Huffpo Sherroded Me

I was asked by the Huffinton Post during the Primary Campaign to follow Hillary Clinton on the west coast--using my own dime--since this is when Huffpo was promoting 'citizen journalism'-- and write stories demonstrating she was a liar by writing that in different places she slanted her message to the audience.

Huffpo is screaming NoNoNo this morning at Jim VandeHai of Politico who yesterday asserted that the HuffingtonPost trained Andrew Bretibart, the guy  who recently slimed Shirley Sherrod and suckered the Obama Adminstration into firing her from her job. 

So Politico's VandeHai is asserting that the Huffington Post uses Breitbart methods of distorting and slanting the news.

Is there anyone who things otherwise? Fox is the conservative shoutfest, Huffpo the liberal fog machine. And both slant, distort and sensationalize the shortcomings of those they oppose


News? It is Gone With The Wind.

Take the facts and distort them to fit the agenda is what is passing for news today and the blogosphere is no exception.  During the primary campaign Huffpo offered me the job of covering Hillary Clinton on the west coast. I was to travel around, on my own dime--this was when Huffpo was promoting "citizen journalism"--and write up her campaign appearances. But there was an agenda: I was to catch her lying, i.e. giving different messages according to the different locations.

I supported Hillary, part of a  small band of liberal bloggers who did, and I refused the agenda. And Huffpo no longer cared for my services.

So I wrote for dKos until I was thrown off for being a "racist" which is to say that I talked about Obama's shortcomings. During the primary campaign anyone who blogged for Hillary was ipso facto a racist on most of the liberal blogs.

It wasn't a fair fight. And much like Journolist, the liberal blogging forces schemed to put their guy over. Part of this effort was to brand as racist anyone effective enough to make a dent in Obama's pristine reputation.
Peter Daou may be the only prominent Hillary blogger who escaped unscathed, and I am not even sure that is true.

What the Shirley Sherrod "moment" offers is a peek into a shoddy and corrupt practice of smears and innuendo passed off as news by nearly everyone in today's media. No one is exempt. Fox does it brilliantly. And the liberal organizations are playing catch up as fast as they can.

Hold onto your critical faculties. Take nothing at face value or should I say first read. And look for the agenda in Everything. It is always there.    

Huffpo Sherroded Me

I was asked by the Huffinton Post during the Primary Campaign to follow Hillary Clinton on the west coast--using my own dime--since this is when Huffpo was promoting 'citizen journalism'-- and write stories demonstrating she was a liar by writing that in different places she slanted her message to the audience.

Huffpo is screaming NoNoNo this morning at Jim VandeHai of Politico who yesterday asserted that the HuffingtonPost trained Andrew Bretibart, the guy  who recently slimed Shirley Sherrod and suckered the Obama Adminstration into firing her from her job. 

So Politico's VandeHai is asserting that the Huffington Post uses Breitbart methods of distorting and slanting the news.

Is there anyone who things otherwise? Fox is the conservative shoutfest, Huffpo the liberal fog machine. And both slant, distort and sensationalize the shortcomings of those they oppose


News? It is Gone With The Wind.

Take the facts and distort them to fit the agenda is what is passing for news today and the blogosphere is no exception.  During the primary campaign Huffpo offered me the job of covering Hillary Clinton on the west coast. I was to travel around, on my own dime--this was when Huffpo was promoting "citizen journalism"--and write up her campaign appearances. But there was an agenda: I was to catch her lying, i.e. giving different messages according to the different locations.

I supported Hillary, part of a  small band of liberal bloggers who did, and I refused the agenda. And Huffpo no longer cared for my services.

So I wrote for dKos until I was thrown off for being a "racist" which is to say that I talked about Obama's shortcomings. During the primary campaign anyone who blogged for Hillary was ipso facto a racist on most of the liberal blogs.

It wasn't a fair fight. And much like Journolist, the liberal blogging forces schemed to put their guy over. Part of this effort was to brand as racist anyone effective enough to make a dent in Obama's pristine reputation.
Peter Daou may be the only prominent Hillary blogger who escaped unscathed, and I am not even sure that is true.

What the Shirley Sherrod "moment" offers is a peek into a shoddy and corrupt practice of smears and innuendo passed off as news by nearly everyone in today's media. No one is exempt. Fox does it brilliantly. And the liberal organizations are playing catch up as fast as they can.

Hold onto your critical faculties. Take nothing at face value or should I say first read. And look for the agenda in Everything. It is always there.    

Huffpo Sherroded Me

I was asked by the Huffinton Post during the Primary Campaign to follow Hillary Clinton on the west coast--using my own dime--since this is when Huffpo was promoting 'citizen journalism'-- and write stories demonstrating she was a liar by writing that in different places she slanted her message to the audience.

Huffpo is screaming NoNoNo this morning at Jim VandeHai of Politico who yesterday asserted that the HuffingtonPost trained Andrew Bretibart, the guy  who recently slimed Shirley Sherrod and suckered the Obama Adminstration into firing her from her job. 

