Thomas Lindaman writes:
With the 40th anniversary of the Watergate story, the media have taken a look back at the state of investigative journalism and they're not happy with what they've found. They're shocked, shocked I tell you, that investigative journalism has gone the way of the 8 track player! Sure, there are a handful of little-known sources they've found, but they're the exception, not the rule. "We need investigative journalism!" they cry from their computer keyboards!
Let me ask you big-time mainstream media advocates of investigative journalism a simple question. Have you looked in the mirror lately? As much as you whine about the lack of investigative journalism, you fail to see the reason for its alleged decline is, well, you. The journalism profession has become little more than a public relations firm working for the Left and any cause it deems vital, no matter how apathetic the public is about it. While media sources spent precious minutes on Mitt Romney's stupid behavior in high school, not even a microsecond was spent doing a serious story about the national security leaks coming out of the Obama White House.
Except on every major newspaper and news network. You're just angry because they can't somehow tie it to Obama.
The right-wing media is doing what it does best: Trying to connect the leaks to the White House (since there's a Democratic President in there right now), based on absolutely nothing.
To Lindaman, this is "investigative journalism."
Remember the story about Obama bullying a student in school? No? Not surprising because you guys didn't think it was important enough to address. But Mitt Romney? Why, he's fair game!
Lindaman, as usual, is parrotting the "Obama pushed a little girl, so he's a bully too!" story that right wing websites are desperately trying to spin. There's some "investigative journalism" for ya! Way to go, NuBreitbart!
Let's see here... In a book that's been around for ages, that also has a disclaimer about composite characters, Obama himself states he pushed a girl, one time, when he was eight years old, and felt horrible about it.
Romney assaulted a classmate when he was seventeen years old, held him down (with the help of other bullies because he's a coward), and cut off his hair with scissors while he was screaming terrified on the floor... because he acted gay. And now he gives a non-apology of how he "doesn't remember" it.
Lindaman thinks these events are exactly the same. This is how Republicans think, folks.
As far as the Romney bullying incident... The simple fact is: Five eyewitnesses, many of them friends of Romney (such as Stu White, who Romney described as his oldest friend.. and was contacted by Romney's brother to serve as a surrogate to defend Romney against this... but who refused to do so) have confirmed that the bullying incident happened, Romney was not punished for it (think his dad may have something to do with that?) and that they took part, and feel awful about doing it now. That's not my definition "flimsy investigating"... that's more like "incontrovertible fact."
Romney's response is that he didn't remember. We're talking about multiple people holding a boy down, as he cries and struggles, for the sole purpose of humiliating him. The boy was terrified! One member of the small mob said this has stuck with him and has always troubled him. But Romney? He can't even recall the story. Either this sort of thing was so typical of him that this particular event was unremarkable, or he isn't troubled by his actions. It hasn't stuck with him. What kind of weapons-grade psycho do you need to be, to not remember doing this?!
It figures that Romney would need a group of people to help him hold down a skinny effeminite kid. Romney dodged the Vietnam war, but doesn't hesitate to be a hawk from the safe sidelines. He eggs people on, but doesn't endanger himself. Yep, he's a Republican.
Also, the fact that this story has not died is all on Romney and his team, not the fantasy "liberal media", you conspiracy nut. Romney could have handled this in a way that showed he had grown since then, and has stronger character. He didn't. He just giggled and said he doesn't remember it. Which means he's lying, or he really doesn't remember it (which means he's a narcissistic sociopath).
You just don't get it, Lindaman. It's the way Romney is handling the bullying story now that demonstrates his complete lack of moral standing.
Romney has come out as being anti-gay equal rights, and has said he doesn't believe in civil unions or gay marriage. And surprise, he has a history of being a homophobe. But yeah, this is a non-story. At least according to fellow right wing homophobes.
One last thing: Lindaman claimed in an older blog post that he himself was bullied in school. This new desperate reductionist post by Lindaman, proves that Lindaman was in fact not bullied. So, the one old post that Lindaman has made that was actually pretty good, is now proven to be just more Lindaman bullshit.
Lindaman, you weren't bullied in school, just ignored. Just like present day. And there's plenty of "investigative journalism" to back that up.
Fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on your point of view), bloggers are doing what Woodward and Bernstein were doing during Watergate. I know you media types don't consider blogging to be legitimate journalism because of the lack of accountability when a story is factually wrong (by the way, has the New York Times recovered from the Jayson Blair fiasco?).
Why is Lindaman bringing up this particular event, out of many others? Because he hopes it'll crush affirmative action.
