This is a very good piece, Steve. This is a particularly strong piece of analytical work:

It’s not surprising some journalists will bounce ideas off one another, though Journolist proves there was an even larger, coordinated effort. And if a Journolist-of-the-right comes to light at some point, it won’t necessarily be surprising either. But although Journolist’s attempts regarding Jeremiah Wright failed, their attacks on Sarah Palin stuck far more successfully (although she also proved in interviews to be arguably an easier target). For those on the right, this proves what they’ve believed all along – a media conspiring against them. But the Journolist lack of power is evident in their inability to force the conversation on Wright. In that sense, it is far more likely Journolist operated outside the mainstream, and did not have the actual influence The Daily Caller would like people to believe.

I doubt this is the raw meat some seem to seeking, but I, for one, appreciated it.

FOX NETWORK: TRUTH TAKES A HOLIDAY!

I know many here will continue to use the Journolist stuff to prove what they already believe about the media, but let’s see if we can take a deep breath, relax, and use some reason.

1.) The Daily Caller is doing their best to generate hits and page views any way they can, which is not unusual for a new site trying to establish itself. But they fail to mention that one of their own reporters was part of Journolist.

2.) Also, as Ezra Klein points out, “FOX HUNT: Liberal journalists suggest government shut down Fox News.” This, uh, never happened.

Here’s what did happen. On March 12, there was a thread about a column Howell Raines (not a Jlist member, I should note) wrote for The Washington Post about Fox’s form of advocacy journalism. In the thread, Jonathan Zasloff, a law professor at UCLA, asked, “is there any reason why the FCC couldn’t simply pull their broadcasting permit once it expires?” Michael Scherer, an actual journalist at Time magazine, reacted with incredulity. “You really want political parties/white houses picking and choosing which news organizations to favor?” He replied.

And that’s … it. No one mentioned Zasloff’s FCC comment again. The thread moved into broader questions about Fox.

3.) Klein sums up the reality of Journolist: “What even the Daily Caller’s cherrypicked articles have shown is that Journolist was a long-running argument between people who had different views and different interests. In another wrinkle they haven’t mentioned, Journolist included Gautham Nagesh, a Daily Caller reporter (he’s since moved to The Hill). He frequently disagreed with other members of the list. It also included almost 400-some other people, including grad students, low-level editors, midwestern academics, and many others I’d never met or known of before they joined. If I had thought there was some deep and dark conspiracy to protect, I can guarantee you I would’ve been a bit more selective.

But there wasn’t. Though the Daily Caller’s headlines suggests the listserv of 400 spoke with one voice, their own reporting, and their own reporters, show that the reality was very different. It just doesn’t fit their agenda to say so.”

Of course, sensible people knew long ago that the mainstream media plotted on how to spin stories to favor the Left. If the American press had any concerns about credibility, they would fire the reporters who deliberately put bias into their stories. But, hey, who would be left at the New York Times if they started doing that? Maybe the weather reporter and the crossword guy.

Thanks . Finally a story on Journolist . Jeffrey Toobin’s disdain for Gov. Palin is interesting regarding what later came out about Toobin’s own treatment women .

..treatment of women,of course .

I would assume that Andrea Mitchell or one of her writers was on that list also.

More on the non-scandal from James Fallows:

2) Journo-list. I completely agree with my colleague Clive Crook, and disagree with my colleague Sullivan, on this one. This is the least scandalous scandal I’ve ever known about.

I have one question for people who are upset about an email list involving 400+ mainly-liberal journalists and academics: Have you ever been on a listserv? If you have, everything about the dreaded Journolist would be familiar to you. It had all of the virtues, and many of the faults, of the standard internet email list.

Virtues: at its best, it was a way of getting informed comment from people you wouldn’t otherwise be in touch with. For me, this meant hearing from people: with experience in Afghanistan or Iraq; with expertise on financial regulation; with sharply diverging views about the importance of controlling the federal deficit; with informed views about what it would take to implement the new health care bill; with experience in reporting about intelligence agencies; with some knowledge of what is up with California state government; and so on.

Faults: Flame wars. The reality that some people took it way more seriously than others and spent all day composing inbox-clogging IM-style replies. With a wide variety of members, the inevitable reality was that most messages would not be of interest to any given member. And — as with most of the other listservs I’ve been on over the years and am still on — many people, especially the young ones, wrote with an innocent assumption that they were talking within a community, rather than for potential years-later out-of-context quotation. I am chagrined to note that virtually the only thing I ever contributed to this group was a sadder-but-wiser warning that nothing in digital form was ever “private,” so people should write only what they were willing to stand behind in public.

