If ever the world would have forgiven a man for not being able to walk and chew gum at the same time, it would have been now. No one would blame Barack Obama if he focused exclusively on the economic crisis, pushing the foreign policy in-tray to the back of his desk. After all, there’s only so much even a Messiah can handle.

For all that, the new US President has crammed a slew of foreign policy moves into his first six weeks, any one of which would have made big news in normal times.

Instead, in the age of global economic meltdown, they have had to fight for more than fleeting media attention.

Most visible have been the big declarations, whether announcing the beginning of the end of the Iraq war, avowing that “the United States of America does not torture” or ordering that Guantanamo be closed.

In just the last week, we’ve had the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, dispatching officials to Syria as well as inviting Iran to talks on the future of Afghanistan – extending a hand to two states previously consigned to outer darkness.

The start of the month brought the revelation that Obama had written a secret letter to his Russian counterpart, Dmitri Medvedev, hinting at a deal in which Moscow would lean on Iran, urging it to abandon its quest for nuclear weapons, in return for the US scrapping its planned installation of a missile defence system in Russia’s eastern European backyard. A gesture to cap it all: the Obama Administration has moved to ease trade and travel restrictions with Cuba.

The question – 50 days into the administration – is:

is there a common thread of logic running through these moves, one that we might describe, however prematurely, as the Obama doctrine?

The first unifying theme, sounded minutes after he took the presidential oath, is a repudiation of the legacy of his predecessor. Obama is determined to signal to the world that he is the unBush. Some on the left and right alike have suggested that this is more symbolic than real, that in fact the basic lineaments of US policy remain in place.

Obama will keep rather a lot of troops in Iraq until the end of 2011, just as the Bush administration planned; he has intensified US involvement in Afghanistan, sending 17,000 more troops; and Robert Gates, George Bush’s defence secretary, remains in this post under Obama.

Put that to the Obama team and they don’t wholly deny it. The US did not become a different country on January 20, they say; its interests have not changed overnight.

What no one denies is that there is a clear advantage for the US in the rest of the world believing that a profound change has come about. Which is why the declaration by the Vice President, Joe Biden, that the US is pressing the “reset button” has become the current catchphrase of US diplomacy.

A benign assessment of the Obama record so far would see two other early traits.

The first is a readiness to speak the truth. Asked by The New York Times last week whether the US was winning the war in Afghanistan, he replied tersely: “No.”

After the Bush years, when those who followed the evidence were dismissed as dullards imprisoned in the narrow-minded confines of the “reality-based community”, such candour is a relief!

Second, there are some signs of imaginative thinking. Deploying the veteran of the Northern Ireland peace process, George Mitchell, to the Israel-Palestine conflict is one of those ideas that seems obvious – but only because it makes so much sense. The same goes for allocating the Afghan-Pakistan, or “Afpak”, file to the hardball maestro Richard Holbrooke.

But plaudits surely go to Obama’s direct appeal to Medvedev, with its echoes of the former US president John Kennedy’s resolution of the Cuban missile crisis of 1962. Just as JFK agreed to remove US missiles from Turkey if the Soviet Union took theirs away from Cuba, so Obama implicitly made a similar offer to Russia: you get Iran to back down and I’ll remove my interceptor missiles and radar stations from Poland and the Czech Republic. If such an initiative were to work, the knock-on effects would be multiple.

Take one: Israel has long hinted that if its friends were to make the Iranian threat go away, it would respond by moving forward on the peace track. For a long while that was assumed to mean military action against Iran. But if Obama’s Russia gambit were to succeed – and the critics claim Gates started work on these lines a year ago – the goal of an Iranian nuclear freeze, with all its ancillary benefits, would be achieved without a shot being fired.

To be clear, this is not guitar-strumming hippie dovishness, as the escalation in Afghanistan confirms – though one administration official warns against overinterpreting that move. It is a “time-buying exercise”, he says, ensuring things don’t get worse on the ground while the White House undertakes a strategic review of the entire Afpak region, from where, it argues, every major al-Qaeda attack since September 11, 2001, has emanated.

I’m told this was the thrust of Biden’s message to NATO’s North Atlantic Council in Brussels this week: not some kind of “wussy multilateralism”, with lots of cosy meetings and platitudes, but a “results-oriented” desire to get things done – and the belief that that only happens when the world acts in concert.

To be sure, these are only the early signals in the early days. But from a President with his hands full, they are encouraging.

