Left Wing Media: Hitler’s propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels jealous
Dissing the Media
Comments | Print friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
Anybody who accused members of the media of being little short of dedicated advocates of the liberal propaganda machine and adjuncts of the left wing of the Democratic party were routinely dismissed as right-wing nuts.
Critics who dared to suggest that a large number of journalists worked in lock step as avid promoters of the ultra-left policies of the ultra-left wing of the Democratic party were inevitably portrayed as right-wing nuts. Suggesting that reporters could be doubling as left-wing propagandists were always greeted as the results of some kind of mental disorder peculiar to anyone with conservative views.
It turns out that they were right all along. These people would have made Hitler’s propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels jealous. What he did he did openly, these sniveling pipsqueaks did behind the scenes.
It’s almost impossible not to have the utmost contempt for these so called journalists One has to ask, as my sainted Grandmother Brennan, (the daughter of Patrick Murphy, the City of Brooklyn’s late 19th century Democrat leader) would have imperiously sniffed “who are these people?”
Not a single one of them would have passed muster with the late Generoso Pope, lord and master of the National Enquirer who employed the hardest working, toughest reporters in the business who would never have called themselves journalists.
They were reporters, period, and among the best in the trade. Sent out to cover a major event they swarmed all over the terrain doing whatever they needed to do to get the story while their colleagues in the mainstream media sat around barrooms interviewing each other and filing wire service copy.
They weren’t graduates of Ivy League schools. They learned their trade in the trenches of Fleet Street. They knew what their job was, and had no illusions. Get the story or go back to low paid jobs in London.
I’m happy to see that they are still at it, as Al Gore has just discovered much in the way as brother Edwards has.
While a lot of them came from the British left, when it came to their jobs, they were apolitical. Proud of their trade, they would have been outraged at the spectacle of so-called journalists conspiring to rig stories to fit their political leanings.
Calling the chatter between members of Journolist “embarrassing” The Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz alleged that the e-mails show an effort “to hammer out the shrewdest talking points against the Republicans—including, in one case, a suggestion for accusing random conservatives of being racist.”
Tucker Carlson writing on the Daily Caller website cited the example of Journolist members “savaging Sarah Palin.”
Palin, he wrote, responded with a slam at the media’s “sick puppies,” alleging that she was confronted during the 2008 campaign by “hordes of Obama’s opposition researchers-slash-‘reporters.’ “
Carlson concludes by writing “the people making the most stridently partisan comments in the invitation-only group weren’t reporters at all—they were out-of-the-closet liberals acting like, well, liberals.
“I don’t think you can be a journalist and carry water for a politician, and that’s what they were doing: ‘Here’s the line on Palin.’ . . . These are political hacks, and I think they should stop calling themselves journalists. It discredits the rest of us.”
He adds: “The key question is whether the openly opinionated commentators among Journolist’s 400 members were so swept away by ideology that they cared mainly about doing damage to the other side. The group consisted primarily of left-leaning commentators, bloggers and policy wonks, with some mainstream or centrist reporters as well.”
A couple of examples of Journolist skullduggery cited by Carlson: “Michael Tomasky, an opinion writer for the Guardian, is quoted as writing “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.”
Thomas Schaller, a Baltimore Sun columnist and political science professor, was quoted as asking “Why don’t we use the power of this list to do something about the debate?” Schaller proposed a “smart statement expressing disgust” at the ABC anchors’ questions, which was later published as an open letter signed by 48 members.
Chris Hayes, Washington bureau chief of the Nation, was more blunt when he told his colleagues to ignore the Rev.Wright, Obama’s pastor for 20 years: “All this hand wringing about just how awful and odious Rev. Wright remarks are just keeps the hustle going. . . . If you don’t think he’s worthy of defense, don’t defend him! What I’m saying is that there is no earthly reason to use our various platforms to discuss what about Wright we find objectionable.”
What amazes me is that these unabashed propagandists for the far left are still employed – a fact that indicts the news outlets which keeps them on the payroll as much as it does them.