However, the blogosphere is proving you don't need to go to Columbia to point out corruption in the world around us. And given the state of what passes for mainstream journalism these days, the blogger sitting at home in his PJs is out-hustling the big name reporters you rub shoulders with at dinner parties where the topic of the so-called death of investigative journalism is discussed over brie and Chardonnay.
Maybe the reason the media are lamenting the "death" of investigative journalism is because they're afraid to dig into their own side's misdeeds. After all, it's always much more fun to try to take down the high and mighty when you have a personal vendetta, right? Ah, but when you realize your side, the one you've put so much personal stake into, is no better than the side you hate, it's not so fun, is it? There was a time when investigative journalists would put their feelings aside and go after the crooks, letting the chips fall where they may. But when you can't separate the personal from the professional, you're going to play favorites and, in doing so, help to kill investigative journalism through politically blind neglect.
If you really give a damn about investigative journalism, stop playing favorites and start sending out reporters to shine a flashlight into the dark corners of the Left. Sure, you may not get invited to as many dinner parties with those Leftists, but at least you won't get scooped like the National Inquirer did on the John Edwards story.
You're a liar.
Solyndra was a story broken by ABC News.
Fast & Furious, which is now resulting in Congressional investigations, was a story broken by CBS News.
The faces of modern media are... Rupert Murdoch and Limbaugh.
The right's idea of "investigative journalism" is heavily edited videos (Breitbart) and talking points issued by their party (Fox News).
The reason Lindaman's mad, is because there's no big scandals with the Obama administration.
So the "investigative journalism" on the right has been reduced to birth certificates, social security numbers, ancient irrelevant nonsense like Reverend Wright and Ayers, tweeting dick pictures, and what kind of mustard Obama uses. Not that this is anything new. Right wingers, including Lindaman, trashed John Kerry for... windsurfing. So where's Lindaman's outrage about Romney jetskiing?
Yes, the media is to blame for all this. For decades now.
According to right wingers, there is nothing actually morally bankrupt about the outdated, mean spirited misanthropic right wing philosophy. It's... the media. How dare the media recognize these destructive elements in our society?
Sorry, Lindaman... you lost any and all credibility about investigative journalism, when you kissed the Swift Boaters' asses.
With the 40th anniversary of the Watergate story, the media have taken a look back at the state of investigative journalism and they're not happy with what they've found. They're shocked, shocked I tell you, that investigative journalism has gone the way of the 8 track player! Sure, there are a handful of little-known sources they've found, but they're the exception, not the rule. "We need investigative journalism!" they cry from their computer keyboards!
Let me ask you big-time mainstream media advocates of investigative journalism a simple question. Have you looked in the mirror lately? As much as you whine about the lack of investigative journalism, you fail to see the reason for its alleged decline is, well, you. The journalism profession has become little more than a public relations firm working for the Left and any cause it deems vital, no matter how apathetic the public is about it. While media sources spent precious minutes on Mitt Romney's stupid behavior in high school, not even a microsecond was spent doing a serious story about the national security leaks coming out of the Obama White House.
Except on every major newspaper and news network. You're just angry because they can't somehow tie it to Obama.
The right-wing media is doing what it does best: Trying to connect the leaks to the White House (since there's a Democratic President in there right now), based on absolutely nothing.
To Lindaman, this is "investigative journalism."
Remember the story about Obama bullying a student in school? No? Not surprising because you guys didn't think it was important enough to address. But Mitt Romney? Why, he's fair game!
Lindaman, as usual, is parrotting the "Obama pushed a little girl, so he's a bully too!" story that right wing websites are desperately trying to spin. There's some "investigative journalism" for ya! Way to go, NuBreitbart!
Let's see here... In a book that's been around for ages, that also has a disclaimer about composite characters, Obama himself states he pushed a girl, one time, when he was eight years old, and felt horrible about it.
Romney assaulted a classmate when he was seventeen years old, held him down (with the help of other bullies because he's a coward), and cut off his hair with scissors while he was screaming terrified on the floor... because he acted gay. And now he gives a non-apology of how he "doesn't remember" it.
Lindaman thinks these events are exactly the same. This is how Republicans think, folks.
As far as the Romney bullying incident... The simple fact is: Five eyewitnesses, many of them friends of Romney (such as Stu White, who Romney described as his oldest friend.. and was contacted by Romney's brother to serve as a surrogate to defend Romney against this... but who refused to do so) have confirmed that the bullying incident happened, Romney was not punished for it (think his dad may have something to do with that?) and that they took part, and feel awful about doing it now. That's not my definition "flimsy investigating"... that's more like "incontrovertible fact."
