Media Plotted to kill Rev. Wright stories.
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
THE PALINS MEET THE MSM
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."
In this post, I am dealing with how much of MSM conspired to tear down Sarah Palin. The electricity her choice brought to the GOP ticket, her anti-establish credibility, her touching decision to keep her Down Syndrome baby and her willingness to confront Obama were seen as a threat to the preordained feel good story the MSM was drooling over--a well-spoken African American (who has liberal sensibilities) makes good in a good ole boy establishment with the power to bring the races together.
As we know now, the attacks against Palin started coming the same day she was picked as VP.
Liberal journalist coordinate attacks against Palin
We have such evenhanded fair-minded exchanges as follow:
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 Palin [sic], a one-term governor of Alaska, is qualified to be President of the United States? Train wreck, thy name is Sarah Palin.”
At least one liberal journalist in the Journolist’s listserv recognized the hypocrisy of the "inexperience" line being applied to Palin. Though that didn't seem to dissuade most from using it anyways.
Not a wise argument, responded Jonathan Stein, a reporter for Mother Jones. If McCain were asked about Palin’s inexperience, he could simply point to then candidate Barack Obama’s similarly thin resume. “Q: Sen. McCain, given Gov. Palin’s paltry experience, how is she qualified to be commander in chief?,” Stein asked hypothetically. “A: Well, she has much experience as the Democratic nominee.”
In this nugget, Mr. Adler pushes a sexist point that they would not dare push against a liberal female politician. As if it is his job to direct or be concerned with everyone else's coverage of Palin.
Politico reporter Ben Adler, now an editor at Newsweek, replied, “but doesn’t leaving sad baby without its mother while she campaigns weaken that family values argument? Or will everyone be too afraid to make that point?”
Finally, in this nugget, we clearly see how the liberal journalist establishment was more interested in trying to marginalize Palin than actually trying to fairly cover all aspects of the 2008 election.
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment