Liz “Sprinkles” Sidoti and the All Propaganda (AP)

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Regular readers will recall that I occasionally refer to the AP as "all propaganda" (rather than the Associated Press). This is not without justification.

Let's take today's "analysis" piece by the AP in national newspapers originally captioned by The Associated Press: Analysis: Note to Washington: Voters say talk jobs.

In The Arizona Republic this piece was captioned Job-focused voters weary of D.C. games.

In the Arizona Daily Star, its frustrated creative writer copy editor captioned it Americans want jobs, prosperity, but in DC you'd never know it. Why don't you just quit and write the next great American novel?

Headlines aside, what caught my attention about this supposed "analysis" piece is who wrote it: Liz Sidoti the AP's national political writer who has covered national politics since 2003, and Christine Simmons who has covered Washington for the AP since 2007. AP writers Ann Sanner and Natasha Metzler also contributed to the report.

Liz Sidoti is familiar to those of who follow the media closely. She is a biased hack. We like to mock her as Liz "Sprinkles" Sidoti. Many of you may recall why. Salon.com Politics | McCain gets donuts; Obama gets likened to a terrorist:

We've known for a while that so many political reporters fawn over John McCain that the media is often considered "McCain's base," but Dana Milbank's latest piece suggests news outlets are anxious to solidify the relationship.

Appearing before the nation's newspaper editors yesterday, AP chairman Dean Singleton pressed Barack Obama on whether he would send more U.S. troops to Afghanistan, where "Obama bin Laden is still at large." McCain's treatment was slightly different.

McCain's moderators, theAP's Ron Fournier and Liz Sidoti, greeted McCain with a box of Dunkin' Donuts. "We spend quite a bit of time with you on the back of the Straight Talk Express asking you questions, and what we've decided to do today was invite everyone else along on the ride," Sidoti explained. "We even brought you your favorite treat."

McCain opened the offering. "Oh, yes, with sprinkles!" he said.

Sidoti passed him a cup. "A little coffee with a little cream and a little sugar," she said.

This is neither a joke nor an exaggeration. Here is the video:

So, in March, McCain gives political reporters free barbecue, and in April, the nation's leading newspaper editors give McCain free doughnuts (with sprinkles!) and coffee.

There's something about this that undermines the notion of objective and detached journalism.

Which brings us to the substance of today's supposed "analysis" piece by Liz "Sprinkles" Sidoti. The Associated Press: Analysis: Note to Washington: Voters say talk jobs:

They just don't get it in Washington.

There's a gaping disconnect between what Americans care about and what President Barack Obama and Congress, Democrats and Republicans are actually doing. A new GfK-Associated Press poll tells the story: contempt for lawmakers, a bare majority approving what Obama's doing.

You mean this, Sprinkles? Democrats bring the economy back from the brink of a Great Depression. Who "doesn't get it" is your unrequited love, John McCain and the Republicans: McCain was for the TARP before he was against it, he opposed the stimulus bill that his campaign adviser economist Mark Zandi says averted the next Great Depression, and McCain and most of the Republicans have voted against every jobs bill, including one just yesterday. So if the focus of voter anger is job creation, Sprinkles, that anger is directed at those in Washington who are the Party of No.

Now look at Washington.

The White House and Congress are consumed with the partisan gridlock on overhauling health care. That issue is overshadowing everything else — even legislation in the House and Senate to provide unemployment relief.

The Senate did vote Wednesday to extend many elements of last year's economic stimulus, including help for the jobless. But that isn't final: The vote merely sends the measure into talks with the House, which is wary about some Senate provisions.

This is internal inconsistency within adjoining paragraphs undermining the very premise of Sprinkles' analysis: Obama and the Congress are not doing anything to create jobs – but wait – they are! The Senate voted on a jobs bill even as I was writing this crap.

The gulf between what voters are focused on and what Washington is talking most about seems as wide as the anger is deep in America, and that helps explain why people are so turned off, so furious at politicians of any stripe.

