On Electioneering With Satan's Name

I've got another question: is it reporting when a journalist writes that a Senator is straight-talking maverick?

It is pretty amazing to me that Bill Keller finds time to do this also running the New York Times.

In James Dobson's defense, he doesn't have time to Worship John McCain like you Michael.

He spends his time recommending men shower with their boys to show them their "manliness"

http://archives.republicoft.com/index.php/archives/2005/08/10/double-your-dobson-double-your-fun/

Or, Dobson is bravely fighting off his pet Dachshund with a belt.

http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2008/02/05/of-weiners-and-dogs/

Attaturk and TomT, does your rage never abate? Do you stay up all night clicking refresh, awaiting my next post, so that, no matter the topic, you can accuse me of sleeping in the BBQ sauce? More power to you, I guess. I think it is great when people find their life's passion, whatever it may be.

Attaturk and TomT, does your rage never abate? Do you stay up all night clicking refresh, awaiting my next post, so that, no matter the topic, you can accuse me of sleeping in the BBQ sauce? More power to you, I guess. I think it is great when people find their life's passion, whatever it may be.

Everyone needs a hobby.

When did you pick the Maverick as yours?

"Rage never abate"???

Mike, do you know how incredibly frustrating it is for those of us on the sidelines hoping and praying for people (You, George Bush, Nancy Pelosi, etc) to do their fu*king jobs and be disappointed again and again and again??

You, Mike, post one piece of crap after the next and then have the audacity to complain that it's criticized?

If only you had a little "rage", maybe you could make real difference in the world, instead of being McCain's *ss buddy.

Dood, Dobson thinks young boys should be taking showers with grown men? That's some seriously out there stuff. That guy should be getting the Chris Hanson treatment.

And MS, there's no crying in baseball, homey.

It depends on your definition of Separation Church and State. Is it the Garden of Roger Williams? Or TJ's letter to the Danbury Baptists?

"I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties."

Or some modern crazy court interpretation like
Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow.

I like Williams and TJ's view. Dobson can make an @ss of himself if he wants...

Michael: If instead of berating your readers you asked the candidates intelligent questions about the issues the readers would not berate you.

McCain returns Phil Gramm to the Spotlight (or, a story you won't read on Time Magazine):

http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/06/24/0624gramm.html

Michael Scherer, I'd like to propose a small and mostly unscientific social experiment. (A small and perhaps a silly idea on my part, but one that is ernestly suggested.)

I'm going to assume on occasion you take a few moments at least one day a week to step out and grab a bagel and coffee, maybe have a quick lunch or even get some take-out if you're pulling a long night.

Next time you do, and you find yourself in line maybe you can find a random person who is up for a little random conversation. Ask them some variation of the following (in any order):

1) "Did you hear that thing in the news about Barak Obama?"
2) "What an election eh, and what about that other thing... about John McCain?"

Repeat that as much as you like.

Do you want to speculate which candidate will evoke a response on some weird trivial little "scandal" and which will simply evoke a list of the candidate’s "talking points"?

I personally think that knowing about McCain’s violation of campaign finance laws is as pertinent a topic to be aware of as Obama’s decision to forgo public financing.

Here's something that for some reason makes me "full o' rage"

High-ranking political appointees at the Justice Department labored to stock a prestigious hiring program with young conservatives in a five-year-long attempt to reshape the department's ranks, according to an inspector general's report to be released today.

The report will trace the effort to 2002, early in the Bush administration, when key advisers to then-Attorney General John D. Ashcroft moved to exert more control over the program to hire rookie lawyers and summer interns, according to two people familiar with the probe.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/23/AR2008062301796.html?nav=rss_politics

You could -- if you ACTUALLY did the job you are PAID to do in the profession I have to think YOU CHOSE to join -- ask the GOP nominee, prime defender, and first class HUGGER about stories like this and even EVEN dare I say, report on his explanation.

Or you can do 2nd or 3rd hand hack jobs on stuff we already know about from the standpoint of defending or explaining McCain.

Oooooh, look at me all full of indignity...or indignitude as George Bush would say it.

How dare I, a "dirty effing hippie" dare criticize.

Michael: Please report something for once. These inane pieces that don't tell us anything are not worth our time.

McCain broke a campaign finance law, and if you don't believe that, then at least tell the people what McCain did in that regard.

And you can't get pissy, commenters are telling you what they want, give it to them.

If anyone's interested, the best Church and State book around is Anson Stokes' 'Church and State in the United States.' Don't bother picking up the updated one with Pfeffer as co-author - it's actually worse.

Daniel Dreisbach is my favorite modern author on the subject. Worth looking into if you're actually interested in Church-State issues.

