I have an article at Quadrant Online that deals with the “Journolist” website discussion group that emerged during the 2008 American election. It was a list server restricted to left-leaning observers of the political world, which included a number of media people from major newsgathering organisations, Time, Newsweek, The Washington Post, and The New York Times being amongst them. The “Daily Caller” website has been publishing some of these discussions and they are a fascination.
That the American media is largely Democrat and left-liberal is not news. But the evidence that journalists worked together to think through how they could ensure to the best of their ability that Obama was elected and McCain was not ought to be seen as extraordinary and a major concern.
What interests me as particulars of a more general case is that no one amongst these media people could have been unaware of Obama’s Marxist mentor, Frank Davis Marshall. Nor could they have been unaware of his close relationship with the former “Weathermen”, Bill Ayres and his wife Bernadette Dohrn. As I write, if you don’t know who these people are or the role they played in Obama’s life, you have to ask yourself why that is.
And if you come to realise that virtually the whole of the press corps in the US was aware of who these people were and their role in Obama’s life and yet wrote nothing about it, then you again have to ask yourself why that is.
How has the US ended up with probably the most leftist member of the Democratic Party, and thus the most leftist member of either party, as its President? There are no end of reasons, but the complicity of the American media has had certainly played its part.
Here is a partial list of some of the names and organisations that were parties to the “Journolist” group. Have a look. It is quite instructive.
As I write, if you don’t know who these people are or the role they played in Obama’s life, you have to ask yourself why that is.
Mate, if you only just heard of Bill Ayres then obviously you were not paying any attention whatsoever during the 08 campaign as Ayres’ life story got no end of press.
Your entire post is based on a bullshit premise.
Kates, why don’t you post about how the US media has ignored the serious questions about Obama’s Kenyan birth?
Then you can do an expose on all the murders Hilary Clinton organised during the 90s.
Then when you are done, to prove you are unbiased, tell us about how the media is ignoring all the evidence that Dick Cheney planted explosives in the WTC.
What a bunch of specious crap.
Tillman
27 Jul 10 at 12:42 pm
Kates sez:
virtually the whole of the press corps in the US was aware of who these people were and their role in Obama’s life and yet wrote nothing about it
What a bunch of total fucking bullshit.
Took me about 15 seconds to do an archive search of the leftist/Nazi New York Times for the election year of 2008 (1 January through election date).
Here’s the leftist/Nazi New York Times “writing nothing about” Ayers in the lead up to the election:
http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?frow=0&n=10&srcht=a&query=ayers&srchst=nyt&submit.x=0&submit.y=0&submit=sub&hdlquery=&bylquery=&daterange=period&mon1=01&day1=01&year1=2008&mon2=11&day2=04&year2=2008
And here’s the leftist/Nazi New York Times page dedicated to reporting on Ayers and Dohrn:
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/a/william_c_ayers/index.html?8qa&scp=1-spot&sq=ayers&st=nyt
Ridiculous garbage, Kates.
Tillman
27 Jul 10 at 12:49 pm
if you only just heard of Bill Ayres then obviously you were not paying any attention whatsoever during the 08 campaign as Ayres’ life story got no end of press.
Only from Fox and blogs. If you read a lot of blogs, you know who Bill Ayers is. Most people would have no idea.
Then when you are done, to prove you are unbiased, tell us about how the media is ignoring all the evidence that Dick Cheney planted explosives in the WTC.
okaaaaayyyy….
we have a Truther in our midst.
Your entire post is based on a bullshit premise.
The premise is that Obama was not sufficiently scrutinised by the press. That’s not bullshit. For example, look at the wave of outrage when he actually tried to implement policies! How come? Because people didn’t understand what they were voting for. Obama didn’t tell them and the press played along.
daddy dave
27 Jul 10 at 12:50 pm
yeah Yanks believe Obama put up taxes except cutting taxes was 40% of the stimulus package.
Just as well over 70% of them believed hussein was responsible for 11/9
Butterfield, Bloomfeld % Bishop
27 Jul 10 at 12:53 pm
you dumbarse, Tillman. Read some of those articles that you found in that search. The only time the NYT wrote about Ayers was to explain to their readers that it was all a beat-up from the McCain campaign, and Sarah Palin’s “increasingly scary rallys.” (that’s a quote).
daddy dave
27 Jul 10 at 12:53 pm
Homer, you’re quoting a debunked survey. sheesh, you’re about as lame as Tillman today.
daddy dave
27 Jul 10 at 12:55 pm
Daddy Dave, you are thick as two short planks.
