Weigel resigns
I haven’t covered this story so far, but for those who have been following it, the news is that Weigel has resigned from his WaPo post. Ace offers a great deal of background. Here’s more.
There’s an awful lot of this resignation stuff going around lately, isn’t there?
[ADDENDUM: On further reflection, I’d say that Weigel makes someone like Keith Olbermann look good. At least the latter is up-front about his viciousness and his biases. Weigel was pretending to be something he was not, and then he had the stupidity to trust that the emails relating his real feelings would never leave the confines of the liberal clique in which they were originally circulated.]
I had a strange dream this past Tuesday.
In the dream, I somehow knew that it was a Friday in the near future (I have no idea what the date was). I got onto the computer to read the various news and opinion sites I read … and discovered that alleged-President Obama had resigned his occupancy of the Oval Office.
Like that’ll happen!
… surely it will take pry-bars and blasting caps to get that interloper out of the WH.
“There’s an awful lot of this resignation stuff going around lately, isn’t there?”
Yes, and I’m resigned to it happening
I don’t think this guy is an anomaly in “conservative” circles. His type is the reason we had impotent McCain up against Boy Wonder.
Breaking: WaPo’s David Weigel Resigns After More Conservative-bashing Emails Disclosed
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/lachlan-markay/2010/06/25/breaking-wapos-david-weigel-resigns-after-more-conservative-bashing-
Yesterday I reported on leaked emails from Weigel to a listserve of liberal journalists bashing conservatives and conservatism – you know, the people Weigel is supposed to be covering. As bad as those email were, a plethora of messages from Weigel published in the Daily Caller take the conservative-bashing to a whole new level.
The new emails also demonstrated that yesterday’s quasi-apology from Weigel was really not as sincere as he claimed. He said that he made some of his most offensive remarks at the end of a bad day. But these new emails show that there was really nothing unique about them, and that offensive remarks about conservatives really were nothing new or uncommon.
more from the Daily caller
http://dailycaller.com/2010/06/25/emails-reveal-post-reporter-savaging-conservatives-rooting-for-democrats/
though remember, this is what i said was happening.
when you control both sides of an issue you have complete control
Weigal was good cop to others bad cop, and you never knew that you were being played from by both sides. should make you think of those good cop feminists too, same thing. it insures that they dictate the whole issue, and there is no other issue.
seems like it took a while, but we are once again learnign about the progressives. or as a commenter reported..
I happened to be watching a TCM classic movie this morning, THE BAMBOO PRISON, a Korean War POW melodrama from 1955. In the movie, the GI’s are getting tortured and brainwashed by the ChiComs, and some of them are turning traitor and parroting the communist party line. The reds call these turncoat GIs “the progressives”, and everything about them is “progressive” this and “progressive” that. Now, in order to avoid the tainted term “liberal”, our own home-grown loony leftists prefer to call themselves “progressives”. But even in 1955, it was well known that “Progressive” = Lousy Commie Stooge. And it still does.
which is why these movies are so rarely on…
in the movies the terms that are scrubbed are seen when they are dirty… compare that to now, and you can see how they have been laundered.
suggested read:
Purifying the World: What the New Radical Ideology Stands For
spme.net/library/pdf/PurifyingtheWorld.pdf
On further reflection, I’d say that Weigel makes someone like Keith Olbermann look good. At least the latter is up-front about his viciousness and his biases.
Weigel’s liberalism was treated as a given. Even Keith Olbermann, on whose show Weigel is a regular guest, tweeted his agreement: “If the WaPost didn’t know @DaveWeigel wasn’t a conservative blogger, it’s time for the Post to FOLD. My full support is yours, David.”
i think i know what the problem is…
they hear crudity and they think Crudités
a simple mistake any elite could make…
Artldgr: I find it virtually impossible to believe the WaPo didn’t know Weigel’s true politics and opinions. The point I was trying to make in the addendum here is that most of his readers were likely to have been unaware of his biases. Weigel and the WaPo were probably counting on that, and therein lay the deceptiveness.
A modest proposal: have each side’s activities covered by a reporter from the other side.
I know intellectual honesty goes against liberal/ progressive (pace Artfldgr – I too have been amused by the liberals adopting the term “progressive,” and for the same reason) principles to give patriotic Americans a fair shake, but think about it: it might just pull the news media out of their death spiral.
Even better, albeit expensive: have every issue covered by a reporter from each side, with their respective takes available at the same time.
