Question: Has Lanny Davis ever read conservative blogs?
October 01, 2009 12:24 pm ET by Eric Boehlert
I ask because Davis publishes a tsk-tsk column today in The Hill in which he scolds liberal blogger Markos Moulitsas for making a factual error.
Now, I'm all for fact-checking, and as Davis points out, Moulitsas dutifully corrected his mistake. But it's monumentally comical for Davis to spend an entire column lecturing bloggers about how they have to be more vigilant about their fact-checking (they need to be "100 percent accurate") without setting aside even a single sentence to note that, oh yeah, the conservative blogosphere today is pretty much fueled by purposeful lies and "mistakes."
Davis's approach is so typical of the Beltway elites: Liberal bloggers (rightfully so) are held to a high standard of accuracy and fair play. Yet conservative bloggers can make up and post whatever BS they want, and Villagers like Davis don't so boo.
UPDATED: I see Davis is also a contributor for the esteemed publication NewsMax. Given that fact, how Davis can lecture anybody about accuracy is beyond me.
It's what you do after those understandable errors that matters. This appears to be a slip, not a purposeful smearing of the guy under false pretenses, which is what those on the right often do.
Moulitsas: a lying scumbag, through and through. Davis, on the other hand, is a progressive who is deserving of all of our respect.
And it's not libelous at all. I'd like to see someone try that one out. As we have far more better, and thorough examples of that on this same website.
Davis is certanily not a progressive, not if he works for Newsmax (which he contributes to), which is the most factually challenged "news" website in the world.
Davis is certanily not a progressive, not if he works for Newsmax (which he contributes to), which is the most factually challenged "news" website in the world.
Is that really how the far left judges people, guilt by association? Davis' opinions should be criticized according to their content. That's the way us open-minded progressives judge people.
Because if not, you should be. Unless of course, you're trying to ring the big irony bell.
He doesn't have to apologize to Cooper for his fabrication, he changed the story. It's been taken care of.
Maybe he does mis-represent Cooper's stand on health care, maybe he doesn't, I don't know what Cooper's stand on health care is exactly.
Obama was born in Africa
Bill Ayers wrote Obama's autobiography
Obama is a Muslim, Nazi, Communist, Stalinist, Fascist, Marxist, Black Nationalist, Wilsonian progressive
The nation's freedom is threatened by ACORN and the SEIU
Obama wants to take our guns away
Obama's healthcare plans involve death panels, euthanasia and eugenics....
Obama hates America, white people, white culture
Obama is a Chicago thug
Global warming is a fraud
The Clintons had Vince Foster killed
John Kerry did not deserve any of his medals or wartime citations
Joe McCarthy was a hero and "McCarthyism" was an act of loyal public service
Fascism and Naziism were and are left-wing/liberal poltical movements
Still waiting for timely retractions and apologies
Laughable...because he didn't spend an "entire column lecturing bloggers"...his point was lecturing Moulitsas for shabby work on Cooper.
Critisizing a liberal does not require that all conservative misdeeds are also chronicled.
Poor ole Lanny...fragged by his fellow soldiers...should be a warning sign to all the other Clinton democrats during the Obama administration.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2008/04/24/lanny-davis-mcgovernesque-obama-track-lose-49-states
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lanny-davis/obama-vs-clinton-on-elect_b_90304.html
Weaselly, you are turning "missing the point" into a genuine art form.
Davis' article is about the importance of fact-checking, and specifically when it comes to blogging. Here, read this key paragraph yourself:
These rules apply to all — not just people who are journalists for respected news organizations but, even more so, for the many bloggers who don't have a fact-checking infrastructure or editor to catch the mistakes before they hit the Internet. Even those who insist on anonymous comments on the blogosphere should care about truth and facts, but the fact that they choose anonymity to vent their spleen means they probably don't care.
Or just read the headline, for crying out loud:
Fact-checking matters — even for columnists and bloggers
Then Davis, who could have chosen an example or two from the wealth of inaccuracies in right-wing blogs, spends his entire time on a liberal example, and one which was corrected.
Boehlert did not say that "all conservative misdeeds" were to be chronicled in Davis' column. That's idiotic. The point was that Davis got high-and-mighty about accuracy, and then chose a weak example from one side when the other side has so much more to choose from.