Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (61088)	11/29/2011 12:23:00 AM
From: joseffy	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

Lefty buddy presents Ezra Klein, the founder of Journalista.. Ezra Klein represents "news" as far as low grade moron buddy knows.

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (61088)	11/29/2011 7:50:21 AM
From: joseffy	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 103300

buddy's Ezra Klein: "I think that the creation of a media environment that can sustain and propel progressivism is more important than any single elected official. " Klein worked on Howard Dean's primary campaign in Vermont in 2003, Klein frequently provides political commentary on MSNBC's The Rachel Maddow Show and Hardball with Chris Matthews. He is a former contributor to the now-cancelled Countdown with Keith Olbermann. JournoList Main article: JournoList In February 2007 Klein created a Google Groups forum called "JournoList" for discussing politics and the news media. The forum's membership was controlled by Klein and limited to "several hundred left-leaning bloggers, political reporters, magazine writers, policy wonks and academics." [22] Posts within JournoList were intended only to be made and read by its members. [23] Klein defended the forum saying that it "[ensures] that folks feel safe giving off-the-cuff analysis and instant reactions". JournoList member, and Time magazine columnist, Joe Klein added that the off-the-record nature of the forum was necessary because “candor is essential and can only be guaranteed by keeping these conversations private”. [22] The existence of JournoList was first publicly revealed in a July 27, 2007 blog post by blogger Mickey Kaus. [24] However, the forum did not attract serious attention until March 17, 2009 when an article published on Politico detailed the nature of the forum and the extent of its membership. [22] The Politico article set off debate within the Blogosphere over the ethics of participating in JournoList and raised questions about its purpose. The first public excerpt of a discussion within JournoList was posted by Mickey Kaus on his blog on March 26, 2009. [25] Members of JournoList included, among others: Ezra Klein, Jeffrey Toobin, Eric Alterman, Paul Krugman, Joe Klein (no relation to Ezra Klein), Matthew Yglesias, and Jonathan Chait. On June 25, 2010, Ezra Klein announced in his Washington Post blog that he would be terminating the Journolist group. This decision was instigated by fellow blogger Dave Weigel's resignation from the Post following the public exposure of several of his Journolist emails about conservative media figures. [26] [27] Klein had justified excluding conservative Republicans from participation as "not about fostering ideology but preventing a collapse into flame war. The emphasis is on empiricism, not ideology". [28] en.wikipedia.org

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (61088)	11/29/2011 8:07:56 AM
From: joseffy	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

Liberals on Ezra Klein's 'Journolist' Wanted Government to Shut Down Fox News By Matt Lewis politicsdaily.com Appearing on Fox News' "Hannity" on Tuesday night, Tucker Carlson announced that The Daily Caller would publish more controversial e-mails from the now defunct Journolist -- a listserv where hundreds of liberal journalists and academics would share information. "We're breaking a story," Carlson told Sean Hannity, "that contains exchanges between members of Journolist, in which some suggest that the federal government shut down Fox." This, of course, comes on the heels of revelations that Journolisters had attempted to kill stories about Rev. Jeremiah Wright in 2008. Carlson was right about the exchanges involving Fox News, as this quote from the story demonstrates: Jonathan Zasloff, a law professor at UCLA, suggested that the federal government simply yank Fox off the air. "I hate to open this can of worms," he wrote, "but is there any reason why the FCC couldn't simply pull their broadcasting permit once it expires?" But while Zasloff did make those comments, it's fair to also point out that they did not go unchallenged: And so a debate ensued. Time's (Michael) Scherer, who had seemed to express support for increased regulation of Fox, suddenly appeared to have qualms: "Do you really want the political parties/white house picking which media operations are news operations and which are a less respectable hybrid of news and political advocacy?" So what does this mean? Clearly, these quotes demonstrate that Zasloff is a liberal who has no problem with suppressing conservative thought. On the other hand, unlike the participants involved in efforts to kill the Jeremiah Wright story, Zasloff is not a journalist, and appears incapable of bringing about the results he desires. My guess is that the more controversial revelations to come from this piece won't be about Fox News, but rather about Rush Limbaugh and Tea Party activists. For example, the column reveals that Sarah Spitz, a producer with Santa Monica, Calif. radio station KCRW, said that if she witnessed Rush Limbaugh having a heart attack, she would "Laugh loudly like a maniac and watch his eyes bug out." And Journolisters weren't above comparing conservative Tea Party activists to Nazis: "You know, at the risk of violating Godwin's law, is anyone starting to see parallels here between the teabaggers and their tactics and the rise of the Brownshirts?" asked Bloomberg's Ryan Donmoyer. "Esp. Now that it's getting violent? Reminds me of the Beer Hall fracases of the 1920s." While these comments are, to be sure, ugly and beyond the pale, it is hard to shock an audience repeatedly -- and I wonder if the Daily Caller might be following up on its last story too soon. My guess is that many conservatives have become inured to attacks on Fox News and Rush Limbaugh -- no matter how repulsive they are. It will be interesting to see if this story makes as big a splash as past columns about Journolist e-mails . . .

