Topic: NewsBusters
In a Feb. 23 NewsBusters post, the Media Research Center's Tim Graham has a fit because a writer attempted to debunk Newt Gingrich's claim that "not once" during the 2008 election "did anybody in the elite media ask why Barack Obama voted in favor of legalizing infanticide." Graham responded with a personal attack on the writer, Politico's Alexander Burns, after deeming his answer insufficient:
Is this what they taught the Harvard Class of 2008? One might think Burns spent more time partying than watching the media in '08, because Obama's three votes in the Illinois state legislature against a "Born-Alive Infants Protection Act" barely came up.
The Politico headline was "Newt: Media never asked Obama about 'infanticide' -- except it did." If Burns wanted to prove Gingrich wrong, he'd find an actual question about that. Click on the Burns link, and it's quite clear Chris Wallace was asking a more generic question to Obama, about whether he was truly a bridge-builder:
[...]
Overnight, Burns reported "conservative readers" pointed out to him what should have been obvious to him. His link didn't prove his case.
Actually, the real answer is this: Obama did not vote in favor of legalizing infanticide. Gingrich lied.
As the National Journal explained (via Media Matters):
According to Politifact, an independent fact-checking organization that looked into similar claims made by former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum on the campaign trail, Obama voiced his opposition to the new legislation as a state senator because it would have given legal status to fetuses and would thus have been struck down by the courts, and because Illinois already had laws to ensure infants who survived abortions would be given medical attention.
If Burns "didn't prove his case," then Graham ignored the truth entirely by failing to point out Gingrich's falsehood. Bad form for a so-called media watchdog.