Technorati Tags: Afghanistan, barack obama, george w. bush, President

With his first month as President in the bag, Barack Obama is receiving an unparalleled level of support from the American public in regards to his ability to handle, and in this case fix, the shattered economy. In fact President Obama has the largest lead over opposition party in overall trust to handle the economy as any U.S. President has had in over 20 years.

Even sky high approval ratings, President Barack Obama still has some undeniable challenges in front of him in regards to the post-partisanship government he spoke of so often throughout his long and hard fought presidential campaign. Nonetheless Obama clearly holds the upper hand, both in overall approval and on the dominant issue of the day. He leads the Republicans in Congress by 61-26 percent in trust to handle the economy, the biggest such lead for a president in ABC News/Washington Post polls since 1991.

Obama’s overall approval ratings are definitely strong, in both the literal and historical sense, currently hovering at 68 percent of Americans approving of the job he has done so far. However when you look closely at the polls internal findings you will find that the partisanship is as glaring as ever with 90 percent of Democrats approving of Obama’s performance thus far, and only 37 percent of Republicans happy with the newly elected President. This sharp party line divide among American’s is nearly identical to the numbers that accompanied George W. Bush in his first term which was hot off the heels of the controversial 2000 election and its subsequent outcome.

As mentioned above, the partisanship divide is as clear cut as ever before, but with that said it also becomes important to point out that many American’s are giving the President credit for his attempts at bringing the two sides together. More or less, a healthy majority of American’s recognize that while it may not be working yet, Barack Obama is undoubtedly attempting to forge a healthy middle ground between the Democrats and Republicans:

While President Barack Obama cannot be happy with the ultra-partisanship we are currently seeing, regardless if he is being recognized for trying to bring the two political factions together, it begs the question; how bad is this split for Republicans? According to the same ABC News/Washington Post poll — the hyper partisanship appears to be a bigger downfall for the Republicans, whose party remains on life support after what the majority of Americans fee was a disastrous Bush presidency. Below are the numbers – and it won’t take long until you see that if anyone is hurting from the inability to work together, it is the elected officials of the right:

• The Democratic Party leads the Republicans by 56-30 percent in trust to handle the country’s main problems. That has slightly improved from 56-23 percent in December, as congressional Republicans found a unified voice in opposition to the stimulus. But the December number was the Republicans’ worst in ABC/Post polls since 1982; they still have far to climb.
• Fifty percent of Americans approve of the way the Democrats in Congress are doing their jobs, while 44 percent disapprove – if hardly a barn-burner, still the Democrats’ best in two years, since April 2007, just after they regained control of Congress. And their Republican counterparts are a good deal weaker: 38 percent approve, 56 percent disapprove. (Democratic gains have come mainly in two groups: among Democrats themselves, and among liberals. Seventy-seven percent of Democrats now approve of their own party; just 55 percent of Republicans feel the same about theirs.)
• The Democrats are holding the edge in partisan affiliation they’ve built since 2004, when the public soured on the Iraq war and the Bush presidency in turn. Thirty-six percent in this poll identify themselves as Democrats, just 24 percent as Republicans. On average in 2003, by contrast, the parties were at parity, 31 percent apiece.

I have also attached a graph that pretty much reinforces the bumbers cited above — You will see just how much the public’s trust level in terms of the economy has dropped off for Republicans starting back in 2005 and plummeting at a fairly steady rate ever since:

Some constants have remained throughout this first month. For instance,young people still support Barack Obama at an unprecedented rate. Among young adults, or as they are being referred to nowadays, “Millennials” (those between the age of 18 and 30) his overall approval rating peaks at a startling 84 percent, compared with 59 percent in his weakest age group, seniors (this was a trend we saw throughout the primaries and general election as well.) There are income gaps here as well; among people with incomes less than $50,000, 66 percent approve of Obama’s handling of the economy; among those in $100,000+ households, this drops to half. Two possible reasons: Better-off Americans are more apt to be Republicans. And they’re in Obama’s cross hairs on taxes — and their awareness of it.

If you are interested in seeing the entire ABC/Washington Post poll regarding Obama’s first month in office you can do so by clicking here. It is really quite interesting and unfortunately, familiar to what we have seen throughout the past couple of years. The main difference  is that now it’s Republican’s who are in the doghouse, and many would say it’s rightfully so.

