Friday, 31 October 2008
|0913 - The LA Times's strange notion of journalistic ethics|
The National Review's Andrew McCarthy demolishes the LA Times's claim of journalistic ethics in the case of the videotape of Obama's attendance at a going away party for a PLO mouthpiece. His conclusion is especially damning:
[...]the mainstream media want the right to mislead you, to provide you with a woefully incomplete record, but to deprive you of clarifying information even when it is readily at their disposal. You just have to take their word for what happened, and never you mind the details.
Are you comfortable taking the Obamedia’s word for it? Or do you think you ought to have a look at what Los Angeles Times has unilaterally decided not to show you?
current mood: disgusted
Was that the PLO mouthpiece who McCain funded?
Is it really that hard
to use Google?
John McCain served as Chairman of the International Republican Institute (IRI), which gave out grants to different organizations including the Palestinian Research Center, which was headed by, wait for it, wait for it - Rashid Khalidi. In 1998, a tax filing from IRI shows $448,873 that went to Khalaidi’s group. The relationship existed for at least 5 years as in 1993 IRI funded several of Khalidi’s studies on “sociopolitical attitudes.”
Seriously. This is idiotic.
You can't claim this is true - because you deny that Barack Obama funded William Ayers' favorite radical causes. There's exactly as much control there. Which is it to be? You can't have it both ways.
Uh, what? Are you smoking crack? When did I say that? After more than ten years, you still have a fondness for putting words in people's mouths.
"Way to dodge", as you'd say.
Obama and Ayers were both on a board. Which of "William Ayers' favorite radical causes" were funded by that organization? Name some recipients that you think are so evil. ("William Ayers' favorite radical causes" existed when Obama was a little too young to be funding anything other than the Good Humor man.)
So Obama being on the board with someone is worse than McCain as the chairperson presiding over a $500k contribution?
I'm just confused as to where exactly you're trying to take this.
So instead of trusting the "Obamedia", we're supposed to trust someone from a magazine who sacked one of their writers and cofounder's son for endorsing Obama, for thinking for himself?
Better luck next time.