Home / Blogs / twandx's blog
Worm turning so fast it's dizzy
Remember Tucker Carlson of the fabled bow-tie who kept his legs together everytime Hillary was mentioned? Now he has come out with "proof" that the msm conspired to deprive Hillary of the nomination by suppressing stories of Reverend Wright.
Well he was one of the boyz who turned his back on our cries for help to expose Wright/Obama connection. By our, I mean the many blogs that kept up a barrage of information to media folk like Tucker and were ignored. Always seemed strange to me that the media boyz and girlz could read Koz and Huff Puff but could never seem to find Riverdaughter or Alegra or Partizane.
Now Tucker professes to be on the side of the angels in an appearance on FOX this morning as he said Obama stole the Primary from Hillary. Here's a bit from his rag that he referenced.
The crisis reached a howling pitch in mid-April, 2008, at an ABC News debate moderated by Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos. Gibson asked Obama why it had taken him so long – nearly a year since Wright’s remarks became public – to dissociate himself from them. Stephanopoulos asked, “Do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?”
Watching this all at home were members of Journolist, a listserv comprised of several hundred liberal journalists, as well as like-minded professors and activists. The tough questioning from the ABC anchors left many of them outraged. “George [Stephanopoulos],” fumed Richard Kim of the Nation, is “being a disgusting little rat snake.”
Others went further. According to records obtained by The Daily Caller, at several points during the 2008 presidential campaign a group of liberal journalists took radical steps to protect their favored candidate. Employees of news organizations including Time, Politico, the Huffington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Guardian, Salon and the New Republic participated in outpourings of anger over how Obama had been treated in the media, and in some cases plotted to fix the damage.
In one instance, Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent urged his colleagues to deflect attention from Obama’s relationship with Wright by changing the subject. Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics, Ackerman wrote, “Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.”
Michael Tomasky, a writer for the Guardian, also tried to rally his fellow members of Journolist: “Listen folks–in my opinion, we all have to do what we can to kill ABC and this idiocy in whatever venues we have. This isn’t about defending Obama. This is about how the [mainstream media] kills any chance of discourse that actually serves the people.”
dailycaller.com/2010/07/20/documents-show-media-plotting-to-kill-stories-about-rev-jeremiah-wright/
ShareThis- twandx's blog
- Login to post comments
It's the onion, stupid!
www.theonion.com/articles/local-family-homeless-after-tornado-destroys-white,17757/
This was really good, Twandx. I haven't been to the Onion for awhile; this reminded me of the great stuff I've been missing.
Better late than never for Tucker Carlson. This JournoList scandal of journalists talking amongst themselves and suggesting they pick out BHO political foes and "call them racists" needs to go down in the history books and needs to not happen again. I don't care if Tucker Carlson was late to the game. This story needs to get out.
What baffles about that JournoList story is the emotional reaction Obot reporters had to their precious candidate being asked reasonable questions by the ABC moderators. Sorry, but: was BHO their pretty, fragile, vulnerable girlfriend?
But in the end, the damning quote stands: Spencer Ackerman suggests deflecting from Reverend Wright's sermons by finding Obama foes, writing about those foes, and suggests journalists "call them racists." Ackerman showed poor impulse control on that one. It's one thing to think it and not act on it. It's another to think it, then fight that thought. But to say it? Did Ezra Klein kick Ackerman off the JournoList listserv after that? No, doesn't look like it.
Who would have imagined strategies like this originating not from inside the Obama campaign (though that may well have taken place) but sprouting inside the MSM? I know we all joked about it and we all groused about it practically happening but here it is explicit. It actually did happen. Whether journalists acted on Ackerman's suggestion is not yet proven. But his bias is proven. All reporters are naturally biased, but they're supposed to strive toward objectivity. Ackerman does not appear to strive much there.
What's sad is, voters who refused to do their own reading were more susceptible to politicians' empty promises. (More than one Obot friend said "don't read his speeches. Stop reading the paper. Just LISTEN to his speeches and watch him speak." Scary. If his speeches don't hold up on paper, then something ain't right.) If this turns off more people to reading the MSM then we'll face a future of more Obamas. MSM employers have an opportunity to do the right thing - they could take steps toward regaining lost public trust by firing journalists who were impulsive like Ackerman was. But sadly MSM will probably stand by and look the other way, in fear of losing web hits and ratings those two journalists (Spencer Ackerman, Ezra Klein) attract.
I am beyond mad when I think of the MSM and how it abused the public trust. Many Americans are finally on to that scandal. I doubt it will change the media, but it doesn't matter. It has rendered itself insignificant.