Technorati Tags: barack obama, Breaking news, Breaking political news, Breaking Politics News, Democrats, george w. bush, GOP, latest Polls, Latest Presidential Polls, Obama

Over the past 48 hours I have heard right wing commentator after right wing commentator, as well as just about every single news outlet in general wet their pants over the latest nationwide polling numbers which show John McCain ahead of Barack Obama. The glee in their voices, and contrived aloofness (“how can this be?”) promptly followed by over analyzing every aspect the shows time slot allows them to are both annoying and petty. Unfortunately for these so called “political experts” the polls they are clamoring over are flawed in more ways then just one.

So you may be asking yourself what is it that makes the latest polls, the ones showing McCain up by a handful of points invalid? And too that my answer is simple – the pollsters conducting these lopsided studies are simply sampling a larger republican population in a way that leaves the results numerically impossible to show anything less then a McCain lead.

Earlier today Seth Colter Walls published a piece over at the Huffington Post which sheds some light on the tampering going on in regards to the pollsters overall sampling sizes which of course hinges (in a macro sense) on ones Party Identification. The pollsters (for reasons unknown by myself) are flat out oversampling Republican voters, and in some cases, are doing so at an obnoxious rate. Walls explains this phenomenon in great detail, stating:

“In a year in which Democrats have a lead of 11 million registered voters over Republicans, and have been adding to that advantage through a robust field operation, are pollsters over-sampling Republicans?

Despite a raft of advantages in the electorate for Democrats, in September’s first Gallup tracking poll, an equal number of Republicans and Democrats were surveyed (including “leaners”) from Sept. 3-5, compared to a 10-point Democratic identification advantage two weeks ago. That partisan makeup of the polling pool resulted in a 5-point lead for McCain in Sept. 5 tracking poll. Meanwhile, the new CBS poll features a 6-point swing in partisan composition toward Republicans, which plays some role in the poll’s two-point lead for McCain. Finally, the latest USA Today poll, which claims a four-point edge for McCain, was arrived at after a 10-point swing in partisan makeup toward GOP respondents.”

This practice is not new to electoral politics, however it is arguably receiving more attention, or in this case scrutiny, due to the fact people can look into the raw data taken into account for whatever specific poll is in question. The reasons they do this are simple – to create a “close race” with the dramatic “ups and downs” which subsequently leads to a peaked interest in the weekly/daily numbers which then spikes the overall demand for their product – the polls:

Norman admitted that the GOP identification in the latest survey has spiked. “The party ID in our most recent poll does show a shift away from what Gallup has been getting in earlier polls, going all the way back to 2005,” Norman said. “But previous conventions — the Republican one in 1988, the Democratic one in 1992, the Democratic one in 2000 — have also shown shifts in party ID toward the party that had the convention, and those shifts seemed to last, to greater or lesser degrees, though the election. Further, I’ve been told by Gallup that their tracking poll has shown a similar shift in party ID since the Republican convention. … I guarantee you we will be watching closely in all of our polls between now and election day to see whether there are further shifts in party ID in either direction.”

Still not convinced? Well don’t just take my word on it, here is what Adam Abramowitz, a world renound political scientist who is currently a professor at Emory University has to say about the latest gaggle of polls we saw released over the past two days:

Emory University political scientist Alan Abramowitz is highly skeptical of the new Gallup, USA Today and CBS polls. About the latter, which showed a statistically insignificant two point lead for McCain, Abramowitz said: “One reason for the dramatic difference between the two recent CBS polls is that the two samples differed fairly dramatically in terms of partisan composition. The first sample was 35.2% Democratic, 26.2 percent Republicans, and 38.6 percent independent. The second sample was 34.9% Democratic, 31.1% Republican, and 34.0% independent. That’s a change from a 9 point Democratic advantage to a 3.8 point Democratic advantage. That alone would probably explain about half of the difference in candidate preferences between the two [CBS] polls.”

So with the argument laid out quite clearly, I think it is important that we look at a handful of other polls, which are being released by major publications. Granted they don’t offer the same “excitement” factor the other trumped up ones do, they seem nonetheless to be a tad more accurate – at least in the sense of their sampling ratios:

• American Research Group (ARG):

• Rasmussen Daily Tracking Poll:

• NBC/Wall Street Journal:

It is clear that John McCain has made up some ground in the polls, I am in no way refuting that. I am however pointing out that the grossly negligent numbers that showed McCain leading by as many as 10 points were in fact doctored to appear how they did.