The “informed” parts of the discussion were useful; for the rest, I just pushed DEL. It’s the same with all the other listservs I’ve been on over the years — and there are half a dozen I’m on now, about China, software development, aviation, Japan, writing topics,defense policy, green energy, you name it. Anthropologically they are all the same. Controversies rise and fall. You feel as if you know people through their online personas, but know them only in a way. Some people give more than they take; others, the reverse. But all participants think they’re operating within some kind of community — rather than speaking, politician style, as if any half-sentence could be used against them in its most damaging construction at any later time.

In the other listservs I know — about China, software, aviation, defense, cybersecurity, etc — some people’s careers could be gravely damaged if their least judicious single sentences were used against them out of context years later. I really, really hate to see that done to young people now. “Have you no sense of decency?” is the right question for Andrew Breitbart. It’s also the right question for the Daily Caller, whose editor (Tucker Carlson) asked for membership in the dreaded Journolist — and was turned down — just before it began seriatim publishing of damaging and out-of-context quotes against young writers.

Any group that allows the supremely uninformed Joe Klein as a member , there to tap into ” the accumulated wisdom ” of this pack of sneering lefties deserves to be exposed . Why did they close down and scatter like cockroaches skittering out of Maynard G . (Chuck ) Todd’s goatee ?

This may be above most Mediaite writer’s paygrade and I have to admit that even I am having a hard time expressing it, but it seems to me that a misnomer which helps cloud this story is the term “journalist”.

Most of those who aren’t academics, whom I see quoted in the Daily Caller stories are opinion writers, perhaps analysts and both new and old media bloggers (magazine writers). When I think of the word journalist and those whom I expect to be fair and balanced, my mind immediately goes to something more akin to an AP writer working without a byline or say… Kerry Sanders and Bob Simon. I don’t think of Chris Hayes or Jeffrey Toobin because in everything they do across the media landscape, they are called upon to insert an opinion.

It seems to me that the edges have been getting blurred for a number of years and there are those who may occasionally cross the threshold between the two worlds, but when I cite Joe Klein, I make reference to the man as if he’s a brand because just like when I buy Tide, I pretty much know what to expect.

I think those are good points Magister. Journolist was a place for opinionated people to express those opinions. There are conservative listservs as well.

Joe Klein is the guy who wrote the trashy book Primary Colors , blowing the lid off the Clinton presidency . He denied writing it until he was forced to admit it . Who would trust this guy ? He very likely is the source for the Daily Caller .

I’m glad to see people on the Right has a little Guts and tricks of their own. God knows “The Right” is full of them

I join with all the former Journolist members and others across the country calling for Joe Klein to pull the Mini Cooper ( to him , it’s a limousine ) to the side of the road and resign by Blackberry . He can return to his job doing price checks at the Dollar Store .

yweston
Member Since March 2009
Comments (7761) | Friends (181)

yweston
Member Since March 2009
Comments (7763) | Friends (181)

yweston said:
When do you work?? All you do is “talk crap” on this site 24/7.

Get back to work , TIME THIEF !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is not news to anyone how actually “watched” the coverage in 2008. It does bring clarity to what we all saw. In other news water is wet and the sky is blue.

sorry… how=who…

Pay-lin isn’t worth plotting AGAINST. She’s a disaster on her OWN.

Now back to work and my NEXT client.

You are right about one thing tatboy: this is not news.

@Real Royal Gnome

I work at my leisure. Unlike you I don’t “hit” a time clock in the back of a factory.

I got one of those “ELITE” Educations. The MORE Education. The MORE Opportunities.

I guess people on the Right. Think Journalist have NO opinions. Because they all listen to those hacks at Fox who ALL have ONE OPINION 24/7.

BTW….People are still talking about Fox and their EDITED tapes. I can’t wait until Fox runs another tape.

yweston
Member Since March 2009
Comments (7767) | Friends (181)

yweston said:
I got one of those “ELITE” Educations

You and Roxsteady both .

Get back to work , TIME THIEF !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

yweston says:
July 22, 2010 at 11:19 am (Quote)
I’m glad to see people on the Right has a little Guts and tricks of their own. God knows “The Right” is full of them

yweston says:
July 22, 2010 at 11:47 am (Quote)
Unlike you I don’t “hit” a time clock in the back of a factory.
I got one of those “ELITE” Educations. The MORE Education. The MORE Opportunities.

I don’t know if you are in any position to attack someone and accuse them of having a lack of education….
Those kind of comments really don’t add anything to the thread, and more often than not make the person who wrote them look foolish.

So basically they’re attempting to pander to every single right-wing paranoia out there?

paulmdoro said:
2.) Also, as Ezra Klein points out, “FOX HUNT: Liberal journalists suggest government shut down Fox News.” This, uh, never happened.

Irrelevant- it was a fascist idea by the left.

yweston said:
Pay-lin isn’t worth plotting AGAINST. She’s a disaster on her OWN.

And that’s why libs are so obsessed with her, eh?

The_Reasonable_Lib said:
So basically they’re attempting to pander to every single right-wing paranoia out there?

