The Manchurian Listserv
“Rev. Wright is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I’ve ever known in my life.”
There’s an amusing moment in the classic Frank Sinatra/John Frankenheimer original version of The Manchurian Candidate, which you can watch about a minute into this clip:
embedded by Embedded Video
YouTube Direkt
James Gregory’s Joe McCarthy-inspired character asks his wife, the Red Queen, played by that paragon of eeeeeevil, Angela Lansbury(!), if there a was an easy way to keep track of how many communists he was supposed to claim were working in the Defense Department. The camera then zooms into the Heinz 57 logo on his ketchup bottle, followed by a cut to Gregory in the Senate bellowing, “There are exactly 57 card-carrying members of the Communist Party in the Department of Defense at this time!”
And yes, McCarthy himself famously claimed, “I have in my hand 57 cases of individuals who would appear to be either card-carrying members or certainly loyal to the Communist Party, but who nevertheless are still helping to shape our foreign policy.” (Van Jones and Anita Dunn could not be reached for comment.)
In perhaps the best-known pull quote from yesterday’s Daily Caller story on the JournoList, Spencer Ackerman, then with the Washington Independent, now with Condé Nast-owned Wired magazine, said:
It’s not necessary to jump to Wright-qua-Wright’s defense. What is necessary is to raise the cost on the right of going after the left. In other words, find a rightwinger’s [sic] and smash it through a plate-glass window. Take a snapshot of the bleeding mess and send it out in a Christmas card to let the right know that it needs to live in a state of constant fear. Obviously I mean this rhetorically.
If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they’ve put upon us. Instead, take one of them — Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists. Ask: why do they have such a deep-seated problem with a black politician who unites the country? What lurks behind those problems? This makes *them* sputter with rage, which in turn leads to overreaction and self-destruction.
Jim Geraghty notes the bruising tone of the above passage:
Considering Weigel’s talk of setting Matt Drudge on fire, Ezra Klein’s off-color recommendation for Tim Russert, and now Ackerman fantasizing about putting conservatives through plate-glass windows, there is a bizarre addiction to lurid, violent, threatening language — not just among the commenters of liberal blogs, but among the folks who we are told represent their best and brightest. It’s disturbing, and the fact that it doesn’t bother more people is disturbing.
As Jim puts it, hey, “Just Another High-Minded Chat About Throwing People Through Windows.”
And Glenn Reynolds wonders what Ackerman’s current employers must think about hiring a journalist now on the record as making such remarks:
QUESTIONS FOR THE CLASS: ‘Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, Who Cares? . . . Call Them Racists’. Is this quote from Spencer Ackerman evidence of actual malice? Could it be invoked in a future libel case against Ackerman or his employer to show a habit of recklessness? Would you hire someone who had made statements like that as a journalist? If you did so, would that be evidence of reckless disregard?
At the Weekly Standard, Mary Katharine writes, “Liberals do it because it works:”
In a standard that works rather conveniently for liberals, and has been embraced by much of the media during the post-Obama Tea Party era, white conservatives and their allies are considered racists for merely being white conservatives. No video evidence is necessary to condemn, and no number of repuditations is sufficient to clear conservatives of this taint. On the other hand, when black leaders and liberal allies are caught on tape being racist or hateful, as in the case of Wright, Jones, the New Black Panthers, or NAACP leaders, it is also racist to point out that racism. A bit of a Catch-22 for someone like, say, Fred Barnes or Karl Rove, who will be accused of racism regardless of the evidence, and who may raise no evidence against accusers.
Jules Crittenden calls it “race-baitism.” It’s a very powerful political weapon with very little downside (Unless you’re Glenn Beck, in which case the potential price for crying “racist” without reason turns out to be rather high.), and it’s often those who profess to be most concerned about racial discord who deploy it without consideration:
Because while racism is something no responsible party or people wants to be associated with, race-baiting is a free throw…The president whose historic election was supposed to help us get past this hasn’t shown a lot of interest in disputing any of it, though I think he did get in an offhand dismissal of the idea in a TV interview a while back. He seems to have settled for just being the first black president as his niche in history, rather than being someone who tried to actually do anything about racial tensions.
Too bad. I don’t know about you, but I wish we could all just get along, and stick to arguing about things we actually disgree about.
I think we’re finally getting to a point where the overuse of the “racism” charge since Barack Obama became president has weakened its sting. This story should weaken it further, as it reveals how comfortable some of our most passionate racism watchdogs are with sowing racial discord for partisan advantage.
I think this is healthy—for those falsely accused, for the political process, for race relations, and for those who suffer real racism of the sort that’s not immediately politically useful to a listserv of mostly white journalists in Washington, D.C.
A month ago, when Dave Weigel was fired by the Washington Post, the story that brought the JournoList back into the news, Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic wrote that many of the Washington Post’s old guard aren’t very happy with comparative youngsters such as JournoList founder Ezra Klein, and the aforementioned racialist vitriol:
Man, soon after I posted that item on The Washington Post, the phone started ringing off the hook. This means that superannuated reporters were calling me, because younger ones would have just texted, or carrier-pigeoned. In any case, here is some of what was told to me from inside The Post:
“This is not just sour grapes about the sudden rise of these untrained kids, though I have to think that some people in the building resent them for bypassing the usual way people rise here. This is really about the serial stupidity of allowing these bloggers to trade on the name of the Washington Post.”
“It makes me crazy when I see these guys referred to as reporters. They’re anything but. And they hurt the newspaper when they claim to be reporters.”
“Ezra Klein is a talented guy, but he’s just an absolute partisan. If this is where journalism has to go, so be it, but I don’t want to go there.”
But then, just as the JournoList is McCarthyism through a fun-house mirror, it’s also an inversion of the story that almost single-handedly (albeit with a lot of help from Hollywood) created the 1970s-1980s-era incarnation of the crusading, muckraking political journalist. But back then, the Washington Post circled the wagons to ferret out the corruption and excesses of “All the President’s Men.” (Though of course, the excesses of all of FDRs, JFKs, and LBJs men were conveniently ignored, just as the FDR-era “Brown Scare” of the 1940s was almost entirely forgotten once McCarthy made himself into such an inviting target.) But the JournoList now makes its members, and arguably the Post itself, All the President’s Men — not that there was much doubt before the existence of the JournoList was widely known. And they’ve already demonstrated that they’re willing to squelch any story, or terminate with extreme prejudice (sorry to mix movie metaphors) any competing narrative to advance the president’s career.
A few years ago, Jonah Goldberg wrote:
Liberals are geniuses at unleashing social panics because A) it never occurs to them that their motives are anything but pure and B) because they are almost exclusively focused on short term tactics. And yet they are invariably shocked when these moral frenzies come back to bite them.
History doesn’t repeat — but it sure does get run through the Play-Doh Fun Factory on occasion.
Update: Thanks to commenter “Apostic” for suggesting the parody of the Manchurian Candidate’s classic riff, now added to the top of the post. Unofficial — at least to the best of our knowledge — JournoList emblem via Steve Green, who says, “Steal This Logo!” (But watch the latest edition of PJTV’s Trifecta, first.)
Update: From Kathy Shaidle a definite “Heh™” moment. Meanwhile Fausta suggests a more appropriately bourgeoisie movie title for the members of the JournoList.
In re this article’s title: “Rev. Wright is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I’ve ever known in my life.” — JournoList members
Heh–Thanks. I just added that as update.
I suggest that whenever Ackerman et al write anything new, comment sections should be flooded with quotes and links from their Journolist rantings.
The Manchurian Listserv and the Manchurian President, a match made in Hades.
Journ0list is an important story and I appreciate PJM and Breitbart for giving it well deserved attention. Mary Katharine Ham is certainly on to something as well with “liberals do it because it works”. Well, it used to work, with predictable results. Like their King, their brand is damaged and the name calling is going to be far less effective going forward. I’m pretty sure that 99 times out of 100 being called a “tea bagging racist” would be met with laughter (and the other time with a smirk).
I wonder if the Journ0list fan club will end up doing more harm than good to their messiah. If they were convinced he was The One “we’ve been waiting for”, why go through all these machinations to prop him up? Why not let the good and bad information come out and trust people to see his marvelousness? Maybe they never believed he was that special and being far left of center was all they really valued.
I think you could erase the word Maybe from your last sentence. I’m sure you were kindly giving the benefit of the doubt.
It’s pretty obvious that they thought he needed their help. That they knew that ” birds if a feather ” would allow the public a glimpse into Obama’s mindset since he had called Wright his spiritual leader.
Perhaps a little racism here too…Libs always feel that their ” poor black brothers” are helpless without them.
But where is the Frank Sinatra character to bring all of these liberal “journalists” down? I think it may be Andrew Breitbart.