So before you (and by you I am talking to the Republicans who have had a nonstop orgasm the past 2 days) go on with your gloating please take into account the fact that the polls in which you are bragging about simply overloaded the sampling with GOP voters.

Technorati Tags: barack obama, Battleground, Breaking news, Cbs Poll, doctoring the polls, ELECTION, Gallup Poll, joe biden, john mccain, John McCain ahead in polls, john mccain leads in the polls, new polls, new presidential polls, obama ahead in the polls, Politics News, Poll Madness Mccain Takes Lead, polls, President, Presidential Polls, Sarah Palin, unfair polls, USA Today Poll, Vote, ]

Fresh off what many are calling one of the better Democratic National Convention’s in recent memory, John McCain, his newly anointed Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin and the rest of the GOP kicked off their week long shin dig in one half of the twin cities, St. Paul, Minnesota. Well, kinda anyways. In what had to be one of the more bizarre Labor Days in quite some time, much of the RNC Convention was canceled due to Hurricane Gustav, all the while a firestorm seemingly spilled over regarding a laundry list of issues plaguing the 72 hour old VP candidate Sarah Palin. Serving as the “cherry on top”; anti-war protesters and law enforcement clashed numerous times throughout the day, subsequently ending in violence, arrests, tear gas and more bad press for the GOP.

In what was a perfect storm of “bad press” for the GOP, one thing is for sure: They will be doing everything in their power to put yesterdays events out of sight, and out of mind – this however may be harder said then done.

With no real convention story to cover, and a fading storm out of the picture by midday the media found themselves following lead after lead regarding John McCain’s surprise VP selection, former Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin.

To say today was a “bad day” for Palin just may be an understatement. Here is a rundown of what TPM’s Greg Sargent appropriately titled “The Palin Melt Down”:

• Palin’s previous claim to have refused the “Bridge to Nowhere” is revealed to be a falsehood:

“Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said she “championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress” and opposed federal funding for a controversial bridge to a sparsely populated island. “I told Congress, ‘Thanks, but no thanks,’ on that bridge to nowhere,” Palin said Friday in Ohio, using the critics’ dismissive name of the project. “‘If our state wanted a bridge,’ I said, ‘we’d build it ourselves.’”

While running for governor in 2006, though, Palin backed federal funding for the infamous bridge, which McCain helped make a symbol of pork barrel excess. And as mayor of the small town of Wasilla from 1996 to 2002, Palin also hired a Washington lobbying firm that helped secure $8 million in congressionally directed spending projects, known as earmarks, according to public spending records compiled by the watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste and lobbying documents.”

• Continuing to tarnish her “reformer” image, it is learned that Palin was heavily reliant on a earmark system that she now claims to be staunchly in opposition of:

On Friday, when McCain introduced her as his running mate, she said she “championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending,” the legislative technique used to slip projects into appropriations bills without rigorous congressional review.

But under her leadership, the state of Alaska has requested 31 earmarks worth $197.8 million in next year’s federal budget, according to the website of Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), the former chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee.

• It is learned that Palin had extensive ties to a “fringe” political outfit in Alaska whose main purpose was to push the idea of seceding from the United States:

“The Alaska Independence Party, which was formed with the goal of seceding from the union and establishing Alaska as an independent state, says that Palin addressed their 2008 convention. The AIP has posted video of what it claims is her address on its Web site.”

• We learn that Palin has just now decided to hire a lawyer in regards to her pending investigation surrounding multiple “abuse of power” cases that are currently underway in her home state of Alaska:

“MSNBC just reported that presumptive vice-presidential nominee and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has hired a lawyer in relation to the Trooper-Gate scandal. Alaska State Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Hollis French told TPMmuckraker that Palin has hired Thomas Van Flein, an Anchorage attorney at the law firm of Clapp, Peterson, Van Flein, Tiemessen & Thorsness. French said that Van Flein has already been in contact with him, regarding the ongoing investigation of Palin.”

All of this in one day – yes, just one day. A mere 72 hours into her VP candidacy and this is what has surfaced. Of course this has everyone scratching their heads, asking themselves “how in the heck didn’t the McCain camp find any of this prior to her selection?”

• Amy Goodman, Democracy Now! host unlawfully arrested at RNC:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBjcqwQgF7Q

• Police Blast a Protester with Pepper Spray:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJZNkJbTpjA

• Police firing rubber bullets at protesters at incredibly close range:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OnnUTK7QjI

Reports coming from various news outlets late into Monday night, and carrying over to the wee hours of this morning seem to portray that the situation on the ground, between police and protesters is continuing to spiral further and further out of control.

