Idaho papers apologize for false Obama statements

Recently two Idaho papers did what very few media outlets across the nation have been willing to do - they apologized for printing letters that spread falsehoods about Illinois Senator Barack Obama.

The Idaho Statesman recently posted the following apology at the top of their Letters to the Editor page:

"Editor's note: The Statesman cannot verify the accuracy of statements made in letters to the editor or guest opinions. However, the Statesman will not run letters that contain statements it knows are false. We should not have run Clarice Wright's Dec. 14 letter to the editor regarding presidential candidate Barack Obama. The Statesman regrets the publication of the letter."

David Keyes, the Publisher of the Bonners Ferry Herald in northern Idaho, issued this statement on December 13th:

Last week the Herald ran a letter titled: “Don’t elect a Muslim.” The letter writer railed on presidential candidate Barack Obama. There were many falsehoods in this letter.
I contacted North Idaho resident Andrea Ohman, who volunteers for the Obama campaign, to ask her to clarify the letter.
It appears Janney Chandler is regurgitating action points sent out by a group trying to defame Obama.
“These malicious, irresponsible charges are precisely the kind of politics the American people have grown tired of, and that Senator Obama is trying to change by focusing on bringing people together to solve our common problems,” Ohman said.
The writer claimed Obama is a Muslim. He is not. He is a Christian.
This paper will do a better job screening inaccurate letters and will not use the excuse of the political season to lower our standards.
I want to thank everyone for their input on a matter we take very seriously. I apologize for letting such a ill-informed, hate-filled letter run in our community newspaper.

On behalf of Obama supporters in Idaho, THANK YOU for having the guts and integrity to admit it was a mistake, and for ensuring that your readers know the truth.

Barack Obama IS Christan, NOT Muslim
Barack Obama was not raised a Muslim. Barack Obama is a committed, baptized Christian who has been a member of Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ for over twenty years. Obama never attended a “radical Muslim school.” Obama attended public elementary school for two years in Indonesia, not an Islamic madrassa. Obama held his personal Bible when he was sworn-in as a U.S. Senator, not a Qur’an. Obama reads the Bible and finds time to pray on the campaign trail.

Some of the many sources that confirm these statements:

• CNN - CNN debunks false report about Obama
• Politifact - Obama's Schooling and Obama's Swearing In
• Snopes
• Senator Hillary Clinton's Campaign
• Barack Obama - Letter from Religious Leaders and Fact Check

Barack Obama IS an American Patriot
Barack Obama, a United States Senator, is patriotic. He does hold his hand to his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance.

Some of the many confirming sources:

• Politifact - Photo was taken during anthem, not pledge
• Washington Post
• Slate
• Think On These Things Blog
• Barack Obama - Letter from Military Leaders and Fact Check

Comments

[ReggieH]

THANK Freaking Goodness! Those letters were making me SO Angry. I didn't know what to do about them. I didn't write a letter or call the statesman to complain because I wasn't sure what their policy was regarding printing known falsehoods in the letters to the editor page.

The damage has already been done, but I guess all we can do now is give the Statesman a little credit for at least being willing to admit their mistake.

Great post, Brett.

BTW, does anybody know what happened to that great post from last week about Gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brady's support for Obama? I thought he wrote a great letter and then I saw it dissapear.

[ychelleh]

Obama Recites Pledge of Allegiance before Senate on 2/1/07

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACNJMg6ZHu8&feature=related

[ychelleh]

Obama Recites Pledge of Allegiance before Senate on 6/21/07

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iC9veEouqqQ&NR=1

[TJ Thomson]

Thanks for setting the record straight, Brett.

[sharon fisher]

And nice letter, Blogmother. :)

The fact that we have to waste our time doing this sort of thing, though, isn't good.

[Katie Whittier]

Reggie: the Brady statement is going to be made public within the next few weeks. We plan to roll it out in portions, so we are doing the same with blogs. Keep an eye out -- it will be coming soon!

[Brian]

I'm not sure being a blind, unthinking "Patriot" is a good thing anymore... And, I am as skeptical about being a "Christians" as being any kind of test for public office. The various churches have done horrible things over the centuries.