I wonder what Andrew thinks of the Queen of diamonds? Hint: You have to see the movie to get that joke!
Ed: very nice to describe a problem, much better to suggest a solution.
We should be aware by now that “Jiberalism is a mental disorder”. (Savage) Yes, “lost” in political correctness and foundational misconceptions; utterly blind to reality; EG: “(Harold Hill) “Obama is a great president for Israel because he has credibility with the Palesteinians and can bring them to peace”! As if a girlfriend can get her girlfriend to lust for a guy they both find ugly…
“I can say better than most what jiberalism is”; but what can awake “them” from their stupor?
I find diverting the conversation to a political reality they had not considered effective (many, so called liberals, have arrogants & A.D.D), and even then it still takes time…
I have a feeling that being called a racist is akin to the ‘sky is falling’ it is rapidly losing it’s sting. You cannot endlessly play the race card without diluting the effect.
David
It’s only losing it’s sting to some independants, although I do hope that conservatives fnally might actually quit worrying about having to prove or show that in fact, they aren’t actually racists (i.e. quit being overly sensitive, such as well, the entire McCain campaign, for example), and get on with being people who stand on principle and policy, and judge by character and action, not race (and yes, I realize there are bad people in every group).
The real problem though is this: “white conservatives and their allies are considered racists for merely being white conservatives” as quoted in the article. This is not just a rhetorical tool for the left. For many of them, it’s a guiding belief. I have had friends argue very passionately that only white people are racists in the USA. Only white people can be even considered racists, since they apparently own all the institutions of power. I brought up the example of minority bigotry towards other minorities, and that was just ‘power struggle for social equity’ mixed in with some ‘they wouldn’t do that if they felt empowered’ or some such bull.
This is something being taught in schools, particularly university social science/social work programs, as fact. It doesn’t matter that you might have tons of minority friends, hire and pay minorities equally- ie, judge people in your life by their character, if you’re white, you are a racist by fiat and institution.
I wish I was kidding or writing in hyperbole, I really do, but this is all based on actual arguments I’ve had with friends of mine who came through social work programs.
It’s called “White Privilege” and, yes, there are required college courses dedicated to it. (Also, yes, it is insane – or, at very least, a very bad use of language.)
Maybe as a “journalist” I should write a ” true story” about The Reverend Sick Bastard Wright that claims he has sex with small animals in his “Church” and the congregation including Obama often watched. After all who needs honesty or truth when you have a good story.
Forgotten man: maybe as a journalist you should not abett the debauchery. Good stories are out there and the Rev Wright “tale” should have been ‘out there’ for prospective voters to review. The classic definition of a free press is that the truth will eventually emerge. The truth will not emerge if journalists are burying items that may not reflect well on their candidate of choice as happened in ’08. Journalists should not have a candidate of choice. Their personal preferences should remain confidential. If you are pushing an agenda or a candidate then you gave up journalism….now you are in the world of opinion. That is subjective-not fact.
Free press? Where? Certainly NOT the mainstream U.S. media who has sold their souls to the devil and renegotiate the contracts on a daily basis. Their agenda is obvious.
We, you and I, and people like Ed Driscoll with Pajamas Media, are practicing what free press is available to the citizens of the United States, and citizens of other countries that read and reply to these articles. I’d be the most informed individual in the universe if I had the time to read 50% of the blogs and articles posted on the internet.
The press that exists in the United States today, is committing treason, and fomenting racial violence daily, by reporting their opinion and omitting news that should be published.
But, alas; The way things are going, they will be subjects of Sharia Law in the not too distant future.
Very entertaining commentary. But that’s the rub. We can sit here and read and write about the sad state of affairs our nation is in until we are blue (er, red) in the face.
What we need are suggestion as to how to get our nation back. And we should all have the sinking feeling that the next two elections will not work; there will be too much fraud in both. The left will never give up their gains willingly (post electoral loss) or legally. They have too much invested. They are too far along; they have waited for 60 years for this time. And even if a Dem loses a seat, the left is so ingrained in every facet of our nation, they will still retain the power to ruin our country.
This is not a criticism of Mr. Driscoll because I have asked this question on other sites, but instead of us complaining about this or that that Dear Leader has done, let’s start a conversation about what we are going to do.
‘blotto’ writes: “What we need are suggestion as to how to get our nation back.”
