Liberal Journalists Plotted to Protect Obama From Rev. Wright Scandal, Online Mag Says

Liberal Journalists Plotted to Protect Obama From Rev. Wright Scandal, Online Mag Says

A group of liberal journalists in 2008 sought to sweep under the rug the Rev. Jeremiah Wright scandal that threatened to derail then-Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign, according to documents obtained by The Daily Caller, an online publication founded by Tucker Carlson, a conservative contributor for Fox News.
The documents offer evidence to conservative critics who have long held that the mainstream media were in the tank for Obama, and bolsters the argument that reporters with major news outlets are biased in their coverage.
Journalists working for Time, Politico, the Huffington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Guardian, Salon and the New Republic expressed outrage over the tough questioning Obama received from ABC anchors Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos at a debate and some of them plotted to protect Obama from the swirling controversy, according to the Daily Caller.

reply to post by sdcigarpig


The Daily Caller actually has the full story.

dailycaller.com...

Pretty damning if you ask me.

Is it right or correct for the press to be supressed on a political canidate? In this case, during the election that the current president now sits, here is evidence where there was a deliberate and systamatic attempt to silence the free media and not have reports about the Rev. Wright and Obama from coming out.
It should never be for those who are suppose to report the news, to decide what is and is not what the public needs to know, as it leads to questions. It leads to misleading and misreprensentation of the facts and prevents the public from making a fair and balanced decision based off of everything that will affect their decision. In the case of a politician and possibly the stars that are in Hollywood and other times when a person that is in the public spot light, their lives cease to be their own. Who they associate with and what they do while out in public where anyone can see and visit is fair game for reporting.
Even though the entire election is done, and the White House has done its best to distance itself from the Rev. Wright, the question is now, if we knew then about Rev. Wright and his views, along with his close association with then Senator Obama, and his firey views would Senator Obama had won the election, or would the public had been turns off by such rhetoric and turned away from him?
When the press is controlled and the news is no longer fair and balanced, where the public can make an independent decision, based off of what they know, then the choice is fair, but when it is biased, the question as to validity and eithical nature of the canidate must be called into question.

Still the question is why?

Why was the media so in the tank for Obama?

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
Still the question is why?

Why was the media so in the tank for Obama?

money.


Not for the journalists, but for the owners of the conglomerates that own the journalists.

Look up who owns the media once.

Then look up who benefited the most from the bailouts, nationalization, subsidies, etc.. etc.. etc.. enacted by the administration.

Let me layout how this works:

You got a handful of mega-corporations owning all the major media outlets.

The owners of which appoint producers to their news rooms that are aligned with their interests.

Those producers are all democrats, because democrats are most aligned with the interests of General Electric, Time Warner, CBS, and Viacom.

News Corp is the general exception to the rule. Murdoch thinks he can make more profit by staying neutral since he doesn't have as large a stake in external industries as the other players do.

So, the producers then go and hire their willing dupes - democrat journalists.

The journalists honestly believe they are doing good by putting out biased information in favor of the democratic party.

They see the democratic party as a socialist party that will rob from the rich and give to the poor.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

The truth is, the democratic party wants "green energy" because GE wants green energy government contracts.

The truth is, the democratic party wants "net neutrality" because Time Warner wants net neutrality. (net neutrality prevents start up competition by limiting the pricing models they can use)

The truth is, the democratic party wants socialist security and medicare because GE wants socialist security and medicare. - who ends up benefiting from the inflated cost of healthcare? General Electric.

The list of subsidies, kick backs, regulations, and contracts put forth by the democratic party ALL work to benefit the major players in the media some way.




[edit on 20-7-2010 by mnemeth1]

reply to post by mnemeth1


Thank you mnemeth1, I have to read it a couple more times.

OK...Read the article at FOX you linked to...then read the article on Tucker Carlson's "the Daily Caller".

Here is what is being spun...Her is the question that the Journalists on the forum were responding to...

Stephanopoulos asked, “Do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?”

Here are the responses that are being claimed to be a conspiracy by journalists to protect Obama...I am skipping the spin and sticking to the evidence the cited.

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.”

Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent
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, “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.”

Thomas Schaller, “why don’t we use the power of this list to do something about the debate?”

“It would create quite a stir, I bet, and be a warning against future behavior of the sort,” Schaller wrote.

All in all I agree with what was stated here.

With two wars and a collapsing economy George Stephanopoulos asks on a sunday morning news show..."Do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?"

WTF has happened to journalism in this country...read the quotes above again without the spin...just what was said..

"do something about the debate"...THE DEBATE...WHAT IS BEING DEBATED...What Obama's Rev said in a Sermon????

"Otherwise the questions in October will be exactly like this. This is just a disease.” YES...it is. This kind of journalism is a disease for anyone that cares about the country and REAL national discourse on the ISSUES.

"This isn’t about defending Obama. This is about how the [mainstream media] kills any chance of discourse that actually serves the people.”

Jesus...this is what we complain about here on ATS...he says it and it is a conspiracy by journalists??? Seriously WTF? How bad is your need to be partisan to spin stuff this way?

[edit on 20-7-2010 by maybereal11]

Super double Ditto!

Keep this story going! One way or another

www.abovetopsecret.com...