Jay Bookman

By AJC/DNC Management

December 16, 2008 11:21 AM | Link to this

I stopped getting news from the “news” papers more than a decade ago. Since then they have served as my anti American, anti capitalism information outlet, a job that they do quite well, in fact.

If all else fails, I can turn to al Jazeera to keep up with what America’s enemies are doing.

No big loss.

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2008 11:29 AM | Link to this

Perhaps it could be some of the idiotic decisions the newspapers make.

For instance the AJC decided to face down the problem of dwindling readership by raising their price. For good measure they even threw in a one day increase by making the Thanksgiving Day newspaper cost $2.00 instead of the newly increased daily price of $.75. What was the difference in this particular paper you might ask? It was chock full of ads that supposedly the AJC charged the advertisers for.

Couple that kind of marketing strategy with the left wing editorializing that infests your news pages and it’s no wonder you’re doomed.

By The Corporal

December 16, 2008 11:30 AM | Link to this

I have subscribed to the AJC for probably over 25 years total. I would hate to see it go as I (being old fashioned) just like to read the paper.

My very conservative friends usually say “why to you read that liberal rag”? I reply, “it’s like an intelligence report - know your enemy.”

Plus, what would I do for the puppies in the dog kennel?

By Mr Snarky

December 16, 2008 11:39 AM | Link to this

Surowieki is an excellent writer. I suspect that newspapers will eventually find that the “publish everything for free on the internet” model will no longer work and a lot of the content on the web will wither.

It’s “no big loss”. if all you do is read stuff that confirms your previously held beliefs and assume that anything that goes against them is a result of bias. What a close-minded, narrow existence some lead.

By Redneck Convert

December 16, 2008 11:42 AM | Link to this

Well, back in the day the old time politicans down at the state capitol when they got caught in a wh*-house blamed it on “them lyin’ Atlanta newspapers.” I guess us godly Conservatives blame getting beat on election day like a rented mule on the Atlanta newspapers too.

So we ain’t sorry to see all the librul papers going under. Turns out us godly Conservatives are too cheap to put out 75 cents a day on a paper. Heck, we even want to get out of paying taxes. We want to read Fox News on the innernet even if we have to wade thru about 70 pop-up ads before we get to the news. Fair and balanced, 70 ads for every story.

Anyhow, long as we got Sean and Rush and Neal on the radio, we’ll be OK. They wouldn’t lie or twist things. So alot of people will have to find a new way to line their bird cage, but leastwise we’ll be rid of a librul rag. Wooten and Bookman are getting on in years anyway, so they’ll be OK, unless we can find a way to cut out Social Security and pensions. We’re working on it, but it don’t look too good right now.

Have a good day everybody and starve a librul reporter. Don’t buy a newspaper.

By DB, Gwinnettian

December 16, 2008 11:53 AM | Link to this

Snarky @ 11.39, like you said.

I’d had a broad-based conversation about the future of news outlets with some conservative friends this weekend. Both acknowledged that the “liberal” news outlets were, in fact, the primary resources for virtually all the stuff being regurgitated on their NewsMax/WND-type sites and worried about what would happen if such resources were to go away. As well they should.

Obviously, the NYTimes learned that people in the early part of the 21st century would NOT pay extra for exclusive online content but I have to wonder if that will hold. I think some kind of pay-to-read model will have to arise in time; I think there will be a real hunger for local and national news reporting that’s independent. Put it this way—bad as the press-release-ish news is now, it could be a lot worse, and I suspect it will be in the near term as more papers find themselves unable to make ends meet.

I’ve subscribed to one daily paper or another for over 20 years. To be honest, the way things are now I’d probably let my AJC subscription lapse but for my better half, who still vastly prefers reading a dead-tree version over an online one. Me, I like the ten minutes or so I spend over breakfast with the AJC, but other than a bit more time on Sunday mornings, just don’t really wolf down a paper, cover-to-cover, like I used to.

By Roy

December 16, 2008 11:59 AM | Link to this

The sooner liberal rags like the AJC shut down, the better off we will all be. The only downside I see is what will we use for fish wrapping and lining the bottom of the bird cage?

By Michael H. Smith

December 16, 2008 12:06 PM | Link to this

Feeling threatened, Jay? If not you probably should. The same arguments were likely made when cars replaced the horse and buggy. Ah the lash makers lament.

The problem is newsprint can’t outrun the electron. The speed of life is approaching the speed of light. News is news for the whole of about 15 minutes: About the same amount of time everyone is supposedly to feel fame.

Wasn’t it the writers of the AJC, particularly this editorial board that dogmatically insisted that flat world globalization is inevitable?

Newspapers as you’ve known them will go the way of the dinosaurs.

Welcome to the inevitable AJC editorial board of the wired - flat - world.

It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the ones most responsive to change.

• Charles Darwin

By Joey

December 16, 2008 12:11 PM | Link to this

I have two subscriptions to the AJC. I read it everyday. Along with internet news outlets.

It is frustrating to me that the AJC is so politically biased as well as biased in favor of things Inside the Perimeter.

A few years ago they did make an effort to include more conservative editorials, but the selected them for effect. Also they never hesitated to edit them for effect. The two times I chalenged them about the editing, they gave “lack of space” excuses. Truth is that selecting and purchasing commentaries that play into their portrayal of conservatives is a far cry from having conservatives on the board to debate the AJC position.

I remain convinced that if owners and management would have balance the Editorial Board politically and geographically five or so years ago the AJC could have ended the erosion of their circulation. Not sure about advertising, but I would guess that advertising revenues would be tied to circulation.

I fear it is too late now.

By RealityKing

December 16, 2008 12:16 PM | Link to this

Americans are not tired of newspapers. We’re just tried of agenda filtered truths by progressively dumbed down journalists. No??? Then why the equal ratings fall at ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and most the other liberal networks??

By Soixante huitard

December 16, 2008 12:29 PM | Link to this

This one here from the Independent UK: http://tinyurl.com/5sljg6.

Despite all the doom and gloom, the picture’s really not necessarily all that bleak.

By Soixante huitard

December 16, 2008 12:30 PM | Link to this

This one here from the Independent UK: http://tinyurl.com/5sljg6 is also quite good.

Despite all the doom and gloom, the picture’s really not necessarily all that bleak.

By Bosch

December 16, 2008 12:33 PM | Link to this

Reality King,

I’m tired of newspapers. They kill too many trees. I haven’t read an actual, physical newspaper in years.

By getalife

December 16, 2008 12:38 PM | Link to this

Papers should cut dead weight like gop hacks, Kristol, Wooten, Broder. etc…

They have no credibility giving w a free pass for destroying our country.

By gadem

December 16, 2008 12:38 PM | Link to this

So Andy, that explains your intellectual capacity…I would like to first apologize to your parents. You actually chose to be uninformed and xenophobic…GREAT CHOICE girl!

By Bosch

December 16, 2008 12:40 PM | Link to this

Does anybody know anything about Arne Duncan - Obama’s pick for Ed. Secretary? I’ve read the quicky CNN article.

I’ve never heard of him.

I’d have picked Howard Gardner, or Bill Ayers, but that’s just me.

By AJC/DNC Management

December 16, 2008 12:41 PM | Link to this

The Urinal; yesterday’s news with an anti American twist-

Iraqis find a ‘hero’ in shoeless reporter

Most mature people see actions such as this as proof of civilization’s coarseness and decline but not the wormy juveniles at the AJC, adult teenage liars gone wild, they found themselves a “hero.”

A virtual Animal House for morons.

Without many paying customers.

By RealityKing

December 16, 2008 12:43 PM | Link to this

Our opinion

This is what I hear when reading most all AJC articles. And why I read so few..

By MikeB

December 16, 2008 12:46 PM | Link to this

When large new organizations (NYT, Cox, R. Murdoch ect.) took it upon themselves to create stories about current events, rather than report the stories they wrote about……… This is when the cynicism kicked in for me.

The media needs to get away from the theory that they are needed to sway a persons opinion, one way or the other. They also need to quit pandering to readership demographics. that does not sell papers because it compromises journalistic integrity, and eventually jades the consumer.

The news should be, the news. If a question needs to be asked about a situation or event, if a person needs to be investigated regardless of political affiliation it should be done. Too often we see newspaper reporters and other members of the media avoid asking and following up on hard questions. “Going soft” on a person being reported on one side of an issue, while lynching a person on the opposite side. This is the BS that consumers are deciding with their wallets not to pay for. Until this farce of a reporting style is expunged from the stories written, The AJC, The NYT and other papers reporting in this fashion will have eroding circulation numbers to deal with.

