In Limbaugh land, such comments qualify Raddatz as a far-far-lefty. What they really show, though, is a willingness to flatter those in power. And that, no doubt, helps explain why the debate commission chose her.
The Kicker
03:23 PM - August 22, 2012
Embed moderator
Only in Limbaugh land could Martha Raddatz be a lefty
Woman’s work - The twisted reality of an Italian freelancer in Syria
Sourcing Trayvon Martin ‘photos’ from stormfront - Not a good idea, Business Insider
Elizabeth Warren, the antidote to CNBC - The senator schools the talking heads on bank regulation
Art Laffer + PR blitz = press failure - The media types up the retail lobby’s propaganda
Reuters’s global warming about-face - A survey shows the newswire ran 50 percent fewer stories on climate change after hiring a “skeptic”
In one tweet
Luke Russert is the Golden Boy of DC
And it drives young journalists crazy
It’s official: We never need to worry about the future of journalism again!
The NYT shows us why
Why does Florida produce so much weird news? Experts explain
CJR's Guide to Online News Startups
ACEsTooHigh.com – Reporting on the science, education, and policy surrounding childhood trauma
Who Owns What
The Business of Digital Journalism
A report from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism
Questions and exercises for journalism students.
If anything, she is a statist or state-worshiper — no different from the typical MSM or AP staffer. And all those mentioned by Limbaugh fit the description. No lefty or righty tag necessary: support of aggressive war and imperial racketeering know no left-right bounds. "Patriotism" is a disease that does not discriminate along those lines.
#1 Posted by Dan A., CJR on Wed 22 Aug 2012 at 07:08 PM
The premise of your piece, Mr Massing, assumes that liberals are somehow anti-military. I dispute that assumption. Liberals are not at all anti-military. Most liberals are against war, or against stupid, ill-conceived wars of choice based upon some daddy issues or someone's perceived shortcomings of chest-beating manhood (cf John McCain, Lindsay Graham, William Kristol). Many liberals are very much against expanding (or maintaining) the vast military-industrial complex, the draining of our national budget on billion dollar military boondoggles, the revolving door of military brass --> lobbyist for the military industrial machine. But that doesn't make them anti-military. That doesn't mean that liberals are against our troops and veterans.
I don't know (or care) whether Ms. Raddatz is liberal or whatever. It's irrelevant in the context of her problem with objectivity and maintaining standards of journalism. Many journalists have the same problem -- Judy Miller, famously, Walter Pincus, John Burns, Tom Ricks, and so on.
And along the lines of problems with objectivity, you make the mistake of accepting Rush Limbaugh's framing without any sort of reflection or intellectual effort. That's an bad mistake for a journalist and I hope you will rethink it.
#2 Posted by James, CJR on Wed 22 Aug 2012 at 11:32 PM