No, only to racists like you.

Joe Klein . Have you spent your blood money from the Daily Caller yet , Traitor Joe ? Resign quickly before you embarass yourself any further .

I work at my leisure. Unlike you I don’t “hit” a time clock in the back of a factory.

Hey moron, that’s exactly what I do. I guess you lefties will have to stop with your claims that I don’t work.

Now Yweston, I’m still waiting for you to comment on the bogus gallup poll that you posted. You can’t possibly think I’m gonna let it go.

Steve (and other mediaites if around)

I’m curious, being in the biz as you all are, what do you make of a group of journalists/opinion writers for legit news sources conspiring to push or bury stories that promote/attack their ideology?

Like you wrote, it is normal and expected that a writer might bounce ideas of another writer from time to time. But a concerted effort to push certain memes or bury stories…it’s just beyond words….

Am I being way too naive here? I mean, this just seems like a major blow to credibility for the industry. Well, it would be if it actually made it to the MSM.

I recall Media Matters, and that doc Outfoxed, made a huge deal about a FOX news editorial VP sending out emails concerning certain stories, with some talking points. (which kind of sounds like his job, to me??)
http://mediamatters.org/research/200407140002

So, I would think that when a site with 400 members of the media, who conspired to bury stories and promote others, it would be a HUGE deal.

For you (again) sara:

More on the non-scandal from James Fallows:

2) Journo-list. I completely agree with my colleague Clive Crook, and disagree with my colleague Sullivan, on this one. This is the least scandalous scandal I’ve ever known about.

I have one question for people who are upset about an email list involving 400+ mainly-liberal journalists and academics: Have you ever been on a listserv? If you have, everything about the dreaded Journolist would be familiar to you. It had all of the virtues, and many of the faults, of the standard internet email list.

Virtues: at its best, it was a way of getting informed comment from people you wouldn’t otherwise be in touch with. For me, this meant hearing from people: with experience in Afghanistan or Iraq; with expertise on financial regulation; with sharply diverging views about the importance of controlling the federal deficit; with informed views about what it would take to implement the new health care bill; with experience in reporting about intelligence agencies; with some knowledge of what is up with California state government; and so on.

Faults: Flame wars. The reality that some people took it way more seriously than others and spent all day composing inbox-clogging IM-style replies. With a wide variety of members, the inevitable reality was that most messages would not be of interest to any given member. And — as with most of the other listservs I’ve been on over the years and am still on — many people, especially the young ones, wrote with an innocent assumption that they were talking within a community, rather than for potential years-later out-of-context quotation. I am chagrined to note that virtually the only thing I ever contributed to this group was a sadder-but-wiser warning that nothing in digital form was ever “private,” so people should write only what they were willing to stand behind in public.

The “informed” parts of the discussion were useful; for the rest, I just pushed DEL. It’s the same with all the other listservs I’ve been on over the years — and there are half a dozen I’m on now, about China, software development, aviation, Japan, writing topics,defense policy, green energy, you name it. Anthropologically they are all the same. Controversies rise and fall. You feel as if you know people through their online personas, but know them only in a way. Some people give more than they take; others, the reverse. But all participants think they’re operating within some kind of community — rather than speaking, politician style, as if any half-sentence could be used against them in its most damaging construction at any later time.

In the other listservs I know — about China, software, aviation, defense, cybersecurity, etc — some people’s careers could be gravely damaged if their least judicious single sentences were used against them out of context years later. I really, really hate to see that done to young people now. “Have you no sense of decency?” is the right question for Andrew Breitbart. It’s also the right question for the Daily Caller, whose editor (Tucker Carlson) asked for membership in the dreaded Journolist — and was turned down — just before it began seriatim publishing of damaging and out-of-context quotes against young writers.

u talk about bitter tucker carlson must be quite bitter at this point being fired by 2 networks and a failed talk show host at 3 networks (cnn, msnbc & pbs) so now he turns up at a rupert murdock funded website. must be nice to have a sugar daddy

tucker carlson a journalist, LOL thats a laugh

Paul-

Excellent points and posts.

It’s nice for the Daily Caller to provide the proof. But conservatives have always known that white leftist swine have made it their priority to destroy Sarah Palin. She speaks truth to power.
What is amazing is that despite their coordinated smears and character assassination, she is more popular than ever, and ready to kick that Commie Barack Obama’s ass in 2012.

Here is what I find confounding about those who claim there is a widespread liberal media bias. It is a total given to them that the “liberal media” has an agenda. It’s not debatable. If that is true, isn’t it also possible that the conservative media (Tucker Carlson, Andrew Breitbart, FNC, etc.) could have an agenda of their own? Couldn’t Carlson be looking to make a name for his new site?

“The lamestream media is no longer a cornerstone of democracy in America. They need help. They need to regain their credibility and some respect. There are some pretty sick puppies in the industry today. They really need help,” Palin said.