Bingo. The entire Right is busy bickering about the Leftist ‘hypocrisy’, ‘fanaticism’, ‘lies’, ‘evil’, ‘destruction of the Republic’, and even ‘Leftist gaffes’ … I haven’t heard a single solid, comprehensive and EFFECTIVE proposal as to what we are going to DO about it.
(1) First and foremost, no amount talk and bickering, and gloating, and Twittering, and congratulating each other on ‘exposing’ the Left etc is going to work. Talk doesn’t get war won. Simple.
(2) No amount of protests rallies, calling the senator, challenging constitutionality etc is going to work. To wit: past 19 months of Leftist works. Often in plain defiance of twice being struck down by the Court.
(3) No amount of ELECTIONEERING is going to work. Nov ’10, you can’t win veto-proof majority. There simly aren’t enough seats in election in the senate. (check the numbers at say, wiki, or something, and then do simple arithmetic). Even if you win a filibuster-proof majority in Senate, it will be useless. You can’t do anything to undo the damge the Left has already done. Nor can you pass any preventive laws. OB will just veto those.
(4) The task of any more agenda to be enacted by the Left is swiftly being taken over by the executive branch along with its 1200 or so agencies which are free to make rules—with or without legislative mandates. Check out what the FCC, FEC, SEC, FED, FTC, and others are ACTIVELY pursuing right now. Hey folks these folks just have to pronounce anything at all as ‘rules’. If they get struck down by the SCOTUS, big deal: next day announce the same rules with a few words changed here and there, and again the same charade of long judicial review …
(5) JUDICIAL challenges are useless. See above. For example, suppose the current challenge of Obamacare Act goes through, SCOTUS says its unconstitutional. Next day, Sebellius issues ‘rules’ consisting of precisely the 2300 pages that constitute the Obamacare Law. And proceed. If challenged, and if the challenge holds in court, if struck down, hey, reissue the same with some wording change. (they’ve already done this drama)
So now that we have exhausted all procedural, electoral, judicial, AND ‘public opion/protest’ avenues of stoping the beast, it is approriate to ask, what then, if anything, CAN we do?
The answer is simple. Effective. Constitutional. And surefire.
A massive concentrated camaign of civil disobedience by the public.
For example, the one thing which strikes most effective to me, is the following
There are 66% of population which are definitely americans. Meaning who value the Constitution as sacrosanct, AND consider any enemy of the Constitution as the enemy of the Republic. That brings us to the 22% population which calls itself “liberal” and “left-leaning” and “progressive” and such other euphemisms for anti-american socialist/fascist.
If from the 66% who are americans, 10 million show up in DC one fine morning and refuse to leave until goverment meets their demands—a right of the people recognized even by the Constitution—the government will have no choice but to yield. It can try to suppress the people, but who will enforce such suppression? The military is about 95% Americans vs. 5% Leftists. We can dictate terms to the government without having to fire a single bullet. And it is LEGAL! In the sense of being a constitutionally recognized right. The 10 million strength can be maintained indefinitely by rotating participation of americans. Some come some go, as per the imperatives of their lives dictate. 10 million remain. Until the government comes to the table.
blotto, if you have heard any other means of stopping this monster which has not been tried and failed, i would be glad to listen. If not, you might want to seriously consider my method (or its more effective variations) and spread the word.
I have been parrotting for six months now, that there is just too much talk on the Right and NO effective action … any challenges to that position?
American Eagle, YOU ARE RIGHT! I’ve been thinking this also, including that I suspect past stolen elections and one very big one in Nov. Are there any websites that would organize us? I’ll miss a day or two of work, unlike liberal demonstrators who don’t have to.
I’m there IF someone puts the siege together. Whom would that be?
(Hell, I’d be for dragging the bastards down the steps and places them on pikes on the Mall, but don’t know when peak buzzard season is in DC.)
American Eagle, Go check out Paul Ryan’s “A Roadmap For America” website. Their are so many answers I’m still reading more each day. It’s quite long but that’s the good part. He’s put a lot of time and thought into it and frankly I think he’s a genious. I wish everyone would read what he’s written.
You’ve neatly outlined the corruption and the failure of the soap box, the ballot box and the jury box. That leaves only one box left to open.
We’re now being ruled by monsters – killers without conscience. Some of them have giddily speculated about the millions that they would have to kill to achieve their authoritarian Utopia – or have openly admired some of history’s worst mass murderers. The plain and simple truth is that the same ideas that have animated history’s worst practitioners of genocide and slaughter nnow have a happy home in the White House.
