Tag Archives: david-weigel

Ron Paul Still Needs to Seriously Answer Newsletter Questions

http://www.youtube.com/v/LywD6gXBudc

View original post here:

On December 15th, Jeff Lord predicted that Ron Paul would have to “seriously answer” for his newsletters as he ascended in the polls in Iowa. As Jeff points out these questions were raised in January 2008 in Reason by David Weigel and Julian Sanchez. I would add that their reporting built on the groundwork laid by James Kirchick in The New Republic earlier that month. Six days later, Paul failed to… Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : Amspecblog Discovery Date : 22/12/2011 06:01 Number of articles : 2

Ron Paul Still Needs to Seriously Answer Newsletter Questions

NBC Reporter Throws Around Conservative Label but Can’t Call Rangel A Lib

NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell, on Wednesday’s Today show, in reporting about the results from yesterday’s primaries threw around the conservative label around as she identified several Republicans that way but for some reason when it came to reporting on Democrat Charlie Rangel’s win couldn’t manage to attach the “liberal” label to the ethics challenged Congressman. O’Donnell began her piece noting that “Democrats are suddenly very excited” about their chances of winning the Delaware primary seat due to “the conservative rebellion” that led to Republican Christine O’Donnell’s win in that primary, adding that “conservative Christine O’Donnell was propelled by several Tea Party groups.” And later O’Donnell even relayed the Democratic spin that O’Donnell was “an ultra right wing extremist.” However when it came to talking about Rangel’s primary win, the NBC correspondent, didn’t bother to attach an ideological label, merely calling him “20-term Congressman Charlie Rangel.” In total, Kelly O’Donnell used the “conservative” label five times in her piece but never once labeled any of the Democrats brought up in her story a liberal. The following is the full O’Donnell story as it was aired on the September 15 Today show: MEREDITH VIEIRA: But let’s begin with the results of the final primaries before November’s midterm elections and what they mean for both parties. We’re gonna talk to Christine O’Donnell about her surprise victory in Delaware, in just a moment. But first NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell has the latest. Kelly, good morning to you. [On screen headline: “Life Of The Tea Party, Upset Win In GOP Race For Biden’s Senate Seat”] KELLY O’DONNELL: Good morning, Meredith. Well the Tea Party has toppled conventional wisdom again and here in Delaware, the result is both shocking and convincing because it wasn’t close. The most popular Republican in the state, Mike Castle, he is out. Democrats are suddenly very excited and O’Donnell says don’t count her out in a fight to get the seat that Joe Biden held for 36 years. CHRISTINE O’DONNELL: Ladies and gentlemen, the people of Delaware have spoken. KELLY O’DONNELL: The conservative rebellion rolled over Delaware’s Republican Party brass. CHRISTINE O’DONNELL: Don’t ever underestimate the power of we the people! KELLY O’DONNELL: An upset hard to imagine just a few weeks ago. Conservative Christine O’Donnell was propelled by several Tea Party groups and that movement’s most famous figure. CHRISTINE O’DONNELL: You betcha! There’s another woman I gotta thank. You betcha! Thank you Governor Palin for your endorsement. KELLY O’DONNELL: O’Donnell was ridiculed and written-off by other Republicans as unelectable. She had never won before, but knocked out Congressman Mike Castle who had never lost in a dozen races. Castle did not offer his congratulations. REP. MIKE CASTLE: The voters in the Republican Party have spoken and I respect that decision. KELLY O’DONNELL: Castle had called O’Donnell unqualified. (Begin ad clip) ANNOUNCER: She didn’t pay thousands in income taxes. (End clip) KELLY O’DONNELL: Animosity was so intense, the state Republican Party paid for robo-calls where O’Donnell’s past campaign manager attacked her. (Begin clip of robo-call) UNIDENTIFIED CAMPAIGN MANAGER: I found out that she was living on campaign donations, using them for rent and personal expenses while leaving her workers unpaid and piling up thousands in debt. (End clip) KELLY O’DONNELL: O’Donnell denies misusing funds. She claims her own financial hard times actually help her understand voters’ anger. CHRISTINE O’DONNELL: A lot of people have already said that we can’t win the general election. I know. KELLY O’DONNELL: Democratic officials are gleeful and called her an ultra right wing extremist. Ironically, her supporters used an Obama slogan to predict victory in November. O’DONNELL SUPPORTERS AT RALLY CHANTING: Yes We Can! KELLY O’DONNELL: Turning to New Hampshire’s GOP Senate primary, a tight race too close to call. Former state attorney general, Kelly Ayotte, the choice of both the Republican establishment and Sarah Palin against a Tea Party endorsed conservative activist Ovide Lamontagne. On to New York, where the Republican nominee for governor is another Tea Party conservative . Real estate developer Carl Paladino over the party favorite former Congressman Rick Lazio, while New York Democrats stood by 20-term Congressman Charlie Rangel who’s accused of House ethics violations. Rangel beat back several challengers. REP. CHARLIE RANGEL: I go back to Washington stronger than I have ever been. KELLY O’DONNELL: And back here in Delaware, Democrats didn’t have a primary fight for the Senate seat, so Chris Coons is their candidate in November. O’Donnell who has worked as a media consultant for conservative non-profit groups says that she is hoping to get donations, even though the national party is reluctant to get behind her. And she also hopes to get the endorsement of Mike Castle. That has not happened. She is calling for unity, isn’t sure if she can expect it but says the Tea Party is behind her.