Palin said that behavior of the media, in betraying the tenets of journalism – also betrays her son’s decision to serve his country overseas and protect the rights of Americans.

“I have lost all respect for the ‘mainstream’ media because they lied; and still lie. And they abuse America’s freedom of the press — because with freedom comes responsibility. My son chose to put his life on the line to defend that freedom, and I feel like his, and every good soldier’s, efforts are thrown in their faces when the press takes advantage of their sacrifices instead of respecting the freedoms they’re willing to die for,” Palin said.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/22/sarah-palin-strikes-back-at-journolists-sick-puppies/2/#ixzz0uQscC559

Any word yet on how many of Mediaites staff were part of Journolist? It would explain a lot.

I lost all respect for Sarah Palin when she resorted to divisive politics in the presidential campaign by claiming certain parts of America are more patriotic than others.

We know that a Daily Caller staff member was part of it Azarkhan.

Good advice from one arrogant leftist to another:

“Be humble about conclusions. … Sarah Palin may not be ready to be president today, but that doesn’t mean she won’t be ready to be president tomorrow.”

Marc Ambinder

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/40072_Page2.html#ixzz0uQuCHRyC

“certain parts of America are more patriotic than others”

Swinish leftists wouldn’t know patriotism if it bit them in the ass.

Paulmdoro writes: “This is the least scandalous scandal I’ve ever known about.”

Let me get this straight, Paul. A journalist advocates that he and his peers write palpably false things to smear ideological opponents, and not one of his 400 “elite media” friends says a word in disagreement. And you are okay with this?

Well, Paul, that may not be a scandal for you. It might even be your standard practice. But the rest of us subscribe to the old-fashioned view that journalists shouldn’t deliberately publish lies, and when they do, they should get fired by their bosses.

The idea that simply living in a rural area makes one more patriotic than a city dweller is one of the dumbest, most purely ignorant things I have ever heard.

paulmdoro said:
It is a total given to them that the “liberal media” has an agenda. It’s not debatable

Journolist proved it.

A lot of things were discussed on Journolist felix. Discussing something is not the same thing as doing it, is it?

And some of us subscribe to the old-fashioned view that journalists shouldn’t deliberately take things out of context or leave out certain information to push their agenda and generate more page views.

paulmdoro said:
The idea that simply living in a rural area makes one more patriotic than a city dweller is one of the dumbest, most purely ignorant things I have ever heard.

And you are an expert on all things dumb.

Paul, I’m curious, do you also lose respect when the left call’s anyone who disagrees with BO racist?

yweston says:
July 22, 2010 at 11:49 am

BTW….People are still talking about Fox and their EDITED tapes. I can’t wait until Fox runs another tape.

And what people would that be? And why is it “their” edited tapes? Did THEY edit them?

Again, gotta give it to Weston. She just makes stuff up, gets called on it, but keeps on going! Ethics would deter some folks… but Weston “perseveres”.

paulmdoro said:
A lot of things were discussed on Journolist felix. Discussing something is not the same thing as doing it, is it?

Ask the Muslim terrorist who went away to prison for plotting to blow up NYC again. They didn’t do that either.

More than 13 months ago, I wrote a column that began: “Sarah Palin can be the Republican nominee in 2012. I am not saying she will be, but she can be. Those who underestimate her do so at their own risk…

Now, more than a year later, I have not changed my mind about Palin’s political potential. This is not based on the polls — especially a recent one showing her in a 46 percent to 46 percent tie with Obama in a hypothetical 2012 face-off. I don’t believe such polls tell us anything meaningful.

I am basing my belief now, as back then, on Palin’s ability to connect with the base of her party. Name a bigger name in the Republican Party today. Heck, name any name in the Republican Party today.
Roger Simon

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/40072.html#ixzz0uQuv2f1v

What does that have to do with Sarah Palin, Michelle? No one should be called racist for a policy disagreement with a president. Just like no one should flippantly be compared to a Nazi or called a Communist.

Sarah Palin will be the Barry Goldwater of 2012 if she runs for president.

paulmdoro said:
I lost all respect for Sarah Palin

I am sure she lost a lot of sleep over that.

Paul, my point is your selective outrage. Since you lost all respect for Palin, I’m wondering if you have any respect for the left? What about this bunch, do you respect them:

A Short Walk Down Memory Hole Lane,

http://www.ringospictures.com/index.php?page=20090816

I used to enjoy debating you, paul because you weren’t as out there as the rest of the libs on here. Kind of disappointing.

paulmdoro said:
ust like no one should flippantly be compared to a Nazi or called a Communist.

Oh, ya mean how the left did to Bush?

How is my outrage selective? You asked me a broad hypothetical Michelle. Is there a person you would like to single out? Maybe be more specific? Palin’s comments in 2008 were divisive and obtuse. Your patriotism has nothing to do with your address.

