Washington Post Journalist Covering Conservatives Found To Hate Them, Resigns

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
In case anyone here still wonders why the conservatives never seem to get any good press...

David Weigel quits the Post
By: Keach Hagey
June 25, 2010 12:44 PM EDT


100625_david_weigel_shinkle_289.jpg


David Weigel, the Washington Post blogger assigned to cover the conservative beat, resigned Friday following the leak of e-mails he wrote disparaging conservatives.

"Dave offered his resignation and we accepted it," said Kris Coratti, director of communications for The Washington Post.

Fishbowl DC leaked the first round of e-mails Thursday. More e-mails emerged on the Daily Caller Friday morning. The e-mails, leaked from the off-the-record e-mail list JournoList, reveal Weigel writing that Matt Drudge should "set himself on fire," calling Ron Paul's supporters "Paultards," wishing for the death of Rush Limbaugh and accusing Republicans of "racism."

After he learned that Fishbowl DC was about to publish some of the e-mails, Weigel apologized for his remarks on his blog, saying he was "incredibly frustrated with the amount of hate mail" he was getting after The Drudge Report linked to one of his stories about an encounter between Rep. Bob Etheridge (D-N.C.) and a videographer.

The Post stood by Weigel on Thursday night, with Managing Editor Raju Narisetti telling POLITICO, "Dave's apology to readers reflects he understands, in calmer hindsight, the need to exercise good judgment at all times and of not throwing stones, especially when operating from inside an echo-filled glass house that is modern-day digital journalism. Time to move on."

But more damaging e-mails surfaced Friday in a story on the Daily Caller, which the site's spokeswoman said the reporter had been working on for several weeks. The site crashed from the traffic brought on by Drudge linking to the story.

Weigel submitted his resignation a few hours later.

Hey, Dave! Don't despair! Even if you have now been outed, you can still post here or for MSNBC! :awe:
 

mav451

Senior member
Jan 31, 2006
626
0
76
The Post is a rag. They write nothing but negative news on the Terps. So yeah my angle is sports, not politics haha.
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,001
571
126
In case anyone here still wonders why the conservatives never seem to get any good press...

Hey, Dave! Don't despair! Even if you have now been outed, you can still post here or for MSNBC! :awe:

The e-mails, leaked from the off-the-record e-mail list JournoList, reveal Weigel writing that Matt Drudge should "set himself on fire," calling Ron Paul's supporters "Paultards," wishing for the death of Rush Limbaugh and accusing Republicans of "racism."

Gosh, he'd fit right the hell in here.
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
Gosh, he'd fit right the hell in here.

It just gets better when you understand where exactly this "unbiased," "mainstream" journalist comes from.

I wasn't going to post one of the long articles that outed this clown, but it is a hot day here in DC and I just feel like it. :awe:





E-mails reveal Post reporter savaging conservatives, rooting for Democrats

By Jonathan Strong - The Daily Caller
Friday, June 25th, 2010

Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh famously said he hoped President Obama would “fail” in January, 2009.

Almost a year later, when Limbaugh was rushed to the hospital with chest pains, Washington Post reporter David Weigel had a wish of his own. “I hope he fails,” Weigel cracked to fellow liberal reporters on the “Journolist” email list-serv.

“Too soon?” he wondered.

Weigel was hired this spring by the Post to cover the conservative movement. Almost from the beginning there have been complaints that his coverage betrays a personal animus toward conservatives. E-mails obtained by the Daily Caller suggest those complaints have merit.

“Honestly, it’s been tough to find fresh angles sometimes – how many times can I report that these [tea party] activists are joyfully signing up with the agenda of discredited right-winger X and discredited right-wing group Y?” Weigel lamented in one February email.

In other posts, Weigel describes conservatives as using the media to “violently, angrily divide America.”

According to Weigel, their motives include “racism” and protecting “white privilege,” and for some of the top conservatives in D.C., a nihilistic thirst for power.

“There’s also the fact that neither the pundits, nor possibly the Republicans, will be punished for their crazy outbursts of racism. Newt Gingrich is an amoral blowhard who resigned in disgrace, and Pat Buchanan is an anti-Semite who was drummed out of the movement by William F. Buckley. Both are now polluting my inbox and TV with their bellowing and minority-bashing. They’re never going to go away or be deprived of their soapboxes,” Weigel wrote.

Of Matt Drudge, Weigel remarked, “It’s really a disgrace that an amoral shut-in like Drudge maintains the influence he does on the news cycle while gay-baiting, lying, and flubbing facts to this degree.”

In April, Weigel wrote that the problem with the mainstream media is “this need to give equal/extra time to ‘real American’ views, no matter how fucking moronic, which just so happen to be the views of the conglomerates that run the media and/or buy up ads.”

When Obama’s “green jobs czar” Van Jones resigned after it was revealed he signed a 9/11 “truther” petition, alleging the government may have conspired to allow terrorists to kill 3,000 civilians, Weigel highlighted the alleged racism of Glenn Beck – Jones’s top critic.

“One extra, obvious point – Beck’s campaign against Jones was transparently racial . . . he treated his very white, very angry audience to video after video of Jones giving scorching speeches. At one point Beck just eschewed subtlety and played videos of Jones alongside videos of Jeremiah Wright while he remained on the screen mugging like Harpo Marx,” Weigel said.

Right wing “memes” begin in “WND/FreeRepublic/talk radio swamps,” Weigel wrote, referring to conservative websites World Net Daily and Free Republic. Sometimes, they spread like a virus into liberal sites, a fact that clearly upsets Weigel.

After Sarah Palin claimed Obama’s health care legislation included “death panels” that would ration health care, for instance, the Huffington Post reported that many Americans believed the claim was true. Weigel suggested that reporting on the subject might be counter-productive to liberal policy aims. The Huffington Post, Weigel pointed out, ran “a picture of Sarah Palin, linking to a poll that suggests 45 percent of Americans believe her death panel lie. But as long as the top liberal-leaning news site talks about it every single hour of every day, I’m sure that number will go down.”

“Let’s move the fuck on already,” Weigel wrote.

Weigel seems to harbor special contempt for a type of conservative he calls a ratfucker, a favorite phrase of his.
In a thread with the subject line, “ACORN Ratf*cker arrested,” Journolisters discussed how James O’Keefe, whose undercover reporting showed officials from activist group ACORN willing to help a fake prostitution ring skirt the law, had been arrested in another, failed operation at Sen. Mary Landrieu’s (D-LA) office.

Weigel’s response:

“HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.”

“Deep breath.”

“HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAHAHA.”

“He’s either going to get a radio talk show or start a prison ministry. That’s was successful conservative ratfuckers do for their second acts,” Weigel wrote, likely alluding to Nixon aide Charles Colson who converted to Christianity after a stint in prison for obstruction of justice and founded Prison Fellowship.

Republicans? “Ratfucking [Obama] on every bill.”

Palin? Tried to “ratfuck” a moderate Republican in a contentious primary in New York.

Limbaugh? Used “ratfucking tactics” in urging Republican activists to vote for Hillary Clinton in open primaries after Obama had all but beat her for the Democratic nomination.

Reached by phone late Thursday and asked about the e-mails, Weigel responded, “my reporting, I think, stands for itself.”

“I’ve always been of the belief that you could have opinions and could report anyway …. people aren’t usually asked to stand or fall on everything they’ve said in private.”

In the e-mails, Weigel appeared particularly invested in the President’s health care law, expressing undisguised scorn for moderate Democrats who seemed fearful about voting for it.

Rep. Daniel Lipinski, a pro-life Democrat from Illinois who expressed reservations about the abortion provisions in the legislation was, according to Weigel, a “monster” because he represents “a deeply safe seat” and could afford to vote for it.

Before he left Congress in a cloud, then-Rep. Eric Massa rocked Washington by claiming that backroom deals were polluting the health care bill. Weigel seemed to have little patience for Massa’s inconvenient allegations. “Well, so much for the health care push leading the news cycle,” Weigel wrote. “Does anyone else think this guy’s turning out to be a political suicide bomber?”

After Scott Brown won the Massachusetts Senate seat, threatening to kill the health care legislation by his presence, Weigel stressed how important it was for reporters to highlight what a terrible candidate his opponent Martha Coakley had been.

“I think pointing out Coakley’s awfulness is vital, because it’s 1) true and 2) unreasonable panic about it is doing more damage to the Democrats,” Weigel wrote.

But despite the perils of the modern media cycle, the health care bill survived, and for once, all was right in Weigel’s world.

“Tangentially related: Betsy McCaughey showed up at Grover Norquist’s conservative meeting today, massive spiral-bound health care bill in hand, and shook with rage as she promised that the ‘war’ was not over.”

“I’m still smiling.”
LOL! I bet he is not smiling now that he is exposed. Still, no unemployment line for this clown - I bet he gets a job offer from Herr Olbermann real soon now.
 
Last edited:

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
It is a wake up and smell the roses day at the Washington Post.

p-b0K-eQJGBXxXE.gif


An Unhappy Day At The Washington Post

Jun 25 2010, 1:18 PM ET

By Jeffrey Goldberg

But also sort of a happy day at The Washington Post, for the dwindling band of writers and editors there who value such old-fashioned traits as temperance in the expression of personal views; forthrightness; and fairness.

The liberal blogger Dave Weigel, who was hired by The Post to cover the conservative movement, has resigned, after advising Matt Drudge on a semi-public forum for leftish commentators to set himself on fire. Put aside the controversy over whether the Post, which was advised by its star blogger, Ezra Klein (who once advised parties unknown, via his Twitter account, to "fuck tim russert. fuck him with a spiky acid-tipped dick") that Weigel would do an excellent and balanced job of reporting on conservatives, even understood that it was hiring a liberal, and not a conservative (Ben Smith has more on this aspect of the controversy), the issue in the newsroom today is, How did the Post come to this?

"How could we destroy our standards by hiring a guy stupid enough to write about people that way in a public forum?" one of my friends at the Post asked me when we spoke earlier today. "I'm not suggesting that many people on the paper don't lean left, but there's leaning left, and then there's behaving like an idiot."

I gave my friend the answer he already knew: The sad truth is that the Washington Post, in its general desperation for page views, now hires people who came up in journalism without much adult supervision, and without the proper amount of toilet-training. This little episode today is proof of this. But it is also proof that some people at the Post (where I worked, briefly, 20 years ago) still know the difference between acceptable behavior and unacceptable behavior, and that maybe this episode will lead to the reimposition of some level of standards.
 
Last edited:

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Lets see I can quite get my arms around what PJIBBERISH said, "In case anyone here still wonders why the conservatives never seem to get any good press..."

But what we have here is one lone reporter at one lone Newspaper with a admitted anti conservative agenda. And since he was supposed to be that lone newspaper's outreach person to those with conservatives views, his anti conservative viewpoints make his personally opinions almost mutually exclusive with his job description at the Newspaper. Therefore the Washington post was quite right in firing his butt, his own biases got in the way of doing the job he was hired to do.

However, almost all other journalists are not hired to be their Newspaper's liaison to the conservative community, nor can we say, "In case anyone here still wonders why the conservatives never seem to get any good press..." And in fact there are many conservative journalists, and if they are not influential or credible, the fault rests on their own the public is not buying their views rather than any censorship allegations. We can certainly cite George Will, Pat Buchanan, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O, and a host of others.
 

dahunan

Lifer
Jan 10, 2002
18,191
3
0
ONE man and this EXTENDS TO "...the conservatives never seem to get any good press..."

YOU and posts like this are exactly why there isn't anything good about conservatives worth writing
 

mav451

Senior member
Jan 31, 2006
626
0
76
Well technically a conservative should never read the Post. He'd be proudly clutching his Wash Times haha.
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,829
3
0
Hating conservatives doesn't make him a bad journalist. Isn't that a complete non sequitur to fire someone for hating the group he covers? Maybe we can get Fox News to fire O'Reilly because he hates liberals.
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
ONE man and this EXTENDS TO "...the conservatives never seem to get any good press..."

YOU and posts like this are exactly why there isn't anything good about conservatives worth writing

I posted the (liberal) Atlantic commentary in anticipation of this kind of excuse mongering.

ONE journalist, ONE newspaper, ONE network, ONE exception... Except that the virulence is posted on a list server that serves MANY liberal/progressive journalists.

THIS guy's comments were outed, but HIS are not the only ones to be found. He was roundly supported by his peers.

HE was identified, but, like Herr Olbermann that used to be a sports reporter before he became the face of left wing haters on cable programming, there is a plethora of biased people that call themselves impartial and independent when they are shown time and again to be shills for the Left.

The conservatives and the libertarians identify themselves as such. They don't hide their true identities.

Additionally, though I seldom watch the cable shows, at least enough to make this a blanket claim, I have seen guys like Hannity and O'Reilly make a point to ALWAYS, on every show that I have flipped to watch, invite people competent to defend the perspectives of the Left that they themselves may abhor. That is balance and it is allowing for a fair hearing. Can you ever recall a time when Olbermann did the same?

This outing does not tar all journalists, though it has been proved that the great majority identify solidly with the Democrats and the Left, but it does caution anyone who still believes that the distaste for the right amongst the journos is a mild one. It is anything but.
 
Last edited:

mav451

Senior member
Jan 31, 2006
626
0
76
Additionally, though I seldom watch the cable shows, I have seen guys like Hannity and O'Reilly make a point to ALWAYS, on every show, invite people competent to defend the perspectives of the Left that they themselves may abhor. That is balance and it is allowing for a fair hearing. Can you ever recall a time when Olbermann did the same?

This outing does not tar all journalists, though it has been proved that the great majority identify solidly with the Democrats and the Left, but it does caution anyone who still believes that the distaste for the right amongst the journos is a mild one. It is anything but.