My reference to Cheney was to make the point that all of this crap is equally stupid. Birthers and truthers are two sides of the same coin.
I obviously don’t think Cheney had anything to do with 9/11, any more than I believe HRC murdered people or Obama is Kenyan.
Good god you must be willfully obtuse.
Only from Fox and blogs. If you read a lot of blogs, you know who Bill Ayers is. Most people would have no idea.
Bullshit. It was all over the New York Times and the rest of the “lamestream” media.
You are just wrong. You are factually incorrect, you ignorant twit.
Tillman
27 Jul 10 at 12:56 pm
surveys DD.
Zogby found a similar result amongst soldiers in Iraq
Butterfield, Bloomfeld % Bishop
27 Jul 10 at 12:59 pm
The only time the NYT wrote about Ayers was to explain to their readers that it was all a beat-up from the McCain campaign
Oh what a rapid shift.
30 seconds ago you said they didn’t mention it at all.
Here’s what the NYT actually wrote:
A review of records of the schools project and interviews with a dozen people who know both men, suggest that Mr. Obama, 47, has played down his contacts with Mr. Ayers, 63. But the two men do not appear to have been close. Nor has Mr. Obama ever expressed sympathy for the radical views and actions of Mr. Ayers, whom he has called “somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8.”
Where do they say it was a beatup?
You’re just making shit up.
I can’t read any more of this drivel because your stupidity and ignorance are too annoying.
Bye.
Tillman
27 Jul 10 at 1:00 pm
Kates laments partisanship in journalism.
And here’s his completely objective, rational, well-founded and thoroughly reasonable conclusion:
The American President is not some soft leftist in the mould of the ALP but an out-and-out hard core radical neo-Marxist.
You forget to mention he was a Nazi, Kates.
Tillman
27 Jul 10 at 1:03 pm
Kates, why don’t you post about how the US media has ignored the serious questions about Obama’s Kenyan birth?
Alternatively, head over to the Atlantic Monthly – a publication Tillman cited as authoritative last week – where you can still read Andrew Sullivan pursuing the Trig Palin false pregnancy scandal.
The New York Times didn’t investigate the Ayers story – it reacted to the coverage given it in the blogosphere.
We now know that some of the most influential journalists in America colluded to protect Obama and attack his critics. Spencer Ackerman of The Washington Independent wrote this on JournoList:
Ackerman also wrote: “find a right winger’s [head] and smash it through a plate-glass window. Take a snapshot of the bleeding mess and send it out in a Christmas card to let the right know that it needs to live in a state of constant fear.”
Well, now the truth is out and it’s going to cost the liberal media and their Dear Leader very dearly.
C.L.
27 Jul 10 at 1:07 pm
Nice brain explosion Tillers, but try addressing the actual post.
Sinclair Davidson
27 Jul 10 at 1:07 pm
Tillman forfeits. Flawless victory to Kates.
Infidel Tiger
27 Jul 10 at 1:09 pm
“…objective, rational, well-founded and thoroughly reasonable…”
Tillman in this thread:
“bullshit… murders … explosives in the WTC… crap… fucking bullshit… leftist/Nazi… leftist/Nazi… leftist/Nazi… Dick Cheney… garbage… crap… 9/11… bullshit… shit… drivel…
C.L.
27 Jul 10 at 1:11 pm
CL sez:
The New York Times didn’t investigate the Ayers story
The NYT sez:
A review of records of the schools project and interviews with a dozen people who know both men, suggest that…
So they did do an investigation. Another CL lie.
You just don’t like what the actual investigation uncovered i.e. no evidence that Obama was a baby-killing Nazi terrorist.
Tillman
27 Jul 10 at 1:14 pm
CL writes:
The New York Times didn’t investigate the Ayers story – it reacted to the coverage given it in the blogosphere.
Tillman ‘doctors’ what CL wrote:
The New York Times didn’t investigate the Ayers story
dover_beach
27 Jul 10 at 1:19 pm
try addressing the actual post
What, you mean Kates’ explosive evidence that some dimwitted journos engaged in a dimwitted effort to advance their own personal agendas?
OH MY GOD!!!
What a sensation!
You don’t say.
Journalists with an agenda who say dopey shit. Who would have ever believed it if we didn’t have the proof in front of us.
Well I am just going to have to rethink everything I thought I understood now that I realise some journalists are dopey and biased.
Of course, I am glad that you have established beyond any doubt that it is only leftist (i.e. Nazi) journalists who are dopey and/or biased, and that of course all conservative journalists (including of course Fox) are engaged in nothing but a pure, disinterested pursuit of the Truth.