Read more from the original source:
NBC Reporter Throws Around Conservative Label but Can’t Call Rangel A Lib

Memo to Slate’s Weigel: Those Who Live in Glass Houses Shouldn’t Throw Stones

Anxiety was pretty high in the heat of battle with the race for the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate. However, a lot of that tension exists beyond the state of Delaware and there have been self-proclaimed conventional wisdom wizards critical of how the electoral process in Delaware has worked itself out. One of those has been former embattled Washington Post blogger Dave Weigel, who in a Slate.com post dated Sept. 14, took a few shots at conservative talker Mark Levin, calling him a “creep” for his criticisms of The Weekly Standard John McCormack , author of an unfavorable story about Delaware U.S. Senate nominee Christine O’Donnell. “This is absolutely pathetic,” Weigel wrote of Levin’s critique. “No, Mark, when reporters investigate female candidates, they are not ‘obsessed,’ any more than you’re obsessed with Hillary Clinton when you call her “her thighness” and ‘Hillary Rotten Clinton.’ They’re reporting. For all of your posing about legal theory and the Constitution, you make it pretty clear here that you’re a political hack.” But Levin responded promptly by reminiscing about Weigel’s prior “JournoList” transgressions by compiling his own list of so-called “Weigelisms” and posted him on his Facebook blog : “This would be a vastly better world to live in if Matt Drudge decided to handle his emotional problems more responsibly, and set himself on fire.” “Follow-up to one hell of a day: Apparently, the  Washington Examiner  thought it would be fun to write up an item about my dancing at the wedding of Megan McArdle and Peter Suderman. Said item included the name and job of my girlfriend, who was not even there – nor in DC at all.” “I’d politely encourage everyone to think twice about rewarding the Examiner with any traffic or links for a while. I know the temptation is high to follow up hot hot Byron York scoops, but please resist it.” “It’s all very amusing to me. Two hundred screaming Ron Paul fanatics couldn’t get their man into the Fox News New Hampshire GOP debate, but Fox News is pumping around the clock to get Paultard Tea Party people on TV.” Of course, Weigel apologized for these comments, but if he were serious about that apology and sincerely wanted to try to re-establish some modicum of his credibility, one would think he would refrain from labeling his opponents as “creeps.”

See the article here:
Memo to Slate’s Weigel: Those Who Live in Glass Houses Shouldn’t Throw Stones

Essay: WaPo Needs ‘Conservative Beat’ Reporter, Not ‘Beat Conservatives’ Reporter