Romney's response is that he didn't remember. We're talking about multiple people holding a boy down, as he cries and struggles, for the sole purpose of humiliating him. The boy was terrified! One member of the small mob said this has stuck with him and has always troubled him. But Romney? He can't even recall the story. Either this sort of thing was so typical of him that this particular event was unremarkable, or he isn't troubled by his actions. It hasn't stuck with him. What kind of weapons-grade psycho do you need to be, to not remember doing this?!
It figures that Romney would need a group of people to help him hold down a skinny effeminite kid. Romney dodged the Vietnam war, but doesn't hesitate to be a hawk from the safe sidelines. He eggs people on, but doesn't endanger himself. Yep, he's a Republican.
Also, the fact that this story has not died is all on Romney and his team, not the fantasy "liberal media", you conspiracy nut. Romney could have handled this in a way that showed he had grown since then, and has stronger character. He didn't. He just giggled and said he doesn't remember it. Which means he's lying, or he really doesn't remember it (which means he's a narcissistic sociopath).
You just don't get it, Lindaman. It's the way Romney is handling the bullying story now that demonstrates his complete lack of moral standing.
Romney has come out as being anti-gay equal rights, and has said he doesn't believe in civil unions or gay marriage. And surprise, he has a history of being a homophobe. But yeah, this is a non-story. At least according to fellow right wing homophobes.
One last thing: Lindaman claimed in an older blog post that he himself was bullied in school. This new desperate reductionist post by Lindaman, proves that Lindaman was in fact not bullied. So, the one old post that Lindaman has made that was actually pretty good, is now proven to be just more Lindaman bullshit.
Lindaman, you weren't bullied in school, just ignored. Just like present day. And there's plenty of "investigative journalism" to back that up.
Fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on your point of view), bloggers are doing what Woodward and Bernstein were doing during Watergate. I know you media types don't consider blogging to be legitimate journalism because of the lack of accountability when a story is factually wrong (by the way, has the New York Times recovered from the Jayson Blair fiasco?).
Why is Lindaman bringing up this particular event, out of many others? Because he hopes it'll crush affirmative action.
However, the blogosphere is proving you don't need to go to Columbia to point out corruption in the world around us. And given the state of what passes for mainstream journalism these days, the blogger sitting at home in his PJs is out-hustling the big name reporters you rub shoulders with at dinner parties where the topic of the so-called death of investigative journalism is discussed over brie and Chardonnay.
Maybe the reason the media are lamenting the "death" of investigative journalism is because they're afraid to dig into their own side's misdeeds. After all, it's always much more fun to try to take down the high and mighty when you have a personal vendetta, right? Ah, but when you realize your side, the one you've put so much personal stake into, is no better than the side you hate, it's not so fun, is it? There was a time when investigative journalists would put their feelings aside and go after the crooks, letting the chips fall where they may. But when you can't separate the personal from the professional, you're going to play favorites and, in doing so, help to kill investigative journalism through politically blind neglect.
If you really give a damn about investigative journalism, stop playing favorites and start sending out reporters to shine a flashlight into the dark corners of the Left. Sure, you may not get invited to as many dinner parties with those Leftists, but at least you won't get scooped like the National Inquirer did on the John Edwards story.
You're a liar.
Solyndra was a story broken by ABC News.
Fast & Furious, which is now resulting in Congressional investigations, was a story broken by CBS News.
The faces of modern media are... Rupert Murdoch and Limbaugh.
The right's idea of "investigative journalism" is heavily edited videos (Breitbart) and talking points issued by their party (Fox News).
The reason Lindaman's mad, is because there's no big scandals with the Obama administration.
So the "investigative journalism" on the right has been reduced to birth certificates, social security numbers, ancient irrelevant nonsense like Reverend Wright and Ayers, tweeting dick pictures, and what kind of mustard Obama uses. Not that this is anything new. Right wingers, including Lindaman, trashed John Kerry for... windsurfing. So where's Lindaman's outrage about Romney jetskiing?
Yes, the media is to blame for all this. For decades now.
According to right wingers, there is nothing actually morally bankrupt about the outdated, mean spirited misanthropic right wing philosophy. It's... the media. How dare the media recognize these destructive elements in our society?
Sorry, Lindaman... you lost any and all credibility about investigative journalism, when you kissed the Swift Boaters' asses.