Kates’ completely honest, unemotional, unbiased and completely reasonable and purely factual account of the 2008 campaign is of course just another fine example of pure objectivity.
My god you people are beyond parody.
Tillman
27 Jul 10 at 1:19 pm
I think it’s quite accurate to say Obama is much more leftist than any previous president and that much of the press gave him a free ride.
What I don’t get is the assumption that having a ‘relationship’ with a few old Commos is a big deal. Obama is a disaster, no question, but I don’t think that means anyone is pulling his strings. I doubt if US voters would have assumed that either, if they were told.
DavidLeyonhjelm
27 Jul 10 at 1:20 pm
The Washington Independent is a two year old left leaning web site that runs no print edition. Ackerman is more blogger than journalist, and even when he writes for print publications all of his work, outside defence issues, is op-ed.
AJ
27 Jul 10 at 1:20 pm
A review of records of the schools project and interviews with a dozen people who know both men, suggest that…
Published: October 3, 2008. The very article Tillman cites admits that it is a reaction to an already ongoing and storied controversy.
The New York Times didn’t investigate the Ayers story – it reacted to the coverage given it in the blogosphere.
Tillman: caught lying again.
C.L.
27 Jul 10 at 1:20 pm
“…objective, rational, well-founded and thoroughly reasonable…”
Tillman in this thread:
“bullshit… murders … explosives in the WTC… crap… fucking bullshit… leftist/Nazi… leftist/Nazi… leftist/Nazi… Dick Cheney… garbage… crap… 9/11… bullshit… shit… drivel… dopey shit… Nazi…”
C.L.
27 Jul 10 at 1:22 pm
Tillers – as far as I can see you are the only person carrying on about nazi’s and birthers and truthers. If you don’t think Steve’s story is new, why not just say so?
Sinclair Davidson
27 Jul 10 at 1:22 pm
David L
I think that’s correct. No one is pulling O’s strings.
For the life ofme I don’t understand how he wasn’t damaged a as result of his relationship with “Rev” Wright.
If there’s anything that comes out of this it’s that the term racist etc has lost all meaning and effectiveness.
JC
27 Jul 10 at 1:26 pm
AJ
You miss Kates’ point: Ackerman supported Obama, and Ackerman is a Nazi, therefore Obama is a Nazi.
It’s really quite simple.
Tillman
27 Jul 10 at 1:28 pm
Somebody missed their lithium this morn.
Infidel Tiger
27 Jul 10 at 1:29 pm
Tillers – cup of tea, lie down. Works well.
Sinclair Davidson
27 Jul 10 at 1:31 pm
Yeah, AJ, you tried that trick earlier in the week: just a few obscure magazine were involved, you said.
The known members (and their ‘obscure’ publications and offices):
1. Spencer Ackerman – Wired, FireDogLake, Washington
Independent, Talking Points Memo, The American Prospect
2. Ben Adler – Newsweek, POLITICO
3. Mike Allen – POLITICO
4. Eric Alterman – The Nation, Media Matters for America
5. Marc Ambinder – The Atlantic
6. Greg Anrig – The Century Foundation
7. Ryan Avent – Economist
8. Dean Baker – The American Prospect
9. Nick Baumann – Mother Jones
10. Josh Bearman – LA Weekly
11. Steven Benen – The Carpetbagger Report
12. Jared Bernstein – Economic Policy Institute
13. Michael Berube – Crooked Timber (blog), Pennsylvania State University
14. Lindsay Beyerstein – (blogger)
15. Joel Bleifuss – In These Times
16. John Blevins – South Texas College of Law
17. Sam Boyd – The American Prospect
18. Rich Byrne – Playwright and freelancer
19. Ta-Nehisi Coates – The Atlantic
20. Jonathan Chait – The New Republic
21. Lakshmi Chaudry – In These Times
22. Isaac Chotiner – The New Republic
23. Michael Cohen – New America Foundation
24. Jonathan Cohn – The New Republic
25. Joe Conason – The New York Observer
26. David Corn – Mother Jones
27. Daniel Davies – The Guardian
28. David Dayen – FireDogLake
29. Brad DeLong – The Economists’ Voice, University of California at Berkley
30. Ryan Donmoyer – Bloomberg
31. Kevin Drum – Washington Monthly
32. Matt Duss – Center for American Progress
33. Eve Fairbanks – The New Republic
34. Henry Farrell – George Washington University