Please do not twist the economics of media consumption to avoid putting this on the table. This is the real deal.

Opinions of reporters and editors should be restricted to the Opinion section only.

By Wyld Byll Hyltnyr

December 16, 2008 12:48 PM | Link to this

Do the newspapers have a plan to go carbon neutral; if not they have no future. How can any caring intelligent (i.e. conservative) person justified the dimunition of the rain forest and the large carbon footprint that is needed to deliver the AJC to one’s doorstep.

ps - sorry about yesterday’s off color comment, Jay.

By Dave R.

December 16, 2008 12:50 PM | Link to this

If the death of newspapers puts people who do not produce anything but hot air out of work, I’m all for the death of newspapers.

The best quote to sum up columnists and their worth is from the Disney movie, Ratatouille:

“In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face is that, in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is more meaningful than our criticism designating it so.”

Pretty much describes you, Bookman.

By Bosch

December 16, 2008 12:52 PM | Link to this

I have to say I miss the days of straight up reporting. I watched a news conference the other day about something insignificant and by the end of the conference the news folks had twisted it all around to be something racy. I just rolled my eyes.

That’s why campaigns are so ridiculous now. Like this Obama/Blagojevich thing.

I’ll say it again: one of the worst things to EVER happen to this country is the onset of 24/7 news channels.

By Bosch

December 16, 2008 12:55 PM | Link to this

Dave R.,

I love that movie. That rat rocks.

But Bookman IS in the Opinion section, remember? Most people realize this column DOES reflect his OPINION.

By Midori

December 16, 2008 12:55 PM | Link to this

The only time I “buy” newspapers is when I’m out and about, and put in a situation where I have to “wait” (doctor’s office, restaurant, etc.).

It’s just too handy, convenient and thrifty not to regularly read my news on line.

By red state antonym

December 16, 2008 12:55 PM | Link to this

You right wing idiots are always complaining about the AJC being liberal. The editorial pages may be a bit more liberal than editorials in other papers but it does allow conservative voices regularly. Woot, George Will, Bill Kristol all have regular columns in the editorials. I’ll admit that the liberal side with Tucker, Bookman, King and Luko, do have a numerical advantage.

Most of the letters printed seem to come from the whiners who live north of I-20, meaning they have a conservative slant.

If you want a conservatibe newspaper where even the stories take on a conservative slant, subscribe to the NY Post. That’s a real birdcage liner.

By Soixante huitard

December 16, 2008 12:57 PM | Link to this

The best quote to sum up columnists and their worth is from the Disney movie, Ratatouille. (Dave R)

That’s funny. Speaking of Disney. Didn’t they get themselves into a little dustup over partisanship, sponsorship and claims of censorship when a certain movie was released a few years ago?

By Midori

December 16, 2008 12:58 PM | Link to this

Ok, fess up!! What have you guys done to Newt???!!??

I was saddened to learn that at a time of national trial, when a president-elect is preparing to take office in the midst of the worst financial crisis in over seventy years, that the Republican National Committee is engaged in the sort of negative, attack politics that the voters rejected in the 2006 and 2008 election cycles.

The recent web advertisement, “Questions Remain,” is a destructive distraction. Clearly, we should insist that all taped communications regarding the Senate seat should be made public. However, that should be a matter of public policy, not an excuse for political attack.

In a time when America is facing real challenges, Republicans should be working to help the incoming President succeed in meeting them, regardless of his Party.

From now until the inaugural, Republicans should be offering to help the President-elect prepare to take office.

Furthermore, once President Obama takes office, Republicans should be eager to work with him when he is right, and, when he is wrong, offer a better solution, instead of just opposing him.

This is the only way the Republican Party will become known as the “better solutions” party, not just an opposition party. And this is the only way Republicans will ever regain the trust of the voters to return to the majority.

This ad is a terrible signal to be sending about both the goals of the Republican Party in the midst of the nation’s troubled economic times and about whether we have actually learned anything from the defeats of 2006 and 2008.

The RNC should pull the ad down immediately.

By Jack

December 16, 2008 12:58 PM | Link to this

I’d pay double the price for the AJC print edition & would pay to read an on-line version if only I could find something that wasn’t cloned from the other anti-American, liberal rags.

By larry

December 16, 2008 1:03 PM | Link to this

The Unholy Alliance of the Media (newspapers, local and network television news and Hollywood) with the political Left is what is responsible for newspapers’ decline and the decline in television ratings. Increasingly large numbers of people simply don’t care to be assaulted by the constant propaganda. Even the brain dead minions of the Left are growing bored with the never-changing tripe put out by their leaders (very dutifully passed on by the media) telling them how to think.

Good riddance to bad rubbish is my response to the decline of newspapers in this country.

By DB, Gwinnettian

December 16, 2008 1:06 PM | Link to this

“Most people realize this column DOES reflect his OPINION.”

Actually, I suspect percentage of people who comprehend the difference between news, news analysis, and opinion when it’s presented to them in print or online is well under 50 percent.

And I probably shouldn’t feed the trolls, but really, boys—if there were such a pent-up demand for a more conservative daily newspaper, why isn’t the Moonie Times turning a profit? Why is the NY Post such a bust? Hell’s bells, why don’t YOU GUYS pool your massive wealth and publish one if it’s so frickin’ easy to do?

By findog

December 16, 2008 1:08 PM | Link to this

Slate tried a pay to get past the fron porch, didn’t make it through a full year. NY Times tried to charge to read Dowd, made it a year. Walmart’s business model is to advertise until the little guy is out of business and then cut back, hurting smaller papers. I do not see how the editorial page drives subscribers in an intelligent society. Now if editorial direction is so slanted that you cannot trust your news source then a wise person would move along to a new source. I quit the AJC print edition when they could not get the Sunday commics printed cleanly, the majic eye illusion will not work with an out of focus printer…

By Bosch

December 16, 2008 1:14 PM | Link to this

Can any of the AJC critics point out an ARTICLE that proves them to be a liberal rag?

By Citizen of the World

December 16, 2008 1:22 PM | Link to this

The online newspaper: free. The print newspaper: 50 cents Knowing what’s going on in the world: priceless.

What’s wrong with this picture? Newspapers need to charge more for the print version and require a subscription for online service.

By CommunistAJC

December 16, 2008 1:25 PM | Link to this

Bosch, Sure, just look at what party the AJC supports in every election. Nuff said.

As for the AJC, the only thing it’s useful for is coupons in the Sunday edition.

Jay, You and your fellow “journalists” have ZERO credibility. From Dan Rather making up a document about W’s NG service to NBC hiring a former Jimmy Carter staff member to host his own show. People are sick of the bias that comes from people like you. Plus, most people in Georgia can not stand Cynthia Tucker. It’s not her skin color but her attitude towards whitey.

By BDAtlanta

December 16, 2008 1:31 PM | Link to this

Bosch, Here is a critical article from last week by a guy that didnt want to see Duncan get the job. The interesting parts are down near the bottom.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20081229/kohn?rel=hp_picks

Interesting read…but I don’t like the sounds of “more standardized testing, closing neighborhood schools, militarization, and the privatization of school management”

By GOP is gone

December 16, 2008 1:31 PM | Link to this

Amen, Gwinnettian. And it is nice to know I have at least one fellow Gwinnettian with good sense. Why don’t Management, Andy, Bud, Ray and the Corporal all pony up and start their own brand of Newspaper. I mean they should do well in this area. If they can get investors to continue giving like that Madoff guy could, the top pyramid guys should be able to make a living.

By Soixante huitard

December 16, 2008 1:31 PM | Link to this

if only I could find something that wasn’t cloned from the other anti-American, liberal rags

But Jack, my friend, this statement presupposes that we accept your automatic equation of “liberal” and “anti-American”.

Now from what perspective are you making such an assumption?

This is an open forum here and here you typically must justify your assertions. So where does it come from? From the same place, maybe, from which a certain provincial elected representative from this state speaks when he refers to Obama as a Marxist?

In other words, the rustic musings of people whose thinking typically doesn’t see beyond the briar-laden hills encircling them to the world outside?

Is that where that comes from Jack?

By GOP is gone

December 16, 2008 1:32 PM | Link to this

Amen, Gwinnettian. And it is nice to know I have at least one fellow Gwinnettian with good sense. Why don’t Management, Andy, Bud, Ray and the Corporal all pony up and start their own brand of Newspaper. I mean they should do well in this area. If they can get investors to continue giving like that Madoff guy could, the top pyramid guys should be able to make a living.

