If you have "no place to go," come here!

The difference between the local press and the national press

Insight analytical has terrific coverage of Obama's gaffe-filled , invitation only* visit to New Mexico (a state Clinton won, and now we see why). The real kick in the teeth is this little item (via), from El Paso Times Online Editor Jay Koester, "covering" the event:

Obama shook hands for about 15 minutes, then left to cheers. That’s all I have for now. I’ll give you more when I return to the office.

In closing, Obamanos!

Biased, much?

See, at the national level, it's totally OK, in fact, de rigeur, to be biased for Obama. But you don't come right out and admit it!

But at the local level, who cares? Except, of course, any Hillary supporters -- again, in the majority in NM -- who might worry about getting fair treatment from the El Paso Times in the future....

NOTE If Obama is such a winner, why the heck do they have to wrap him in tissue paper?

No votes yet


Submitted by lambert on

give a precise link and a quote and maybe some analysis, for heaven's sake. Just don't dump in a link. It looks like spam.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

Salmo's picture
Submitted by Salmo on

I suspect that the Clinton win still reflects voter preferences, but reflecting preferences is not what papers normally try to do. Local papers will consistently err on the side that provokes controversy - it sells papers. I have no idea why a New Mexican reporter did what he did, nor why an editor allowed it, but having been covered by local papers here in Maine, and being set up with stories the reporter admitted adding a "gee whiz" factor to, I can say that consumers of local news should always be aware that the papers are businesses scrambling for market share. So, I am sure that the paper was delighted it provoked the local vets to respond. It will milk that too.

SunnyLC's picture
Submitted by SunnyLC on

This is the link for the first in the series...the rest follow in order...

My thought is that there was a rebuff of Obama's original plans. In a story in the paper on Saturday, one post commander said he had heard the event would be at the Bataan Memorial. Then, the news went dark until Monday morning. The location wasn't made public even then. By that time, though, the event was no longer "exclusive" for Vets and it was also not open to the public. About 100 Obama supporting vets were rounded up and another 100 + were from the ranks of other Obama supporters.

Obama's quick stop at the Bataan Memorial was a "surprise" and it took place BEFORE the vets had their ceremonies. It looks like he knew he had to stay away. But I bet they took lots of pictures to use later in case the GOP picks up on Obama's insensitive joke about the primaries being like the Bataan Death march, which were made just a few days before the annual memorial march was held here at the end of March.

Frankly, Bill Richardson has lost his luster, so I'm not sure the Obama-Richardson team has a chance to win in November if Obama is the nominee. Maybe no Democrat can win NM at this point...But that's just my gut feeling. CD-2 (which includes Las Cruces) is heavily military and conservative. I'm not sure about ABQ. Santa Fe probably would be a Democratic bastion. But it's hard to know what will happen in November...