35. Tim Fernholz – American Prospect
36. James Galbraith – University of Texas at Austin (professor)
37. Todd Gitlin – Columbia University
38. Ilan Goldenberg – National Security Network
39. Dana Goldstein – The Daily Beast
40. Merrill Goozner – Chicago Tribune
41. David Greenberg – Slate
42. Robert Greenwald – Brave New Films
43. Chris Hayes – The Nation
44. Don Hazen – Alternet
45. Michael Hirsh – Newsweek
46. John Judis – The New Republic, The American Prospect
47. Michael Kazin – Georgetown University (law professor)
48. Ed Kilgore – Democratic Stategist
49. Richard Kim – The Nation
50. Mark Kleiman – The Reality Based Community
51. Ezra Klein – Washington Post, Newsweek, The American Prospect
52. Joe Klein – TIME
53. Paul Krugman – The New York Times, Princeton University
54. Lisa Lerer – POLITICO
55. Daniel Levy – Century Foundation
56. Alec McGillis – Washington Post
57. Scott McLemee – Inside Higher Ed
58. Ari Melber – The Nation
59. Seth Michaels – MyDD.com
60. Luke Mitchell – Harper’s Magazine
61. Gautham Nagesh – The Hill, Daily Caller
62. Suzanne Nossel – Human Rights Watch
63. Michael O’Hare – University of California, Berkeley
64. Rick Perlstein – Author, Campaign for America’s Future
65. Harold Pollack – University of Chicago
66. Foster Kamer – The Village Voice
67. Katha Pollitt – The Nation
68. Ari Rabin-Havt – Media Matters
69. David Roberts – Grist
70. Alyssa Rosenberg – Washingtonian, The Atlantic, Government Executive
71. Alex Rossmiller – National Security Network
72. Laura Rozen – Politico, Mother Jones
73. Greg Sargent – Washington Post
74. Thomas Schaller – Baltimore Sun
75. Noam Scheiber – The New Republic
76. Michael Scherer – TIME
77. Mark Schmitt – American Prospect
78. Adam Serwer – American Prospect
79. Thomas Schaller – Baltimore Sun (columnist), University of Maryland, Baltimore County (professor), FiveThirtyEight.com (contributing writer)
80. Julie Bergman Sender – Balcony Films
81. Walter Shapiro – PoliticsDaily.com
82. Nate Silver – FiveThirtyEight.com
83. Jesse Singal – The Boston Globe, Washington Monthly
84. Ben Smith – POLITICO
85. Sarah Spitz – NPR
86. Adele Stan – The Media Consortium
87. Kate Steadman – Kaiser Health News
88. Jonathan Stein – Mother Jones
89. Sam Stein – The Huffington Post
90. Jesse Taylor – Pandagon.net
91. Steven Teles – Yale University
92. Thoma – The Economist’s View (blog), University of Oregon (professor)
93. Michael Tomasky – The Guardian
94. Jeffrey Toobin – CNN, The New Yorker
95. Rebecca Traister – Salon (columnist)
96. Cenk Uygur – The Young Turks
97. Tracy Van Slyke – The Media Consortium
98. Dave Weigel – Washington Post, MSNBC, The Washington Independent
99. Moira Whelan – National Security Network
100. Scott Winship – Pew Economic Mobility Project
101. Kai Wright – The Root
102. Holly Yeager – Columbia Journalism Review
103. Rich Yeselson – Change to Win
104. Matthew Yglesias – Center for American Progress, The Atlantic Monthly
105. Jonathan Zasloff – UCLA
106. Julian Zelizer – Princeton professor and CNN contributor
107. Avi Zenilman – POLITICO
C.L.
27 Jul 10 at 1:34 pm
AJ.
You gotta stop the lying or get better clued up.
I’m not blaming Obama on this. I’m blaming these lying sacks of turd for doing what they did.
JC
27 Jul 10 at 1:41 pm
Wow, what a useless pile of factually incorrect crap.
Good one Steve.
FDB
27 Jul 10 at 2:00 pm
Birthers and truthers are two sides of the same coin.
I obviously don’t think Cheney had anything to do with 9/11, any more than I believe HRC murdered people or Obama is Kenyan.
.
Tillman, who was talking about Obama’s place of birth other than you? You’ve set up a straw man, then countered by mocking it (the straw man built by you) with sarcastic comments about 9/11 Trutherism.
daddy dave
27 Jul 10 at 2:18 pm
FDB, please take note.
But the evidence that journalists worked together to think through how they could ensure to the best of their ability that Obama was elected and McCain was not
…factually correct….
ought to be seen as extraordinary and a major concern.
