many surprising and significant benefits to mankind.Posted by Alfred Spector, VP Engineering, and Franz Och, Research Scientist http://articles.world-of-newave.info/computers/internet/searching/search-engines/google/the-intelligent-cloud-2008102991.htm 2008-10-01T11:38:21Z 2008-10-01T11:38:21Z Blogger.Com http://www.blogger.com/feeds/10861780/posts/default/6503769724804104446?v=2 The intelligent cloud {new window}   Www.Blogger.Com - The Internet has had an enormous impact on people's lives around the world in the ten years since Google's founding. It has changed politics, entertainment, culture, business, health care, the environment and just about every other topic you can think of. Which got us to thinking, what's going to happen in the next ten years? How will this phenomenal technology evolve, how will we adapt, and (more importantly) how will it adapt to us? We asked ten of our top experts this very question, and during September (our 10th anniversary month) we are presenting their responses. As computer scientist Alan Kay has famously observed, the best way to predict the future is to invent it, so we will be doing our best to make good on our experts' words every day. - Karen Wickre and Alan Eagle, series editorsIn coming years, computer processing, storage, and networking capabilities will continue up the steeply exponential curve they have followed for the past few decades. By 2019, parallel-processing computer clusters will be 50 to 100 times more powerful in most respects. Computer programs, more of them web-based, will evolve to take advantage of this newfound power, and Internet usage will also grow: more people online, doing more things, using more advanced and responsive applications. By any metric, the "cloud" of computational resources and online data and content will grow very rapidly for a long time.As we're already seeing, people will interact with the cloud using a plethora of devices: PCs, mobile phones and PDAs, and games. But we'll also see a rush of new devices customized to particular applications, and more environmental sensors and actuators, all sending and receiving data via the cloud. The increasing number and diversity of interactions will not only direct more information to the cloud, they will also provide valuable information on how people and systems think and react.Thus, computer systems will have greater opportunity to learn from the collective behavior of billions of humans. They will get smarter, gleaning relationships between objects, nuances, intentions, meanings, and other deep conceptual information. Today's Google search uses an early form of this approach, but in the future many more systems will be able to benefit from it.What does this mean to Google? For starters, even better search. We could train our systems to discern not only the characters or place names in a YouTube video or a book, for example, but also to recognize the plot or the symbolism. The potential result would be a kind of conceptual search: "Find me a story with an exciting chase scene and a happy ending." As systems are allowed to learn from interactions at an individual level, they can provide results customized to an individual's situational needs: where they are located, what time of day it is, what they are doing. And translation and multi-modal systems will also be feasible, so people speaking one language can seamlessly interact with people and information in other languages.The impact of such systems will go well beyond Google. Researchers across medical and scientific fields can access massive data sets and run analysis and pattern detection algorithms that aren't possible today. The proposed Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST), for example, may generate over 15 terabytes of new data per day! Virtually any research field will benefit from systems with the ability to gather, manipulate, and learn from datasets at that scale.Traditionally, systems that solve complicated problems and queries have been called "intelligent", but compared to earlier approaches in the field of 'artificial intelligence', the path that we foresee has important new elements. First of all, this system will operate on an enormous scale with an unprecedented computational power of millions of computers. It will be used by billions of people and learn from an aggregate of potentially trillions of meaningful interactions per day. It will be engineered iteratively, based on a feedback loop of quick changes, evaluation, and adjustments. And it will be built based on the needs of solving and improving concrete and useful tasks such as finding information, answering questions, performing spoken dialogue, translating text and speech, understanding images and videos, and other tasks as yet undefined. When combined with the creativity, knowledge, and drive inherent in people, this "intelligent cloud" will generate many surprising and significant benefits to mankind.Posted by Alfred Spector, VP Engineering, and Franz Och, Research Scientist