The ” recent unpleasantness ” at the Washington Post was, to conservatives at least, entirely predictable. What decent left-leaning journalist could live among the remote, primitive tribes known as conservatives and not be driven just a little bit mad? (If the Post’s editors were embarrassed, they could at least take comfort that their man hadn’t “gone native.”) Predictable, but no less unfortunate. The Washington Post dearly needs someone to explain conservatism to its editors and staff. Why? A look through the June 30 edition of the Washington Post gives a pretty good indication. No, not the puff piece on Obama Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. (Apparently a photo of the grown man in charge of a vast federal agency wearing a bike helmet is supposed convey competence. The caption reads – really – “Ray LaHood has worked to expand transportation safety, including emphasizing the rights of cyclists in federal transportation policy.) No, a few columns should suffice. Courtland Milloy began a piece on Justice Clarence Thomas’ recent opinion defending the Second Amendment on a promising note. Thomas, Milloy wrote approvingly, “roared to life” in the opinion, citing the legal disarming of blacks in the post-reconstruction south, which left them vulnerable to the KKK and other white supremacists. So far, so good. In fact, too good to be true, because Milloy suggested that “Thomas’s references to historical threats posed by white militias might have been dismissed,” except that those groups are at it again, inflamed by “Barack Obama’s election as the nation’s first black president.” Although he didn’t elaborate, Millow seems to have been referring to a recent report stating that the number of militia groups in the country has nearly tripled to about 500 since Obama was sworn in. Of course, that number comes from the Southern Poverty Law Center , a left-wing 60s hold-over whose very existence depends on seeing more men in sheets than a prison production of “Julius Caesar.” Milloy worried that these groups’ actions could become as “violent as their racist rhetoric often threatens.” Again, Milloy didn’t elaborate, but since the SPLC could find violent, racist rhetoric on a cereal box , readers can be forgiven for not sharing his sense of dread. Over on the editorial page, Ruth Marcus had the goods on those dangerous right-wingers, pointing to a ridiculous campaign ad from an Alabama Tea Party candidate for the GOP nomination to congress. In the ad, Rick Barber talks to the shades of the Founding Fathers, shows images from the Holocaust and suggests that “We are all becoming slaves to our government.” “To hijack the horrors of the Holocaust and slavery in the service of a political campaign demeans the candidate and, worse, dishonors the victims,” Marcus wrote. “Decency demands that some comparisons be off-limits.” Indeed it does. Just ask George W. BusHitler, as many of Marcus’ ideological pals liked to call the last president. Marcus’ larger point is that many on the right have become “unhinged,” exhibiting “white hot vehemence.” “The concern and disagreement – over health-care legislation, over bank bailouts, over debt – are understandable,” she graciously allowed. “The slippery slope fears of decent into socialism/totalitarianism are incomprehensible.” Here’s where it might be helpful to the Post to have an honest broker on the conservative beat. That reporter could explain to Marcus, Milloy and the rest of the gang that these simple conservatives lack the grasp of nuance and the exquisite post-modern sense of irony that’s pumped into the Post’s newsroom by the HVAC system. Conservatives, he might tell them, actually took Obama at his word. They really believed he’d try to “fundamentally change” this nation, just like he promised to. They were listening when his wife admitted she’d never been proud of her country. They made the assumption, silly as it might seem, that when you associate for years with domestic terrorists and outspoken America-haters, you may be of like mind. Then, government suddenly was taking over banks and carmakers, health insurance and tuition lending. Government spent vast amounts of taxpayer money to get … more government. Only unions seemed immune to the pain the rest of the nation suffered. All that sure does look like change we can believe in – and don’t want. But Marcus, like Milloy, is concerned about just how much we don’t want it. “It does not take much to imagine the leap from bellicose talk to action,” for the “delusional but passionate” mouth-breathers. Conservative politicians and radio hosts don’t help. Marcus pointed to Sarah Palin’s “‘don’t retreat – reload’ approach” and John Boehner – John Boehner ! – talking up a “political rebellion.” So those on the right who fear the massive expansion of government and the corresponding proscribing of personal liberties are delusional, but those on the left who fear phantom acts of right-wing violence are not? War metaphors and “white-hot” rhetoric about rebellion and are irresponsible and scary. (Except when the left uses them. On that same editorial page, an op-ed from Stephanie J. Jones asserted that late Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall “saved this nation from a second civil war.”) If the Post wants credibility with the majority of the electorate that consider themselves conservative, it really does need someone to play anthropologist and report back to the Post’s staffers from darkest Dixie. It’s dangerous work. Whoever they hire should wear a bike helmet.

Visit link:
Essay: WaPo Needs ‘Conservative Beat’ Reporter, Not ‘Beat Conservatives’ Reporter

David Weigel Explains Away Journolist E-mails by Claiming to be a Jerk

Former Washington Post writer David Weigel has attempted to explain away his Journolist e-mails attacking conservatives by claiming he was a trash-talking thoughtless jerk. If you think that self-damnation was bad, at least it was much better than admitting something even closer to the truth which would be that he deviously allowed people to think of him as a conservative. In fact, he is still lamely making that conservative claim in his Big Journalism article but first the jerk confession: …I treated the list like a dive bar, swaggering in and popping off about what was “really” happening out there, and snarking at conservatives. Why did I want these people to like me so much? Why did I assume that I needed to crack wise and rant about people who, usually for no more than five minutes were getting on my nerves? Because I was stupid and arrogant, and needlessly mean… Unfortunately, Weigel proved that he still remains a jerk by continuing to claim that he was somehow conservative: I interned at the libertarian Center for Individual Rights in the summer of 2001. I supported the Iraq War and crashed an anti-war protest on my campus. I voted in Republican primaries in 2002 and 2004. (Since I was in Illinois, I voted in 2004 for Jack Ryan to get the GOP’s nomination for Senate, to oppose Barack Obama. I’m better off than one of those guys.) Weigel still tries to convince us of his one-time conservative credentials despite the fact that in the three presidential elections since 2000 he voted for Nader, Kerry, and Obama. Gee! What a “conservative!” Despite his pretend conservatism, Weigel just can’t seem to understand why people think he has misrepresented himself: Still, this was hubris. It was the hubris of someone who rose — objectively speaking — a bit too fast, and someone who misunderstood a few things about his trade. It was also the hubris of someone who thought the best way to be annoyed about something was to do it publicly. This is the reason I’m surprised at commentary accusing me of misrepresenting myself. Except that liberal Journolist was supposed to be private and Weigel wrote there in the expectation that it would remain so. Dave’s misrepresentation mode continues. 

