Sunday, June 30, 2013

Journalism: Come Get Some!


Now that everybody is a journalist (and, mind you, I have no problem with the parameters being set to "a pulse, a blog and a POV" as long as we all understand that means everyone from Jeff Gannon to the Weekly World News to Jennifer Rubin to Ann Coulter is now in the club) here is some Big Time Journalism that I'm sure your Crazy Uncle Liberty is all cranked up over but that you, being a dirty Liberal who does not love America, might have missed.
Insider: Obama Openly Weeping: 'They're Going To Impeach Me'

A White House insider claims that Barack Obama has confided to friends, "They're going to impeach me."

That's the revelation coming from the Globe which also claims that a distressed Obama "can't eat or sleep" and "has been walking the White House's halls at night, bizarrely staring at the portrait of Abraham Lincoln for inspiration."

According to the tabloid, an "inside source" claims; "Numerous times his aides and friends have seen him openly weeping" and Obama "is petrified that he will have to resign in disgrace or be thrown out of office in disgrace."

Of course, talk of impeachment is not confined to the tabloids. Andrew B Wilson recently opened an article, "Impeach Obama?" for the American Spectator by posing the question: "Don’t even think it, Rush says. But let’s think it anyway."...
It has everything:  an "inside source", quotes from real, live, dead-tree newspaper,  a link to a high-traffic Conservative site that you might have heard of, an out-of-context link to a dirty Hippie just to show that the journalist is reasonable and balanced
On the liberal side of the world, Michael Tomasky, writing for the Daily Beastrecently spoke at length on the subject in an article titled "The Coming Attempt to Impeach Obama:"

"[T]he double-barrel revelations that the White House hasn’t quite been telling the whole story on Benghazi and that some mid-level IRS people targeted some Tea Party groups for scrutiny are guaranteed to ramp up the crazy [on impeachment]... and the people in the White House damn well better fear the same..."


Tomasky attempted to redeem himself to his liberal audience by saying the idea of impeaching Obama is "industrial-strength insane," but he still conceded that it's well within the realm of possibility...
and even a poll in which people are asked stuff -- 
A poll conducted by Wenzel Strategies last month indicated that 48% of Americans wanted to see Obama impeached over the IRS scandal. 

The most shocking aspect of the poll however was that one in four Democrats wanted to see Obama impeached over the IRS Scandal.

The same poll indicated that "50.1% of those polled said that Obama’s conduct with regard to Benghazi alone justified impeachment, with 27.6% of those responders self-identifying as Democrats."

Fritz Wenzel went so far as to say, "the American public is building a serious appetite for it."
-- by an polling outfit that has business cards and everything.
World News Daily, aka WND is reporting the surprising results of a poll conducted on its behalf by Wenzel Strategies.
Like it or not, in our brave new world of Truthinews, the job of fact-checking, source-vetting and the basic editorial function of bullshit-testing has been outsourced to you the reader.

So on the plus side, congratulations on your promotion!

On the minus side, your new job duties do not come with a raise, a parking space or dental coverage.

19 comments:

D. said...

Damn. I could use a parking space in this nabe...

In any case, I seem to recall reading that stuff about impeachment before, but the name was Richard Nixon.

And given the track record of conservative/Republican prevarication, I do not find their whispers credible.

Anonymous said...

Hi DG, didn't see an email address where I was sure Mrs. DG wouldn't see it, but I thought I put it in comments you would see it when you moderated them. (Then just copy to a text file and don't approve this comment, heh heh).

I thought it would be fun to turn the tables and have Mrs. DG answer the questions.


Baffle the Bible Bitch. 13 questions. Topics are Religion and the craft of writing.


1. What is the Q document?

Hint: Mathew and Luke

A. It is believed to be the (now lost) source for both Mathew and Luke (called Q because of quella, the german word for spring) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_source )


2. True or False? Hitler was born a catholic, raised a catholic, and died a catholic.

A. True. And he has never been excommunicated.



3. What is the minimum number of words in a novel?

A. 50,000



4. What is the maximum number of words in a vignette?

A. 400


5. What is the indefinite personal pronoun?

A. He


6. Who was most likely the Roman emperor when Jesus was alive?

A. Tiberius


7. What is the difference between a regular nail and a crucifixion nail?

A. The Romans made special nails for crucifixions. Like a regular nail but much longer.


8. How old is the King James Bible?

A. 402 years (begun 1604 completed 1611)


9. What is a zen beginner?

A. It is not someone new the study of zen, but relates to "the beginner sees many possibilities where the expert sees but few"


10. The word is spartan. When is is capitalized and when isn't it?

A. Capitalized when used as a noun (a person from Sparta). Not when used as an adjective (to describe something simple or unadorned).


11. If churches can't be taxed, how come they still pay for water, sewer, sidewalks etc.?

A. Those aren't taxes, those are fees. Technically, a tax is money that goes into the general fund. If the money is earmarked for a specific purpose, it's a fee.


12. There is a way for a woman can become a buddhist monk. How?

A. She must be reborn as a man. (Stole that from the movie Beyond Rangoon)


13. According to the bible, what is the one problem that stumped both God and Jesus?

A. Keeping subordinates loyal (God and Satan, Jesus and Judas)


Love the show!

marindenver said...

That cuhlored boy openly weeping in the White House (probably wringing his hands too) is so totally not a dog whistle of any sort.

They never give up on this stuff.

bowtiejack said...

Ah, yes - Wenzel Strategies

"The polling firm gave Todd Akin the lead in his Senate race (he lost by 16%), claimed Mitt Romney and Republican Senate candidates would win in Ohio and Virginia (they lost) and promoted birther conspiracies. "

Bring it on, beyootches.