By Billy

December 16, 2008 1:33 PM | Link to this

Why is it that the so-called “conservatives” have to ruin all chances of intelligent discourse in the AJC forums? It is a waste of time to read the forums.

By Davo

December 16, 2008 1:33 PM | Link to this

The elephant in the room ragarding the AJC that no one will discuss…the Sunday Un-funnies.

Please, Please…I long for the day when a serial killer finally ends the Family Circus and Nancy’s crack-head mother regains custody.

By WhoCares

December 16, 2008 1:36 PM | Link to this

The only reason people by the AJC is for the coupon for the penny item at Publix.It’s the out of touch with reality hacks like Bookman that are going to whine themselves right out of a job.

By DB, Gwinnettian

December 16, 2008 1:37 PM | Link to this

Davo, since you’re such a fan of Bil Keane’s artistic masterpieces, ever seen this?

By Kevin

December 16, 2008 1:37 PM | Link to this

I believe in this day of limitless blogs, the role of an opinion in a newspaper is nil. Consumers have more news options than ever.

Why on earth do I care about the opinion the editorial board of a newspaper? How does it help the situation for them to endorse political candidates?

All the editorial opinion pages does is to make half (or more) of your audience disagree with you. What kind of backward marketing is that?

I personally don’t buy the AJC for one reason: Cythia Tucker. She’s a race-baiter whose sole purpose in life is to make racial differences the cause of every problem. She doesn’t want Atlanta to move beyond race, because she’ll have nothing to write about. She strives to keep things stirred up.

Get rid of the editorial board and focus on REPORTING.

By Hillbilly Deluxe

December 16, 2008 1:38 PM | Link to this

I subscribe to one regional paper and 3 county papers up here in the hills. I’m not really happy with any of them. The majority of what they print is wasted space in my view. (The county papers are the official legal organs for the counties though. That’s why I take them.)

As for the AJC, my parents recently cancelled their subscription of 60 years. (Journal subscribers before the papers merged.) They say they don’t miss it.

By Jeremy

December 16, 2008 1:38 PM | Link to this

AJC/DNC Management why are you so anti-american? I have seen your post for a few months now and if you hate America that much Delta is ready when you are. I am beginning to wonder if the republican party has an anti-american wing.The hero post about the ajc headline was actually funny because you can’t be that stupid. It is called grammer. The Iraqi’s found a hero not the AJC. That is your free grammer leason for the day. Please do us all a favor if you really hate America that much just leave. If you don’t hate America as much as it sounds like you do then just be quiet.

By mm

December 16, 2008 1:42 PM | Link to this

Management,

If you want to keep up with what America’s enemies are doing, watch Fox News.

I can tell from your posts you certainly don’t watch/read “real” news.

And true to wingnut form, if a network or newspaper doesn’t lie about Democrats (and cover for Republicans), the wingnuts scream liberal MSM.

RIP Republican party. May God have mercy on your souls.

By Bosch

December 16, 2008 1:46 PM | Link to this

Communist AJC,

No, that isn’t enough said. Just because a paper endorses a particular candidate, doesn’t make them a liberal or conservative paper.

Again, can you show us ONE ARTICLE, not opinion piece that would prove the AJC is a liberal newspaper?

By CommunistAJC

December 16, 2008 1:49 PM | Link to this

mm, What do you consider “real news?” Just curious.

Algonquin J. Calhoun, By the way, I guess my opinion does matter because I convinced five people to cancel their subscriptions to this trash heap called the AJC. So suck on that, redneck!

By Bosch

December 16, 2008 1:50 PM | Link to this

Kevin,

Seriously? You don’t buy the AJC because of Cynthia Tucker? Wow. Then why do you blog here?

By Mike

December 16, 2008 1:51 PM | Link to this

Much of the blame also rests with Americans ourselves (collectively).

Even if the editorial content was exactly perfect, do you think the average American would actually take the time to actually inform himslef about current events in the world?

Not with Oprah, Dancing with the Stars, wrestling and NASCAR to worry about.

An ignorant, lazy society gets (is getting?) exactly what it deserves.

By RB from Gwinnett

December 16, 2008 1:51 PM | Link to this

Midori, That’s a nice request for the behavior of the Republican party. Would it be ok, however, if we just follow the example YOU and your fellow liberals set in your treatment of Bush? Surely you don’t expect us to treat Obama and differently than you’ve treated Bush, do you?

By CommunistAJC

December 16, 2008 1:56 PM | Link to this

Bosch, Here you go nimrod. I found this on Baracks own website. AJC endorses Barack Obama. Is this good enough for you or should I go and find every other democrat endorsed by the AJC? NUFF SAID.

Breaking: Atlanta Journal-Constitution Endorses Barack Obama By Sam Graham-Felsen

For Democrats, Obama the pick.

According to a recent Gallup poll, almost three out of four Americans are dissatisfied with how things are going in our country, with just 24 percent believing we’re headed in the right direction. The deep discontent reflected in those numbers have made Democrats optimistic about their party’s chances of electing one of their own to the White House in November.

However, the situation represents more than a mere opportunity; it imposes an obligation on the Democratic Party to offer the country a candidate who can inspire the American people, a candidate capable of addressing the many critical challenges, foreign and domestic, that will confront our next president and commander in chief.

At times of crisis, this country has always been blessed with strong, even visionary, leadership. But that has not been true for the last seven years. To the contrary, on almost every front we are suffering the consequences of slapdash, divisive leadership.

Economically, the country appears to be sliding into a recession; internationally, our reputation on the world stage has perhaps never been lower. Militarily, our men and women in uniform have been burdened with responsibilities that they lack the manpower to carry out over the long term, and with the aging of the Baby Boom generation and a soaring national debt, our financial obligations likewise threaten to overwhelm the resources we have committed to meet them.

In Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and Barack Obama, the Democrats offer Georgia voters three candidates with the experience, leadership and character to begin to turn this country around. However, only two of those candidates now harbor realistic hopes for the nomination.

Edwards, a former senator from neighboring North Carolina, has used his campaign to voice the growing anxiety and fear of many in America’s working and middle classes. It’s an important message, as recent days have confirmed, and with economic troubles ahead, the issues that Edwards has highlighted could prove central in determining the outcome of the general election.

However, judging from the reaction of primary voters, Edwards’ impassioned, crusading style may be better suited to a House or Senate race than a race for the presidency. He remains a distant third in most polls, and his hopes for the nomination no longer seem realistic.

That leaves Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York and Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois. On questions of policy, not much separates the two. Their approaches toward health care, tax policy, foreign relations and the suppression of Islamic terrorism vary only at the margins.

(In fact, that similarity probably accounts for the dismaying pettiness of the disputes between the Obama and Clinton camps in recent days. Campaigns have to argue, and with little of real import separating them, they are now arguing over the little things and in some cases the imaginary things.)

The question, then, is which of the two candidates would be more able to implement the policies they agree upon.

Throughout the campaign, Clinton has argued that she has the better grasp of official Washington, which is probably true. Through hard work and intelligence, she has built an admirable record of success as a senator that has impressed even some Republican colleagues.

Unfortunately, the opposite is true as well — official Washington also has a better grasp on Clinton.

Perhaps burned by her experience in her husband’s administration, she has too often chosen to play within the Washington system rather than dare to challenge its assumptions. And that’s not the kind of leadership needed at the moment.

The prime example of that instinct was probably Clinton’s vote last year in favor of naming Iran’s Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist group. While that stance kept her in good standing in certain Washington circles, it also fed what at the time was a rising push toward military confrontation with Iran that was unnecessary and dangerous. Even voters willing to set aside Clinton’s earlier vote giving President Bush authority to invade Iraq were taken aback when she seemed to have repeated that mistake.

For reasons largely outside her control, Clinton is also one of the more reviled figures in American politics. That sentiment is unfair and irrational, and she has done little to deserve it. But it exists nonetheless, and it would limit the amount of public support she would be able to rally as president.

Obama, on the other hand, has demonstrated an appeal across many of the lines that have divided America. That is a critically important attribute, because the scale of changes that must be made to correct America’s course cannot be accomplished with majorities of 50 percent plus one.

Different moments in history require different types of leaders, and part of the art of picking a president is matching the person to the challenge and to the time. So while both Clinton and Obama would make very good presidents, Obama is the person; this is his time.

By Tipper

December 16, 2008 1:59 PM | Link to this

Printing newspapers is bad for climate change. Newspapers are killing the planet. AlGore should be outraged.