@ blotto, I believe that is what the Tea Party is, if you are not involved you should consider it.
David
Not true—unless Tea Party grows some real teeth, they are as effective as calling the senators and winning Mass for Brown. Even if they take all seats available in Nov, there ain’t nothin’ they can do to stop the beast. See my reply to blotto’s comment, and please, seriously consider the points i make there.
I respectfully disagree. There is one thing they can do even if they only gain control of the House of Representatives – they can starve the beast that is the bureaucracy. Those countless government agencies have to be funded to exist and those appropriations start in the House. Cut their funding. Even Civil Service rules won’t protect them if their budget is cut deep enough. I seriously doubt they’d work for free. Starve the beast.
Obama might try to veto the reduced budgets and blame Republicans for shutting down government the way Clinton did it. So be it. Let the government shut down. Let Obama veto the budget. When he does, the House should take a recess. See who blinks first.
Obama is not Bill Clinton and Boehner is not Newt Gingrich. Clinton is a skilled politician, no matter his failures personally, and Boehner is not Gingrich who was preoccupied with his book deal and was outwitted by Clinton. I think the public is ready for a shutdown.
McCarthy’s Names.
I once had lunch a friends’s friend. He was a retired FBI Agent.
He told this true story.
His brother was a retired FBI Agent and after leaving the Bureau, he worked on Joe McCarthy’s Senate Committee.
J. Edgar Hoover knew since 1939 that the US Federal Gov. was infiltrated with many Russian Spies in high positions-from Hiss in the state Department, to Hopkins, who lived in the White House with FDR; he also knew that Roosevelt knew but did nothing about it.
When Truman took Office, Hoover convinced Gov. Byrne of South Carolina (and U S Sec. of State) to carry the proof of Communist Spying to Byrnes’ personal friend, Truman. He did so.
Nothing was done. Hiss was promoted to head the UN.
Hoover decided to arrange a meeting with McCarthy, hoping that McCarthy would get the Word Out to the American people.
Thru the two FBI Agent brothers, one who was working for McCarthy, Hoover and McCarthy met on late afternoon in a West Virginia small town Diner.
McCarthy agreed to spread the word. They also aagreed that to protect Hoover from being identified as the source, he would use a different number of names every time he showed the list.
sincerely, jake diPluma
Such stories, if true, give credence to the idea that the ‘new world order’ or ‘one world gov’t’ has been the theme for a long long time. It would fit in with reports that Bush Sr. was close with the Harrimans, whose bank helped fund the USSR. It would support the idea that party divisions in the US truly are hyped, that the Presidential candidates end up – most of them – as basically loyal servants to the one-world gov’t idea.
It would also help explain the systematic appeasement of Muslim elements and goals – wrapping Islam into the world order through ‘good business,’ allowing the construction of memorials and mosques (at both sites, WTC and Shanksville) that exalt Islam and mock, literally the victims (at Shanksville, the plans for the mosque-memorial have the 40 victims dangling on their way to Islamic h%ll while a giant crescent is laid out with a ‘prayer navigation’ directional towards Mecca).
It would also explain how – if it is true – that American elites might ‘allow’ a horrendous terror event to occur that simultaneously pumped the juices of patriotism while in fact cementing Western elites’ ties with jihadist governments.
Of course, it would require a unitary agreement between and/or control of politicians by the ‘elites.’ OTOH, if you just look at Michael Bloomberg’s advocacy for the Ground Zero Mosque, you don’t really need a conspiracy at all to explain these things – simply craven appeasement and denial.
The way I view this administration, Congress, and the lap dog media, is like the Keystone Cops turning into the mafia.
As a certain radio talk show host as said,” if you want to know what a liberal is, just listen to what he calls others”. Still more liberal[?] filth from journolist is being released by Tucker Carlson, the government shutting down Fox News, fascists, etc. All the vomit from twisted minds you can handle.
Imagine, ONE TV station, just one & they have all the rest, and they’re going crazy over it. It must be a Fascist thing.
Dangerous times are coming, the liberal filth are getting edgy & we know where the Chief Fascist stands.
Here’s the term “Brown Scare” described a bit more directly.
http://tinyurl.com/2e26gmk
On top of what the Journolist archives will likely produce, remember this account of the NY Times spiking a whistleblower story linking Obama and his campaign to ACORN and its nefarious activities.