Indexed: October 1, 2008, 11:38 am - Page Size: 6KB
Category: Computers > Internet > Searching > Search Engines > Google

]]> {ISSUES > THE SOUTH} - The Burlington Declaration FIRST-EVER NORTH AMERICAN SECESSIONIST CONVENTION A SUCCESS MEETING BRINGS MORE THAN 40 SECESSIONISTS FROM ALL OVER THE COUNTRY TO BURLINGTON, VERMONT November 8, 2006 The first North American Secessionist Convention was held in Vermont last week-end [November 3-5, 2006] and attracted more than three dozen people from groups actively working for secession from the United States.The gathering, sponsored by the Middlebury Institute (http://www.middleburyinstitute.net - "for the study of separatism, secession, and self-determination"), drew 43 people, with delegatesfrom 16 secessionist organizations in 18 states, including Hawaii, Alaska, Cascadia, Louisiana, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vermont, andNew Hampshire.The convention issued a document outlining its basic points of agreement at the end of the meeting. The Burlington Declaration stated: We, the participants in the First North American Secessionist Convention, though representing many different and diverse groups and constituencies, agree on the following principles as representing the truths of natural law and historical experience:1. Any political entity has the right to separate itself from a larger body of which it is a part and peaceably to establish its independence as a free and legitimate state in the eyes of the world.2. Governments are instituted among peoples, deriving their just powers from the consent of their citizens, and whenever any form of government becomes destructive of the legitimate goals of life, liberty, prosperity, and self-determination, it is the right of the people in democratic fashion to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.3. Any government formed by and dependent upon a constitution to regulate its actions and affairs has certain legitimate powers delegated to it, but any powers not so delegated are reserved to the people of that state and their democratically chosen political bodies.4. Nations once independent should engage in peace, commerce, good will, and honest friendship with all nations, and observe good faith, justice, and harmony toward all, but establish entangling relationships with none, nor engage in colonial dominance, political or economic, over any.5. Direct democracy, with one vote for each and every citizen (as the polity shall designate citizenship), has proven to be a desirable form of governance among people, but it can operate with justice and equality only when at a small enough scale that each person may be known to every other person; when representative forms of government are undertaken, they should likewise best be established at a scale small enough so that each representative can be informed of the opinions and beliefs of the general run of the people in the constituency or community which that person is chosen to represent.It is within this body of principles that we ask all governments to operate and it is by them that we ourselves, individually and the organizations we represent, intend to be guided.Burlington, Vermont November 4, 2006 http://articles.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/territorial-disputes/united-states/the-south/the-burlington-declaration-2008109331.htm 2008-10-01T10:52:05Z 2008-10-01T10:52:05Z Secessionist.Us http://www.secessionist.us/2006/11/burlington-declaration.html The Burlington Declaration {new window}   Www.Secessionist.Us - FIRST-EVER NORTH AMERICAN SECESSIONIST CONVENTION A SUCCESS MEETING BRINGS MORE THAN 40 SECESSIONISTS FROM ALL OVER THE COUNTRY TO BURLINGTON, VERMONT November 8, 2006 The first North American Secessionist Convention was held in Vermont last week-end [November 3-5, 2006] and attracted more than three dozen people from groups actively working for secession from the United States.The gathering, sponsored by the Middlebury Institute (http://www.middleburyinstitute.net - "for the study of separatism, secession, and self-determination"), drew 43 people, with delegatesfrom 16 secessionist organizations in 18 states, including Hawaii, Alaska, Cascadia, Louisiana, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vermont, andNew Hampshire.The convention issued a document outlining its basic points of agreement at the end of the meeting. The Burlington Declaration stated: We, the participants in the First North American Secessionist Convention, though representing many different and diverse groups and constituencies, agree on the following principles as representing the truths of natural law and historical experience:1. Any political entity has the right to separate itself from a larger body of which it is a part and peaceably to establish its independence as a free and legitimate state in the eyes of the world.2. Governments are instituted among peoples, deriving their just powers from the consent of their citizens, and whenever any form of government becomes destructive of the legitimate