By CommunistAJC

December 16, 2008 2:00 PM | Link to this

Bosch, So why do people like you scream BIAS at Fox News? I’ve showed proof about the AJC’s hypocrisy about media bias when they themselves fully endorse a certain party. Feel free to call me a nazi, racist or right-winger because it’s pretty much all you have left. The AJC is an opinionated newspaper. What else do you want? Almost everything in the AJC is an opinion and that is why they are failing badly. By the way, do you work there because you and Calhoun seem to get pretty angry when people write negatively about the newspaper?

By Dusty

December 16, 2008 2:04 PM | Link to this

What a laugh. Librals want to see something that proves that they and their designated newsknocker the AJC are LIBERAL LEFTIES!

Did any of you come to the “shoe throwing” blog and read every ugly remark that could be made about President Bush, Iraq, the USA, our “killer” troops and a few death wishes for the President by consumate complaining liberal Democrats?

And now you want PROOF?? What fools ye liberals be!!

By The Corporal

December 16, 2008 2:07 PM | Link to this

I still miss the evening Atlanta Journal.

By Bosch

December 16, 2008 2:13 PM | Link to this

Communist AJC,

Fox News isn’t a newspaper.

I really don’t see the bias in stories like this:

Pedestrian killed on I-85 in Dekalb County

Now, I’m not arguing that news outlets like Fox and CNN aren’t biased, I’m trying to see how people can consider newspapers biased for simply reporting the news. Television outlets have hours and hours of analysis and pundits giving their opinions, etc. which I find rather irritating sometimes, but newspapers, no, they report stories.

And no, you’ve shown me no proof that the AJC is a liberal rag because they endorsed Obama. They simply endorsed them, big deal.

And no, I don’t work for the AJC, or feel the need to call you a nazi, nor am I the least bit angry.

If you simply read the news article in the paper, any newspaper, not the opinion sections (which, by the way, the AJC has opinions from both sides politically), I find it hard how anyone can claim such a bias.

By rd

December 16, 2008 2:15 PM | Link to this

When I was in grade school, I was taught that news reporting was supposed to be objective.

Statistical analysis shows that the articles put out by major news outlets (newspapers and MSM) is overwhelmingly liberal. Polls among reporters and editorial boards show that they are overwhelmingly and unapoligetically liberal, and overwhelming contribute to liberal candidates. In the last presidential campaign, we new more about joe the plumber than Tony Rezko. We knew more about the Tina Fey Sarah Palin than the real Sarah Palin.

Even now, the AJC will report about the pitiful state of state mental hospitals (and how we should spend more) while not telling us that we spend $266,000 per patient. There is an obvious problem with black racism in Clayton County… much to the detriment of homeowners and students there… but when was the last time the AJC called them out on that? And yet they will cover a few comments made by a member of the BOE in Gwinnett, a county which will soon be minority white, like he was a member of the KKK.

If you want to save your newspaper, start publishing objective news. If you want to save your jobs, start reporting BOTH sides of the issues. It is not sufficient to give space to one lone conservative voice in a paper full of yellow left-leaning news. But you know what? My comment here will fall on deaf ears and you’ll be out of a job in 10 years.

By GodHatesTrash

December 16, 2008 2:19 PM | Link to this

I didn’t realize that Duke had such low admission standards.

Must be a lacrosse player.

By mm

December 16, 2008 2:20 PM | Link to this

Oh yes, we have Dusty and RB still defending Bush. Good man. Bad President. I don’t care if he’s dem, GOP, Independant, etc. He was a BAD president.

Commie, “real” news is from a source that does not show graphics like “Democrat” on the screen while showing a disgraced Republican politician. That excludes Fox News.

“Real” news is from a source that is not left or right leaning. That excludes Democratic Underground and Weekly Standard, Rush Limbaugh and Randi Rhodes, Sean Hannity and Keith Oberman.

By CommunistAJC

December 16, 2008 2:22 PM | Link to this

Bosch, Remember the movie JAWS? Remember the mayor and how he needed PROOF of a great white shark? Then you will also remember how Richard Dreyfus said ” the only way you’ll believe me about the shark is if it comes up and bites you on the a$$!” Great line and it proves just how biased you really are. The AJC doesn’t report news. That’s what channel 2 action news is for. No, the AJC reports how white people are evil, see Cynthia Tucker, and how stupid Bush and Sarah Palin are, see Jay Bookman. Yes, when a newspaper FULLY endorses the democrat party over the republican party 10-0 then a person can make the assumption that it is fully in the tank for a particular party. Get it?

By the way, the AJC does not report UP TO THE MINUTE NEWS ABOUT TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS. THATS WHAT WSB IS FOR.

By Bosch

December 16, 2008 2:23 PM | Link to this

rd,

If the newspaper did report such things, then that would be opinionated. Maybe that’s why they don’t.

$266,000/mental patient? According to whom? Is that for every patient over the course of how long? Just curious.

By Ms. Tucker if U R Nasty

December 16, 2008 2:26 PM | Link to this

As long as the Urinal-Constipation is run by a bunch of lib hacks, then the paper will continue its downward spiral. This is what happens to any enterprise that libs run. I have been wondering when the Urinal-Constipation, NYSlimes, WashingtonCompost and the others will b e asking for some bailout money.

By GodHatesTrash

December 16, 2008 2:29 PM | Link to this

Cable TV offers me the opportunity to watch The Daily Show and The Colbert Report reruns, which I do a couple of times a week. I love how they lampoon the kkkriminals in the White House and the morons that love them.

They are a lot less biased than Fox News, and a whole lot funnier.

And smarter, but so is my dog…

By CommunistAJC

December 16, 2008 2:29 PM | Link to this

mm, Ok, so with your logic let me show you a rebuttal. CNN places large X over Dick Cheney during a speech. Bias? YES. CNN, CBS, NBC AND ABC ALL FAIL TO SHOW THE LETTER “D” BESIDE ROD BLAGO LAST WEEK. Dan Rather makes up fake documents on Bush. Chris Matthews says Obama gives him a chill up his leg. Shall I provide more bias to you?

By the way, WHO said anything about Rush or Hannity? They are not news anchors. Also, 90% of the reporters and news media in general are registered democrats.

List: Katie Couric, Dan Rather, Chris Matthews, George Snufalofagus, Wolf Blitzer, Anderson Cooper, Matt Lauer, Bob Schiefer, Brian Williams, David Gregory, Diane Sawyer, Cookie Roberts, etc….. ALL REGISTERED DEMOCRATS.

By CommunistAJC

December 16, 2008 2:31 PM | Link to this

GodHatesTrash, Duke has low admissions? Since when? By the way, I’d love to know what university or community college you attended.

By Bosch

December 16, 2008 2:34 PM | Link to this

Communist AJC,

Bookman, Tucker, and Wooten for that matter are Opinions writers.

And I’m not sure how a quote from a movie about a nasty man-eating shark proves how biased I am.

And I also don’t see the bias in stories like:

Atlanta to warm up to near-record highs

Of course, if you want to read the whole global warming issue into it. But they certainly don’t mention it.

I see your point about endorsements, but I disagree. Is that allowed?

By GodHatesTrash

December 16, 2008 2:35 PM | Link to this

update on the shoe-thrower:

…Mr al-Zaidi is held by Iraqi forces in the heavily fortified Green Zone compound in central Baghdad, where the US embassy and most government offices are housed.

“He has got a broken arm and ribs, and cuts to his eye and arm,” he said. “He is being held by forces under the command of Muwafaq al-Rubaie [Iraq’s national security adviser].” Television pictures from the press conference show Mr al-Zaidi being carried away by prime ministerial guards but no sign of excess violence.

The BBC reports that he may have sustained the injuries while in custody.

The brother of the Iraqi journalist who threw his shoes at US President George W Bush has said that the reporter has been beaten in custody. ….

The head of Iraq’s journalists’ union told the BBC that officials told him Mr Zaidi was being treated well.

The union head, Mouyyad al-Lami, said he hoped to visit his colleague later.

Reuters reports that al-Zeidi was injured during clashes with security at the press conference with Bush, and he was hit in the head with a rifle butt. Reuters also reports that al-Zeidi could be sentenced to two to seven years in prison… (emphasis mine)

Bush-style democracy…

Pathetic

By spankmonkey

December 16, 2008 2:35 PM | Link to this

Er… aaaaah…, I thought we were not to mount personal attacks, you know just like Andy is doing right now… Of course maybe he’ll bust a vein in his head and have to stay away from blogs for a while, so… nevermind…

Quality tirades BTW Andy, good stuff…

By The Corporal

December 16, 2008 2:35 PM | Link to this

Algonquin J. Calhoun

Did you really know the Kingfish and lightnin’??

