WaPo's David Weigel Quits/Fired Over Emails

[red states rule]

In another example of liberal media bias, the Washington Post had to can a reporter whose job it was to "report" on conservatives, after emails he sent about conservatives were exposed

Even the Washington Post could not spin and prtect him, but it is typical of the modern day liberal media who no longer tries to hide their bias and hate for those with different points of view




Weigel's Words:

•"This would be a vastly better world to live in if Matt Drudge decided to handle his emotional problems more responsibly, and set himself on fire."

•"Follow-up to one hell of a day: Apparently, the Washington Examiner thought it would be fun to write up an item about my dancing at the wedding of Megan McArdle and Peter Suderman. Said item included the name and job of my girlfriend, who was not even there -- nor in DC at all."

•"I'd politely encourage everyone to think twice about rewarding the Examiner with any traffic or links for a while. I know the temptation is high to follow up hot hot Byron York scoops, but please resist it."

•"It's all very amusing to me. Two hundred screaming Ron Paul fanatics couldn't get their man into the Fox News New Hampshire GOP debate, but Fox News is pumping around the clock to get Paultard Tea Party people on TV."

http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlDC/online_media/wapos_weigel_lets_loose_with_scathing_emails_on_li beral_listserv_165738.asp





and his lame excuses and "apology" were not enough to msave him. Oh well, I am sure he has a job at MSNBC waiting for him





"This would be a vastly better world to live in if Matt Drudge decided to handle his emotional problems more responsibly, and set himself on fire."

I apologize to Matt Drudge for this -- I was incredibly frustrated with the amount of hate mail I was getting and lashed out. If he wants to link to this post with some headline accusing me of wishing death on him, I suppose he can do so. But I don't wish that. I was tired, angry, and hyperbolic, and I'm sorry.

- "Follow-up to one hell of a day: Apparently, the Washington Examiner thought it would be fun to write up an item about my dancing at the wedding of Megan McArdle and Peter Suderman. Said item included the name and job of my girlfriend, who was not even there -- nor in DC at all."

I stand by this -- I was offended by the way that item was written. I do apologize for reacting like this against the entire Washington Examiner, as my gripe was with one reporter, and the person who gave them this item was apologizing to me.

- "I'd politely encourage everyone to think twice about rewarding the Examiner with any traffic or links for a while. I know the temptation is high to follow up hot hot Byron York scoops, but please resist it."

I stand by that reaction but apologize for belittling Byron York.

- "It's all very amusing to me. Two hundred screaming Ron Paul fanatics couldn't get their man into the Fox News New Hampshire GOP debate, but Fox News is pumping around the clock to get Paultard Tea Party people on TV."

I stand by this, although I apologize if people find the word "Paultard" offensive. It was a neologism coined during the 2008 campaign to describe fanatical supporters of Paul -- I used it in this case to convey how Fox covered those supporters in 2008.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010/06/an_apology_to_my_readers.html

[Sweetchuck]

I don't think media bias is so much a hatred toward the opposition or a fanaticism toward a political slant, but more of an effort to maintain a certain level of integrity. Now be careful, 'integrity' in this sense is sort of an oxymoron and by integrity I mean that they continue to cater to their audience. Give the people what they want and ironically it's this focus which eliminates any integrity the institution has.

Fox does exactly the same shit.

[red states rule]

I don't think media bias is so much a hatred toward the opposition or a fanaticism toward a political slant, but more of an effort to maintain a certain level of integrity. Now be careful, 'integrity' in this sense is sort of an oxymoron and by integrity I mean that they continue to cater to their audience. Give the people what they want and ironically it's this focus which eliminates any integrity the institution has.

Fox does exactly the same shit.

Allow me to offer an example of the HATE the liberal media has for anyone who opposes Obama

<object width="518" height="419"><param name="movie" value="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=Xd2GaGnzVr" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=Xd2GaGnzVr" allowfullscreen="true" width="518" height="419" /></object>

[Sweetchuck]

Allow me to offer an example of the HATE the liberal media has for anyone who opposes Obama

<object width="518" height="419"><param name="movie" value="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=Xd2GaGnzVr" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=Xd2GaGnzVr" allowfullscreen="true" width="518" height="419" /></object>

I think you missed the point. It's all a dog-and-pony show designed to get sheeple tuning in.