#felixw: I just went back and reread the Daily Caller thing about Palin and I’m just seeing a bunch of opinion writers trying out lines of thought and deciding that the experience thing wouldn’t play. Maybe you can point me to another example (other than the “call them racist” thing) that was demonstrably false, but all I’m seeing from the Daily Caller excerpts are editorialists trying out themes.

As for the “call somebody a racist” idea from a columnist with whom I’m not familiar, perhaps because he works for a minor league freepaper with a poor reputation, but I can’t see anywhere in the piece that anyone agreed with the tactic and Carlson only highlights people speaking against it.

MichelleF said:

I used to enjoy debating you, paul because you weren’t as out there as the rest of the libs on here. Kind of disappointing.

Wow I lost you that easily? You couldn’t have enjoyed it that much.

paulmdoro said:
Palin’s comments in 2008 were divisive and obtuse.

Divisive like this:

“Nobody thinks that Bush and McCain have a real answer to the challenges we face. So what they’re going to try to do is make you scared of me,” Obama said. “You know, he’s not patriotic enough, he’s got a funny name, you know, he doesn’t look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills.”

I don’t think so.

MichelleF said:
I used to enjoy debating you, paul because you weren’t as out there as the rest of the libs on here. Kind of disappointing.

Paul and Valkyrie are die-hard socialists.

“Sarah Palin will be the Barry Goldwater of 2012 if she runs for president”

Hardly. She has a political style, savvy, and charisma that Mr. Goldwater could not begin to comprehend, let alone emulate.

In fact Ms. Palin is creating a new paradigm, unlike any we have witnessed so far in American politics. Whatever she does, and however she does it, it will be in her own unique style.

This is really inside baseball stuff! Where is the beef?

What is the new paradigm, and how does she get past the fact that independents and moderates are not really fans of her?

The Real Royal King said:
This is a very good piece, Steve. This is a particularly strong piece of analytical work: It’s not surprising some journalists will bounce ideas off one another, though Journolist proves there was an even larger, coordinated effort. And if a Journolist-of-the-right comes to light at some point, it won’t necessarily be surprising either. But although Journolist’s attempts regarding Jeremiah Wright failed, their attacks on Sarah Palin stuck far more successfully (although she also proved in interviews to be arguably an easier target). For those on the right, this proves what they’ve believed all along – a media conspiring against them. But the Journolist lack of power is evident in their inability to force the conversation on Wright. In that sense, it is far more likely Journolist operated outside the mainstream, and did not have the actual influence The Daily Caller would like people to believe. I doubt this is the raw meat some seem to seeking, but I, for one, appreciated it. FOX NETWORK: TRUTH TAKES A HOLIDAY!

Exactly – these people are discussing the issues and Andrew Not So Breitbart along with that Cabbage Patch Kid Carlson are trying to sell it as ‘left wing media.’ They are so full of shit.

paulmdoro said:
Sarah Palin will be the Barry Goldwater of 2012 if she runs for president.

Why would you insult Barry Goldwater so?

When Palin came on the national scene, national journalists didn’t know anything about her. Some of what is reporting just appears to have been conversations and trying to figure out why did McCain pick Palin.
The conspiracy amongst journalist to gang up on Palin is not jumping at to me.

Bill Adkins said:
Why would you insult Barry Goldwater so?

Apologies to Mr. Goldwater, his supporters, and his family.

“What is the new paradigm”

(re: Georgia GOP governors primary)
With a simple Facebook posting nine days ago, and a 30-second message sent to telephones in 400,000 Republican households, Palin served as both sword and shield for Karen Handel — boosting the former secretary of state to the top rung in a GOP runoff for governor.

It may have been the most efficient and impressive use of political celebrity this state has ever seen, made on behalf of a woman whose views sometimes mirror those of the former Alaskan governor – but not always…

[regarding attacks on Ms. Handel]
None of it stuck. Palin’s endorsement of Handel came so late that her backing never appeared in a single TV or radio ad. Not one mailer from the Handel campaign mentioned the former Alaskan governor.

Word-of-mouth, newscasts and newspaper articles, and a single round of robo-calls from Palin last week – “Karen’s opponents are kind of saying those crazy things about her” — were enough. That’s the power of celebrity.

Palin’s endorsement helped Handel thwart nearly $1 million in advertised attacks,…

http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2010/07/21/the-practical-calculating-side-of-sarah-palin/

So Palin helped a Georgia Republican win a primary by effectively using her celebrity? Is this really a new paradigm?

Can’t we all just agree to ignore this whole Journolist thing now? It’s unpleasant and inconvenient to have to discuss this, and I think the Daily Caller should be shut down by the government and Tucker Carlson should be thrown through a plate glass window for bringing this all to light. After all, we know that the fact that writers had to conspire to coordinate their coverage in a concentrated push to support Democrats and hurt Republicans is Bush’s fault. And if it isn’t, this scandal is likely a racist plot by Fred Barnes or Karl Rove (or “anyone” on the right, really). Think about it.