Kathleen said...

The Globe and Enquirer posted similar trash stories about Bush (Laura divorcing him over Condi, Bush having nervous breakdown, etc. etc.) so there is that. One of the few cases that the media have done it to "both sides".

Anonymous said...

Kathleen,
The Globe and Enquirer are also well known as gossip rags who post barely-vetted rumors in hopes that one in a thousand result in a scoop. The problem here is that there is a significantly large wedge of the population who think WND and TownHall (which S. E. Cupp cited on national TV) and similar dregs are real.

Do you remember the likes of Congresswoman Bachmann railing against President Obama's naval escort to *central* India, utilizing something like one in five US Navy ships and a budget that was larger than the NASA budget for the moon landing? (Quick Geography Fact: India is not on the Moon.) That all started on fringe websites, and that made to to FOX, The Blaze, and the speeches of congresspeople. As paranoid as the crazy was during President Clinton's terms, something like that would have never made it so far.

And just in case you think the descriptions of the things forwarded are over-the-top:

http://myrightwingdad.blogspot.com/

And some requisite brain bleach:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3U0udLH974

Keep in mind that movement conservatism has largely become post-fact. By absorbing the evangelical fundamentalists, their basic perception is that everything is faith-based. They know that they are right, and therefore what they believe must be true. Period.

Mike.K.

zombie rotten mcdonald said...

the parameters being set to "a pulse, a blog and a POV"

Dammit. One out of three.

Anonymous said...

This is absolutely not new...
Anybody with a pulse and a POV should be skeptical of what they read. In so far as this outsourcing of basic editorial functions is a new thing, I say Huzzah!!

What this country needs is a lot more skepticism and more limit testing.

Suzan said...

But you do have executive status.

So use it wisely. . . .

What else I think about this latest odd depiction by the stunted, incredibly biased, but very well-utilized media, I'll write about later as it seems merely nauseating to me now.

But it could be that the whole act was staged and the gig is somehow up now (and needs simple explanations - which are right down their alley).

Be well.

Grung_e_Gene said...

Rush Limpballs or some other conservative star emits these stories and then every right-wing regurgitate it amongst themselves in the Right-Wing Fart Bubble.

It's Incestuous Amplification; believing one's own spin.

Bisham said...

The polling question: If you knew that Barack Obama had fathered an illegitimate black child would you be more or less likely to want him impeached for the worst scandal in our nation's history, such as the IRS scandal?

Booze Allen said...

Yeah, David Gregory led with those poll numbers this morning.

(Just joking -- I think.)

Anonymous said...

just dropping something off
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/42204_Guardian-Observer_Publishes_Then_Pulls_New_NSA_Bombshell_Story_Featuring_Birther_Wayne_Madsen/comments/#ctop

Anonymous said...

Good morning, Mr. Glass.

(Grammar Nazi. No need to post this)

"Like it or NOT"

Enjoy the rest of your day.

---Kevin Holsinger

Kathleen said...

Mike K: Disclosure: I have been known to read and sometimes enjoy the tabloids (LOL). I'm a sucker for articles featuring "Stars Without Makeup" (yeah, I'm shallow). You make a good point and helped me realize the so called "mainstream" media are just as bad if not worst because they treat these thugs like they're "normal" and have "views" that "deserve a hearing". (I don't know if you intended to make that point but your comment helped me make that connection) In their way they've mainstreamed evil (I don't dignify it by calling it "crazy") more than the so called tabloids do.

Anonymous said...

Kathleen,

OK, dark dirty secret here: I'm an absolute sucker for the Weekly World News. You have *no* idea how badly I wanted to write for them.

Also, even though my mother would berate me for spending my money on the WWN, I would catch her reading *every one* that I bought.

Anyway... Yes, and thank you. To really hammer that point home, watch FOX, or even CNN, interview people like the American Family Association and NOM and similar "protect the straights!" groups after DOMA was struck down. CNN was almost as bad. All these poor put-upon Christians needed someplace, anyplace to let the world know how much they suffer now that they no longer are able to legally be better than a bunch of icky homos. Brian Fischer and the like are waving their blood-spurting stigmata in front of every camera they see, because they no longer have legal backing to treat the icky, horrible people like they are icky, horrible people. And, as you said, "they treat these thugs like they're "normal" and have "views" that "deserve a hearing"."

Same with the IRS. Same with Benghazi. Same with Death Panels. Same with the Birth Certificate.

I really agree with DG & BG on this. Most people watch the news to get their own opinions reinforced, not for fact. And, studies have shown that conservatives are much worse about this, so "both sides" but is really quite skewed. So, the news doesn't want to state anything as fact. They know that if they say "Obama did not ride a naval fleet to the interior of India. Over land. LAAAAAND.", a third of their audience will become enraged because they are being told they are wrong. The viewers will write angry letters, try to rally protests, and the news channel looses lots of viewers and is flooded with "controversy". So, it's much easier, as DG puts it, to put red ants and black ants in a jar, give it a shake, and air that on TV for five minutes. It's "controversial" and "both sides have opinions" and "brought to you by Viagra!" and "Next, is Obama going to call a drone strike against Jane Fonda? Rand Paul and Alan Colmes air their views!".

Even though I have some quips about Rachel Maddow, and she usually sticks to safe topics, she will at least call out and/or correct a guest. You don't see that on FOX.

Mike.K.

Anonymous said...

They're giving "crazy" a bad name.

Don't cast aspersions on their asparagus! (said Goober Louie Gohmert ... Crazy--TexAss).

zombie rotten mcdonald said...

ew. Now I'm thinking of Louie Gohmert asparagus-smell pee.

zombie rotten mcdonald said...

Also: used to subscribe to teh WWN when in college.