So Politico's VandeHai is asserting that the Huffington Post uses Breitbart methods of distorting and slanting the news.

Is there anyone who things otherwise? Fox is the conservative shoutfest, Huffpo the liberal fog machine. And both slant, distort and sensationalize the shortcomings of those they oppose


News? It is Gone With The Wind.

Take the facts and distort them to fit the agenda is what is passing for news today and the blogosphere is no exception.  During the primary campaign Huffpo offered me the job of covering Hillary Clinton on the west coast. I was to travel around, on my own dime--this was when Huffpo was promoting "citizen journalism"--and write up her campaign appearances. But there was an agenda: I was to catch her lying, i.e. giving different messages according to the different locations.

I supported Hillary, part of a  small band of liberal bloggers who did, and I refused the agenda. And Huffpo no longer cared for my services.

So I wrote for dKos until I was thrown off for being a "racist" which is to say that I talked about Obama's shortcomings. During the primary campaign anyone who blogged for Hillary was ipso facto a racist on most of the liberal blogs.

It wasn't a fair fight. And much like Journolist, the liberal blogging forces schemed to put their guy over. Part of this effort was to brand as racist anyone effective enough to make a dent in Obama's pristine reputation.
Peter Daou may be the only prominent Hillary blogger who escaped unscathed, and I am not even sure that is true.

What the Shirley Sherrod "moment" offers is a peek into a shoddy and corrupt practice of smears and innuendo passed off as news by nearly everyone in today's media. No one is exempt. Fox does it brilliantly. And the liberal organizations are playing catch up as fast as they can.

Hold onto your critical faculties. Take nothing at face value or should I say first read. And look for the agenda in Everything. It is always there.    

Charlie Cook Unfazed By Election Results

Pennsylvania's 12th congressional district was the only district in the nation to flip from John Kerry in 2004 to John McCain in 2008. A quintessentially conservative district, the seat appeared poised to move from red-to-blue after the passing of its longtime Congressman, Jack Murtha.

But something strange happened on Tuesday. Instead of backing the Republican candidate in the race, Tim Burns, voters in the district did what was all-but-unthinkable not all that long ago: backing the Democratic nominee in the special election, Mark Critz -- and not even by a narrow margin, giving him a comfortable 8-point margin of victory.

What did this massive debacle of an election for the GOP, which poured a million dollars into the race (in addition to thousands more coming from conservative activists), do to Charlie Cook's assessment that Republicans are on the brink of regaining control of the House? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Here's the latest from the Cook Political Report, via Marc Ambinder:

Overall, our outlook of a 30 to 40 seat gain for House Republicans remains unchanged.

This is quite remarkable, if you think about it. Not only do the Republicans lose a race they are supposed to easily win (in Cook's words on the eve of the election, "Republicans have no excuse to lose this race") -- but they lose it badly. Yet this result has no impact whatsoever on the view of the Cook Political Report towards the race for the House in 2010? Even Republicans are beginning to second-guess their fortunes.

California Rep. Kevin McCarthy, who is in charge of candidate recruitment for the NRCC, conceded that the $1 million-plus spent on the Pennsylvania special wasn’t well-spent.

“That’s a couple different things we’re going to have to analyze, because why does the polling show that we were close the whole time and then it not be close on election night?” McCarthy said on ABC’s “Top Line” program. “That’s a mistake on our part; that’s a mistake on our investment that we have to make a correction to.” [emphasis added]

Former Congressman Tom Davis, who spent two terms as the chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, was even more blunt:

“If you can’t win a seat that is trending Republican in a year like this, then where is the wave?” asked Tom Davis, a former Republican congressman from Virginia, who said Republicans will need to examine what went wrong.

If those at the top ranks of the House GOP's campaign apparatus are beginning to publicly question whether the polling is overstating the strength of the party's position, and a former campaign chief starts wondering "where... the wave" is, might not also one of the leading election prognosticators inside the Beltway do the same? Apparently not.

LATE UPDATE from desmoinesdem: On May 25 Cook published a commentary on the PA-12 special election and its implications for November.

Transitions

I have been writing on the front page here at MyDD for four and a half years, and was commenting and posting diaries on the site for a long time before that. My blogging has slowed down a bit in recent months as I have pushed to finish up law school -- I took my last final yesterday, and graduate on Friday -- and worked to help get my professor, Goodwin Liu, confirmed to the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Not long after graduation, I will be starting up studies for the bar exam, which will undoubtedly take up a great deal of my time. The amount that I will be able to post on this site may wane a bit more before it begins to wax again.

It is funny, though. Bob Brigham tweeted the following yesterday:

BobBrigham The blogosphere is getting old when you remember MyDD'er "quiting" blogging (not effectively) for law school. Now done. Go @jonathanhsinger

As it turned out, my initial intention to sharply curtail my blogging during law school clearly didn't pan out -- or at least not until these final few months of my time in Berkeley. Which is all to say, while I'm guessing I won't be posting much in the next couple months leading up to the bar exam, my intentions have not always panned out in this regard. So on to the next post...

Diaries

Advertise Blogads