…appropriate conclusion.
daddy dave
27 Jul 10 at 2:20 pm
If there was a new ethic that enforced the difference between a report, a column and an editorial with respect to readers to make their own decisions and a committment to dissemminating all the facts so they can do this, the political culture would improve its standard.
.
But News Ltd v Time-Warner/Fairfax et al is like Israel v the Arabs. It just goes ’round and ’round and ’round ’til you wanna throw up.
Adrien
27 Jul 10 at 2:21 pm
And also politicians don’t want it. Makes it harder for them.
Adrien
27 Jul 10 at 2:23 pm
LOL
First CL cites Politico (and Mike Allen) as being in the tank for Obama.
Hilarious because it’s so obviously false.
Then CL gives us the **BREAKING NEWS** that Mother Jones and The Nation are left of centre.
Wow. What a revelation.
Who knew.
Tillman
27 Jul 10 at 2:26 pm
Then CL gives us the **BREAKING NEWS** that Mother Jones and The Nation are left of centre.
Wow. What a revelation.
Who knew.
More straw men.
CL revealed nothing of the sort. The political leanings of those publications are neither the topic of either the article nor this discussion.
daddy dave
27 Jul 10 at 2:39 pm
What I don’t get is the assumption that having a ‘relationship’ with a few old Commos is a big deal.
Because Bill Ayres was not just a “commo”, he was a terrorist who planted explosives in the NYPD, the Capitol and the Pentagon. He only escaped prosecution for these bombings because the FBI used illegal surveillance methods while tracking him.
Yobbo
27 Jul 10 at 3:00 pm
“Are you now or were you ever…?”
Welcome to paranoid thoughts in Steve’s House of Un-American Activities!
Wow! What an amazing array of commentary triggered by a nonsense post! This post/article by Steve has it all – guilt by association, ‘swiftboating’, McCarthyism, conspiracy theories etc – almost no smear is offlimits other than perhaps the “death panels”.
Perhaps it would be helpful for Steve to spend some time reading “The Crucible” and devote less time to Glen Beck.
ennui
27 Jul 10 at 3:55 pm
ennui,
Journolist is a fact. It’s not a paranoid conspiracy theory. At least do a bit of checking before you embarrass yourself like this.
daddy dave
27 Jul 10 at 3:58 pm
Yobbo – C’arn. Bill Ayers might’ve blown up Congress. It would’ve made the world a brighter place.
Adrien
27 Jul 10 at 4:12 pm
Doesn’t the Left have any other shade or colour apart from whitewash?
This post/article by Steve has it all – guilt by association, ‘swiftboating’, McCarthyism, conspiracy theories etc
Where are any of the above in Steve’s post? The hysterical reaction of some to this post is instructive; they’re like someone who turns up to the hospital with a bottle up their clacker profusely denying the obvious.
dover_beach
27 Jul 10 at 4:16 pm
An army of hundreds of left-wing Obama lickers conspire together on strategies to poison the coverage of the American Presidential election campaign and all you apologists can come up with are tired accusations of paranoia.
You people need an education in the basic English definition of the word. “Paranoia: baseless or excessive suspicion of the motives of others”.
Blake Van Buren
27 Jul 10 at 4:50 pm
DD
Don’t be totally ingeuous! I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you did not actually read the Quadrant article.
It is not the site I’m crticising – it is the smearing of certain journalists based on some alleged grand conspiracy to defeat McCain/Palin and their “failure” to highlight some alleged influences on Obama’s life.
‘Paranoid’ is not an unreasonable description of the article!
ennui
27 Jul 10 at 5:14 pm
DD
‘ingenuous’ – I would not like that to read as ‘ingenious’!!
ennui
27 Jul 10 at 5:18 pm
Ennui…
What exactly is your outrage? Is the p
Jc..
27 Jul 10 at 5:30 pm
Is the problem the fact that all this stuff leaked and it embarrassed leftwhingers?
I don’t call this a conspiracy but it is obvious these leftwhingers are simply batting for their political ideology rather than being professional.
I find it hysterical that all this stuff leaked making leftwhingers even more paranoid and schizophrenic than before.
Jc..
27 Jul 10 at 5:34 pm
How many of those people are genuine journalists CL, paid for impartial reporting? From the first 10, I can only see Marc Ambinder and he does both political reporting and opinion. Most of the rest are bloggers, writers for minor leftwing magazines and a couple of big name leftwing opinion writers for major publications.