Malkin has a good summary: http://michellemalkin.com/2009/09/16/whats-missing-from-the-new-york-times-coverage-of-acorn/
Its a nice bookend to consider.
Let’s not forget that, as per the Verona intercepts, Joe McCarthy was right</b. (And, don't confuse McCarthy with the House Committee on Un-American Activities, which was a political farce).
But didn’t Whittaker Chambers testify before the House Un-American Activities Committee? If you read “Witness,” that committee (and Richard Nixon, for that matter) doesn’t sound so laughable any more.
There are more substantial grounds on which to attack Barack Obama than this story of JWright and, even, the exposure of JournoList (and media in general) collusion to suppress negative information of all kinds during Barack’s 2 year run.
Hardly anyone ever mentions what finally forced Barry’s hand vis à vis his preacherman, the guy he “…could no more disown than my own father”. (well, dad was kind of a piece of work as well, disowned his own son, to boot)
It was when JWright made some vicious and shameless observations about Hillary Clinton during the waning months of the campaign that Barry was finally forced to publically repudiate the old bigot.
The J-List story, however, is more important from the point of view of managed media than to the subtext and context of who, exactly, Barack’s preacherman is.
When it comes to the entrenched media and its surrogates and underlings, all you can say is…
“all scum, all the time”
They still eventually get tripped up by the truth as the public sees it.
Calling Rove a racist only works for as long as the public perceives it might be true. The more often this trick is used, the more the public sees through it.
Not to mention did anyone notice that Ackerman gave the game away? “if we defend Wright, we lose… if we tear him down, we lose”
Ackerman admits Wright is indefensible, because of course his critics are correct. HE IS A RACIST AND A PSYCHO LEFTIST, and Obama is close to him and listened to him and agrees with him.
The “call them racists” meme is, and he knows it is, distraction to avoid the public confronting the truth.
This is not just a conspiracy, it is an EVIL conspiracy to fool the public so that it will not bother to defend itself against something which clearly intends to do harm to it.
Journalists aren’t just dishonest. If they support the personal destruction of a Rove or Barnes on a FICTIONAL basis, for the purpose of DISTRACTING ATTENTION from a problem of theirs, then they are genuinely EVIL, CRUEL, DESTRUCTIVE people.. in different times and places, people like these would send people like me to the frickin’ GULAG.
“…in different times and places, people like these would send people like me to the frickin’ GULAG.”
Don’t worry, they are working on it.
And we all know that, in fact we have to write from behind a pen-name, otherwise sooner or later our name would pop up in the wrong moment and we would lose our jobs and our lives would become really difficult.
The subversive left is ALWAYS in the process of building a gulag, it may be at a slow pace or in a very primitive phase but the gulag is always there.
Our totalitarian universities and media are already a fully functional gulag: they still tolerate the occasional dissent but they have certainly gone a long way in killing the freedom of speech.
If you are not a nihilist marxist, you are already in troubles in America.
My browser highlights “marxist” and tells me to capitalize it.
It doesn’t do it with “christian”.
Helen Thomas had the excuse of age,
and Jesse Jackson, outrage,
why do the others stage
their own last days ?
Unless, of course, for them, these _are_ the End Times
and they have, in john Brunner’s phrase:
‘Little left to lose, and not much time to regret it.’
The Manchurian Candidate is an odd movie. It makes fun of people who were talking about communist infiltration of the American government…and the whole point of the movie is that communists had infiltrated the American government!
Go figure.
Reading the justifications of the JournoList guys (and gals) for colluding to suppress negative information of all sorts about Barry, it seems those particular purveyors of information designated themselves as sole arbiters of which information was fit to purvey.
Apparently, they had decided that GWB was such a disaster that they had to do whatever was in their collective power to elect a guy they perceived as his polar opposite, The One™
In the spirit of Saul Alinsky’s and Billy Ayers’ core philosophy of “the end justifies the means” JournoListers decided to do everything in their power to bring about their own desired outcome in a presidential election.
As such, their acts were criminal, not to mention a deep and permanent insult to the profession to which they purport to belong.
Thanks to their perfidy and scheming (reminiscent of some of the kind of stuff that surfaced in Climategate) Journalism falls a notch farther down
I love that sign on the door of Rev. G.D.A. Wright’s million dollar home. It reads,”I was born a poor black child, but G.D. America anyway.”
That should be in a movie staring Steve Martin.
Spencer Ackerman has provided a defense when called a racist.