Haha you really think Fox News would allow those talking heads to be exposed on their own network? If they invite anyone (whether in-person or over TV), they are usually not allowed to finish their points. I see the same nonsense on CNN (where conservative "guests" are not allowed to finish), so it goes both ways. But please don't assume that it is even remotely fair or balanced. It's just playing the game.

I've listened to Hannity/O'Reilly before...and I'm surprised you don't mention Beck, though he only got his show after Obama was elected.
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
The story just keeps getting richer. The guy who started this private tête-à-tête amongst "progressive" journalists that preferred to stay in the closet rather than be identified as the lefties they are, has closed up shop, locked up the premises and thrown away the key.

So much for the transparency and full disclosure these bums have made their trumpet call.

Note founder Klein's concern that identifying the true opinions of these so called "jounaliststs" can and will be used against them.

I guess that while they have no problem in pursuing their scorched earth agenda against conservatives and libertarians, they absolutely do not want to be identified and their own words used to describe their agenda.

As the saying goes, it is not the crime but the cover up that brings 'em down.

POLITICO

June 25, 2010

Ezra Klein shuts down Journolist

Ezra Klein announced on his WaPo blog that he is shutting down Journolist , the off-the-record listserve where Dave Weigel made the comments that ended his career at the Post. In his explanation, Klein notes the irony that Tucker Carlson, founder and editor-in-chief of the Daily Caller, which published the story that proved to be last straw in the case against Weigel, was begging to get on the list himself.
It was ironic, in a way, that it would be the Daily Caller that published e-mails from Journolist. A few weeks ago, its editor, Tucker Carlson, asked if he could join the list. After asking other members, I said no, that the rules had worked so far to protect people, and the members weren't comfortable changing them. He tried to change my mind, and I offered, instead, to partner with Carlson to start a bipartisan list serv. That didn't interest him.

In any case, Journolist is done now. I'll delete the group soon after this post goes live. That's not because Journolist was a bad idea, or anyone on it did anything wrong. It was a wonderful, chaotic, educational discussion. I'm proud of having started it, grateful to have participated in it, and I have no doubt that someone else will reform it, with many of the same members, and keep it going. Hopefully, it will lose some of its mystique in the process, and be understood more for what it is: One of many e-mail lists where people talk about things they're interested in. But insofar as the current version of Journolist has seen its archives become a weapon, and insofar as people's careers are now at stake, it has to die.​

So sad that he has stopped the public from identifying by name and affiliation these closeted "journalists."

Time for WikiLeaks and 4chan to raise the veil of secrecy methinks.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
The PJABBER problem with saying, "Time for WikiLeaks and 4chan to raise the veil of secrecy methinks.", is simply because they are two edge swords more likely to discredit conservative rather than Liberal journalists over any longer period of time.

But I more suspect, in a few days, we will all discover little or nothing has changed in terms of journalism in America.
 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,628
183
106
One lone newshound chokes on giving the righties good press and resigns? Our loss!
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
Could it their whiny little victim mentality?

I believe there is a certain reveling in the delicious exposure of the hypocrisy and abject fear of the leftish journos that hide rather to let their true flags fly even in the Age of Obama.
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
BJ: Contradicting his own lies and loving it! :awe:

Not quite. The Atlantic commentary is one journalist's recognition of the modern (I would call it post-modern more accurately) decline in the standard of journalism practiced. There was a time, before the one we live in now, where journalists were expected to remain non-partisan and that time has passed. Funeral and wake to be announced at a later date.

Hey, non-partisan journalism is itself a relatively modern phenomenon. Traditionally, it is much more of the type of yellow journalism practiced in the Gilded Age. What goes around, comes around.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
I believe there is a certain reveling in the delicious exposure of the hypocrisy and abject fear of the leftish journos that hide rather to let their true flags fly even in the Age of Obama.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If I were a conservative journalist, I would be too ashamed to write anything after GWB&co melted down the American economy with inspired studiedly.

But as we can see, conservative journalists have no shame or integrity.
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If I were a conservative journalist, I would be too ashamed to write anything after GWB&co melted down the American economy with inspired studiedly.

But as we can see, conservative journalists have no shame or integrity.

It does takes me a while to get through your very poor spelling and grammatical construction, but after I do so I cannot see where we are discussing in this thread the relatively small percentage of journalists that are conservative or libertarian.

Conservative and libertarian journalists were specifically excluded from membership in this listserv.

The listserv was started in February, 2007, when the Democrats controlled the Congress and continued to foster programs that stressed the home mortgage markets.

If the full record of the listserv were to be made available instead of being erased to hide the identities and the comments of the participants, we could see how the press that wrote about the events of those days felt personally and then could compare those statements with what they wrote professionally, while professing to be "objective."

Alas, freedom of the press seems to mean freedom to destroy the record of their own hidden agenda so as not to be held accountable.