If anyone wants to join me, I’m starting another liberal listserve to figure out how to get people to stop talking about this and how to make it appear to be the fault of racist teabaggers. Ideas anyone? The future of our country depends on our ability to make them forget this Journolist thing ever happened.

paulmdoro said:
A lot of things were discussed on Journolist felix. Discussing something is not the same thing as doing it, is it?

Paul, open your eyes. The intimidation techniques advocated on JournoList are put in practice every day in the mainstream media. Or have you been sleeping during the race card playing of the last two years? If so, you must be Rip Van Winkle, because it takes place every hour of every day in the mainstream media.

Can you reference some of these intimidation tactics? Link to some stories? I’d like to see what you consider examples of this.

“So Palin helped a Georgia Republican win a primary by effectively using her celebrity? Is this really a new paradigm?”

I usually don’t indulge leftists, mainly because I understand the ideology that makes you the slave that you are. And I’m not going to waste much time with you either.

But the fact is, there isn’t another person in America who could have done as little as she did and have as great an impact on a political race.

Now we both know you’re going to spew some stupid shit about how that’s not true, about how the One is all that…blah, blah,blah.

Whatever. The fact remains that despite all your efforts to destroy her, Sarah Palin is still kicking your ass up and down Main Street, USA. See you in November!

“Paul, open your eyes”

Felixw, it’s not nice to ask the impossible.

Azarkhan, I am trying to engage in a respectful discussion here. I agree that she obviously has had an impact on certain races, like the one you referenced. But that is a far cry from winning a presidential election, isn’t it? She obviously has a very strong, devoted base. But as Nixon said, “I can’t win without the conservatives but I can’t win with only the conservatives.” She has to appeal to moderates and independents to win a presidential election. Right now I don’t think she has broad appeal to those voters. In April, 24% of Americans viewed her favorably while 38% viewed her unfavorably. Even a quarter of conservatives viewed her unfavorably in that poll, with 35% favorable and 39% undecided. That is quite a mountain to climb.

I guess everyone screaming “conspiracy” is under the impression that editorial writers don’t read other columnists and that Glenn Beck doesn’t watch Bill O’Reilly.

Azarkhan said:
“Paul, open your eyes”

Felixw, it’s not nice to ask the impossible.

Have I been disrespectful to you?

Magister said:
All I’m seeing from the Daily Caller excerpts are editorialists trying out themes.

That’s a good one, Magister, “trying out themes.” When the Mafia hit men have their calls taped while they discuss the different ways to whack a wise guy, they should tell the jury they were only “trying out themes.”

Uh, Magister, do I really need to point out that the themes were on how to do hit pieces on their ideological opponents. But maybe you missed that part.

Palin must be advanced to the Republican Presidential slot. She will beat Obama or Clinton. Huckabee, Romney, Paul, McCain must be discouraged to drop out. Palin will not betray the conservatives.

I can’t see McCain running again and I can’t see Romney dropping out.

paulmdoro said:
Can you reference some of these intimidation tactics? Link to some stories? I’d like to see what you consider examples of this.

Paul, maybe you missed this tactic discussed on JournoList:

“What is necessary is to raise the cost on the right of going after the left. In other words, find a rightwinger’s face 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.”

And if you don’t think that happens in the media, turn on MSNBC during prime time and count to ten. Before you get to double digits you will magically witness an example of this tactic put into practice.

I don’t watch MSNBC. I know they are partisan and that doesn’t really interest me. I was hoping you’d provide some links or show me some specific examples of what you’re talking about. You’ll get no argument from me that MSNBC is partisan.

Bill Adkins said:
Why would you insult Barry Goldwater so?

You’re gonna wish you listened to Goldwater when Eminem and Ludacris destroy America with their gangster rap.

The bias and lib intimidation happened during the campaign.

he 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.”

And who can forget this nugget from CNN prior to a BHO interview?

“CNN’s John Roberts declared his interview with Barack Obama on Monday a “Rev. Wright-free zone” to telegraph he wouldn’t ask the Democratic presidential contender about the controversy over his former pastor.

Dems warned people that if Goldwater was elected, we could end up in Vietnam. Good thing Goldwater lost.

So, in light of recent history, it seems like it might be important to see all the quotes that are being used in context. This is all fascinating. They should release all the posts.

writer said:
Dems warned people that if Goldwater was elected, we could end up in Vietnam. Good thing Goldwater lost.

Weren’t we already in the war during the 1964 election?

“Have I been disrespectful to you?” paulmdoro

“Here is what I find confounding about those who claim there is a widespread liberal media bias.”