Lefty: You are a recist!
Righty: Do you mean an Ackerman type of racist or some other type?
Did I miss that somebody took Breitbart up on his $100K offer? These revelations on Journolist are coming in fast and furious.
I thought about the 57 subversives from Manchurian Candidate during the campaign, when then-Sen. Obama talked about visiting all 57 states. Coincedence? Well, if you think so, why don’t you pass the time by playing some solitaire?
Another way to look at this is that they helped Obama stage a coup against Hillary and the moderate Democrats. Much of the controversy about Wright came out in the debate right before the PA primary, which she won…and would have won with a larger margin if the press coverage was better.
Add to this the up and coming film about Obama’s minions harassing her supporters in the caucuses, and you have a scandal about who controls the Democratic party: The moderates (DLC, governors, bluedog Dems) or the elites who can manipulate votes merey by crying racism?
“The Manchurian Candidate” isn’t exactly a bad movie (I particularly like the sequence when Frank Sinatra attacks Harry Silva on sight when he answers the door), but its naive charm has pretty much evaporated since info on the Venona transcripts was released.
Well, goddamn, we DID have communists crawling out of the woodwork, after all. How ’bout that.
Here’s another Wright.
Robert Wright, a left-wing apologist writing in the NY Times, has questioned why anyone would reject a mosque at the site where 3,000 Americans were murdered in the name of Islam and the rule of Mohammad.
Mr. Wright’s next step is to call for a picture of Bin Laden on the ten dollar bill.
He, like our president, believes that if we keep telling our enemies that we really like them in spite of their calls for our extermination, then they will play nice.
The 911 mosque idea is just the latest anti-Christian, anti-Jewish provocation that is dividing this country. Meanwhile, it is a crime to be a Christian in Saudi Arabia and Israel is being daily attacked by the left and their gun totting brethren around the world.
There is a war going on. Islam is the enemy. Get used to it. It will get much worse before it gets better. Ultimately ,the good guys will win but at what price?
http://jewishdailyreport.wordpress.com/2010/07/21/no-911-mosque/
This has certainly been a bad week for the Progressives. JournoList provides smoking gun evidence of media collusion. NAACP charges tea party with racism and gets everyone riled up. Breitbart throws a hand grenade. Everyone takes shrapnel, including Breitbart, but the NAACP and the Administration have to be Medevaced out while Breitbart is still present for duty. You can’t buy stuff like this. Unfortunately, we can and will pay dearly for it.
Here’s an idea for what can be done, provided that the GOP wins enough seats: a Constitutional amendment to repeal every bill passed since January 1, 2009. Obama can’t do anything about it since the President plays no part in the passage of a Constitutional amendment. The trick would be getting 37 states to ratify. By my count, 22 states would definitely ratify, and 9 definitely would not. So it would be close, but it would be something that Obama could not stop, at least not directly.
Who else, other than me, thinks that these guys would likely run screaming and wet their pants if they thought they would be in actual physical peril?
Note that the degree to which these guys advocate violence is pretty much inversely proportional to their own propensity to do actual, uh, manly things.
They long to be thought of as real communists who maim and kill at will for the Party. But, of course, they are not quite “up” to that. The second best thing for this bunch is to glorify and defend dictators, terrorists, and demogogues.
s/b “demagogues” in my last comment. A freudian typo?
The reason people like Ackerman and Weigel make email threats is because they are complete little cowards who would hide under the table if they were actually confronted by someone who would knock their teeth out. These are lefty twerps. The bigger issues are the institutions that hire these creeps and the old Lefties who hang around them. Man love at its most disgusting.
McCarthy touched upon the infrastructure of an organization that exists within our government. We call them Communists, but they also include remnants of Nazi Party (The US govt smuggled hundreds of top Nazi officials into the US through operation “Paperclip” which is factual accounts of Nazi involvement with US government and its policies), there is the true story of the Odessa Files, and so many other examples of foreign infiltration and frankly manipulations of our Government since WW2 by these groups.
The error McCarthy made was in assuming what he was investigating was ” Communist”. It was and is a group of powerful and wealthy individuals beholden to nobody but themselves. They bankroll and manipulate elections, US policies, the Economy and Tax policies..effectively managing the USA from behind the Scenes.
What Senator McCarthy saw was real, he was just seeing a small part and could not put all the pieces together. History, access to information and Hindsight allows us to put it all together, finish the work he started.