People of similar profession and interests talk outside of work. This is as damning as finding out Andrew Bolt and Piers Ackerman have coffee.
AJ
27 Jul 10 at 6:55 pm
it is the smearing of certain journalists based on some alleged grand conspiracy to defeat McCain/Palin
so do you accept that “Journolist” was real, or are you disputing its?
(warning: this is a trick question. If you dispute its existence then, well basically you’re wrong; if you admit its true then you have to eat your earlier ignorant remarks)
daddy dave
27 Jul 10 at 7:03 pm
How many of those people are genuine journalists CL, paid for impartial reporting?
so the “impartial reporting” is the wriggle out clause?
This is as damning as finding out Andrew Bolt and Piers Ackerman have coffee.
No, finding out that two of the journalists on the list had coffee would be as damning as finding out Andrew Bolt and Piers Ackerman have coffee.
daddy dave
27 Jul 10 at 7:06 pm
“so the “impartial reporting” is the wriggle out clause?”
This conspiracy is meant to have weight because leftwing journalists are skewing their reporting to hide politically inconvenient stories and systematically promote one side over the other. However, almost no one on that list is involved in reporting. They are paid –the ones who are paid, anyhow– to give leftwing opinion. This conspiracy has apparently revealed two things: there are these things called opinion writers and sometimes they talk outside of school. Can you articulate what exactly is wrong with this?
AJ
27 Jul 10 at 7:27 pm
This is as damning as finding out Andrew Bolt and Piers Ackerman have coffee.
Or that Piers Ackerman and Tony Abbott have lunch together.
Tillman
27 Jul 10 at 7:40 pm
Can you articulate what exactly is wrong with this?
They have every right to collude with the Obama campaign. Not illegal. Their right.
It’s not so much a matter of “wrong” as the key word being “illuminating”. We have a new understanding of the relationship between key news organisations and the Democratic party.
We all know that opinion writers take sides, but did you really expect that there was this level of collusion and synchronisation? I didn’t. Those yawns and calls of “nothing to see here” from the left side of the gallery sound fake.
People are surprised. Admit that it’s surprising.
daddy dave
27 Jul 10 at 7:43 pm
Left, right, I don’t want your spin, I just want the news…
.
27 Jul 10 at 7:46 pm
We have a new understanding of the relationship between key news organisations and the Democratic party.
Key news organisations that CL identified like:
- Mother Jones
- The Nation
- Crooked Timber
- Lindsay Beyerstein (blogger)
- Brave New Films
- Ed Kilgore -Democratic strategist
- The Village Voice
- Kaiser Health News
Yes very illuminating to discover that there are Obama supporters at the Village Voice. Although I would have hoped for more from an influential journal of record such as “Kaiser Health News”.
And what a revelation – Ed Kilgore Democratic Strategist supports the Democratic candidate for president.
No wonder you lot are so distressed. It really is a body blow to the Republic, isn’t it?
What a bunch of hysterical bed-wetting loons you lot are.
Oh and newsflash – some contributors to the WSJ op-ed page may have voted Republican. Some of them may have even had private conversations about getting McCain elected.
Quelle horreur.
Tillman
27 Jul 10 at 7:54 pm
An army of hundreds of left-wing Obama lickers conspire together on strategies to poison the coverage of the American Presidential election campaign and all you apologists can come up with are tired accusations of paranoia.
That’s satire, right?
Please tell me that this guy is taking the piss.
Tillman
27 Jul 10 at 7:56 pm
Aj
The NPR producer was salivating at the idea of seeing Rush dying in front of her.
NPR is partially funded by the government .I presume she has ro go.
Jc..
27 Jul 10 at 7:58 pm
Tillers,
It’s a little more than Obama supporters having a chin wag about ‘the one’.
They were actively putting together ideas on how to frame opponents by inventing accusations of racism about them.
In other words they
But hey, if you want knee pad in front of these low lives, be my guest. Never let it be said that I was stopping you.
Jc..
27 Jul 10 at 8:01 pm
Oops
In other words they were trying to figures ways of destroying people they saw as opponents.
Jc..
27 Jul 10 at 8:02 pm
conspire together on strategies to poison the coverage of the American Presidential election campaign
Does this guy know any US history?
Read some of the venomous, dishonest filth that supporters of Adams and Jefferson levelled at each other in the 1796 campaign.
2008 was like getting sprinkled with baby shampoo dissolved in Perrier by comparison.
All of this is just part and parcel of the democratic process, and you libertards think it’s a “conspiracy” to “poison” democracy.
It IS democracy.
