Journolist and Larry Sinclair –
There are a few questions in the following American Spectator article that causes me to ask a couple more:
…Did anyone pay them for favorable news coverage? Were they promised jobs and privileges for toeing the party line? And whom else were they commanded to punish in the public prints? What other lies did they purposely, and with malice aforethought, disseminate throughout the media?
In short, there are a lot of unanswered questions that still surround the lingering Journolist scandal. …
It would be very interesting to see if the Truth Assassins over at the ‘Journolist’ listserv ever had any discussions, strategies, agreements, and/or directives to undermine a real discussion of question(s) of whether or not Obama is a Natural Born Citizen. How far were/are they willing to go to undermine finding out the truth about Obama’s eligibility?
It would also be very interesting to see if the Truth Assassins over at the ‘Journolist’ listserv had any discussions, strategies, plans, intimidation efforts, etc. to bury the possibility of a real investigation of Larry Sinclair’s allegations against Obama. Were any of these ‘Journolist’ Truth Assassins in collusion with any members of the Obama Administration? Did ‘Journalist’ assist in getting Joe Biden’s son to have Larry Sinclair unjustly arrested when he appeared before the National Press Club to talk about his allegations of doing drugs and having sex with Obama in 1999? Did ‘Journalist’ conspire to kill any investigation into Obama and Emanuel’s alleged membership in a gay spa (Man’s Country)?
Will ‘Journolist’ release all of their correspondences in the interest of truth and full disclosure so future readers know their true biases?
By John R. Guardiano on 7.21.10 @ 6:07AM
“The only morality [that] they recognize is what will further their cause — meaning they reserve unto themselves the right to commit any crime, to lie [and] to cheat…”
— Ronald Reagan, speaking candidly about the Soviet Union during his first press conference as president, Jan. 29, 1981
“Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent urged his colleagues to deflect attention from Obama’s relationship with Wright by changing the subject [and lying]. Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics, Ackerman wrote, ‘Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.'”
— The Daily Caller’s Jonathan Strong in a stunning investigative exposé of the hidden machinations behind “Journolist,” a secret listserve of several hundred liberal journalists, activists and academics, July 20, 2010
We always knew that most liberal journalists were biased. Now we know that many of them are dishonest — and that, like their leftist forbearers in the Soviet Union, they reserve unto themselves the right to lie and to cheat to further their political ends.
We know this because of the Daily Caller’s astonishing report yesterday that a cabal of liberal journalists, activists, and academics acted in concert, and with malice aforethought, to kill and bury stories that were unfavorable to their political masters: Barack Obama and Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
Indeed, these “journalists” were so blindly and zealously committed to the left-wing political agenda that they advocated smearing their political opponents with wholly unfounded charges of “racism” and “bigotry.”
Thus Ackerman’s call for his fellow lefty “journalists” to “pick one,” any one conservative. After all, “who cares” who it is? Who cares about their innocence? Just pick a prominent conservative and call him a racist. Smear him! Show no mercy! Destroy his reputation and kill his public image! Now!
I must confess that as worldly wise as I like to think that I am, I have been stunned, shocked and appalled by the raw partisanship and animalistic lust for power displayed by this pack of left-wing journalists.
Of course I always new most Washington journalists were leftists. But what I didn’t realize were the depths of intellectual dishonesty and dishonor to which many Washington journalists would descend in order to protect leftist pols and smear conservatives.
“Have you no sense of decency?” Mr. Ackerman. “Have you sense of shame?”
Apparently not. But Ackerman is not alone. As the Daily Caller reports, several hundred journalists, activists and academics secretly conspired on Journolist. What did they know and when did they know it — and with whom did they conspire and why?
Did anyone pay them for favorable news coverage? Were they promised jobs and privileges for toeing the party line? And whom else were they commanded to punish in the public prints? What other lies did they purposely, and with malice aforethought, disseminate throughout the media?
In short, there are a lot of unanswered questions that still surround the lingering Journolist scandal. Which is why I have urged Journolist co-conspirators Ezra Klein, David Weigel, Jonathan Chait, Michael Tomasky, Matthew Yglesias, and Spencer Ackerman to come clean and to release the Journolist archives in toto….Continue Reading
By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
07/21/10 7:25 AM EDT
If any large publication stands to suffer from the JournoList controversy, it’s the Washington Post. The paper hired JournoList founder Ezra Klein from the left-wing publication The American Prospect, and Klein continued to run JournoList while at the Post. In June, the paper quickly accepted the resignation of David Weigel, whom it hired from the left-wing publication The Washington Independent, over comments made on JournoList. (Klein announced he was shutting down the list-serv shortly thereafter.) It is not known whether other Post writers, some of whom also came to the paper from left-wing publications, took part in JournoList; I have asked a couple, and they haven’t yet responded.
Now, courtesy of the Daily Caller, we’ve had a peek inside the discussions on JournoList, and it reveals some writers and staffers at left-wing publications like the Nation, as well as ostensibly mainstream outlets like NPR and Bloomberg, making intemperate remarks about conservatives, advocating that some conservatives be arbitrarily branded as racists, drawing parallels between Tea Partiers and Nazis, and appealing to fellow journalists on the list-serv to ignore the controversy over then-candidate Barack Obama and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright…
Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/at-washington-post-mums-the-word-on-journolist-98909894.html#ixzz0uJtjFGSY
In support of Lt. Col. Lakin’s courage in seeking the ‘Truth’ (and as a former In-Flight Tech in the Navy), I urge all who have served or have friends/family in the military to ask the following question of those currently serving.
Brothers and Sisters in the Military, when are you going to demand Obama establish that he is a Natural Born Citizen, eligible to serve as Commander In Chief?
The military is the only government organization that I continue to have respect for and it pains me criticize those serving. And I understand the consequences of challenging Obama’s eligibility directly, but the continuing attacks against our Constitution by the left cannot be allowed to pass without objection in some form or another. Acquiescence is not the only option.
Consider this please. What if every serviceman or woman went to his or her Chaplin, stated their concerns and provided the basic evidence (direct and circumstantial, links, former statements by NPR etc. indicating a Kenyan birth, etc., etc.) that would cause most reasonable persons to have legitimate questions about Obama’s lack of eligibility to serve and issue lawful orders? What if requests were made to each Chaplin instructing them to pass these concerns up the Chain of Command? Would there come a point, a number of requests that would cause the leadership to demand proof of eligibility?
Maybe military leadership could utilize the following provision?
§ 935. Art. 135. Courts of inquiry
(a) Courts of inquiry to investigate any matter may be convened by any person authorized to convene a general court-martial or by any other person designated by the Secretary concerned for that purpose, whether or not the persons involved have requested such an inquiry.
If the Oath to protect the Constitution is not important today, why don’t we just change the oath of allegiance to reflect our current level of commitment?
I, _______, do solemnly swear to protect ME and I will try to defend the Constitution as long as it doesn’t adversely impact the aforementioned ‘ME’.
Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters.
Official Disclosure – Just to be clear, my graphics depict almost all members of the BOPAC Administration as being full of crap. They do not actually look like turds – one needs special ‘full of crap’ glasses to be able to see the core of those who continually feed America BS. I treat everyone equally – when Glenn Beck goes off on those who reasonably question Obama’s eligibility, he gets a half-full of crap depiction.