24 Jul

Columnist Bemoans The Loss Of “Privacy” In Journolist Story; Conspiring Amongst “Friends” Is A-Ok!

                                       

This tripe from Kathleen Parker is something. She bemoans the loss of privacy and kinship when the Journolist blew up in the faces of some 400+ reporters:

It should come as no surprise that self-identifying liberals have liberal thoughts and friends, so no foul there, as Carlson has said. And, indeed, some of the comments are, on their face, condemnable, not to mention banal. But some also have been presented out of context and, besides, were offered as part of an ongoing argument among colleagues who believed they were acting in good faith that theirs was a private conversation.

Were they naive to think so? In this world, yes. Was Carlson right to “out” the private comments of people who, for the most part, have no significant power? That, to me, is the more compelling issue.

No significant power?

They conspired amongst themselves to get the Wright story off of the air:

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.”

“Richard Kim got this right above: ‘a horrible glimpse of general election press strategy.’ He’s dead on,” Tomasky continued. “We need to throw chairs now, try as hard as we can to get the call next time. Otherwise the questions in October will be exactly like this. This is just a disease.”

Thomas Schaller, a columnist for the Baltimore Sun as well as a political science professor, upped the ante from there. In a post with the subject header, “why don’t we use the power of this list to do something about the debate?” Schaller proposed coordinating a “smart statement expressing disgust” at the questions Gibson and Stephanopoulos had posed to Obama.

“It would create quite a stir, I bet, and be a warning against future behavior of the sort,” Schaller wrote.

Tomasky approved. “YES. A thousand times yes,” he exclaimed.

Then they conspired to find ways to defeat McCain/Palin via their professions:

In the hours after Sen. John McCain announced his choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate in the last presidential race, members of an online forum called Journolist struggled to make sense of the pick. Many of them were liberal reporters, and in some cases their comments reflected a journalist’s instinct to figure out the meaning of a story.

But in many other exchanges, the Journolisters clearly had another, more partisan goal in mind: to formulate the most effective talking points in order to defeat Palin and McCain and help elect Barack Obama president. The tone was more campaign headquarters than newsroom.

Examples?

Chris Hayes of the Nation wrote in with words of encouragement, and to ask for more talking points. “Keep the ideas coming! Have to go on TV to talk about this in a few min and need all the help I can get,” Hayes wrote.

Suzanne Nossel, chief of operations for Human Rights Watch, added a novel take: “I think it is and can be spun as a profoundly sexist pick. Women should feel umbrage at the idea that their votes can be attracted just by putting a woman, any woman, on the ticket no matter her qualifications or views.”

Mother Jones’s Stein loved the idea. “That’s excellent! If enough people – people on this list? – write that the pick is sexist, you’ll have the networks debating it for days. And that negates the SINGLE thing Palin brings to the ticket,” he wrote.

And TIME’s Joe Klein used the idea’s from the Journalist to write an article written in the first person, as if he came up with the idea’s himself:

Time’s Joe Klein then linked to his own piece, parts of which he acknowledged came from strategy sessions on Journolist. “Here’s my attempt to incorporate the accumulated wisdom of this august list-serve community,” he wrote. And indeed Klein’s article contained arguments developed by his fellow Journolisters. Klein praised Palin personally, calling her “fresh” and “delightful,” but questioned her “militant” ideology. He noted Palin had endorsed parts of Obama’s energy proposal.

Ed Morrissey:

While Klein is very clearly an opinion journalist at Time, he represented those opinions as his own — and one has to wonder how many other talking points from JournoList Klein passed off as his own over the years at Time.

These discussions centered on what message would harm the GOP the most. They asked for ideas for a GOP attack prior to going on TV. This Journalist helped them shape their anti-Republican message…

And Kathleen Parker wants to dismiss it as some kind of list of friends?

400 strangers getting together in a email list is not a bunch of friends just “shooting the s@#t,” and it’s certainly not a private discussion when they were colluding amongst each other to find ways to get a certain political party elected.

Dan Riehl:

Let’s see if I can succinctly break down her complaint.

Liberals can use a mass email list to frame the debate on politics in America. Kathleen Parker can use her position at the WaPo to frame the JournoList debate in a manner to marginalize the focus of the Right on line. But when said Right on line openly frames the debate in a manner she doesn’t care for, it’s time to consider drawing a line? That about it?

Yup, that pretty much sounds like her complaint.

What utter idiocy.