By NRB

December 16, 2008 2:37 PM | Link to this

Good riddance to your liberal garbage. See you on the street corner trying to sell pencils out of a tin cup, jay.

By spankmonkey

December 16, 2008 2:41 PM | Link to this

This must be grumpy conservative day… Oh wait that’s every day for the “hey you kids get off my lawn” types…

Anyway, I saw Dusty’s post lamenting all the folks calling our troops “killers” on the shoe throwing blog, went to look myself, did a search on the page for the word “killer” and found nothing.

Did Jay take some posts down?

By GodHatesTrash

December 16, 2008 2:41 PM | Link to this

I graduated from an Ivy.

I have always heard that Duke was a good school, well-financed with tebakkky money. North Carolina has some of the best universities in the south (not that that’s saying much), which accounts for Obama’s recent victory there.

But in your case, somebody fooled or paid off somebody, or you’ve since suffered severe head trauma.

By Bosch

December 16, 2008 2:42 PM | Link to this

I also find it quite disturbing that so many of the Bookman critics show such ill-will towards him - they actually WANT him to lose his job.

I don’t like Wooten’s columns so much, but I don’t wish the man ill-will and hope he loses his job. That’s really nuts.

By Wackolibhack

December 16, 2008 2:45 PM | Link to this

It is Bush’s fault that newspapers are going the way of the Dodo bird. Bush made the AJC liberal. Bush hates the AJC and I hate Bush!!!!!!

By BJ

December 16, 2008 2:45 PM | Link to this

Face it, us “whiteys” do want to pay to read your biased, lefty news. Although I did get a nice chuckle out of that AP story yesterday that actually claimed that because we are having a colder winter than last year that “global warming” is actually worse than thought. How do you guys keep coming up with this stuff?

Word on the street is that ya’ll are moving your printing out of ATL to Gwinnett County. Hmm, not enough qualified workers in the inner city? Or a tax dodge? Hmmm.

Bj

By CommunistAJC

December 16, 2008 2:51 PM | Link to this

GodHatesTrash, It is a great school, comrade. Duke has more money from the health sector. Remember, it is 2008 and not 1908. I’ve figured you out comrade. Ivy League? Which one?

Bosch, Sigh. Goodness. Bosch, when opinions spill over in to how a newspaper writes and edits it’s articles people get suspicious. It’s fine to disagree with me and I’d rather debate with you then name call with the other lame bloggers on this site. At least you have the courtesy not to call me a nazi or a racist for pointing things out. I’m off to Borders to pick up a few books in the snow. Remember, I live in Obama country. Cook County, IL. Better known as Chicago. Want to trade politicians? I’d love to trade in this group of democrats for your group of republicans. At least my taxes would go down.

By spankmonkey

December 16, 2008 2:52 PM | Link to this

Bosch, why would you be in any way surprised? Yopu’ve been around here for a while, you know the regular wingnuts, and you’ve read thier rantings… He!! just look at Andy’s postings from today, he’s definately unhinged today.

I’m just surprised they’re not wishing bad things to happen to Jay’s family as well…

By Bosch

December 16, 2008 3:10 PM | Link to this

Communist AJC,

If you return…..

I googled the article you posted about the endorsement of Obama, and I noticed that the article was, in itself, printed in the OPINION section.

Now, I’m certainly what you would consider a liberal and you are certainly what I consider to be a conservative, so I think we can both agree that we harbor some biases.

However, I read the AJC on-line every day, and I’ve yet seen an article, an actual news article, that showed where the reporter had biased liberal leanings. I know that could be my biases showing through, and that was one of my original points in our discussion:

I asked for one article, not from the opinion section, that shows the AJC is a liberal newspaper.

If you or anyone else would post such an article and explain it’s bias, I’m all ears.

By AJC/DNC Management

December 16, 2008 3:25 PM | Link to this

By DB, Gwinnettian December 16, 2008 1:06 PM And I probably shouldn’t feed the trolls, but really, boys—if there were such a pent-up demand for a more conservative daily newspaper, why isn’t the Moonie Times turning a profit?

You may want to check this out but the Drudge Report and the Wall Street Journal are tearing your as-ses up.

~~~~~

By Bosch December 16, 2008 1:14 PM Can any of the AJC critics point out an ARTICLE that proves them to be a liberal rag?

This is a joke, right?

~~~~~~

By GOP is gone December 16, 2008 1:31 PM Why don’t Management, Andy, Bud, Ray and the Corporal all pony up and start their own brand of Newspaper.

1) I get my news from other more responsible sources, that is not a problem and anybody can see that because I am always up with current events. I read this rag to keep an eye on what America’s enemies are thinking and to get a good laugh.

