Skip to comments.When McCain Picked Palin to be His VP, Liberal “Journalists” Coordinated Plan to Destroy Her…
Posted on 07/28/2010 11:03:49 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Repeat after me: Liberal media bias is a myth
(Daily Caller)- 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 journalists 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.
The conversation began with a debate over how best to attack Sarah Palin. Honestly, this pick reeks of desperation, wrote Michael Cohen of the New America Foundation in the minutes after the news became public. How can anyone logically argue that Sarah Pallin [sic], a one-term governor of Alaska, is qualified to be President of the United States? Train wreck, thy name is Sarah Pallin.
Not a wise argument, responded Jonathan Stein, a reporter for Mother Jones. If McCain were asked about Palins inexperience, he could simply point to then candidate Barack Obamas similarly thin resume. Q: Sen. McCain, given Gov. Palins paltry experience, how is she qualified to be commander in chief?, Stein asked hypothetically. A: Well, she has much experience as the Democratic nominee.
What a joke, added Jeffrey Toobin of the New Yorker. I always thought that some part of McCain doesnt want to be president, and this choice proves my point. Welcome back, Admiral Stockdale.
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 Joness Stein loved the idea. Thats excellent! If enough people people on this list? write that the pick is sexist, youll have the networks debating it for days. And that negates the SINGLE thing Palin brings to the ticket, he wrote.
Another writer from Mother Jones, Nick Baumann, had this idea: Say it with me: Classic GOP Tokenism.
Kilgore wasnt sold: I STRONGLY think the immediate task is to challenge the maverick bullsh*t about Palin, which everybody on the tube is echoing. Ill say it one more time: Palin is a hard-core conservative ideologue in every measurable way.
The entire TV news was involved. As long as people pay for cable & sat TV and watch TV - they are in control. The NCAA, NBA, NFL, MBL, ESPN et al love Hussein.
Idiots will trade their freedom for a TV clicker and NEVER underestimate the influence of TV.
Why is it so surprising to people that liberals would not want the Republicans to win? This is just silly to even worry about this. Do you expect Rush to suddenly talk about how great Obama is? This is pure stupid to complain about Liberals bashing conservatives. When conservative papers stop bashing liberals than we will have problems. This is a total NON STORY!!!!
Perhaps the same way that one could argue a man who has served in the Senate for only 2 years is qualified?
But they were not independent operators; they worked for public corporations whose stated mandate DOES NOT include political advocacy. If they coordinated their work to ignore or disseminate a coordinated story line with other corporate entities, they would in fact be fraudulently representing their employers. Morality aside, it is patently unethical behavior .. Amazing that this has to be spelled out for you.
And nothing has changed. They cut their teeth on Dan Quayle and went to work on Sarah.
They misunderestimated Sarah.
“Why is it so surprising to people that liberals would not want the Republicans to win?”
It’s not surprising. The MSM (TV, newspaper, radio) have been in the tank for the Democrats for decades and decades. Their staffs are filled with liberals who want to present the news through their filters. All you have to do is go on youtube and watch old election night clips. THEY CAN’T STAND IT when a Republican wins an election and they HATE to have to report it. Then, contrast that with 2008 and they were gleeful. I can even remember a clip (maybe from ABC) that you can actually hear someone on set CLAPPING when it was announced BHO had won on election night. Thankfully, the old media is dying. And thankfully, the internet and alternative news organizations are now leading the way. Well, just as long as we have a free internet, that is. People like Jay Rockefeller want it filtered or shut down all together. They are scared of a TRUE FREE PRESS.
135 so far, out of 400 or so:
Kudos to BuckeyeTexan for the great investigative work! Remember when journalists did investigative reporting?
What are the nations leading, nationally known, conservative papers?
Wall Street Journal.
Some temper their statements every so often to try to maintain credibility with there audience but all of them are propaganda agents and nothing more.
The reason why this is not a “total NON STORY!!!” is because the journolist emails give a documented insight into how the MSM manipulates the news. The emails show that so called “journalists” are willing to make up lies and distort the facts in order to get Obama elected.
This is important because after reading the emails even the most naive observer should realize that the MSM deal only in lies and propaganda. No one should believe anything they say.
That’s it? Besides, it is not a conservative newspaper, but surely you didn’t mean only one?
IIRC, when McPain selected Palin, Liberals (I think Obama) sent ~35 lawyers to Alaska to dig up dirt on her.
Where’s the objectivity??
Of course, the funny thing was that the worst things they could find were a phoney story about an Alaska state trooper and another phoney story about something with library books!!
Because its no longer needed. Everyone just gets their day-planners from Media Matters.
I presume SOME (You know who you are) here on FR find this perfectly acceptable, as they seem to be actively participating.
Wall Street Journal.
Not even nearly true. The editorial pages are conservative but the "news" articles are moderate to slightly liberal, and they are completely independent of the editorial pages.
OTOH, the NYT "news" articles are written with the same editorial bent as the editorial pages, and now it appears that the storylines are coordinated with other leading news agencies; i.e. all those fabulous and relevant "exposes" on Wasilla, Alaska, and so on. And isn't it wondrously coincidental how often Newsweak and Time have practically the same cover stories of non-news events?
Don't you wish you knew what you were talking about?
If the MSM wants to maintain ANY credibility, they need to fire any employee who was a member of Journolist.
Remember all those asshole journalists who would roll their eyes at the "crazies" - the conservatives who would dare to ask if they 'were working together' against conservatives? Oh, they were so smug in their lies.
So, so smug in all the lies....
Eff the New York Times and the Washington Post - either they lied or they were too incompetent to root out the truth about Journolist .... either way, if YOU are supporting the MSM YOU are supporting haters who work against the half of Americans who are conservative.