That said, I am going to interject my personal opinion on the situation. Now I know a lot of people won’t like it, and that’s perfectly alright, so be it. The way I see it is that the protesters more often then not (they play the victims very well) are doing something against the rules whenever you see police act in the manner seen above. They are quick to claim “police brutality” and whine it up for the cameras, but for all constructive purposes they were dealt with, or became caught up in, police action that was being directed at stopping something or someone breaking the rules.

That is not to say that law enforcement officials are never to blame. Hell, half the time they are at fault for using excessive and/or inappropriate force. But you have to remember that they are facing highly emotional crowds, often which will go as far as they are physically able too without being refrained. With this mentality comes a high risk for riots, which would then in turn only produce an increase, at a huge rate none the less, of violence. It is this which makes the job of the police force somewhat difficult, and very unrewarding.

I should also mention that even though I am a proud Democrat, always have been, always will be, I have never been one who cheers on the side show antics of fringe groups on the outer realms of the left. In my opinion they do much more harm then good, and the only thing they really accomplish is the diminishing legitmacey of any argument they are trying to make.

Take a look at the “protesters” on the far left, and their irrational, and emotionalist actions throughout the 70′s. What did it produce? A whole lot of Republican presidents.

So in wrapping this thing up, I think it is fair to say Republican’s had a bad day, protesters had a bad day, and the media had a field day. That said, if Tuesday is anything like Labor Day, we are in for a ride, so buckle up, get some shut eye, and check back tomorrow – err, later today..

Technorati Tags: Amy Good, Bristol Palin, Bristol Palin Levi Johnston, Bristol Palin Pregnancy, Giuliani And Palin, GOP Convention, Levi Johnson, Levi Johnston, Levin Johnson Bristol Palin, Maj. Gen. Craig Campbell, Maj. Gen. Craig Campbell Alaska National Guard, Maj. Gen. Craig Campbell Palin, Mark Sanford Sarah Palin, Media News, Mike Wooten, Off The Bus News, Palin, Palin Brother In Law, Palin Family, Palin Giuliani Experience, Palin Trooper, Palin Troopergate, Police Republican Convention, Politics News, Protests GOP Convention, Protests Republican Convention, Republican Convention, rudy giuliani, Sarah Palin, Sarah Palin Daughter Pregnant, Sarah Palin John Mccain, Sarah Palin Scandal, Sarah Palin Trooper Scandal, Sarah Palin Vice President, Slideshow, St. Paul

WASHINGTON – Barack Obama selected Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware late Friday night to be his vice presidential running mate, according to a Democratic official, balancing his ticket with an older congressional veteran well-versed in foreign policy and defense issues. Biden, 65, has twice sought the White House, and is a Catholic with blue-collar roots, a generally liberal voting record and a reputation as a long-winded orator.

Across more than 30 years in the Senate, he has served at various times not only as chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee but also as head of the Judiciary Committee, with its jurisdiction over anti-crime legislation, Supreme Court nominees and Constitutional issues.

In selecting Biden, Obama passed over several other potential running mates, none more prominent than former first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, his tenacious rival in dozens of primaries and caucuses.

Obama’s campaign arranged a debut for the newly minted ticket on Saturday outside the Old State Capitol in Springfield, Ill.

Hundreds of miles to the west, carpenters, electricians, sound stage gurus and others transformed the Pepsi Center in Denver into a made-for-television convention venue.

Tucked away in one corner were thousands of lightweight rolled cardboard tubes, ready-made handles for signs bearing the names of the Democratic ticket – once the identity of Obama’s running mate was known.

While Obama decided against adding Clinton to his ticket, he has gone to great lengths to gain the confidence of her primary voters, agreeing to allow her name to be placed in nomination at the convention and permitting a roll call vote that threatens to expose lingering divisions within the party.

Biden slowly emerged as Obama’s choice across a long day and night of political suspense as other contenders gradually fell away.

First Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine let it be known that he had been ruled out. Then came word that Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana had also been passed over.

Several aides to Clinton said the Obama campaign had never requested financial or other records from her.

Other finalists in the veep sweepstakes were Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius and Texas Rep. Chet Edwards.