2) Judging from the content of your comments, which usually consist of moonbat talking points such as Palin’s wardrobe, you may be the one who reevaluates the information you are receiving.

~~~~~

By spankmonkey December 16, 2008 2:52 PM I’m just surprised they’re not wishing bad things to happen to Jay’s family as well…

I’m not a mental defective liberal like you are, spankmonkey, taking this way too seriously and completely unable to debate or discuss the issues.

Just sit it the background and whine, you got that covered.

By RaceCop

December 16, 2008 3:27 PM | Link to this

It is racist to call the AJC liberal.

By Bosch

December 16, 2008 3:31 PM | Link to this

Andy,

No, it’s not a joke. I just ask for one NEWS story, and the Opinion section doesn’t count, that shows the AJC is a liberal newspaper.

By Ms. Tucker if U R Nasty

December 16, 2008 3:38 PM | Link to this

The Opinion section sets the tone of the paper. Give me a break, Bosch. If this paper had a conservative leaning editorial board you would be going nuts. This paper is getting what it deserves. I hope they close down. I think the Urinal-Constipation lost something like 13% of its readership last year. The problem is that most lib voters do not read newspapers. They listen to rap and read celeb mags.

By Drew

December 16, 2008 3:45 PM | Link to this

I love newspapers. I learned to read reading the Miami Herald every day, I have always subscribed to a local paper and looked forward to reading other cities’ newspapers when I traveled. I have worked for newspapers and I’ve created advertising that didn’t come to life until in was in print. When I wake up in the morning, one of the things I look forward to is fetching my morning paper.

But I’m in the minority. Newspapers are dead. They’re wasteful and dirty, cost thousands of dollars daily to distribute and frankly, they look a lot worse than they used to. And the AJC, for one, largely tailors it’s editorial content to the exact people who don’t read papers anymore. Just like my Miami Herald who finds itself publishing an english-language paper to a largely spanish-speaking populace, you’re speaking to a crowd that largely considers you irrelevant… while alienating the people who might be able to keep you afloat, for at least a few more years.

But ultimately it doesn’t matter…. when I can get my news (tailored to my interests, no less) with a few fingerstrokes on my smartphone, why do I need to give the AJC $150 every year? (Sometimes you ask for a lot more than that!) Perhaps you can find ways to make the advertising model work online. I hope so. Good luck.

By AJC/DNC Management

December 16, 2008 3:48 PM | Link to this

By Bosch December 16, 2008 3:31 PM Andy, No, it’s not a joke. I just ask for one NEWS story, and the Opinion section doesn’t count, that shows the AJC is a liberal newspaper.

10-4, from today’s edition-

Wall St. scheme spread the pain- Respected investor in $50 billion case drew in everything from big shots to small nest eggs.Urinal/Pravda

This dude had nothing to do with Wall Street, he plied his trade by word of mouth with the country club set.

But the AJC hates capitalists and the fattest capitalist target around; Wall Street.

The U.S. military said a detainee died of an apparent heart attack while in custody at a U.S. detention facility near Baghdad’s airport. Monday’s statement said the 25-year-old man was pronounced dead by doctors at a combat hospital after losing consciousness at Camp Cropper. It did not give his name or nationality or say why he was being held.-Urinal/Jihad

Huh? (Bad!!! America.)

Impeachment panel named in Illinois scandal-Urinal/DNC

“Illinois scandal?”

Oblahmi’s senate seat?

Nichols trial holdouts: ‘Show me something’-Urinal/PMS

How about the judge with the top of his head blown off?

By Chuck

December 16, 2008 3:54 PM | Link to this

Bosch, I defy you to find an edition of this newspaper that doesn’t find a racial spin to one story or another. Every day. That’s been my experience.

By Dusty

December 16, 2008 3:55 PM | Link to this

spankmonkey@2:41

You did not read the “shoe throwing” blog too closely, did you? This is where I derived the word “killer” in reference to our military as written by a liberal blogger.

Midori @ 12:13 …Dec. 15

“The Iraqis can also thank George Bush and the US Military for millions of dead and disabled wives and husbands.”

The she added:

“You don’t ‘liberate’ people with the butt of a gun or bombs from the sky.

She is referring to our USA MILITARY in Iraq.

That is why I say “Disgusting!” You defend such talk as this. I will not.

By Midori

December 16, 2008 4:04 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

can’t you find another message board to haunt?

RB,

huh??

I have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about, which puts me light years ahead of Dusty.

By Maniac is accurate

December 16, 2008 4:08 PM | Link to this

The problem won’t be when the wood fiber paper goes away, it’ll be when the reporting goes away. All you who complain about the editorial pages lump the reporting and the opinions together and that’s stupid. Newspaper journalism is still the best in the world. CNN is smart. They are starting to hire some print folks and it is making their Web site much better. Their TV ads can carry both entities.

By Dusty

December 16, 2008 4:09 PM | Link to this

Midori @4:04

Whatsa matter? Don’t like your own words?

You ARE light years ahead. Way out in space, that is.

By Yeah I said it, so what?

December 16, 2008 4:10 PM | Link to this

Some of YOU hacks have no lives, that’s why you come to AJC.com; to rant and moan because your life is so miserable. You take the high and mighty position that your infinite wisdom rises above the “liberal drivel”. You see, your rather small mind only allows you to put things into proverbial boxes. If you cannot grasp a concept or idea, label it as “liberal” in an effort to discount it and push it aside. That way, you don’t have to deal with your own mental impotence.

As much as you hate this so-called “liberal rag”, you flock to it everyday to heap a helping of your miserable little lives onto the blog writer and others who want to engage in discussion, even if it means having divergent opinions. Oh ye self-righteous! What vermin you are.

By spankmonkey

December 16, 2008 4:12 PM | Link to this

I don’t defend anything. I have a younger Brother who almost lost his life to an IED outside Falujah in 2004. And a father who served in the Navy and then the Army in Vietnam.

However the constitution defends Midori’s talk all day long.

I obviously lean to left of you, but not for a second will I refer to our service people as “killers” nor do I especially see Midori’s post as such.

By Bud Wiser

December 16, 2008 4:16 PM | Link to this

Too late Dusty.

Dimrodi gor pulled.

She’s probably out selling somethin’ in the hood as we speak to pay her way on the Obama Love Boat to Washington.

By Midori

December 16, 2008 4:17 PM | Link to this

What are you going to do now, Dusty?

Huff and Puff and blow my house down?

I have no time for your “outrage du jour”.

Spankmonkey - consider the source. She must be cranky because her broomstick is on the fritz.

By The Corporal

December 16, 2008 4:22 PM | Link to this

Sorry, but some of you guys asked for this again!

When civilized man can no longer stand the horror of war and refuses to fight, then he will surely be killed or enslaved by the uncivilized who can.

Author Unknown

By Bosch

December 16, 2008 4:24 PM | Link to this

Andy,

Are you saying these things didn’t happen? Or, are you saying that just the mere fact that the AJC reported these things make them liberal?

Chuck,

Are you talking about the entire newspaper including the opinion section or are you talking about the news stories that the reporters write? Your answer is a little broad and vague.

Ms. Tucker,

The opinion section sets the tone? How’s that exactly? And no, I wouldn’t go nuts if the editorial board were conservative, I’d do like I do now, I’d read the news stories, and skip the conservative columns I don’t care for - or at least read them less often. Even if the board were conservative, I’d trust them to report the news and not make stuff up that didn’t happen.

My hometown paper is rather conservative if you go by the opinion section, but the news they report is, well, news most of the time - I never question whether or not something actually happened….do you think I should?

Like the article I posted earlier about the pedestrian getting killed on I-85, are you questioning whether or not that actually happened, or do you think that the reporter who wrote the story put some kind of liberal twist to it. He did mention the poor individual was Hispanic…….hmmmmmm.

So the readership of the actual print newspaper is down by 13%, I wonder how many hits ajc.com got? I wonder if there were an increase? Got any stats on that?

By GreenJeans

December 16, 2008 4:26 PM | Link to this

Like Jesus?

By Maniac is accurate

December 16, 2008 4:26 PM | Link to this

The problem at the small newspapers is bad, too. They will survive longer due to less Web use in rural areas, people clipping scrapbook local photos, etc. But, guess what, the editor of your local paper makes about what a beginning school teacher makes. You get the paper the publisher decides to pay for.

By Dusty

December 16, 2008 4:27 PM | Link to this

spankmonkey@4:12

Nobody has said you cannot say anything disgusting when you feel like it.(Except Bookman!)

You go tell your younger brother that he is leaving millions of dead and disabled wives and husbands in Iraq and see if he thinks he is being called a “killer”.

I believe he will be a little more perceptible than you.

By Dusty

December 16, 2008 4:33 PM | Link to this

Dear Midori @4:17

I have no interest whatsoever in your home or the three little pigs who live therein.

Got any more sunshine you want to spread around?

By Midori

December 16, 2008 4:34 PM | Link to this

This Bud’s for you!!

By Midori

December 16, 2008 4:39 PM | Link to this

Sure Dusty. Here ya go

My only wish is that Bud would start stalking you and leave me alone.

Maybe if I tap my heels 3 times, and keep repeating it?

you think?

By Bud Wiser

December 16, 2008 4:44 PM | Link to this

Hey Dimrodi … you flatter yourself thinking I would stalk you.

As for you stalking me, I used to deal with dimwits a lot more ignorant and blustery than you, so it’s no crap to me.

Knock yourself out, fool.

By Dusty

December 16, 2008 4:44 PM | Link to this

Dear Midori,@4:39

Bud won’t “stalk” me because I don’t talk like American troops are killers. Do you see the difference? Probably not.

By spankmonkey

December 16, 2008 4:45 PM | Link to this

Actually Dusty, One of the first things they teach you in boot camp is “sticks-n-stones…”.