Only 22 percent of Americans — less than at any previous point in Obama's presidency — approve of Congress, the new GfK-AP poll shows. Just over half like what Obama's doing. Frustration is directed at both Republicans and Democrats. Half of all people say they want to fire their congressman.

Unemployment and the economy are by far the issues Americans are most concerned about; health care trails behind those issues as well as terrorism and the federal budget deficit.

Sprinkles is implying that health care reform is a distraction issue from what voters really care about. (She quotes a Republican in support of this premise.) Curious then that the GfK-AP poll to which she refers also focused almost exclusively on health care reform questions before a few questions about jobs. http://www.ap-gfkpoll.com/pdf/AP-GfK%20Poll%20March%202010%20HC%20Topline%203.9.10.pdf

The GfK-AP topline poll cited by Sprinkles http://www.ap-gfkpoll.com/pdf/AP-GfK%20Poll%20March%202010%20Topline%20Release2%203.9.10.pdf revealed:

President Obama: 53% total approval – 46% total disapproval

Generic Congress: 22% total approval – 76% total disapproval

Democrats in Congress: 36% total approval – 61% total disapproval

Republicans in Congress: 30% total approval – 67% total disapproval

Question: "Do you want to see the Republicans or Democrats win control of Congress?"

Democrats 44%

Republicans 38%

Don't Care 15%

Question: "Would you like to see your own member of Congress get re-elected in November, or would you like to see someone else win the election?"

Own Member 40%

Someone Else 49%

Don't Care 7%

The smarter students in class have already discovered why the GfK-AP Poll is largely meaningless, and why Liz "Sprinkles" Sidoti's "analysis" is total crap.

Congressional Democrats are retaining their approval number within their historical norm of the 34-38% range. The 30% approval for Republicans is well below their historical norm. You see, that would destroy the AP's narrative that Democrats are in danger of losing both chambers of Congress to Republicans this fall, so Sprinkles cites the generic congressional approval number which lumps them all together. And "half of all people want to fire their congressman?" The poll does not ask nor identify whether the respondent is represented by a Democrat or a Republican. Without this breakdown, the generic number is meaningless.

Obama's 53% approval rating at this stage of his presidency is actually pretty good considering the economic catastrophe he inherited from George W. Bush. It is comparable to previous recent presidents.

Sprinkle's one paragraph of supposed "analysis":

Even voters who supported Obama and his Democrats have soured on Washington. That's a danger for the party in power as it looks to hang onto control of the House and Senate in November. Angry voters tend to reject the status quo; that's how Democrats rose to power in Congress in 2006 and Obama won the White House in 2008. Today, voters are still furious with Washington — if not more so. And now Democrats could be blamed.

Can you believe Sprinkles gets paid to write this crap? Equating a year of Democrats trying to rectify the economic catastrophe wrought by Republican economic polices over the past decade with the elections of 2006 and 2008, or any other year for that matter, is complete nonsense. Democrats have been trying to do everything possible to fix the economy and to put people back to work. Republicans have voted in lockstep unison against every Democratic proposal. Republicans have offered no plan, no vision to fix what their economic policies have wrought. Why? Because they still believe in those economic policies, like a religion, and they want those policies to continue. Hence the Party of No opposes any deviation from their faith based supply-side economic policies of the past 30 years.

Bush gave us a decade of zero net job growth, doubled the national debt and gave us a great recession teetering on the brink of the next Great Depression. The guys who drove the car off the cliff now want to get behind the wheel again.

This is what voters rejected in 2006 and 2008 and will punish the Republicans for again in 2010. Voters know who was responsible. And voters know who is trying to help them now.

Liz "Sprinkles" Sidoti may want her unrequited love, John McCain, to be president so she can bring him sprinkle doughnuts in the White House, but the country would be in a Great Depression had he been elected. So get over it, Sprinkles.