Among those on the short list, Biden brought the most experience in defense or foreign policy, areas in which Obama is rated relatively poorly in the polls compared with Republican Sen. John McCain.

While the war in Iraq has been supplanted as the campaign’s top issues by the economy in recent months, the recent Russian invasion of Georgia has returned foreign policy to the forefront.

In addition to foreign policy experience, Biden, a native of Scranton, Pa., has working-class roots that could benefit Obama, who lost the blue-collar vote to Clinton during their competition for the presidential nomination.

Biden was elected to the Senate at the age of 29 in 1973.

No sooner had word spread of his selection than McCain’s campaign unleashed its first attack. Spokesman Ben Porritt said in a statement that Biden had:

“denounced Barack Obama’s poor foreign policy judgment and has strongly argued in his own words what Americans are quickly realizing, that Barack Obama is not ready to be president.”

As evidence, Republicans cited an ABC interview from August 2007, in which Biden said he would stand by an earlier statement that Obama was not ready to serve as president.

Biden is seeking a new Senate term in the fall. there was no immediate word whether he intended to change plans as he reaches for national office. Biden dropped out of the 2008 race for the Democratic presidential nomination after a poor finish in the Iowa caucuses, but not before he talked dismissively of joining someone else’s ticket.

“I am not running for vice president,” he said in a Fox interview. “I would not accept it if anyone offered it to me. The fact of the matter is I’d rather stay as chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee than be vice president.”

It was his second try for the White House. The first ended badly in 1988 when he was caught lifting lines from a speech by British Labor Party leader Neil Kinnock.

In the decades since, he become a power in the Senate, presiding over confirmation proceedings for Supreme Court nominees as well as convening hearings to criticize President Bush’s handling of the Iraq War.

Biden voted to authorize the war, but long ago became one of the Senate’s surest critics of the conflict.

Obama worked to keep his choice secret, although he addressed the issue broadly during the day in an interview.

“Obviously, the most important question is: Is this person ready to be president?” Obama told “The Early Show” on CBS. Second, he said, was: “Can this person help me govern? Are they going to be an effective partner in creating the kind of economic opportunity here at home and guiding us through some dangerous waters internationally?”

And, he added:

“I want somebody who is going to be able to challenge my thinking and not simply be a yes person when it comes to policymaking.

___

Associated Press writers David Espo in Denver, Angela K. Brown in Waco, Texas, Glen Johnson in Boston, Randall Chase in Greenville, Del., Bob Lewis in Richmond, Va., John Hanna in Topeka, Kan., Scott Lindlaw in San Francisco and Jesse Holland in Washington contributed to this report. Pickler reported from Chicago.

Technorati Tags: barack obama, Barack Obama Joe Biden, Barack Obama Vice President, Barack Obama VP, Barack Obama VP Pick, Biden For Vp, joe biden, Joe Biden Vp, Joe Biden Vp Pick, Obama Biden, Obama Biden 08, Obama Biden 2008, Obama Biden Ticket, Politics News

NEW YORK – Fewer Americans are reading newspapers and are instead getting their news online, but television remains the leading source of news in the country, according to a survey released Sunday. Not surprisingly, younger people tend to get more of their news on the Internet, while older folks use traditional media such as television and newspapers, the Pew Research Center’s biannual survey on news consumption habits said.

Pew said the results show an increasing shift toward online news consumption, but that there is now a sizable group of a more engaged, sophisticated and well-off people that use both traditional and online sources to get their news.

The Pew researchers referred to these people as “integrators,” and says they account for 23% of those surveyed, spending the most time with the news on a typical day.

“Like Web-oriented news consumers, integrators are affluent and highly educated. However they are older, on average, than those who consider the Internet their main source of news,” the survey said.

It is this group that advertisers typically like to target, which helps explain why newspaper publishers have seen sharp declines in ad revenues as spending shifts online.

Pew found that the largest group of news consumers – 46% of those polled – have a “heavy reliance” on television for their news at all times of the day. This group is the oldest, with a median age of 52, and least affluent, with 43% unemployed. They are unlikely to own a computer or go online for news.

Overall, among those who get some of their news from TV, fewer are watching the 6:30 broadcast network newscasts, and instead opting for cable news sources such as CNN or Fox News Channel. CNN’s audience is now majority Democratic, while 39% of Fox News viewers are Republicans, 33% Democrats, with the remainder independent or didn’t specify.