But seriously, they kind of get used to hearing that crap and it’s water off a duck’s back.

By spankmonkey

December 16, 2008 4:48 PM | Link to this

Actually American troops ARE killers, and the best in the world thank god!

It’s their boss that’s a moron. He pulled resources out of Afghanistan where the fight truly was, for… well we don’t actually know why do we? WMD’s? nope. Saddam was a threat to us? nope. We don’t really know, do we?

By Midori

December 16, 2008 4:50 PM | Link to this

Bud,

I have a meeting to go to.

Shall I leave a trail of bread crumbs? M&Ms?

or have you become more sophisticated in your techniques?

By Bud Wiser

December 16, 2008 4:51 PM | Link to this

Dimrodi must be gone … oh yeah, another rerun ofGood Times is showin’ at 5.

By Algonquin J. Calhoun

December 16, 2008 4:51 PM | Link to this

By The Corporal December 16, 2008 2:35 PM | Link to this Algonquin J. Calhoun

Did you really know the Kingfish and lightnin’??

I did not know them personally but I loved the show. Unfortunately, it’s been labeled as a show that perpetuates stereotypes and has become a lightning rod for those who like to point fingers and deride everything. it was a great show that has been slandered from ever being broadcast by anyone. Meanwhile, programs such as House of Payne and Sanford and son are all over the television landscape. These programs are more caricaturish than Amos and Andy ever was and they’re not funny. Amos and Andy was!

By the way, many years ago, I too was a corporal. I served in the United States Marine Corps from 1968-72. In 1969-70 I served a tour of duty in Vietnam. Take care and have a nice day.

By Midori

December 16, 2008 4:55 PM | Link to this

Al,

which one did Bud Wiser play?

He seems to know a lot about black sitcoms.

A Conniseur, from his many references to them.

Oh well — off to my meeting.

Don’t forget to follow the trail, Bud.

I may need your help with some heavy lifting.

By AJC/DNC Management

December 16, 2008 5:02 PM | Link to this

By Bosch December 16, 2008 4:24 PM Andy, Are you saying these things didn’t happen? Or, are you saying that just the mere fact that the AJC reported these things make them liberal?

If you can’t see the obvious spin in these headlines then what’s the use of bothering, I ask myself.

See ya.

By JAY BOOKMAN

December 16, 2008 5:04 PM | Link to this

All of you folks trying to blame the problems of the newspaper industry on alleged liberal bias would have a much better argument if you could cite instances — even a single instance — of a conservative newspaper that is bucking the industry’s economic trend.

But you can’t. To the contrary, the Chicago Tribune is probably the most conservative major-city newspaper in the country and is a longtime backer of Republican candidates, yet its decline has been steeper than most.

I’d also highly recommend Management’s post up above as evidence of the lunacy rampant on this issue. In his first piece of evidence of alleged liberal bias by the AJC, he cites our description of Bernie Madoff’s $50 billion ripoff as a Wall Street scheme.

According to Management, “This dude had nothing to do with Wall Street….But the AJC hates capitalists and the fattest capitalist target around; Wall Street,” so we used Madoff to tarnish Wall Street.

Interesting. Nutty, but interesting.

If our description is evidence of anti-capitalist liberalism, then the Wall Street Journal hates capitalism too, because it describes Madoff as “the longtime Wall Street trading force.”

Forbes magazine and its right wing owner, Steve Forbes, are also disguised Marxists who despise capitalism, because Forbes states that “By all accounts, Bernard Madoff had a successful trading business and was a hitter on Wall Street…. and claimed to often contribute 10% of New York Stock Exchange trading volume.”

Those commie fellow travelers at Forbes further state that Madoff perpetrated “the largest fraud ever on Wall Street.”

I mean, it’s laughable. The rest of Management’s “evidence” is of equal value, meaning none at all, but he believes it nonetheless.

By Ted Striker

December 16, 2008 5:11 PM | Link to this

All you folks idiotically wishin’ for the AJC to go down seemingly don’t understand that you’d need to find another free online environment in which to espouse your disagreeabilities.

By Dusty

December 16, 2008 5:12 PM | Link to this

Dear spankmonkey,

Make up your mind.

At 4:12 you wrote that you would never call our service people killers.

Then @ 4:48 you write that American troops are killers.

I don’t believe you have ever been in the military. You are just a liberal trying to undermind American efforts in Iraq to discredit President Bush.

In doing so, you undermine the troops, troops to which your own brother belonged and served.

I commend your brother and his service.

I neither commend nor understand you. Perhaps you are angry because your brother was wounded. That might explain it.

By Taxpayer

December 16, 2008 5:18 PM | Link to this

Jay,

What’s new.

By Bosch

December 16, 2008 5:21 PM | Link to this

Andy,

But I AM asking. And you still haven’t shown any of us how those headlines show a liberal bias.

But I think Jay just kind of said that.

By Dusty

December 16, 2008 5:22 PM | Link to this

OK …Bookman has made it clear. HooRay!!

Bookman is NOT liberal.

Tucker is NOT liberal.

Luckovich is NOT liberal.

The Cox Family (owners) are NOT Democrats.

AJC is more middle of the road that a yellow line on a two lane street. Yes sireeee!!

I am sooo glad that is all cleared up. Now I can leave for dinner. Sigh…..

By spankmonkey

December 16, 2008 5:26 PM | Link to this

Hello? What EXACTLY is a soldier’s job? Did I say killer of babies? Or killer of women and children? No, not even close. Our guys go over there and KILL other soldiers or insurgents… correct? And they are the best in the world at it.

Obviously, you are the one who doesn’t understand soldiers. I didn’t serve, but I grew up around soldiers and on Army/Navy bases.

You ever heard the phrase “Death from above”? Do you know what service uses that? To cause death is to KILL, I thought…

I understand soldiers quite well.

I’d be willing to bet that between yourself, and the other half dozen hardcore Bushies here, you don’t know a single serviceman… (Corporal gets a pass on this one…)

Nor have you ever sent a care package to make up for what Bush and Rummie couldn’t provide while the chickenhawks sent troops off to war…

By Swami Dave

December 16, 2008 5:29 PM | Link to this

As for bias, the editorial section is opinion and, as such, designed bias by those who are publishing theirs. Do I think that there is a potential risk to any outlet which allows their “opinions” section be driven to strongly by any philosophical opinion? Yes. I would contend that simple laws of marketing and focusing on your customers would define that risk. However, to expect that an “opinions” section would be moderate or centrist is pretty silly. The biggest problem with a “moderate” opinion section would be that it would fail in one of its highest goals which it to engender a response - which, reading some of these posts, it apparently does.

As for bias outside of the “opinion” sections & whether it exists, it is -my- opinion that it does. It is -my- opinion that it is not so much the reporting specifically, but the frame of reference from which reporting is done. I acknowledge that it would be difficult to separate my biases from my perspective of events or stories. Frankly, I expect that my writing would be pretty bad if I did. I would contend that this, more than anything else, is at the core of the discussion.

Since there has been numerous request for examples, I will attempt to provide one.

Couple of acknowledgements: 1) Most importantly, this is an AP story that was picked up by AJC - so it can serve as an example for my point even if it does not evidence the AJC’s alleged bias.
2) My biggest contention about his story is not the bias of what is reported, but the frame of reference from which it was written. It is more about what is -not- said than anything that is.

[from AJC archives](http://www.ajc.com/search/content/shared-gen/ap/PresidentialElections/CampaignMoney.html}

In -my- opinion, the underlying bias of the story is not in their reporting. It is rooted in the fact that they are viewing the event / situation in apparent amazement of how much Obama raised and spent. To them, it was “astonishing” how much he raised and spent - 4-to-1 over McCain during the election cycle.

Is there anyone who can credibly argue that if it had been McCain (Mr. “Campaign Finance Reform”) who had raised and outspent Obama 4-to-1 that the tone of this article (and any others on the subject) would have been “astonishment”? Just 4, 8, 10 years ago, many of these same members of the media were trumpeting that lessening the monied influence in campaigns was important to the protection of our democracy.

In all actuality, this election could have been the primer for story after story highlighting John McCain’s (stupid in my opinion) fights to pass campaign finance reform because he was largely getting beaten by the very thing that he fought in Congress. Yet, apparently, when it was not a Republican candidate enjoying a financial / campaign fundraising advantage, the monied interests and their involvement in the campaign was apparently a non-issue.

For intellectually honesty, I admit that I think campaign finance reform is a terrible idea and support individuals donating any amounts they wish to the candidate of their choice. So long as there is a up-front reporting structure (publicly posted with 7 days of checks clearing - so that everyone can know who is “bought” by whom), I would get rid of them all.

However, I do see the intellectual dishonesty and hypocrisy in media reports that ballyhooed campaign finance limits as “requirements” for government to “get the money out” only to fall silent (or gush “astonished”) when the candidate of their choice breaks all records for fundraising and campaign expenditures during an election. I would guarantee that if it were not the candidate of their choice, the “frame of reference” would have been how the individual “bought the Presidency”.

-Swami Dave

By AmVet

December 16, 2008 5:38 PM | Link to this

THAT IS IT!!!

I’m canceling my subscription!

Of course, RepubliCons hate newspapers. And the TV news. And the magazines. And Hollywood. And…

Well, basically everyone but themselves. And they have for a LONG time.

Sir Spiro commanded as much when he told them to loathe those “nattering nabobs of negativity”! (Talk about your garden-variety, GOP loser and scumbag - Agnew was the definition.)

They loathe the free press for one reason and one reason only.

They didn’t suck up to George W. Bush’s cabal. At least not enough.

And to some small degree —MUCH too small in my estimation — they actually tried to expose a tiny bit of The Hero of the Texas ANG’s unending deceit and deadly incompetence.

