Bill Sammon on Dana Milbank of the Washington Post (and why you should never believe Milbank)

Fighting Back | November 12, 2002 | Bill Sammon

[Dems_R_Losers]

EXCELLENT reporting!!! I've been yelling here for everyone to ignore Milbank. He is about as reliable as Maureen Dowd. He is determined to drive a wedge between the White House and conservatives. We are all fools if we fall for it. These last two articles are SO obvious. But I'm sure they are all snickering in the Post newsroom, especially if Rush is really fulminating about it (PLEASE tell me I am wrong, I thought Rush was way too smart fo fall into this trap.)

The liberal media are desperate to keep the abortion issue alive for 2004. They still think it guarantees losses for Republicans and an easy shorthand for Republicans to be portrayed as extreme.

[Wolfstar]

Good morning, Miss Marple. Thanks for posting this item. It does an excellent job of starkly highlighting one of my pet peeves: the fact that even smart FReepers, who should know better, tend to take everything they read in the press or hear on TV newscasts as gospel. The media DOES NOT DESERVE such blind acquiescence to all they spew out. Quite the opposite. Their product (news is a product) deserves the utmost scruitny and skepticism.

Here's an on-point article also posted on FR this morning. It uses tongue-in-check humor to make some very insightful points about how "news" is developed and packaged for a gullible public.

[deport]

• More Milbank

[NorCoGOP]

"The handsome armored presidential Chevrolet Suburban carrying our charge from the YMCA camp hurtled at 50 miles per hour through Estes Park and down the twisting mountain road. The motion set your pooler's stomach a-churning, bu the twisting doubtless had no impact on our POTUS, who has a constitution greater than your correspondent's.

What a wus...I can drive down Highway 34 at 65-70, in the dark...no problem...

[KC_Conspirator]

Precisely. Trent Lott also made strong, PUBLIC, comments about immigration, but you don't see Milbank writing about that because its an issue that galvanizes people towards the GOP position. Furthermore, most of Milbanks sources are unquoted, just like the NY Times, because their articles are really not that valid.

[Miss Marple]

EVERYONE GO READ DEPORT'S LINK!!! YOU WILL SEE WHAT A HORRIBLE PERSON MILBANK IS!!!

[samantha]

Judging by just a perusal of the old TNR articles(a perusal is all I could take), I would say he sounds like an immature, frustrated, still in the closet homosexual. I mean I met Alexander, and I sure do not want to see him nude. LOLROTFLMCO

[gaspar]

What would you expect from a Yale graduate?

[Utah Girl]

Thank you for taking the time out to type the passages out of Bill Sammon's book about Dana Milbank. Milbank is scum, I thought so before I went to deport's link. Yikes, Milbank also has a juvenile take on sex too.

[afraidfortherepublic]

Humor of sex abuse???? There is humor in sex abuse??? Where???

And his simile has to do with George Bush shaking his hand -- nothing more. Milbank is one sick dude!

[JoJo Gunn]

With all due respect, Broder isn't even close to that lice storm Richard Cohen.

[kayak]

From the time I first began lurking on FR, months and months before I ever registered in early '99, one thing that struck me was that verification of sources and facts was sought .... demanded .... to back up statements. And I found myself among kindred spirits who recognized the extreme bias of the media.

Ever since the election of 2000, though, the rule of thumb on FR seems to be that if someone in the media says it, it must be true ...... no matter what the political leanings or affiliation of the person.

There is a gigantic disconnect between those two concepts. If the things said about Republicans and/or conservatives before November 2000 were to taken with huge blocks of salt and examined for credibility, then the same should be true now.

FReepers, I would ask you to use your heads. If a reporter or columnist was prejudiced before Bush became President, that same member of the media is still prejudiced. Anyone who thought that x42 was wonderful is going to dislike Bush and try to discredit him. In my book that's a no-brainer.

Why do so many people here jump to accept at face value a statement about the Bush administration by a reporter/columnist whom they excoriated previously because that person praised x42? Once a Clymer, always a Clymer, unless there is evidence of a dramatic awakening. Milbank has, obviously, not experienced such a conversion.

[Wphile]

Great post. One of the best part's of Sammon's book was his critique of the press.

I wouldn't trust Dana Milbank any further than I can throw him. How he can call himself a "journalist" is beyond me. Alas, this is what more than a good share of journalism has become.

[Miss Marple]

This is going to be my crusade for the next few weeks. I am dedicated to teaching people how to read the news (especially after my experience with my sister). I am going to glean examples of how the news is manipulated and post examples, with dissections, as often as I can.

Nothing Milbank writes should be believed.

[Wait4Truth]

I have detested Dana Milbank FOREVER! He is pompous, arrogant, sarcastic and a total liar. He hates President Bush with a passion only seen by DU. His article implying that the President is a liar was plastered in my liberal newspaper - not in the editorial section where it belonged, but in the news section. I wrote a very nasty email to my newspaper and they responded that many readers thought it should have been on the front page, as it was in The Washington Post! I am still livid when I think about it!!! I read Fighting Back after Jane talked about it and my lividness only increased as I read his crass comments about the President that I honor and respect. Dana Milbank is a fraud and should be dissed by every Freeper!

[Miss Marple]

Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to notice Dana Milbank articles posted here and point out his bias. I am going to try and keep track, but I can't be here 24/7.

Bookmark this thread, which also has deport's excellent link. EVERY time a Milbank article is posted, with the accompanying "Woe is me" by the clueless, hook up that link!!

I am tired of these weasels yanking peoples' chains. I AM FIGHTING BACK!

[BlueAngel]

Bump! Have to go but will read later. Thanks for the post, Miss Marple.

[kayak]

This excellent idea bears repeating .....

Bookmark this thread, which also has deport's excellent link. EVERY time a Milbank article is posted, with the accompanying "Woe is me" by the clueless, hook up that link!!

[A Citizen Reporter]

Thank you for posting this! I have seen Dana Milbank appear occasionally on MSNBC as well. Apparentely, he is one of their favorite "pundits", which doesn't surprise me. I can't stand to watch MSNBC, and only do so when absolutely forced. At my fitness center, it is the only cable news channel they will carry.....:(

[Miss Marple]

You are welcome! I am dedicated to discrediting Milbank!