Swooning WaPo cheers Savior-in-Chief: “There goes our journalistic objectivity”
In the tank.
No reports of fainting, ogling, or drooling yet, but I will bet you there are cheering followers in the WaPo building who will not wash their hands for a week after greeting the Savior-in-Chief.
Howard Kurtz *Correction: David Nakamura* breathlessly reports:
Staff writers, photographers, editors and employees from other departments lined the hallway after word spread that the President-elect would be walking through the newroom.
At about 3:15 p.m., Obama entered through a back hallway and began shaking hands, as professional newsmen and women reached over to shake his hand and take pictures…
…Obama left the newsroom around 3:30 p.m.
“There goes our journalistic objectivity,” one reporter quipped, as people traded stories and pictures.
Oh, don’t worry, WaPo. Your “journalistic objectivity” went out the window a long, long time ago.
Mark this down as the first notorious Obamedia moment of 2009.
***
Flashback: Notorious Obamedia moments of 2008
Flashback: Seattle Times news editors cheered Rove resignation news
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- ScoopThis.Org » Washington Post goes caca for cocoa puffs over Barack Obama!
- My Ode to Hope and Change « JoHNBRoDiGaNDoTCoM
- “There goes our journalistic objectivity” « Wellsy’s World
- Michelle Malkin » AP’s final dig at President Bush
- Public Secrets
- B. Hussein Obama Coronation Invitation | Stuck On Stupid
- ButAsForMe! » Swooning WaPo cheers Savior-in-Chief: “There goes our journalistic objectivity”
- The Empty Center | America Needs Me
- Is The Liberal Media Kingdom Is Crumbling? « Bohicaville
- Is The Liberal Media Kingdom Crumbling? « Bohicaville
- Iklan Mudah Blog » Blog Archive » “There goes our journalistic objectivity” dont bastardtise. Malaysia cannot survive with or, as is the case here, a complicit press corps. The hard questions need to come before a disastrous policy decisio
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Media Bias, Washington Post
Doug Ross @ Journal
» Stupak: the Sanctity of Life is Important to Us, Which is Why We Will Slash Care for Old People and Further Enslave Children to Massive Deficits
JustOneMinute
» Count Every VoteRedstate
» Kill The Bill.JustOneMinute
» Because He Reads The Wrong Books?Legal Insurrection
» Freedom So Willingly RelinquishedAmSpecBlog
» Thus Caveth Stupak
The Barack Obey-Me Media.
At least they’re running themselves out of business.
“Journalistic integrity” will return to the Washington Post only when it files for bankruptcy and closes its doors.
There goes your what?
To quote you Michelle, SNORT!
WaPo = Losers.
Clueless after all these years…
All I want to know is if he flashed his man-boobs at the women reporters. Actually, I’m sure the WP has a few men that would have liked that, too. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
BTW…are we now supposed to capitalize His pronouns?
Thank GOD they didn’t hug the guy.
Now they need to hire Joe the Plumber if they want to lay claim to any journalistic objectivity.
As it appears they all had that tingle in their trousers they will probably hire Matthews instead.
Obama was just thanking his staff for helping him win the election. Nothing to see here…
its nice to know journalists will be first in line for the mark of support for their new savior..
This picture was found of the WaPo reporters going to the inauguration.
Enjoy.
You cannot lose something you never had.
The Obamessiah has made it clear that, currently, he will not require the capitalization of personal pronouns related to him. He also has lifted the requirement of bowing, kneeling, or prostrating oneself in his presence.
However, the following terms are “suggested” when referring to The One:
Father of the Country
The Expansionist
Preserver of the Union
Protector of the Working Man
Man of the People
The Sage of Monticello
Honest Abe
Comming to a national monument near you.
I don’t think they bother to put on knee pads anymore.
Michelle, you simply must get over the idea that the “news” these days is anything but just entertainment. I tuned out of the mid-stream media (Keith, what’s urinalysis?) some time in the 1970’s because all it was even then was communist propaganda.
The hotel lounge where I was having breakfast this morning had one of the crap broadcast shows blabbering on about the cold weather. Almost on cue, up came the disclaimer that the current cold snap doesn’t mean that global warming is off. What a bunch of rocket-polishers.
I just can’t wait to see the details of Waxman’s “Save-the-Planet” bill.
Why do I expect nothing less from WaPo?
When the Washington Times staff does this, then we can truly ‘kiss our butts goodbye’.
For the majority of the media, WaPo and NYTimes in particular, “journalistic objectivity” is an oxymoron.
This has to beat “postal service” out.
I wonder how many won’t wash their hands after shaking the hand of the “messiah?”
Oh man…I can’t believe they were “cheering”! How could they do that?
Oh yeah…they weren’t.
Cooper here is a NYT reporter, not exactly an objective source when it comes to their main rival. But of course, if its plastered on Drudge, it good enough.
Journalistic integrity is INDEED important. I would say that extends to blog headings as well.
chapoutier:
LMAO!!! Oh wait…you weren’t joking were you…oh well, LMAO anyway!