The above statement is disrespectful to all conservatives. To deny media bias against conservatives, to minimize the Journolist conspiracy, to downplay the impact of that conspiracy and the media bias against Ms. Palin and other conservatives, to deny that the Left continually engages in racial smears and character assassination, to accuse the right of playing racial politics when the modern Democratic Party thrives on dividing America with race identity politics…

well Paul, that’s just an insult to my fucking intelligence.

PS: Try not to use the word “confounding.” Gives away that great education you got.

felixw said:
Uh, Magister, do I really need to point out that the themes were on how to do hit pieces on their ideological opponents. But maybe you missed that part.

They are overwhelmingly opinion writers. They’re supposed to have an opinion.

Again as I said in my first comment to this post, perhaps there’s some confusion because the media landscape has become blurred, but columnists and analysts trade in opinions and bloggers, along with their old media co-horts (magazine writers) offer “perspective”.

Rush Youngberg said:
Palin must be advanced to the Republican Presidential slot. She will beat Obama or Clinton. Huckabee, Romney, Paul, McCain must be discouraged to drop out. Palin will not betray the conservatives.

But the question isn’t betraying the conservatives, it’s a question of winning over the moderates. Right now, she wouldn’t win the presidency because she’s too conservative. That’s what the race is about. There aren’t enough conservatives or liberals to carry the entire country. The battle is won among the moderates. Now, if she can start appealing to them, then maybe she has a shot, but right now, she’s building on her base. If the economy doesn’t double dip and starts to improve (it’s got a shot, it’s already showing signs of improvement) then she won’t win. The Republicans best bet could be Romney since he will appeal to the moderates. That’s why McCain lost, he was appealing to the moderates then decided to go after the conservative base. He missed out and lost the moderates. Once he lost them, he lost the election. Sorry, cons and libs, it’s the moderates who decide these things. More of them.

paulmdoro said:
Weren’t we already in the war during the 1964 election?

No, you got that wrong. The Democrats said that if you elect Goldwater you will get a mushroom cloud, in 1960.

Permatiltx said:
But the question isn’t betraying the conservatives, it’s a question of winning over the moderates. Right now, she wouldn’t win the presidency because she’s too conservative. That’s what the race is about. There aren’t enough conservatives or liberals to carry the entire country. The battle is won among the moderates. Now, if she can start appealing to them, then maybe she has a shot, but right now, she’s building on her base. If the economy doesn’t double dip and starts to improve (it’s got a shot, it’s already showing signs of improvement) then she won’t win. The Republicans best bet could be Romney since he will appeal to the moderates. That’s why McCain lost, he was appealing to the moderates then decided to go after the conservative base. He missed out and lost the moderates. Once he lost them, he lost the election. Sorry, cons and libs, it’s the moderates who decide these things. More of them.

Nice analysis.

paulmdoro said:
I don’t watch MSNBC. I know they are partisan and that doesn’t really interest me. I was hoping you’d provide some links or show me some specific examples of what you’re talking about. You’ll get no argument from me that MSNBC is partisan.

It’s the classic argument. Seems that liberals are okay with saying Yes MSNBC has a liberal slant. But conservatives won’t say Fox News has a conservative slant. Why is that? Both statements are true. They are on either side of the political spectrum.

Vietnam didn’t kick into high gear till LBJ’s Gulf of Tonkin resolution. But in retrospect, the idea of the Dems painting Goldwater as a war monger is quite ironic.

Azarkhan said:
“Have I been disrespectful to you?” paulmdoro

“Here is what I find confounding about those who claim there is a widespread liberal media bias.”

The above statement is disrespectful to all conservatives. To deny media bias against conservatives, to minimize the Journolist conspiracy, to downplay the impact of that conspiracy and the media bias against Ms. Palin and other conservatives, to deny that the Left continually engages in racial smears and character assassination, to accuse the right of playing racial politics when the modern Democratic Party thrives on dividing America with race identity politics…

well Paul, that’s just an insult to my fucking intelligence.

PS: Try not to use the word “confounding.” Gives away that great education you got.

I thought we were having a nice discussion and I was enjoying it. Not sure why you feel the need to resort to insults. Oh well.

Permatiltx said:
It’s the classic argument. Seems that liberals are okay with saying Yes MSNBC has a liberal slant. But conservatives won’t say Fox News has a conservative slant. Why is that? Both statements are true. They are on either side of the political spectrum.

Because to those on the right the fact that fox has liberals on occasionally that means that they are balanced, but in that same vein MSNBC has Scarborough. There’s also this belief that Fox balances the media out.

Permatiltx said:
But the question isn’t betraying the conservatives, it’s a question of winning over the moderates. Right now, she wouldn’t win the presidency because she’s too conservative. That’s what the race is about. There aren’t enough conservatives or liberals to carry the entire country. The battle is won among the moderates. Now, if she can start appealing to them, then maybe she has a shot, but right now, she’s building on her base. If the economy doesn’t double dip and starts to improve (it’s got a shot, it’s already showing signs of improvement) then she won’t win. The Republicans best bet could be Romney since he will appeal to the moderates. That’s why McCain lost, he was appealing to the moderates then decided to go after the conservative base. He missed out and lost the moderates. Once he lost them, he lost the election. Sorry, cons and libs, it’s the moderates who decide these things. More of them.