About Curt

Curt served in the Marine Corps for four years and has been a law enforcement officer in Los Angeles for the last 20 years.
This entry was posted in Barack Obama, Conservatism, Journolist, MSM Bias, Obama Euphoric-Rapture Syndrome, Radical Relationships, Wright. Bookmark the permalink. Saturday, July 24th, 2010 at 1:11 pm
| 453 views

11 Responses to Columnist Bemoans The Loss Of “Privacy” In Journolist Story; Conspiring Amongst “Friends” Is A-Ok!

  1. Missy says: 1

    Exposing our nation’s security secrets, no problem. Exposing left wing journalist’s secret plots, no so good. :roll:

    If they sell out their country for a plaque to hang in their office, why do they think any one person in their cabal of 400 is trustworthy? They all need to be standing in unemployment lines.

    ReplyReply
  2. nohype says: 2

    Context is suddenly so important. It was not important back in 2008 when Katie Couric cherry picked her interview with Sarah Palin to paint Palin in as unflattering a way as she could. Couric won awards for her hit job and CBS never did release the unedited tapes despite the claim by Palin that the excepts were out of context. Why was context not important then?

    ReplyReply
  3. Just4thefax says: 3

    Can’t wait to see the left nuts, D-bagger list published for all to see.

    ReplyReply
  4. Brian says: 4

    Notice how many Washington Post columnists, like Parker, are on Obama’s Journ-O-List? Well, we don’t know if she’s on it, yet. Wasn’t it the Post that helped everyone understand that, “It’s the cover-up that gets you?”

    Or how the WaPo’s publisher, Katharine Weymouth had to nix plans at her home in July of last year where they were selling access to Obama administration officials, members of Congress, and even the paper’s own reporters and editors?

    Nope, no Culture of Corruption in Parker’s ranks at all.

    But what do you expect from a presstitute who sits on Eliot Spitzer’s cueball noggin for a few of the filthy ones crammed into her sausage-casing garter?

    ReplyReply
  5. Skookum says: 5

    Missy, that was a stinging overhand right to the nose, you staggered them kiddo and they’re seeing stars; don’t give them a chance to recover, set up a combination and put’em on the floor.

    ReplyReply
  6. Missy says: 6

    @Skookum:

    Thanks Skookum, missed you, good to see you back!

    ReplyReply
  7. Wanna bet that these same “journalists” now claiming an invasion of privacy on a mass list were cheering on the hackers who broke into Sarah Palin’s PERSONAL email and leaked the contents?

    Let the weazels complain all they want. Who cares what they think.

    As for Parker… what an IDIOT!

    ReplyReply
  8. Ret. Marine says: 8

    Pretty sad isn’t it folks. What we have here is a matter best served with “warrents” for the arrest of these people for sedition. Yeah pretty harsh word isn’t it, but, it is also true. When the people who are intrusted to give the information, good or bad, to those of us to make informed decissions about the direction of this Republic are in cahoots with an ideology completly against our way of life, then when exposed for their “dastardly deeds” hiding the truth about the then candidate obama, whether true or not, we have a grave threat to our Republic.
    While it could be said, “buyers beware” there is no excuss for the actions of this current regime and the direction it is now heading but nonehteless it is heading in that direction because of their involvement in the cover-up of an unvetted candidate. There is a large populas who would just as soon believe the lies they are being fed daily with the help of the individuals mentioned by the “journolist” story and would know no difference as to the trouble we are currently in, that alone will constitute danger to their lives and others to the extent that it will pit many against each other with the willful lieing of the press. This could end very badly for many citizens when it comes to the point where our Constitution has been suspended, our liberties curtailed, our freedom of movement has halted, and our right to peaceably assemble nullified.
    Only in a world void of personal responsibility, willful moral degration, and willing participation of a decietful press will the outsome become apparent when the body bags begin to fill. I truely hope and pray for this Republic every day. I will remember the Oath I took some 35 years past, never to be discharged of this willful duty, nor will I stand by unarmed while the carnage persist, nor will I ever forget who was involved in the destruction. They will be hunted by an old, yet very mean green machine member. Live free or die. They have made their beds, it is now time for We the
    People to insist and demand they tell us which side of the bed they will be on. Happy hunting Fellow Patriots. Their day is coming.

    ReplyReply
  9. THOSES JOURNALIST HAVE A RESPONSABILITY to be true to the facts, and failed miserably,
    and embrace one side only of the electorat, which was detected faulty from the beginning by the
    gifted brains of the mass, and instead of taking the message coming from credible sources, they continiue to push their agenda, and they fell in the same disorder of false news to cover up their lies with more lies, even when the many proofs was hitting them right in their faces
    IT’s regrettable to say, they carry a big chunk of responsability of the disastrous situation
    THE AMERICANS will have to undo .

    ReplyReply
  10. Doug says: 10

    Jonah Goldberg had a quote from James DeLong that perfectly summarizes the entire sordid affair: “The real problem with JournoList is that much of it consisted of exchanges among people who worked for institutions about how to best hijack their employers for the cause of Progressivism.”

    ReplyReply
  11. Pingback: The Baltimore Reporter

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>