How are they not embarrassed? What a bunch of idiots drooling over one of their own.
Washington Post? They’re still around?
In 1964 when the Beatles were in New York, a reporter’s gloved hand brushed the back of Paul McCartney. Some girls in the crowd who saw what had happened, rushed the reporter and started kissing her hand. She had no idea what had happened and why the girls were kissing her hand.
Kind of like this type of idol worship. Only much more disgusting. As the old saying goes – Never fall in love with a politician; you’ll get jilted every time.
Can’t wait for the liberal media to start tearing down The B.O. when they disapprove.
*They may be on the down low with PEBO now, but after 1/20/2009, the beginning of an error, they will start scratching their collective heads as they see P-BO splashing around in the shallow end of the gene pool; I wish him well with my heart, but my head knows he is destined to fail; Failed idealogy leads to a failed presidency; The WaPo won’t have that as a headline in 2012, but you’ll likely catch it in the 26th and last paragraph, where they usually get around to the truth.
It would be hard to top ABC Obama groupie Charlie Gibson’s performance after the Obama “race speech” last March. Gibson began his postspeech interview with Obama by saying “You gave an extraordinary speech” and then the purring got worse after that. Gibson seemed positively libidinous.
Next time a liberal tries to convince you that left wing bias is a myth, point out this article.
MSM: Flounder, you can’t spend your whole life worrying about your mistakes! You f#$%^d up – you trusted us! Hey, make the best of it! Maybe we can help.
It’s traditional for the plantation overseer to visit the slave quarters and check in on his investment. That’s about what The One was doing at WaPo.
The Age of the Misleaders is upon us!
Post,Times NBC,CBS etc. etc.
Politicians and educators alike…all of them misleaders and out in front of them all the man from Kenya!
Today my child’s high school had a mandatory assembly for Martin Luther King.
It turned out to be a power point slide show and rally for…..you guessed it Barack Obama!
There was only one slide of King and a video of Barack saying “I have a dream”!
Here are some of the comments uttered by classmates in between the applause’s for change and hope:
-”I just got my license and now that Obama is President gas will go down to .50 cents”!
- “Now that a black man is president, everyone will get along”!
-”Now Hillary and Barack are friends and will work to make the world peaceful”!
-”Obama is going to cut everyone’s taxes and everyone will have a job”!
I guess the futures so bright we have to wear shades!
I don’t imagine the attitudes are much different at other schools across the nation.
Tells me one thing for sure; all the misleaders are doing a first class number on our youth!!
BTW-My child, felt angry, duped, and would have walked out and wanted to but would have lost credit for the class!
On the other hand, would it not be wonderful to see the President of the United States treated this way REGARDLESS of his party?
They don’t need ‘em. They’ve got callouses on their knees like camels.
Speedos for Eskimos, to help them cope with the heat.
Gibson’s comment after Bush’s speech last night was telling also, something along the lines of “The President mentioned some mistakes he had made, and what he claimed were successes.” A digusting display. Again.
On the other hand, I wish I had thought to invest in some personal-use “moist towelettes” for all the tingling, gushing media to clean themselves with at the inauguration. Limited edition, with the Messiah’s smiling face on them, of course.
I’d have made a mint.
Are journalists not allowed to like and dislike politicians any more?
You have got ridiculous double standards, Michelle Malkin. You criticise the NY Times and WaPo for not being fair, then you support Fox News which is empirically a biased news organisation that masquerades as being fair and balanced. Why is it okay for Fox News to maintain a thin veneer of “fairness” while displaying egregious bias, but not okay for the NYTime and the WaPo to do it? Every time you criticise a “double standard”, there is a pronounced irony (though I’m beginning to doubt conservatives understand the concept) present.
As Obama made his way through the newsroom these queries were revealing: “Where’s the weather person? What’s Tuesday looking like?”
Surely God would not allow snow or rain to fall on The One’s parade. Then again, if God is not on your side, the next best thing to have is the Fourth Estate.
Omu mooed:
They don’t have to be “allowed” to do anything. They have the right to their own opinions. What they aren’t supposed to do is let their personal biases effect their reporting of facts, and it’s clear that’s what has been happening for the past year in the case of Obama in particular and Democrats in general.
Omu, if you deny that the New York Times and Washed-up Post weren’t essentially house organs for Obama once it became clear that he would defeat Hillary, you’re just lying to yourself. But don’t believe me about the way the Times leans, believe the New York Times‘ own ombudsman. In its July 25, 2004 edition, the Times‘ Daniel Okrent answers the headline’s question “Is The New York Times a Liberal Newspaper?” with these four words in the first paragraph:
He goes on to write:
Think the Post’s Dana Milbank — the guy who smeared Governor Palin with that “Kill him” crapola — will be spending the next four years taking note of every instance in which Barack Obama drops his “g’s” the way he did with Palin? I don’t know how old you are, Omu, but as a news junkie spanning four decades I can tell you leftward bias has never been more obvious and pervasive.