Indeed and this is why I compared her to Goldwater.

paulmdoro said:
I thought we were having a nice discussion and I was enjoying it. Not sure why you feel the need to resort to insults. Oh well.

That is simply the acknowledgment that you have bested them.

If tossing insults means you’ve lost an argument, then posters such as Royal King, BFD, and real john t must also be losing a lot.

Indeed writer it happens far too often here. Takes away the fun.

“If tossing insults means you’ve lost an argument, then posters such as Royal King, BFD, and real john t must also be losing a lot.” writer

Riter, dey has to do dat cause we aint smart as dem. We jus hiks…an slow.. Ize surprize deys got any payshunce wit us at all.

Members of journolist not yet revealed:

Campbell Brown (see her personal attack on Palin as an unfit mother, taken directly from the planning on journolist).

John Roberts (see his “this is a Rev Wright free zone”)

Every one on MSNBC — see “you are a racist” commentary every day.

paulmdoro said:
More on the non-scandal from James Fallows:

so says a guy from Journolist.

*nothing to see here people, move along!*

LOL!

So did you even bother to read his thoughts, or did you not make it past his name? Also, did Tucker Carlson ever mention that a Daily Caller writer was part of Journolist?

Tucker Carlson has done the public a great service in exposing the Big Lie factory of hacks, shills, & propagandists at Journolist. He is like the Orkin man. When he shines his light, the vermin scatter.

Lars Svensen said:
Tucker Carlson has done the public a great service in exposing the Big Lie factory of hacks, shills, & propagandists at Journolist. He is like the Orkin man. When he shines his light, the vermin scatter.

Perhaps. But if some of the journalists are going to be quoted, all the posts should be outed in full so that things can be viewed in context.

After Obama won the 2008 election, liberal author Eric Alterman of the book What Liberal media? expressed himself this way:
“F*cking Nascar retards…”

Gotta love those lefties! Classy bunch!

Michelle, what does that have to do with anything? And how does one person represent millions of people?

Sorry if you don’t like it Paul, but the topic of this thread is the jourolist and this is part of that story. I wouldn’t want this stuff out there either, but those are the breaks.

Was Eric Alterman a member of Journolist?

Do you think one person represents millions of people and their beliefs Michelle?

Paul, you seem a little touchy about this whole topic. I don’t really blame you, but unfortunately for your libs, this is a legit story.

I’m touchy? You can’t even answer my questions. Why so evasive if this is such a legit story?

Do I think most lefites agree with his statement? I’d wager ALOT of them do. Especially those in the media.

Was Alterman a member of Journolist?

Does that mean most righties think only rural Americans are truly patriotic and those on the coasts are snobby wine-drinking elitists?

Does that mean most righties think only rural Americans are truly patriotic and those on the coasts are snobby wine-drinking elitists?

Don’t think that and never said it.

And yes, Alterman is part of journolist.

I didn’t say that you said it. I think you missed my point.

Well I said I don’t agree with it, so I guess I don’t know what more you want from me. Do I think that some people on the coasts look down on people in the middle, yes I do. I especially think this is true of the media.

Joe Klein . The jig is up . Confess .

paulmdoro said:
For you (again) sara:
More on the non-scandal from James Fallows:

paulmdoro said:
More on the non-scandal from James Fallows:

Pauldmoro, do you mean The democratic James Fallows who wrote speeches for Jimmy Carter? That James Fallows?

paulmdoro said:
I lost all respect for Sarah Palin when she resorted to divisive politics

Have you lost respect for Obama who use divisive politics to get votes?

“White House officials have concluded that, over the long term, the Republicans’ get-tough message is a major political miscalculation. They predict it will ultimately alienate millions of Latinos, the fastest-growing minority group in the nation. ” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/19/AR2010071905351.html?sid=ST2010071905372

This administration is ALL ABOUT dividing on every racial line just for votes.

Bad luck for the leftwing media. They like to keep quiet about how they manipulate the news. But then something like this slips into the public view. And Paulmdoro does his Leslie Nielsen routine: “Nothing to see here, please move along.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSjK2Oqrgic

Meanwhile yesterday’s Daily Caller Journolist email set about Fox News revealed Time magazine’s Michael Scherer’s take on Roger Ailes. “Ailes understands that his job is to build a tribal identity, not a news organization,” he wrote. “You can’t hurt Fox by saying it gets it wrong, if Ailes just uses the criticism to deepen the tribal identity.”

LOL. This is a very revealing statement. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! The ought to change the name of journolist to jewolist.