goals of life, liberty, prosperity, and self-determination, it is the right of the people in democratic fashion to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.3. Any government formed by and dependent upon a constitution to regulate its actions and affairs has certain legitimate powers delegated to it, but any powers not so delegated are reserved to the people of that state and their democratically chosen political bodies.4. Nations once independent should engage in peace, commerce, good will, and honest friendship with all nations, and observe good faith, justice, and harmony toward all, but establish entangling relationships with none, nor engage in colonial dominance, political or economic, over any.5. Direct democracy, with one vote for each and every citizen (as the polity shall designate citizenship), has proven to be a desirable form of governance among people, but it can operate with justice and equality only when at a small enough scale that each person may be known to every other person; when representative forms of government are undertaken, they should likewise best be established at a scale small enough so that each representative can be informed of the opinions and beliefs of the general run of the people in the constituency or community which that person is chosen to represent.It is within this body of principles that we ask all governments to operate and it is by them that we ourselves, individually and the organizations we represent, intend to be guided.Burlington, Vermont November 4, 2006
The American Secessionist Blog: The Burlington Declaration {...}
Indexed: October 1, 2008, 10:52 am - Page Size: 30KB
Category: Society > Issues > Territorial Disputes > United States > The South

]]> {EDUCATION > RESEARCH} - Transparency and Political Relationships Since the 1990s, foreign capital has become an increasingly important source of financing for emerging market firms. Because companies that access global capital markets receive substantial benefits, it is difficult to understand why so few firms take advantage of foreign capital markets. http://articles.world-of-newave.info/reference/education/colleges-and-universities/north-america/united-states/illinois/university-of-chicago/research/transparency-and-political-relationships-2008106732.htm 2008-10-01T10:10:08Z 2008-10-01T10:10:08Z Research.Uchicago.Edu http://research.uchicago.edu/highlights/item.php?id=263 Transparency and Political Relationships {new window}   Research.Uchicago.Edu - Since the 1990s, foreign capital has become an increasingly important source of financing for emerging market firms. Because companies that access global capital markets receive substantial benefits, it is difficult to understand why so few firms take advantage of foreign capital markets.
Research at Chicago {...}
Indexed: October 1, 2008, 10:10 am - Page Size: 15KB
Category: Reference > Education > Colleges and Universities > North America > United States > Illinois > University of Chicago > Research

]]> {NORTH AMERICA > LODGING} - FALL SPECIAL! Luxury Beach Living for families or groups! (USF / panhandle) $395 4bd LinksOUR WEBSITEPhoto GalleryDescription Fall and Winter Special! Book two or more nights and receive an extra night for FREE! Check our Website for more photos and availability - http://www.cedargardenslodge.com This hillside home has a clear ocean view with 24/7 beautiful ocean views. Cedar Gardens Lodge is a 3,400+ square ft. luxury home with floor to ceiling windows that look out to the Pacific. With 4 large bedrooms and 2.5 modern baths, this home very comfortably accommodates 8-10 people. Perfect for family reunions, group trips, even business retreats, Cedar Gardens Lodge has outdoor living areas that are just as spectacular as the inside of the home. With easy sandy beach access and tons of amenities (including a gourmet kitchen, granite counters, wood floors, large stone fireplace, private outdoor hot tub, WiFi, a home theater room, a billiard & game room, an ocean-viewing deck, high-end appliances throughout, parking for 4+ cars, cable TVs with DVD players, a telescope for ocean & star gazing, a Jacuzzi tub, and more.) This home is also very close to the quaint Yachats, the 804 trail, and lots of other central Oregon coast activities. FeaturesBedrooms: 4Property Type: HouseBathrooms: 2.5Sleeps: 8-10Parking Spaces: 4Square Footage: 3800Powered by vFlyer.com and Sweethomesrentals.comvFlyer Id: 1746354 s individual corporate culture habits management communications and decision-making style the contacts and relationships between employees or teams of employees the detail of job-related events and the knowledge of tried and tested usage as it applies to the organization While Scarlett is torn with guilt of causing the death of her second husband Rhett appears and offers a marriage proposal promising to give her everything Scarlett accepts for the money while Rhett secretly hopes that Scarlett will eventually return the love he's had since the day he saw her at Twelve Oaks Her continuing