Regarding Fox News Channel’s “egregious bias” — what are you measuring it against to arrive at that verdict? MSNBC? CNN? CBS, NBC, and ABC News? PBS? NPR? AP or Reuters? Are you suggesting that those organizations aren’t biased against Republicans and conservatives (and, for that matter, Israel)? Say what you will about FNC, but it never tried to fix an election using fake documents.
Even after the vaunted universities that are the sources of all the polls, surveys, and experts they use like a bludgeon against all things right-wing tell them empirical studies show them to be unfair, the MSMers collectively put their hands over their ears and sing “La la la la la la.” They don’t have to address their own bias if they don’t want to, because they are the self-appointed arbiters of what news is and how it is reported.
Educate yourself, Omu. Put down your glass of Fool-Aid and read CBS veteran Bernard Goldberg’s books Bias and Arrogance. Pre-order A Slobbering Love Affair, his upcoming book about Obama-worshipping reporters. Check out the NewsBusters sweet-16 tournament of Obama suckup coverage.
Stop being so gullible.
If you didn’t suffer from ODS, you would say Obama is restoring greatness to the office of the President. That’s what you said about Bush, comparing him to Churchill, and Lincoln, and FDR, and more or less anyone with a good reputation.
OMU,, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out if the media had been objective in the beginning there would be no need of Fox News. With everyone else in the democratic camp, abc, cbs, nbc, cnn, msnbc, must you have all of them? I bet you are for diversity when it comes to skin color and power to the gay folks aren’t you? Why are you against diversity in thought? I was just wondering?
Y’all are confusing OMU by bringing up those pesky little “fact” thingies.
On January 16th, 2009 at 10:14 am, lgm said:
I completely disagree with your acronym, ODS – Obama Derangement Syndrome.
According to every relevant, credible pundit around, Obama’s popularity is destined to nose-dive late this coming summer, when our worsening unemployment numbers kick up the public’s “misery factor” a couple of notches. That’s the point I beleive, BDS morphs from Bush Derangement Syndrome, to Barack Derangement Syndrome.
In a tight economy, why waste three good letter?
As for your inciting statement about B. Hussein Obama being a “good president,” well the evidence is stacking up mightily against that ever standing a chance of happening: just look at his picks for Treasury Sec and AG.
So, either you believe Obama is “restoring greatness” or you’re deranged? No middle ground at all there, eh?
When did Michelle make this comparison? I’d be happy to read a source.
I’ll also note the irony of your mentioning comparisons to Lincoln.
I never said the NY Times or WaPo or MSNBC weren’t biased. That’s not my point anyway. Michelle Malkin essentially posts put-down after put-down of the mainstream media on this blog, declaring them to be bias and expressing outrage over it. Yet she does not criticise Fox News, even though that channel is at the very least just as biased as the NY Times, with the distinction of it being biased to her side. Bias in media is either unacceptable or it’s ok. Malkin needs to make her mind up.
Herein lies a serious problem. The right is losing the media war. Obama and his leftist, mainstream media propaganda machines control the information flow to the populous and are essentially programming them to comply with Obama’s Marxist agendas. Until the right can find an effective channel to transmit a powerful counter information campaign this condition will persist. The bottom line is that if you tell the people something long enough and with great persistence, they will believe it and act accordingly. Let’s face it folks, two irreconcilable, competing ideologies are in a war to win the hearts and minds of the American people and so far the left controls the battlefield.
Now let’s see . . . the left is supported by the Washington Post, The New York Times, The Boston Herald, The Los Angeles Times, The Philadelphia Inquirer, The Seattle Post – Intelligencer, The Seattle Times, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, Public Radio and Public Television, etc., etc., etc., etc. Then on the other side we have that big bad bully FOX News. Come on “Omu” join the conscious world.
Family Man, do you suppose if they kissed him, then they wouldn’t brush their teeth anymore?
EEEWWWW!
How sad for you, and for so many like you, that when a news source presents both sides of the spectrum, you think that shows bias towards the side you don’t agree with. The only reason libs think FOX News is biased is because it is the only outlet where the conservative point of view is shown at all. And, by the way, usually shown concurrently in contrast with the liberal point of view.
I wish I could find the article with the statistics, but I remember a study being done during the General Election that analyzed the campaign coverage (i.e. Positive / Negative stories on Obama / McCain). The MSM was overwhelmingly positive on Obama and Negative on McCain — while Fox News was evenly split on both candidates. Fair and Balanced, you might say. I’ll keep looking for the study, but here’s another little tidbit from Pew. I’ll save you some time and post the summary (actually from a HuffPoo link that I won’t link because I refuse to provide them any additional traffic):
Now, if the audience is overwhelmingly Dhimms — who do you cater to if you want to stay in business? Hmmm???
Front-Page news story today:
Note how the invited students are as young as sixth grade,
and parents are not allowed to attend:
An “Obama Youth”
inaugurationindoctrination?Here’s one
For the record I believe OMU that Michelle Malkin never claimed to be objective. She flatly states out she is conservative at the beginning. Does your liberal media do that??. I doubt it and they always claim they are objective anyway,, especially Chris Mathews.