Tillman
27 Jul 10 at 8:03 pm
Yes very illuminating to discover that there are Obama supporters at the Village Voice.
Tillman, more dissembling? You picked the most obviously left wing publications and then claimed that this is about discovering that they are left wing. That’s not what this is about.
You are refuting things that nobody said.
daddy dave
27 Jul 10 at 8:05 pm
They were actively putting together ideas on how to frame opponents by inventing accusations of racism about them.
“They”?
Who are “they”?
All supporters of Obama?
Name a single presidential candidate who hasn’t had over eager supporters do stupid, irresponsible shit.
Tillman
27 Jul 10 at 8:05 pm
“Read some of the venomous, dishonest filth that supporters of Adams and Jefferson levelled at each other in the 1796 campaign.”
Their reconciliation was an “aw shucks” moment of history.
Both good Presidents. I’d back Jefferson, sans the slaves. But then goes half the family.
.
27 Jul 10 at 8:07 pm
All of this is just part and parcel of the democratic process
All of WHAT is “part and parcel of the democratic process”? I haven’t seen any evidence that you actually understand what we’re talking about.
daddy dave
27 Jul 10 at 8:07 pm
Surely dissembling is an over used insult.
Homer comments here remember.
.
27 Jul 10 at 8:07 pm
Name a single presidential candidate who hasn’t had over eager supporters do stupid, irresponsible shit.
Again, refuting arguments that nobody made.
“They”?
Who are “they”?
Again, demonstrating that you don’t actually know what we’re talking about but are trying to bluff your way through.
daddy dave
27 Jul 10 at 8:09 pm
Surely dissembling is an over used insult.
Not when Tillman’s around.
daddy dave
27 Jul 10 at 8:09 pm
Again, demonstrating that you don’t actually know what we’re talking about but are trying to bluff your way through.
No I don’t know what you’re talking about because you have been saying things that are factually incorrect from the getgo, DD.
Tillman
27 Jul 10 at 8:11 pm
They?
They is describing the people involved in journolist.
That’s the point of the thread, no?
They, or rather some of the contributors were figuring out ways to smear opponents or even people that questioned obama’s relationship with the Rev. and his far left buddies.
They’re hardly behaving professionally.
Jc..
27 Jul 10 at 8:14 pm
you have been saying things that are factually incorrect from the getgo, DD.
Please enlighten me. What did I say that was factually incorrect.
daddy dave
27 Jul 10 at 8:19 pm
DD, your first comment was to say that only “Fox and blogs” covered Ayers.
Wrong. Totally incorrect.
Tillman
27 Jul 10 at 8:23 pm
They is describing the people involved in journolist.
So Ben Smith and Mike Allen from Politico were trying to smear Obama’s opponents?
Total bullshit. Ignorant stupidity and bullshit.
Tillman
27 Jul 10 at 8:24 pm
DD, your first comment was to say that only “Fox and blogs” covered Ayers
Oh yeah, I didn’t mention that the NYT, that bastion of quality journalism, wrote a couple of “nothin-to-see-here-folks” articles about Ayers when it became clear that they had to say something. After all Palin kept mentioning it at her “increasingly scary rallies” (NYT’s words).
“Totally incorrect.”
No it wasn’t.
daddy dave
27 Jul 10 at 8:27 pm
Tillers:
Are you drunk? There are exchanges between them talking about this stuff. I really don’t understand how you could be saying this.
One dude or dudette explains how they should attack people like Rove, Barnes etc as racist.
JC
27 Jul 10 at 8:29 pm
The phrase “Thou doth protest too much” comes to mind.
dover_beach
27 Jul 10 at 8:30 pm
One dude or dudette explains how they should attack people like Rove, Barnes etc as racist.
So an Obama supporting journalist makes an idiot comment?
This is the scandal of the decade?
And it’s a comment so outrageous that all other participants on the listserv are deemed to have adopted it as their own?
Do you accept responsibility for everything I say at Catallaxy, JC?
If not, then why are the guys from Politico responsible for what someone else said.
This is hysteria and guilt by association.
If Peggy Noonan calls Charles Krauthammer to discuss talking points for candidates they prefer, it’s not the end of civilisation and it’s not the end of civilisation if a bunch of Dem supporters do the same thing.
Now some of them said some really stupid shit, but so what?
Look at some of the stupidity on this thread.
On this very thread Obama’s accused of palling around with terrorists and perverting democracy and being a radical crypto-neo-marxist and all sorts of similar garbage.
