Nachumlist
Did JournoList help take down Hillary? (Part 1) July 27, 2010
By Nachum
By now, the name ‘JournoList’ is well known throughout the blogosphere. The assumption is that the hundreds of JournoListas acted in a coordinated attack on Sarah Palin. It is well known that there is admitted bias and now it is a matter of public record. What about their actions during the primaries though? We have the names of the ‘JournoLists’, so it isn’t hard to look at the record. Let’s take a walk down memory lane? The first name that comes to mind is Ezra Klein. He is the first name associated with the JournoList, so why not look at the record.
Date: January 16, 2008
Ezra Klein covers a prmary debate that includes both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. What does he title his article? CLINTON HATRED. Now the problem a writer might have if they are a progressive who is in the tank for Obama, is that they have to maintain plausible deniability. So, while defending Hillary Clinton from attacks from the right, he had to set up an argument that she had liablilities. First, he says:
“I've always found Clinton hatred a bit of a baffling phenomenon”
Oh he likes her, she speaks well, and this is a ‘debate analysis’ but then says:
This isn't, mind you, an article on Hillary Clinton. It's a debate analysis. And it's fascinating, because it's the real world thought processes of someone who genuinely loathes Hillary Clinton. Everything becomes evidence of personal cynicism and ambition. Nothing is a slip, or harmless, or just politics. Every word, gesture, and political feint is evidence of Shakespearian levels of cynicism and power-lust. And this belief in the Manichean size of her traits makes her the center of gravity. Her failures are so deep, her appetite for conquest so epic, that everything must revolve around her story.
He was covering a debate after all, so he then offers us an observation to leave himself plausible deniability:
I watched the debate and saw her and Obama basically did equally well
So, in the end, it is an attack piece on Hillary aimed at his progressive Democratic audience. Oh Hillary, did well, but people hate her. Was this a coordinated attack? Was this the work of a political operative? By April, even CNN’s Lou Dobbs began to notice. In a blog piece covering the now defunct Lou Dobbs program, Anti-Hillary Media Bias Proven! , quotes a transcript of this show aired March 31, 2008, where Lou Dobbs reports:
Those voices in favor of Senator Obama say Senator Clinton should end her campaign for quote “the good of the party.” And that a long campaign would quote “tear the party apart and ensure a Republican victory in November”, but when it comes to the largest audiences the three nightly broadcast newscasts, the bias is seemingly most pronounced. The nonpartisan Center for Media and Public Affairs has found that since last December, 83 percent of the reporting on Senator Obama was positive. Only 53 percent of the reporting on Senator Clinton was positive. (CNN Lou Dobbs Transcript).
Is it possible to document JournoList as far back as the primary campaign? Was there a playbook? Was there direct involvement by the Obama campaign or their proxies to corrupt the election process? Have these Journolistas left themselves open to an investigation having violated election law? There is a video of Obama campaign members violating the electoral process documented in a series of videos by Clinton campaign members called “We will not be silenced” . This also, has not been reported by any large scale media outlet. Could JournoList have repressed this information? The video interviews death threats, intimidation, testimonies of fraud and other gross campaign violations on Clinton supporters to force a vote for Obama.
All of this is old news, but what is now relevant is that the public has the names of the people on JournoList. Who did what, who got paid off, and who broke the law. The truth is coming.
Please Donate to help the list continue!