Read more here:
David Weigel Explains Away Journolist E-mails by Claiming to be a Jerk

Weigel-gate: WaPo Editor Brauchli Huffs They Won’t Do ‘Supreme Court Justice’ Scrutiny on Blogger Hires

In the Saturday Washington Post, media reporter Howard Kurtz wrote up the resignation of blogger David Weigel, whose disgust for conservatives was too much for the Post to defend for a man hired to cover conservatives. Post executive editor Marcus Brauchli  lamented “we can’t have any tolerance for the perception that people are conflicted or bring a bias to their work.” Everyone brings some bias to their work, and some Post reporters bring plenty. I’d guess he means that the Post couldn’t have the perception that a reporter/blogger viscerally hates the people he’s supposed to cover, and wants some of them dead. Brauchli bristled at the idea that the Post didn’t exactly take a hard look at Weigel’s writings before hiring:   Asked about Weigel’s strong views about some conservatives, Brauchli said: “We don’t have the resources or ability to do Supreme Court justice-type investigations into people’s backgrounds. We will have to be more careful in the future.” It didn’t require a committee of investigators to read through 40,000 documents. Two NPR interviews would have been a decent start. I’d think that anyone who’d read Weigel’s reports for The Washington Independent would have found a liberal vibe. For the Post, that’s not disqualifying, it’s a plus, just as it was for NPR. Media outlets don’t have to hire conservatives to cover conservatives, and they generally avoid “stooping” to that, perhaps for the sake of newsroom peace. But a reporter-slash-blogger can’t gain access to conservatives very successfully after suggesting you wished Rush Limbaugh would die, or especially that it’s unfair that the media has to offer “equal time” for moronic “real Americans.” Kurtz relayed:    The Daily Caller reported more inflammatory comments on Friday, with Weigel writing that conservatives were using the media to “violently, angrily divide America” and lamenting news organizations’ “need to give equal/extra time to ‘real American’ views, no matter how [expletive] moronic.” When Rush Limbaugh, who has called for President Obama to fail, was hospitalized with chest pains, Weigel wrote: “I hope he fails.” Post ombudsman Andy Alexander reported the Post will try, try again , but he suggested two hires:  “We will look for someone to replace Dave,” [managing editor Raju] Narisetti said. Instead of just a replacement, The Post might consider two: one conservative with a Klein-like ideological bent, and another who can cover the conservative movement in the role of a truly neutral reporter. In the meantime, Post managers would be wise to remind all staffers that personal opinions, expressed privately on listservs or through social media, can prove damaging if made public…. Alas, it took only one listserv participant to bundle up Weigel’s archived comments and start leaking them outside the group. The result is that Weigel lost his job. But the bigger loss is The Post’s standing among conservatives.

See the article here:
Weigel-gate: WaPo Editor Brauchli Huffs They Won’t Do ‘Supreme Court Justice’ Scrutiny on Blogger Hires

Bachmann Blasts Escrow Fund Idea As ‘Redistribution Of Wealth’ , Says BP Shouldn’t Be ‘Chumps’

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) is emerging as a fierce critic of the Obama administration's proposed escrow fund to handle damage claims against BP. The Minnesota Independent reports that Bachmann spoke Tuesday to the Heritage Foundation, and badmouthed the idea. “The president just called for creating a fund that would be administered by outsiders, which would be more of a redistribution-of-wealth fund,” said Bachmann. “And now it appears like we'll be looking at one more gateway for more government control, more money to government.” Also, David Weigel reports that Bachmann also said: “They have to lift the liability cap. But if I was the head of BP, I would let the signal get out there — 'We're not going to be chumps, and we're not going to be fleeced.' And they shouldn't be. They shouldn't have to be fleeced and make chumps to have to pay for perpetual unemployment and all the rest — they've got to be legitimate claims.” added by: TimALoftis