The group that relies most on the Internet for news is the youngest at a median age of 35. It is also the smallest, at 13% of those polled. Fewer than half of them watch television news on a regular basis. Eighty percent of this group has a college education and they are twice as likely to read an online newspaper than a printed version.

The emergence of this group and the shift among integrators online led to an overall decline in the percentage of people who said they read a newspaper the day before, to 34% from 40% two years ago, the researchers found. That is also reflected in a shift in the industry that has seen circulation figures slip in recent quarters.

The beneficiary of less print newspaper consumption has been other online news sources, with about 25% of the people surveyed saying they go to an Internet site for news at least three times a week. That’s up from 18% in the 2006 survey.

Pew found that consumers of online news tend to be more educated than those who get their news from traditional sources, with 44% of college graduates saying they read news online every day. Just 11% of those who topped out with a high school education go online for news.

About one-third of those younger than 25 said they get no news on a typical day, up from about 25% in 1998.

The survey was conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International. It polled 3,615 adults 18 years or older by telephone between April 30 and June 1, and has a margin of error of 2 percentage points.

Technorati Tags: Breaking news, Media News, Millennial Generation, MILLENNIALS, News Consumption, Newspapers, online news, online news impact, online politics, TV News

Last night John Edwards appeared on ABC’s “Nightline Friday” and discussed the revelations surrounding his extra affair with Miss Rielle Hunter. During the interview Edwards spoke about how the relationship began, what drove him to adultery, its effect on his political future, and whether or not he was the father of Hunter’s child which many have dubbed as Edwards “love child.” Watch the entire interview here – the video is inside.

Since the interview took up the entire show, it has been broken down into two separate sections, both of which are attached below. If you didn’t catch the interview as it aired then this is something you should take a gander at.

I don’t know how the majority of America views this, but personally I have lost a lot of respect for Edwards – and to be frank, kind of think he’s some what of a hypocritical, smooth talking, attention addict.

“I think this President has shown a remarkable disrespect for his office, for the moral dimensions of leadership, for his friends, for his wife, for his precious daughter. It is breathtaking to me the level to which that disrespect has risen,” -John Edwards, on Bill Clinton, 1999

• Part 1:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCc7x4z52o0

• Part 2:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbL-vj-RKxQ

What do you guys think about all of this? I am really interested to see how bad he is hung out to dry by both the right wing (who you know is absolutely loving this) as well as the left side of the aisle – Edwards old friends, advisers, political opponents as well as the current Presidential candidates.

Technorati Tags: Edwards Affair, Elizabeth Edwards Video, John Edwards ABC, John Edwards Affair Statement, John Edwards Discusses Affair, John Edwards interview, John Edwards Nightline, John Edwards' Statement On Affair, Politics News, Rielle Hunter, Rielle Hunter And John Edwards, Rielle Hunter Videos, video

Here is a pretty funny video from the guys over at 236.com, which has them comparing the differing network news channels, and trying to decide on which network ran “the scariest stock video” pertaining to firearms and the Supreme Courts ruling which came down yesterday.

In a piece titled, “News network stock footage archives are locked and loaded”, they describe what the video is all about:

“Following the Supreme Court’s landmark decision on gun rights, the cable news networks had one crucial task: rounding up the best gun-totin’, pistol-packin’, bullet-blastin’ stock footage they could find to spice up their otherwise boring legal voiceovers.

Did they succeed? Judge for yourself with our roundup of the best gun b-roll used by the networks during the last news cycle.”

And of course, here is the video itself:

Technorati Tags: 2nd Amendment, DC Gun Ban Lifted, District Of Columbia v. Heller, Guns Ban Lifted, Heller Decision, Nra, Politics News, SCOTUS Guns, Second Amendment, Second Ammendment Upheld, Supreme court

FOX News has for a long time now been known for their unwavering support for the GOP, as well as an equally opinionated take on anything “liberal”. It has become more or less the networks calling card – with right wing blow hards, O’Reilly and Hannity acting as head cheerleaders. While political “favoritism” has become common among the competing networks (ie: MSNBC slanting to the left) the practice of misrepresentation, and reporting under false pretenses remains a industry “no no” – however FOX apparently doesn’t feel obligated to abide by these standards either.

