Posted on 10/10/2012 4:37:29 AM PDT by tobyhill
he liberal media/politician/bureaucrat revolving door spins so rapidly, sometimes it's hard to keep pace. Today we learn via the Daily Caller that the moderator for tomorrow's vice presidential debate, ABC News reporter Martha Raddatz, hosted President Obama as a guest at her 1991 wedding to the man who would later become Obama's FCC commissioner, Julius Genachowski.
That's shocking enough in its own right but things are further compounded by the fact that ABC News, home of veteran Democratic adviser George Stephanopolous, has long known about this conflict of interest and did nothing about it. Even worse, the network has actively tried to prevent the public from learning of it.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
It won’t help. He’ll peg the Stupid meter anyway.
Her husband is Tom Gjelten. She is divorced from Genachowski
Also being discussed, the cover up.
Biden is a hateful monster.
He will be ugly ugly ugly .
He will cut off Ryan and call him
SON to belittle him !
The media will swoon !
Hmmmm.... apparently she goes for G men
Oh, I'm so sorry to hear that. They seemed like such a nice couple . . . /s
George Stephanopolous of ABC News used to be a strategist for Bill Clinton and even after becoming Chief Washington Correspondent still engaged in regular conversations with Rahm Emanuel, James Carville, and Paul Begala from the Clinton days. (Ironic, isn’t it, that John Harris wrote that story)Journalism has a perspective. Journalism’s interest lies in promoting itself at the expense of the people who work to a bottom line - those upon whom we depend, not for mere talk, but for food, clothing, shelter, security, fuel, etc. Those people are "the man who is actually in the arena,” and journalists are merely critics. So why do journalists cozy up to “liberal” politicians? The question answers itself - socialism is nothing other than the political expression of the sentiments which journalists are inherently motivated to promote.Whoever signs up to be a “liberal” is cozying up to journalism. And is rewarded with positive labels such as “moderate,” “centrist,” “progressive,” or “liberal.” All of which belong in scare quotes, because what a journalist calls “liberal” has nothing to do with promoting liberty, what the journalist calls “progressive” has nothing to do with progress (at least, not progress of, by, and for the people, as the Constitution contemplates) and so on. All those labels are mere euphemisms for socialist. The only positive label journalists do not assign to socialists is “objective.” That label they reserve to themselves. But it is a distinction without a difference, as the above description of George Stephanopolous amply illustrates. It is only a question of what hat a particular socialist happens to wear. And of course “objective” belongs in scare quotes, because in the nature of things no one can know that he or she is actually objective.
A diligent effort to attempt to be objective is of course laudable - but then, any actual effort to attempt objectivity must begin with openness about one’s own motives and interests. And discussion of journalists’ motives - to interest the public and to promote themselves - is politically incorrect, and taboo. It follows that a journalism which calls itself “objective” is anything but objective about itself. There is no reason in logic why I should accept journalism’s self-hype about “objectivity.”
The alert reader may object that I have spoken of journalism in the singular, and take no account of diversity of journalism outlets, and of the (very few) newspapers with conservative (in American political context, a negative label) editorial pages. My answer to that is that
People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. It is impossible indeed to prevent such meetings, by any law which either could be executed, or would be consistent with liberty and justice. But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies; much less to render them necessary. - Wealth of nations, Book I, Ch 10And all major news outlets belong to wire services, principally the Associated Press. The newswire represents a virtual “meeting” of all major journalism outlets - one which has been running continuously since the Civil War era. I do not pretend that all newspapers express the exact same attitude on their editorial pages - but on the front page and the body of the paper, they do. And they call their uniform and politically correct slant “objective."
If Paul Ryan didn’t already know the moderator would be 100% in the tank for the Democrats, then he’s all hair and no smarts. (This still puts him far above Slow Joe “Plugs” Biden, of course.)
Who would marry her? I thought Ray Charles is dead and Stevie Wonder was unavailable.
ABC = All Barack Channel.
And her ex-husband’s (Julius Genachowski) new wife - Rachel Goslins, Executive Director of the President’s Committee on the Arts and Humanities.
And Martha’s current husband - Tom Gjelten, a correspondent for ...NPR.
Its a tight circle.
After being repeatedly interrupted by Braintrust Biden, Ryan merely has to say, “Mr. Vice President, I realize that you want the American people to believe Gov. Romney and I that we are the most despicable human beings in American politics, but you as President of the Senate, can you tell us how many of President Obama’s budgets have passed during his term and the vote totals? I can: None and Zero. Also as President if the Senate, do you know how many DemocRat budgets have been submitted for votes on the Senate floor by Majority Leader Reid. I do. None. What is more despicable Mr. Vice President, someone who has a genuine interest in at least putting forth a plan to try and deal with the economic realities of this country, or a man whose plan cannot even get votes from his own party, which in turn refuses to pass a budget so they do not have a record of their votes for an ever expanding, ever demanding central government bureaucracy reminiscent of and exceeding the old Soviet Union?”
“Hello. I’m Martha Raddatz, and I’ve got a secret.”
perfect! Definitely hope Ryan’s staffers see your suggestion and put it in his notes.
They never want their dirty secrets to be aired, so it’s absolutely paramount that Romney and Ryan tactfully and calmly put them out there in the open air for all to see/hear.
Thanks for posting. It’s up on Drudge.
Oh, that’s perfect. Romney should mention it, and your way is the most non-snarky of all.
Not a fan of Drudge; but he ALWAYS posts the most flattering photos available... :-)
Maybe, just MAYBE the GOP will get a clue one day and stop idiotically agreeing to let liberals moderate every debate. I don’t know what else it will take.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.