Imagine if someone went after Sinc – a tenured (?) academic – for his association with some of the language used on this blog by certain participants. You could have a field day applying the “JournoList” standard to Sinc, who is also the admin here.
This is just ignorant, hysterical, hypocritical nonsense being peddled.
Tillman
27 Jul 10 at 10:03 pm
So an Obama supporting journalist makes an idiot comment?
This is the scandal of the decade?
No.
Since it seems that you’re deliberately failing to understand the point of the article, there’s no point engaging in you any further.
daddy dave
27 Jul 10 at 10:17 pm
Tillers,
You’re clutching at straws and if you keep that up you’re going to end up drowning (and don’t ask me to swim in after again this time).
It wasn’t just idiotic comments; they actually tried this stuff on by accusing people of being racists because they dared to question “The O’s” associations.
They went after those two (American) ABC talking heads because they tried this on.
It wasn’t a chat among friends shooting the breeze. It was a bunch of leather-headed leftwhingers figuring out underhanded ways in silencing any opposition to their candidate.
And it’s different to The CAT. This isn’t a blog set up for people of the same profession and a large number of them signed on to professional standards.
Of course “the O” has “palled” around with terrorists. Bill Ayers is a first rate dirt bag and no reasonable person would want to pall around with a low life creep like him.
If Noonan called Krauthammer and gasbagged about how they could help the next GOP candidate win in 12 by using their employers resources it would be news as it’s entirely reasonable to think they’ve crossed a line regarding professionalism…. let alone underhanded tactics.
These prigs were talking about accusing opponents of racism and the NPR producer was talking about throwing a party in the company of a dying, writhing Rush.
It’s not illegal or anything, however it’s more than little interesting and it wrecks their future credibility I hope.
JC
27 Jul 10 at 10:23 pm
“Admit that it’s surprising.”
I have been aware of the existence of journolist for years because I occasionally read Brad Delong’s blog. The contents in the Daily Caller article didn’t surprise because there was nothing too them. If you strip them of there ominous adjectives, the first cover story amounts to a couple of bloggers and opinion writers didn’t like an interview so they together wrote a public letter and it was published in The Nation. Also liberals are mean. The fact the Caller treated a public published letter like it was a dark, ultra secret conspiracy tells you all you need to know about this story — it’s a load of bullshit.
AJ
28 Jul 10 at 12:43 am
… If you strip the article of its ominous adjectives *
AJ
28 Jul 10 at 12:47 am
oh okay, AJ. Say there was a mirror right group site and instead of figuring out ways of hurting opponents with the racist smear they figured out ways to make Obama’s race an issue.
What you be saying about them?
Turn it off and stop reading Brad De Short as you’ll end up with brain hemorrhage.
JC
28 Jul 10 at 12:57 am
JournoList latest:
They also discussed the Trig Palin rubber-suit pregnancy conspiracy.
I understand the impulse to dismiss this as non-news. But assuming the baby is Sarah Palin’s, her conduct was the equivalent of punching herself in the stomach. It’s gross, gross negligence. I still remember when a family friend delivered her baby, knowing from the amnio that it had Down’s, and the surgeries went on for days. The baby was declared dead, revived, etc., etc. It’s a horrendous process. It was hard enough for her at Dartmouth-Hitchcock, the best hospital in NE north of Boston, but doing that in Wasilla? Doing it in Wasilla when she very well could have stayed in Dallas? That offends me. That sort of thing warrants a social services call.
So I’m inclined to believe that the girl’s the daughter’s, because Palin is an absolutely wretched parent otherwise. Believing it’s the daughter is probably the most flattering possible angle here.
C.L.
28 Jul 10 at 11:05 am
JournoList latest:
They also discussed the Trig Palin rubber-suit pregnancy conspiracy.
C.L.
28 Jul 10 at 11:09 am
I assume that last part isn’t you C.L?
Infidel Tiger
28 Jul 10 at 11:09 am
Re-posted with correct blockquoting!
C.L.
28 Jul 10 at 11:12 am
“oh okay, AJ. Say there was a mirror right group site and instead of figuring out ways of hurting opponents with the racist smear they figured out ways to make Obama’s race an issue.
What you be saying about them?”
There is:
corner.nationalreview.com
Tillman
28 Jul 10 at 11:35 am
“corner.nationalreview.com”
I call bullshit.
Give one example where they discuss “ways to make Obama’s race an issue”.
daddy dave
28 Jul 10 at 11:38 am
You ever read anything Derbyshire posts, DD?
Tillman
28 Jul 10 at 11:51 am