Rush and Beck do the same schtick - more successfully, albeit.

And, if you want to hear some really obsessive, miserable, hateful loathing - listen to about 10 minutes of Michael Savage's show, you'll get a full months dose of it.

[red states rule]

I think you missed the point. It's all a dog-and-pony show designed to get sheeple tuning in.

Rush and Beck do the same schtick - more successfully, albeit.

And, if you want to hear some really obsessive, miserable, hateful loathing - listen to about 10 minutes of Michael Savage's show, you'll get a full months dose of it.

Your point would be somewhat valid if MSNBC and Chris Matthews had many viewers that did tune in

Fox News kills them by about 3 or 4 to one margin

Libs like Matthews are desperate. When desperate thay cannot defend their guy Obama with facts - so go on their usual search and destroy mission of the oposition

Savage is a nut, I have ignored him since his death wish comment on a gay man who called his show years age. He is also a whiner

[Gaffer]

I think you missed the point. It's all a dog-and-pony show designed to get sheeple tuning in.

Rush and Beck do the same schtick - more successfully, albeit.

And, if you want to hear some really obsessive, miserable, hateful loathing - listen to about 10 minutes of Michael Savage's show, you'll get a full months dose of it.

Your right, FOX is a dog and pony show too. They only present what they chose too. But they are a good source for looking into other stories and digging deeper on what they leave out. The others are too busy praising the dark lord, Bush bashing (still), or harping about conservatives.

[red states rule]

Your right, FOX is a dog and pony show too. They only present what they chose too. But they are a good source for looking into other stories and digging deeper on what they leave out. The others are too busy praising the dark lord, Bush bashing (still), or harping about conservatives.

Excuse me, do you guys have any idea how many liberals Fox News has on to give their opinions on a daily basis?

As far as Chris Matthews, he did not hide his bais during the Bush years and the election - and he was gushing on Jan 20, 2009

<object width="518" height="419"><param name="movie" value="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=yduzprprSU" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=yduzprprSU" allowfullscreen="true" width="518" height="419" /></object>

[Gaffer]

Excuse me, do you guys have any idea how many liberals Fox News has on to give their opinions on a daily basis?

As far as Chris Matthews, he did not hide his bais during the Bush years and the election - and he was gushing on Jan 20, 2009

<object width="518" height="419"><param name="movie" value="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=yduzprprSU" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=yduzprprSU" allowfullscreen="true" width="518" height="419" /></object>

Oh yeah, I think FOX has way too many liberals. I guess to be fair they have to have more. One on one isn't very balanced. And chris matthews is a girlie boy. He wets himself when the dark lord speaks.

FOX is the only news I'll watch, but it's mainly to get an idea of what's going on and what to search for on the web.

[red states rule]

Oh yeah, I think FOX has way too many liberals. I guess to be fair they have to have more. One on one isn't very balanced. And chris matthews is a girlie boy. He wets himself when the dark lord speaks.

FOX is the only news I'll watch, but it's mainly to get an idea of what's going on and what to search for on the web.

Fox News has hard core liberals on. Alan Colmes, Kristen Powers, Geraldine Ferraro, Susan Estrich, Bob Beckel, Bob Schrum, Juan Williams, Lanny Davis, and Pat Caddel are the ones I know of the top of my head

IF you can sit and watch MSNBC you will see very few CONSERVATIVES- if any - on to give their opinions. This is why Fox News destroys the other cable news shows in the ratings

You can get both sides of the debate and then make up tour own mind

[Sweetchuck]

Your point would be somewhat valid if MSNBC and Chris Matthews had many viewers that did tune in

Fox News kills them by about 3 or 4 to one margin

Libs like Matthews are desperate. When desperate thay cannot defend their guy Obama with facts - so go on their usual search and destroy mission of the oposition

Savage is a nut, I have ignored him since his death wish comment on a gay man who called his show years age. He is also a whiner

Well, I always wondered why conservative shows were more successful.

