What? You must be joking right? Linda Douglass is a reporter. Reporters don't play favorites.

By Erick Posted in | | | Comments (11) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

The left has decided to start screaming about media bias against Barack Obama to cover up the fact that most reporters are, in fact, in bed with the Obama campaign.

More proof of that came out today. Former ABC News correspondent Linda Douglass, who was until very recently at National Journal, is going to the Obama campaign as a strategist.

But, but, but, Linda Douglass interviewed David Plouffe after the Pennsylvania defeat for a major media organization.

How much are you willing to bet she tailored her interview to help the Obama campaign? I'd bet lots. In fact, I have no doubt she willingly helped the Obama campaign spin its way out of that disaster. She's going to be a campaign strategist for Obama, for God's sake.

Folks, this is really pretty serious. Douglass has gone over to the Obama campaign totally, instead of staying in the media. We can expect her to pull out her rolodex and stroke the necks of reporters not fortunate enough to get a job on the campaign, but who want one in the Obama administration.

We must be vigilant against the media now. If you didn't think so before, you need to realize it now. The media is Obama's mistress. The media is going to whore itself out to the Obama campaign and paint John McCain as badly as they possibly can all while ignoring Obama's gaffes and utter lack of experience and judgment.

Next time you read a New York Times front page article, you probably ought to ask yourself if the reporter wrote it or did Linda Douglass write it. It's going to be that bad.

« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims?Comments (2) | Barack Obama to invent TIME TRAVEL!Comments (12) »
What? You must be joking right? Linda Douglass is a reporter. Reporters don't play favorites. 11 Comments (0 topical, 11 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »

...of being objective. When is the rest of the media going to do that?

Crissy Matthews would probably give his left testicle for a job in the Obama White House. The guy is practically auditioning to be his press secretary. Of course the entire staff of MSNBC is full of Obama sycophants.

“.....women and minorities hardest hit”


"First you win the argument, then you win the vote." - MARGARET THATCHER.
So let's start winning the argument.

heh. by Erick

Well, there are a lot who haven't thought we'd need to be.

Fight On!

Press Sec Up for Grabs... by smartprimate

Omama is the nominee... so now begins the national job interview for press secretary, Cabinet posts and other positions.

(Omama was a typo, but what the heck, we'll keep it.)

Tony Snow by Joe Felice

Can you contrast this with Tony Snow?

Which is to say, he never traded a favorable interview in a tight spot for a paid staff position later.

Hey, prove me wrong and I'll retract.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

Why yes, easily by Erick

Tony was a Rush Limbaugh fill in, conservative columnist, and pundit.

He was never an objective reporter covering Republican and Democrat campaigns hiding behind the alleged objective veneer of a reporter.

Fight On!

Yes, very easily. by St. Louis Conservative

Tony Snow was never an objective journalist. He is and always has been a conservative commentator and pundit.

Linda Douglass was (allegedly) an "objective" journalist. It's now clear she is not and never was (to anyone who has watched her over the years).

What I want to know is...why doesn't the Obama campaign just save its money. They were getting free campaign strategery and PR from Douglass and the rest of the media everyday.

“.....women and minorities hardest hit”

but was an objective journalist in the post. Hume does both roles (Pundit/Anchor) and does a great job of wearing both hats. When Lib partisans get jobs a straight newsman they continue to wear the skirt and pom-poms of their cheerleading outfits. That is the difference bewtten con and lib pundits as newsanchors.

McCain '08

Erick, I certainly agree that we ought to be wary of the media.

But might I humbly question whether it was best to imply that Douglass was intentionally biasing her journalism without any analysis that would provide evidence of such bias?

Please forgive me if I am ignorant of previous posts that would have established Douglass' bias, or if I am out of line here.

--------------------

Small is beautiful.

and withdraw my questioning.

--------------------

Small is beautiful.

 
Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)


©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service