Now that would be worth subscribing to.
NYT, WaPo, alphabet networks, I give you this one free of charge.
I wish we could regress to the journalism standards of the 19th century. Almost all publications were blatantly partisan. But very few made a pretense of being anything else.
I really don’t mind the partisan rantings. It is the hypocrisy that I find objectionable.
Now that I think about it, it should be possible to do this by co-opting reporters/ commentators from different media sources. The media may need anti-trust exemption to do this, but a suitably-worded one (i.e., one distinguishing journalistic from financial coordination) in the interests of public policy shouldn’t pose any insuperable obstacles.
The media would still compete based on their stable of in-house and external (out-house? /g) reporters. With minimal effort they could differentiate themselves to destroy any nascent symmetry (e.g., if paper A features alpha and beta, paper B features beta and gamma, rather than beta and alpha).
I’d think that’d produce a really interesting product, and would redound to the benefit of the Republic – no more burying news inconvenient to one side.
Of course, for that reason, the notion doesn’t have a dog’s chance. Still…
of course WAPO knew… they are part of the cluch of newspapers i linked to that agreed to change news for the greater good…
the goals of world communism from the 40s and 60s was to get control of editorial news and so forth.
its the selectors who grant jobs that skew the rest to write a certain way so they can earn something. you can even make a person like this reporter conform as your stroke him for his insight each time he adds that kind of thing, or takes your suggestions.
the odd thing is that we want to generally blame the writers, when its the market that they respond to, evne if the market is false due to selection pressures.
i should add that marketing lying to the others what the public wants can induce the editor, and so on. so there is never one clear point that you can say such bias comes from. there are many ways to induce it from many positions..
the major point is that without the people made less moral thanks to child abandonment and family dissolution one wouldn’t care about tempting devils. in the absence of that though, we have to find every devil as we cant avoid the temptation.
given the fact that some of the authors you read that you think live in the US actually dont live in the US… the idea of in and out and all that doesnt work…
you basically need a state organ just as ruthless that will not cave or be turned over time… but since they get their workers from the same education pool…
ah well..
I see Artfldgr beat me to it.
I found this link at American Thinker.
Purifying the World: What the New Radical Ideology Stands For
If that doesn’t send chills down your spine, nothing will.
Pingback:THE SULTAN’S WEEKLY ROUNDUP | RUTHFULLY YOURS
At Patterico’s Pontifications, Karl noted that the bigger issue should be the use of JournoList (the very existence of which should have raised red flags) by Weigel and others:
WaPo blogger Dave Weigel resigned today, after a slew of his anti-conservative comments and emails from the newly-defunct JournoList were leaked to FishbowlDC and the Daily Caller. However, by focusing on his invective and profanity, most of his detractors and defenders are overlooking Weigel’s biggest offense.
Weigel used JournoList for exactly the purpose its critics suspected it would be used, i.e., to attempt to shape media coverage for the benefit of the Left. And he did it more than once. As the DC’s Jonathan Strong reports:
After Scott Brown won the Massachusetts Senate seat, threatening to kill the health care legislation by his presence, Weigel stressed how important it was for reporters to highlight what a terrible candidate his opponent Martha Coakley had been.
“I think pointing out Coakley’s awfulness is vital, because it’s 1) true and 2) unreasonable panic about it is doing more damage to the Democrats,” Weigel wrote.
Obama Internet kill switch plan approved by US Senate
President could get power to turn off Internet
news.techworld.com/security/3228198/obama-internet-kill-switch-plan-approved-by-us-senate/?olo=rss
Control and if not control, then destroy.
Here’s the attempt at control.
The following link is to the Federal Communication Commission’s “Notice of Inquiry,” which inquiry was approved 3 to 2 and begins the process of controlling the Internet.
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-114A1.pdf
Note footnote 171 on pg. 128 which references Scott Jordon’s article, “A Layered Network Approach to Net Neutrality.” Link:
http://ijoc.org/ojs/index.php/ijoc/article/viewFile/168/88
Another interesting link details a major player, Christopher S. Yoo, Professor and Founding Director, Center for Technology, Innovation, and Competition (2007- ) and the Annenburg Public Policy Center.
Professor and Founding Director, Center for Technology, Innovation, and Competition (2007- );
http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/csyoo/
A secret leftist cabal to control and manipulate the news?
That’s just crazy talk.
of course its crazy talk
its not secret