One angle is that conservatives on whole have more bucket carrying robots who are ready and willing to adopt the ideology of someone who is charismatic and says stuff they like. Might also explain why conservatives are fundamentally Christian.

[Silver]

Complaining about FOX is just proving you drink the Koolade....FOX is, by far, the fairest presentation of news on any Network with CNN running a close second....Thats news we're talking about....

Hannity is not news, nor is Beck... and neither of those shows is about analyzing news and issues....they are both pushing conservative ideas, period.

O'Reilly is playing the roll of news analyst, but definitely from a conservative perspective...but he, at least has many liberals on the program if the issue is
political and always has someone to present an opposing point of view on non-political issues.

[Sweetchuck]

Complaining about FOX is just proving you drink the Koolade....FOX is, by far, the fairest presentation of news on any Network with CNN running a close second....Thats news we're talking about....

Hannity is not news, nor is Beck... and neither of those shows is about analyzing news and issues....they are both pushing conservative ideas, period.

O'Reilly is playing the roll of news analyst, but definitely from a conservative perspective...but he, at least has many liberals on the program if the issue is
political and always has someone to present an opposing point of view on non-political issues.

That's like saying pestilence is the better of the 4 horsemen. It's all biased news reporting.

The rest of them are entertainers. They are in business to sell advertisement slots and they do it well.

[red states rule]

Now if someone on Fox News would have said this - or Rush would have - all hell would break loose

<object width="518" height="419"><param name="movie" value="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=Xd2GaG8zSU" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=Xd2GaG8zSU" allowfullscreen="true" width="518" height="419" /></object>

[red states rule]

Well, I always wondered why conservative shows were more successful.

One angle is that conservatives on whole have more bucket carrying robots who are ready and willing to adopt the ideology of someone who is charismatic and says stuff they like. Might also explain why conservatives are fundamentally Christian.

Conservative shows are more successful due the hosts relying on facts - and not emotions like liberals do

Libs are more angry now then they were during the Bush years due to the failure of their policies once again - and it is so easy for the voters to see. Liberals right now are not wanting to talk about Obama's failures - they want to talk about something else and try and pass the buck

[red states rule]

In another example of liberal media bias, the Washington Post had to can a reporter whose job it was to "report" on conservatives, after emails he sent about conservatives were exposed

Even the Washington Post could not spin and prtect him, but it is typical of the modern day liberal media who no longer tries to hide their bias and hate for those with different points of view




and his lame excuses and "apology" were not enough to msave him. Oh well, I am sure he has a job at MSNBC waiting for him

Damn, I called it again






Weigel Goes Even Further Left, Signs as MSNBC Contributor



According to a Tweet from "Countdown" host Keith Olbermann, Weigel has come on board as a contributor. "And confirming, @DaveWeigel is now MSNBC contributor @DaveWeigel Welcome aboard and my condolences, uh, congratulations!" wrote Olbermann.

Now Weigel has joined the team of Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz. This from the guy who just today told the world of his wonderful career saga that started out as editor of a campus conservative paper at Northwestern University's Medill School of Journalism. "Was I really that conservative? Yes," he wrote, somehow expecting readers to believe him. While he admitted some of his troubles came from "hubris," much of what he wrote most already knew, that he was no friend to the right. "At Reason, I'd become a little less favorable to Republicans, and I'd never been shy about the fact that I was pro-gay marriage and pro-open borders."

Throw in Weigel's parade of assault on conservatives, prominent figures on the right from Rush Limbaugh to Matt Drudge and Newt Gingrich and the bigger question becomes, does he agree with the right on anything? The answer is: it doesn't matter anymore. He's gone from an organization fighting to keep its credibility to one fighting to lose what little it has.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/dan-gainor/2010/06/28/weigel-goes-even-further-left-signs-msnbc-contributor