We are now learning about a FOX News practice that basically disregards every last aspect of journalistic integrity (as if they had much prior to this anyways). I am referring to the networks tendency to label or claim that various guests, appearing on their programs, better known as “experts”, are something, or hold a position that is for the most part, completely made up:

The story goes something like this: Jane Fleming Kleeb, the Executive Director of the Young Voter PAC, went on The O’Reilly Factor” about two weeks ago to talk about global warming, a topic on which, by her own admission, she’s hardly an expert. So who, then, is Jane Fleming Kleeb? Well, according to the Chyron that flashed across the screen after Bill O’Reilly introduced her, she is a Democratic strategist.” either.

The first time they called me a strategist,” Fleming Kleeb recalls, I literally laughed on TV.”

Thus, Fleming Kleeb was anointed a Democratic strategist” and made regular appearances on cable news shows as such, before decamping from Washington for Nebraska, where her husband is running for a U.S. Senate seat. She now makes about one appearance per week via satellite feed from the heartland.

This type of behavior is beyond unacceptable for a national news network, not only does it lay a foundation of false pretenses in the mids of viewers, it ultimately (depending on what the so called “strategist, or expert” says or does) reflect on the Democratic party – when in all reality there’s absolutely no working relationship between the two:

I think it’s absurd,” says Ed Rollins, a bona fide strategist who has held high-ranking positions in numerous Republican presidential campaigns. Everyone calls themselves a strategist. I have been doing this for 40 years, I know most of the players, and I go on these shows and think, ‚ÄòWho are these people?’”

It’s like Noah’s ark. There are a couple of these people, a couple of those people, with no skill and no real analytical ability.”

“Many of these sort of more junior folks who have sort of made it into the ranks of analyst/commentator/strategist,” says one high-ranking cable news executive, are only too happy to talk about things they don’t know about. Part of the problem is that because, again, they’re very glib, they’re good on TV. And if you ask someone the question and they give you a good-sounding answer, you might not know by asking them that it’s not their area of expertise.

From the sounds of this report it certainly appears as though this is somewhat of a bigger issue within those involved with naitional news networks, and those who are intertwined in their fabric.

Unfortunately it also happens to be an issue that is for the most part, out of our hands – with “our” meaning you and me, the basic viewer/consumer. This is disheartening mainly because without pressure from the viewers the networks have absolutely no prerogative to change the way they do things – which of course, includes mis-labeling guests as “strategists, or experts” when in all reality they are just as knowledgeable as the “Joe Schmoe” watching on his or her television set.

Technorati Tags: "political strategist’, Breaking Media News, Breaking news, Breaking political news, FOX has no standards, fox news, Jane Fleming Kleeb, journalistic integrity, Mainstream Media, misrepresentation, political "favoritism"

By: Stephen Elias

From the beginning of time an individual’s age seemed to be the unavoidable clock that would ultimately decide when they pass from this world. But through our medical and technological advances physicians are armed with an array of new tools and diagnostic tests that can help pinpoint health concerns and aim to remedy the vast array of problems with our bodies.

In a study recently published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology medical professionals have concluded that the key to increased longevity lies within the heart, specifically the coronary arteries. Equipped with such knowledge the question remains; why does coronary artery disease remain the number one killer among both men and women in the United States.

What researchers have discovered is that blood supplied to the heart through such arteries can develop hardened plaque, better knows as atherosclerosis, which can lead to heart attacks. This coronary artery plaque is composed of calcium, and using computer tomography (CT) scans we now have the ability to measure the amount of plaque contained within the artery walls. Utilizing these scans, patients are then given a Coronary artery calcium score” which helps to quantify the health of the arteries, meaning the lower score the healthier the heart is.

The study conducted in Tennessee and California measured the scores of participants age 70 and older. After completion of the scan, each participant was given their individual score and studied over the next six years. As expected the younger the participant was the longer they lived, but the significant portion of the study yielded a much greater discovery; the coronary artery calcium score helped researchers predict who would die and who wouldn’t during the six years regardless of age and other medical issues.

With this knowledge it has been concluded that an older person with a lower calcium score may outlive a younger person with a higher calcium score. This breakthrough now aims to help physicians shift their focus from age to coronary artery calcium scores in helping to identify seniors at risk for heart issues. As always though, regardless of age, the key to having a healthy heart includes diet, exercise, lifestyle, and regular physician visits.

Technorati Tags: Atherosclerosis, breaking health news, breaking medical news, Calcium Score, Cardiology, Coronary Artery, Coronary Artery Calcium Score, Coronary Heart Disease, CT Scan, Diet, Exercise, Heart Health, Plaque