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (61088)	11/29/2011 8:34:06 AM
From: joseffy	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

Here’s the latest about the Journolist scandal, and it really is a shocking example of unprofessionalism. dailycaller.com Members of the list — prominent liberal journalists — conspired to try to kill the Jeremiah Wright controversy because they decided it was an illegitimate story that threatened to hurt Obama’s chances at winning the White House. Follow the link to read the depths of unethical behavior these leading journalists were prepared to go to for the sake of helping their favored candidate. They even discussed launching groundless accusations of racism against conservative journalists, for the sake of stopping the story. What’s depressing is the way in which liberal journalists are not responding to events in order to find out the truth, but playing strategic games to cover or not cover events and controversies in order to win a media/political war. ... this was an attempt to corral press coverage and skew it to a particular outcome. This is a blow to the authority of journalism at a time when it is already reeling. Read the story and see what some fairly prominent liberal journalists were willing to say and to do for the sake of quietly controlling press coverage in a way favorable to their side. Look at this, for example: 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.” Michael Tomasky, a writer for the Guardian, also tried to rally his fellow members of Journolist: “Listen folks-in my opinion, we all have to do what we can to kill ABC and this idiocy in whatever venues we have. This isn’t about defending Obama. This is about how the [mainstream media] kills any chance of discourse that actually serves the people.” You see that theme in several of the quoted messages: We should do this for the sake of the country. The ends justify the means. Two well-known journalism professors also participated in the strategizing. Here’s what I don’t get: even when I was a college journalist, I would have known that something like this was a betrayal of professional ethics. I would bet — I would hope — that most journalists in most American newsrooms, however liberal they may be, would have the ethical sense to know that this kind of thing is a shocking corruption of the basics they learned in J-school. And yet, here are some of the most prominent names in liberal journalism willing to sell out their integrity for a partisan political end. These journalists have brought it on themselves, and they deserve the opprobrium. This is terrible for public discourse, though, because it will just solidify the view many in the public have that all journalists do this sort of thing, and cannot be trusted, no matter what they say. How can you blame people for thinking all journalists are corrupt in the same way, when the alleged best and brightest have behaved so disgracefully? It is another example of the degradation of institutional authority in this country by personal and professional corruption. Read more: blog.beliefnet.com

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (61088)	11/29/2011 8:42:42 AM
From: joseffy	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

Documents show media plotting to kill stories about Rev. Jeremiah Wright 07/20/2010 By Jonathan Strong - The Daily Caller It was the moment of greatest peril for then-Sen. Barack Obama’s political career. In the heat of the presidential campaign, videos surfaced of Obama’s pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, angrily denouncing whites, the U.S. government and America itself. Obama had once bragged of his closeness to Wright. Now the black nationalist preacher’s rhetoric was threatening to torpedo Obama’s campaign. The 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.” 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 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.” Michael Tomasky, a writer for the Guardian, also tried to rally his fellow members of Journolist: “Listen folks–in my opinion, we all have to do what we can to kill ABC and this idiocy in whatever venues we have. This isn’t about defending Obama. This is about how the [mainstream media] kills any chance of discourse that actually serves the people.” “Richard Kim got this right above: ‘a horrible glimpse of general election press strategy.’ He’s dead on,” Tomasky continued. “We need to throw chairs now, try as hard as we can to get the call next time. Otherwise the questions in October will be exactly like this. This is just a disease.” (In an interview Monday, Tomasky defended his position, calling the ABC debate an example of shoddy journalism.) Thomas Schaller, a columnist for the Baltimore Sun as well as a political science professor, upped the ante from there. In a post with the subject header, “why don’t we use the power of this list to do something about the debate?” Schaller proposed coordinating a “smart statement expressing disgust” at the questions Gibson and Stephanopoulos had posed to Obama. “It would create quite a stir, I bet, and be a warning against future behavior of the sort,” Schaller wrote. Tomasky approved. “YES. A thousand times yes,” he exclaimed. The members began collaborating on their open letter. Jonathan Stein of Mother Jones rejected an early draft, saying, “I’d say too short. In my opinion, it doesn’t go far enough in highlighting the inanity of some of [Gibson's] and [Stephanopoulos’s] questions. And it doesn’t point out their factual inaccuracies …Our friends at Media Matters probably have tons of experience with this sort of thing, if we want their input.” Read more: dailycaller.com