Neo-cons definitely do not like that.

The bootlickers think that EVERYBODY was supposed to turn a blind eye to this serially impeachable clusterf&ck of a president.

Which major publication demanded Bush’s impeachment? Which news program insisted the Cabinet heads be removed?

To my knowledge, only a very few.

WHY NOT???

Because generally they are owned by multi-nationals, fat cat toadies and corporate money masters who will not allow it. That’s why.

If anything, I indict them for dereliction of duty for giving BushCo pretty much a free pass.

Virtually all of them should all have clamored for his and Dick Cheney’s resignation years ago and did not. Nor do so now.

Disgraceful.

By Bosch

December 16, 2008 5:41 PM | Link to this

See Andy? Swami Dave did it - it’s not that hard.

Swami,

Good post. We all have our biases, and you can see the same story as liberal, while I see nothing wrong with it, but that’s just because we disagree about things.

I think it was only me who asked, but like I said, I’m open to see the bias and your point of view.

By Dusty

December 16, 2008 5:44 PM | Link to this

SpankMonkey..wrong again..

My father was a doctor in the army during wartime.

My husband served on an aircraft carrier during war time.

My oldest son served in the army.

I think you served in the Cub Scouts and haven’t gotten over the fright of it all.

Go eat your dinner..

By Dusty

December 16, 2008 5:48 PM | Link to this

OH.. AmVet’s been let loose.

There is no clamor for impeachment of Cheney because he has done nothing illegal.

There is no clamor for impeachment of President Bush because he has done nothing illegal.

Get over it, AmVet. You are a lone Ranger beating a dead horse.

By NRB

December 16, 2008 5:48 PM | Link to this

Good riddance, liberal GARBAGE!

See you on the street corner selling pencils out of a tin can, Gay Kookman.

By One Voice

December 16, 2008 5:49 PM | Link to this

A hilarious link some of you may appreciate: http://www.sockandawe.com/

By CommunistAJC

December 16, 2008 5:53 PM | Link to this

JAY BOOKMAN, You stated that the Chicago Tribune is the countrys biggest Republican newspaper? EHHHHHHH….Wrong answer. Ever heard of the Wall Street Journal? By the way, what party do you and Cynthia Tucker vote for 100% of the time? That’s right, THE DEMOCRATS! If you, for one second, think that people believe that the MSM is not left-leaning then you need to think again. 90% of the MSM is registered democrat. Shall I go down the list of major news anchors? Shall I state quotes from many of your liberal media heros?

By Taxpayer

December 16, 2008 5:59 PM | Link to this

Jay,

Why don’t you guys publish a weekly on-line feature article submitted by one of the bloggers. I think they may just provide some entertainment especially if we are allowed to submit comments. Perhaps Andy, Dusty or Corporal would be willing to participate and show us what they’ve got. I’d like to see what they have to say about this 50 billion dollar ponzi scheme for example. I think a minimum of 1000 words with no plagiarism, a maximum of two direct quotes, a maximum of 50 words taken directly from other sources, and properly cited references should do. What do you think, Jay. You could even offer some sort of financial incentive based on ad sales, etc., that are a result of their articles. A little commission.

By AJC/DNC Management

December 16, 2008 6:03 PM | Link to this

By JAY BOOKMAN December 16, 2008 5:04 PM All of you folks trying to blame the problems of the newspaper industry on alleged liberal bias would have a much better argument if you could cite instances — even a single instance — of a conservative newspaper that is bucking the industry’s economic trend. But you can’t.

You know, that sounds a lot like an admission that the AJC is biased towards the left but we already knew that.

The drop occurred nearly across the board during the six months that ended Sept. 30; weekday circulation for the largest metropolitan dailies fell anywhere from 1.9 percent for The Washington Post, to 13.6 percent for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, compared with the period a year earlier.

Now we can discuss the severity of the circulation declines, seems as though some^^ were harder hit than others-

The exceptions among the nation’s biggest newspapers were USA Today and The Wall Street Journal, two national papers and the two largest in circulation, which were virtually unchanged, at 2.3 million for USA Today and 2 million for The Journal on weekdays.-NYTimes

Of the print media, USA Today was the most centrist.-UCLA Newsroom

You were saying?

And check this out, my man, I grew up in Chicago and I know for a fact that the Tribune is a liberal rag no matter how many Republicans they endorse or don’t endorse as they did in the Klintoon years-

LA Times, Chicago Tribune, and New York Times Rampant Bias Towards Obama Opponents May Cost Election

This is the same Chicago Tribune that took it upon itself to destroy Obama’s Senate opponent for having sex with his wife at a, get this, sex club.

And what, Obama is 95% liberal?

If our description is evidence of anti-capitalist liberalism, then the Wall Street Journal hates capitalism too, because it describes Madoff as “the longtime Wall Street trading force.”

I welcome any one of you to tell me where I can find the company that goes by the name of Ponzi, so I can avoid “investing” in them-

The order came just days after federal prosecutors charged Madoff with securities fraud, saying he had admitted squandering nearly $50 billion from investors in a massive Ponzi scheme.

That 50 Bill never made it to Wall Street and for you to insinuate that it did is junk journalism.

We’re talking about an individual.

You are tarring an entire financial industry.

With extreme bias.

By JAY BOOKMAN

December 16, 2008 6:11 PM | Link to this

Swami Dave, I’m very glad to see you posting here, for a number of reasons.

You have my great gratitude for trying to elevate the tone and substance of discussion.

And Commie, you misquote me and then attack the misquote. I didn’t state that “the Chicago Tribune is the country’s biggest Republican newspaper.”

I called it “probably the most conservative major-city newspaper in the country.”

Which it is.

By sunshine and thunder

December 16, 2008 6:11 PM | Link to this

JAY

Are you going to seriously claim that the AJC’s liberal bias doesn’t come through in its reporting?

By CommunistAJC

December 16, 2008 6:21 PM | Link to this

PULLED.

And Commie, you are now banned from posting until Friday.

By yankee

December 16, 2008 6:34 PM | Link to this

Can’t you make it a week from Friday?

By AJC/DNC Management

December 16, 2008 6:39 PM | Link to this

Hopefully, I won’t get booted but I feel the need to point out some inconsistencies-

By JAY BOOKMAN December 16, 2008 6:11 PM You have my great gratitude for trying to elevate the tone and substance of discussion.

By JAY BOOKMAN December 16, 2008 5:04 PM I’d also highly recommend Management’s post up above as evidence of the lunacy rampant on this issue.

Mild yes, but………

By Taxpayer

December 16, 2008 6:48 PM | Link to this

I read the posts by Jay and I fail to see any inconsistencies.

By sunshine and thunder

December 16, 2008 6:51 PM | Link to this

JAY

The examples are numerous but let’s just start with one.

After this recent election your paper was advertising Obama t-shirts on the front page. Did you also advertise Bush T shirts on the front page in 2000 and 2004?

By JAY BOOKMAN

December 16, 2008 7:00 PM | Link to this

To Sunshine:

No, we did not. But in 2000 we also didn’t have hundreds of people lining up the morning after the election demanding to buy souvenir copies of the newspaper, nor thousands of people calling wanting to know where they could get more copies. In 2000 we didn’t have to run the presses for the next several days, trying to keep up with public demand.

In 2008 we did.

So, like good capitalists, we saw a moneymaking opportunity and we jumped at it, just as I believe we did when it was announced that Atlanta had been awarded the Olympic Games.

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2008 7:10 PM | Link to this

How could people have lined up the morning after the election of 2000 for souvenir editions?

That election still had six or seven weeks of drama left and by the time Al Gore finally quit trying to steal it everybody was sick of it anyway.

I bet the AJC wouldn’t sell you a souvenir copy of the morning edition, not so long ago, when they screamed out in giant type that the West Virginia miners had all been found alive.

By GodHatesTrash

December 16, 2008 7:16 PM | Link to this

I would buy some Bush toilet paper.

It would be handy to have after a night of say, 12-13 beers and 6-7 bratwursts watching the Cubbies find another way to blow a season, right Duh?

By Midori

December 16, 2008 7:23 PM | Link to this

yeah,

Al Gore’s campaign manager, who also doubled as the Florida Secretary of State, sure let him down didn’t he?

I mean, come on!! She illegally threw all of those minorities off the voting rolls, and he still found a way to screw it up!!!

And then Kerry’s campaign manager, who also doubled as the Ohio Secretary of State in 2004 screwed up again

What’s an election thief to do???

By CommunistAJC

December 16, 2008 7:25 PM | Link to this

………….

…………..

Commie is banned until Friday.

By Algonquin J. Calhoun

December 16, 2008 7:35 PM | Link to this

There is no clamor for impeachment of Cheney because he has done nothing illegal.

There is no clamor for impeachment of President Bush because he has done nothing illegal.

I’m clamoring for the impeachment, trial, incarceration and ultimate execution of both these murderers.

By AmVet

December 16, 2008 7:38 PM | Link to this

THAT’S IT!!!

I’m canceling my subscription for the fourth time!

It would be different if the AJC would just come out and state the obvious — George W. Bush is the greatest American President in over 500 years.

Hell, he’s the greatest single crusader ever born, really.

We’ve not had one single instance where the Islamic Navy has attacked Pearl Harbor since 9/11.

NOT ONE.

We’ve had nary an towelhead invasion of Alaska via the Rooskie Straight (in part because Sister Sarah is keeping such a close eye on them.)

NOT EVEN ONCE.

We’ve had no Islamofacist Berlin Airlifts of Baghdad since Mission Accomplished.

NARY A CESSNA.

Ingrates…

By Algonquin J. Calhoun

December 16, 2008 10:26 PM | Link to this

Amvet, how many subscriptions do you have? Four times huh? I’m sure Osama would agree with you that George W. Hitler is the Greatest Crusader of All Time.

Commiesalami banned? Well, I’m going to have to truncate my grieving. Whew, those were a rough ten seconds but it’s time to go on.