We need people who QUESTION the received wisdom. Of course, accepting the received wisdom is not allowed in the current One Party system the Empire now uses to manufacture consent.

[Brett Adler]

Brian,

Senator Barack Obama is not a "blind, unthinking" Patriot. If anyone is, it's the folks who question his patriotism simply because he wasn't holding his hand to his heart during the National Anthem or because he doesn't wear an American flag lapel pin every day. Patriotism goes much deeper than that.

The real issue here is not what religion he is, but that people are spreading lies about his religion. You are right that being Christian should not be a test or requirement for political office. I was raised in a Jewish family, so I certainly don't think so. But I do take offense when people spread false rumors about Senator Obama's religion.

The reality of a true democracy is voters are allowed to base their votes on whatever they want to, and therefore need to know the truth so they can vote correctly. While religious beliefs are not a requirement to run for or hold an elected position, it does end up factoring into the voters' decisions. You may not agree with that, but that's how democracy works.

Lastly, Senator Obama does question conventional wisdom. He is the only major Democratic candidate who opposed the Iraq war from the beginning. The rest followed their President into the worm hole.

[JDem]

Yes, opposing the war from the Illinois State Senate was sure sticking his neck out.

Obama was asked if he had been in the US Senate for the vote, would he have voted to not go to war, his answer, "I don't know."

[Julie in Boise]

"Obama was asked if he had been in the US Senate for the vote, would he have voted to not go to war, his answer, "I don't know."

JDem, can you cite a source for that? I don't remember hearing or reading it, and it surprises me. Thanks.

[IdahoRocks]

It was appropriate for the newspapers to apologize. But, the damage had been done. And why did such LTEs get past the editors in the first place? Maybe because Boise is so big, such letters are cast aside as rubbish, not part of "mainstream" thinking. But in a county like Boundary County, with only about 10,000 in the entire county, and plenty of fundamentalist churches who harbor the likes of Ms. Chandler, this kind of printed material is VERY damaging. In Boundary County the fundamentalist churches push the people out to vote and they vote their racist, ignorant choices. And for any newspaper to even print their LTEs is a choice to give these people a voice.

Furthermore, the BF Herald did not print my LTE in response and I didn't really expect them to after having exposed their egregious reporting during the last election. They'll print plenty of positive Bill Sali opinion but only the rare article about a Democratic candidate.

This kind of biased, lying media reporting, whether by a reporter or by an editor who allows false and racist diatribe to be printed, bring to mind what At-Largely (www.atlargely.com) said about the recent hiring of Bill Kristol at the NYT:

"I have no problem with opposing views. I do, however, have a problem with people who believe their own propaganda, lie for a living, live in an imperial fantasy world, and are generally of the mindset that the democracy is code for war-profiteering."

In this case, it seems that democracy is code for hatred, bigotry, and racism.

[jdem]

Julie,

click my name for the first place I read it. A google search also reveals a youtube video with him explaining it and a short mention of it on his obamapedia page.

[Julie in Boise]

JDEm, thanks for the link. I read it, but considering that it came from a Clinton fundraiser, I'm not putting a lot of stock in it.

I finally read something that crystalizes my problem with John Edwards. Writing at Daily Kos (where, as you probably know, Edwards rules the roost), poblano said today:

"What I find most unsettling about John Edwards' philosophy is that it divides the world into two oppositional factions of good and evil. We can never negotiate with the other side because, apparently, they're not reasonable people. They are not capable of being persuaded.

"The problem with this worldview is that it's deeply cynical. It does not permit real change to take hold in he hearts and minds of American people. It just assumes that "we're right, they're wrong, and they're never going to get it".

"I believe that progressive thought can be persuasive. I believe that progressive agenda can become mainstream thought. In fact, on a whole host of issues, ranging from universal health care to the enviorment to Iraq, it already has become mainstream thought.
The only way to truly build consensus is to accept the proposition that the other side is reasonable."

That sums it up so well for me. I liked the 2004 version of Edwards a lot more than the current incarnation for this very reason. If he gets the nomination, fine - we'll hope that he can modulate the anger and ratchet down the rhetoric a bit by November.

Click my name for the full diary.

Edwards and Obama (and Clinton for that matter) are very close on policy matters. We need to decide who has the best chance of uniting a divided electorate.