They think their readers are THIS stupid?

In a truly brazen display of disregard for both the truth and the intelligence of its readers, the New York Post ran this list in its coverage of Saturday's FRC Values Voters Summit. Ron Paul finished 3rd with 15%... but somehow that result doesn't get reported. Considering only on-site voters, of which there were just under 1000, Huckabee was the runaway favorite with 488 votes. Clearly, the Post's list is based on the whole 5,775 votes which included online participants. I think the discrepancy is likely the Post leaving an 'out' for themselves to claim that they just slipped up.
Are they so arrogant at the Post that they think no one will notice or care? Do they not realize how self-defeating a tactic like this will be? I don't live in New York, and I've never read or cared about the Post... but now they've turned me into an absolute anti-Post evangelist! They have just handed their (mis)perceived enemies a heavy club with which to mercilessly beat them.
Take a swing: letters@nypost.com

So Mitt wants to buy a straw poll...

Or more precisely, wants his supporters to buy him one. Here's to hoping it's another Nevada!

Romney Vies for Value Voters' Support

If Mitt should win, I wonder how many MSM hacks will cry foul. I wonder if a $1 donation to the FRC will get you a vote in the poll. Hmmm...

The Sidoti Slant

AP reporter Liz Sidoti begins her coverage of last night's Republican fundraising dinner with this patently misleading headline:

Romney Has Stage to Self at RNC Event

If a reader were unaware that Ron Paul had also addressed the event, they would get the impression that Romney was the only speaker. She begins her fourth paragraph thusly:

'Romney was the only leading candidate who addressed all the donors,'

So if the reader failed to catch that word 'leading' they would still have the impression that Mitt was the only candidate there. Next sentence:

'The former Massachusetts governor had the stage virtually to himself_'

Now, the few who have read this far just might catch the weasel-word 'virtually', and if they've been paying attention they might remember having seen 'leading candidate' a few words back.

Finally, the reporter deigns to mention Ron Paul by name after the article is more than half over. Naturally she prefaces the mention with the obligatory 'Long-shot' jab.

I guess this is what passes for journalism at the vaunted Associated Press.

Let them know what you think:
info@ap.org