"Washington Post admits polling was "in-kind contribution"

How Carter Beat Reagan
By Jeffrey Lord
The American Spectator
September 25, 2012

Dick Morris is right.

Here's his column on "Why the Polls Understate the Romney Vote."

Here's something Dick Morris doesn't mention. And he's charitable.

Remember when Jimmy Carter beat Ronald Reagan in 1980?

That's right. Jimmy Carter beat Ronald Reagan in 1980.

In a series of nine stories in 1980 on "Crucial States" -- battleground states as they are known today -- the New York Times repeatedly told readers then-President Carter was in a close and decidedly winnable race with the former California governor. And used polling data from the New York Times/CBS polls to back up its stories.

Four years later, it was the Washington Post that played the polling game -- and when called out by Reagan campaign manager Ed Rollins a famous Post executive called his paper's polling an "in-kind contribution to the Mondale campaign." Mondale, of course, being then-President Reagan's 1984 opponent and Carter's vice president.

All of which will doubtless serve as a reminder of just how blatantly polling data is manipulated by liberal media -- used essentially as a political weapon to support the liberal of the moment, whether Jimmy Carter in 1980, Walter Mondale in 1984 -- or Barack Obama in 2012. 
READ MORE > > >

Obama's Passport Breach, Missing INS Records For The Week of Obama's Birth, a CIA Donor Link, and More Curious Issues

Time for New Look at 2008 Obama Passport Breach

By Jack Cashill

AmericanThinker.com

March 5, 2012

Among the unexpected findings of the Sheriff Arpaio cold case was this one:

Records of Immigration and Naturalization Service cards filled out by airplane passengers arriving on international flights originating outside the United States in the month of August 1961, examined at the National Archives in Washington, D.C. are missing records for the week of President Obama's birth, including the dates Aug. 1, 1961 through Aug. 7, 1961.

This revelation evoked memories of one of the great underreported stories of the 2008 campaign: the multiple breaches of the presidential candidates' passport records in March of that year.  In one its more egregiously dishonest moments, the Washington Post headlined the story on March 22, "Rice Apologizes For Breach of Passport Data; Employees Looked at Files On Obama, Clinton, McCain."

The "Rice" in question is Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.  The offended party in the Post story was Barack Obama.  He told reporters that he expected "a full and thorough investigation," one that "should be done in conjunction with those congressional committees that have oversight function so it's not simply an internal matter."

It is not until the thirteenth paragraph of the Post story that the reader learns that of one of the three contract employees caught in the act worked for the Analysis Corporation, the CEO of which was John Brennan, a 25-year CIA veteran.  The Post does report that Brennan donated $2,300 to the Obama campaign but suggests no deeper tie.  This information is offset by the revelation that the other two culpable contract employees worked for Stanley Inc., whose CEO Philip Nolan contributed $1,000 to the Clinton campaign.

READ MORE . . .

"WaPo reminds us that some of our establishment elites only argue the law when the law may support their aims."

WaPo Op-Ed: Laws for the Masses, Shelter the Elites

By Christopher Horner

PajamasMedia

June 1, 2011

The Washington Post has printed an editorial sniveling about a court order, prompted by a lawsuit, laying out how the University of Virginia must release certain records. These records relate to a former faculty member and pertain to the Climategate and “hockey stick graph” scandals.

The editorial expresses umbrage with my seeking out the records on behalf of the America Tradition Institute, which I suppose is more palatable for the WaPo to do than actually reporting that the school in fact agreed to hand over the records — just one day before having to go before a judge who would likely have ordered the release.

But how dare I, a “skeptic,” utilize a law the Left passed! Says the piece:

READ MORE . . .