affection for Ashley Wilkes becomes a problem for the couple however When their daughter Bonnie falls off a pony and dies the tragedy causes a rift between the two whic In the 1920s the organization also played a vital role in convincing the U S government to protect vital wildlife areas by including them in a National Wildlife Refuge system The association also purchased critical areas itself and to this day continues to maintain an extensive sanctuary system The largest is the 26 000-acre (110  under their original name Angel This version was recorded at Reading college by Stephen Down and features a blistering Hammond organ solo which divided the fans more or less straight down the middle West Rutland Vermont Rutland County Vermont 2000 United States Census 2005 2007 2008 African American African American (U S Census) Aldace F Walker Area Area code 802 There were 913 households out of which 29 7% had children under the age of 18 living with them 51 2% were had ended without any financial compensation He recruited some experienced musicians including his bassist brother Peter The band of five are veterans of the Zimbabwe music scene His brother Peter is a 12385599 http://articles.world-of-newave.info/regional/north-america/united-states/california/metro-areas/san-francisco-bay-area/travel-and-tourism/lodging/fall-special-luxury-beach-living-for-families-or-2008107433.htm 2008-10-01T08:23:14Z 2008-10-01T08:23:14Z Sfbay.Craigslist.Org http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/vac/861987565.html FALL SPECIAL! Luxury Beach Living for families or groups! (USF / panhandle) $395 4bd {new window}   Sfbay.Craigslist.Org - LinksOUR WEBSITEPhoto GalleryDescription Fall and Winter Special! Book two or more nights and receive an extra night for FREE! Check our Website for more photos and availability - http://www.cedargardenslodge.com This hillside home has a clear ocean view with 24/7 beautiful ocean views. Cedar Gardens Lodge is a 3,400+ square ft. luxury home with floor to ceiling windows that look out to the Pacific. With 4 large bedrooms and 2.5 modern baths, this home very comfortably accommodates 8-10 people. Perfect for family reunions, group trips, even business retreats, Cedar Gardens Lodge has outdoor living areas that are just as spectacular as the inside of the home. With easy sandy beach access and tons of amenities (including a gourmet kitchen, granite counters, wood floors, large stone fireplace, private outdoor hot tub, WiFi, a home theater room, a billiard & game room, an ocean-viewing deck, high-end appliances throughout, parking for 4+ cars, cable TVs with DVD players, a telescope for ocean & star gazing, a Jacuzzi tub, and more.) This home is also very close to the quaint Yachats, the 804 trail, and lots of other central Oregon coast activities. FeaturesBedrooms: 4Property Type: HouseBathrooms: 2.5Sleeps: 8-10Parking Spaces: 4Square Footage: 3800Powered by vFlyer.com and Sweethomesrentals.comvFlyer Id: 1746354 s individual corporate culture habits management communications and decision-making style the contacts and relationships between employees or teams of employees the detail of job-related events and the knowledge of tried and tested usage as it applies to the organization While Scarlett is torn with guilt of causing the death of her second husband Rhett appears and offers a marriage proposal promising to give her everything Scarlett accepts for the money while Rhett secretly hopes that Scarlett will eventually return the love he's had since the day he saw her at Twelve Oaks Her continuing affection for Ashley Wilkes becomes a problem for the couple however When their daughter Bonnie falls off a pony and dies the tragedy causes a rift between the two whic In the 1920s the organization also played a vital role in convincing the U S government to protect vital wildlife areas by including them in a National Wildlife Refuge system The association also purchased critical areas itself and to this day continues to maintain an extensive sanctuary system The largest is the 26 000-acre (110  under their original name Angel This version was recorded at Reading college by Stephen Down and features a blistering Hammond organ solo which divided the fans more or less straight down the middle West Rutland Vermont Rutland County Vermont 2000 United States Census 2005 2007 2008 African American African American (U S Census) Aldace F Walker Area Area code 802 There were 913 households out of which 29 7% had children under the age of 18 living with them 51 2% were had ended without any financial compensation He recruited some experienced musicians including his bassist brother Peter The band of five are veterans of the Zimbabwe music scene His brother Peter is a 12385599
FALL SPECIAL! Luxury Beach Living for families or groups! {...}
Published: October 1, 2008, 8:23 am - Indexed: October 1, 2008, 11:21 am - Page Size: 13KB
Category: Regional > North America > United States > California > Metro Areas > San Francisco Bay Area > Travel and Tourism > Lodging

]]>