Michael S.:
Rage? I'd say no. It's asking, many times over, for people to do their job. Is it your job to be a stenographer? Is it your job to verify McCain's claims? Do you ever use "Teh Google" to check on anything McCain or his surrogates say? Do you realize that McCain is breaking FEC law right at this very moment? We are pissed off because the TradMed is supposed to hold our elected officials accountable, not be their best friends. So until you(and Joe Klein and all the rest of the TradMed) start doing your job, the rage will continue. You might not care if this country goes down Alice's rabbit hole, but a lot of people out there do.

High-ranking political appointees at the Justice Department labored to stock a prestigious hiring program with young conservatives in a five-year-long attempt to reshape the department's ranks, according to an inspector general's report to be released today.

I'm sure Jay Carney thinks this is no big deal. No bj's? No big deal!

Michael, for the last five years I've practiced psychiatry in San Francisco, where I served patients in two different pubic health systems. I long ago lost count of the number of men I've treated who were disowned and tossed out -- made homeless -- by their families because the young men happened to be gay.

And over and over, they reported their parents were followers of Dr. Dobson's "Focus on the Family". They told me in detail about how their parents tossed them out quoting Dobson's hate speech.

Some "focus": Dobson's hatred for gays (and perhaps self-hatred, from the "showers with young boys" pitch described above) ensures his focus is that of a sniper's scope. One family after another picked off by his prejudice and homophobia.

Michael, this is the influence that the "much more influential" Dobson spews upon the body politic.

Are you comfortable blithely telling Time's readers about "influence" that includes telling adult men to shower with young boys?

Why are you so silent about the pernicious nature of Dobson's influence? Are you merely ignorant, or do you share Dobson's hatred for gay people?

Or did you just like the shower suggestion?

"Swampland" indeed.

It's a good way for me to blow off steam when I'm working, Michael.

I really do think your reporting on McCain sucks, though, Michael. You miss all the really big issues -- the Gramm connection, the constant shifting of McCain's positions on things like off-shore drilling, global warming, tax cuts, etc., and the fact that McCain doesn't seem to know anything about Iraq, whether it be troop levels or who's a Sunni and who's a a Shiite.

You've really done a crappy job with this beat. There's just no nice way to say it. And I'm a pretty pro-reporter person.

Mr. Scherer, what are your journalism credentials?

We’re asking pastors to make specific recommendations based on Scripture as to how their congregations should vote,” said Erik Stanley, senior legal counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund.

Scripture states rather clearly that you should render unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar's and render unto God that which is God's.

It would appear that Ceasar in this case has a clearer understanding of the meaning of that passage than these folks do.

But then again, the four Gospels are replete with examples of why these folks are devoid of understanding.

Micheal

McCain needs you to run out and buy some Neosporin for the cuts on his head from a "low hanging door" in the car (Delorean?) he was riding in while in Canada.

Chop chop.

Not sure how I feel about this. Can a non profit arts organization do a play called "John McCain is Too Old To Be President" without losing its tax status? I would hope so. Because John McCain is too old to be president.

It's because the New York Times is reporting that Keller has said he is under investigation by the Internal Revenue Service for possibly violating his non-profit tax status by advocating the election or defeat of a political candidate.

It's about time some of these people got investigated. They can do all the campaining they want, but they can't have the tax exempt status to do it. Hope they look into Dobson next.

Michael, in case you missed Dobson's shower ministry, here it is in full:

Meanwhile, the boy’s father has to do his part. He needs to mirror and affirm his son’s maleness. He can play rough-and-tumble games with his son, in ways that are decidedly different from the games he would play with a little girl. He can help his son learn to throw and catch a ball. He can teach him to pound a square wooden peg into a square hole in a pegboard. He can even take his son with him into the shower, where the boy cannot help but notice that Dad has a pen*s, just like his, only bigger.

Why are you putting this "influence" before Time's readers, Michael? What's next -- will you be telling us about NAMBLA's leaders and their "influence"?

Really, I'm not pissy, not crying. Just watching the show, trying to figure out how it works. Some rules:

1. If post does not attack McCain or Obama, accuse poster of not reporting something that really matters: campaign finance duplicity of McCain, Phil Gramm, etc.

2. If post is critical of both McCain and Obama, accuse poster of equivalence, and failing to do real reporting.

3. If post is critical of Obama or puts context around McCain flub, go to the well: BBQ sauce, sprinkles, etc.

4. If post is critical of McCain or puts context around Obama flub, go to the well: BBQ sauce, sprinkles, etc.

5. If post links to a story, as blogs do, with little original reporting, accuse poster of lazy corporate hackery in the context of a media that led us to war, is trying to rig the next election, etc.

6. If the poster does not respond in comments, accuse poster of ducking hard questions.

7. If poster does respond in comments to ad hominem attacks, accuse poster of being a cry baby who can't play with the big boys.

8. If post in any way challenges partisan assumptions of reality, assume that the challenge originates not from reality, but the core duplicity and mendacity and cowardice of the poster.

9. Occasionally respond to the content of the post.

These are just the first nine rules. There are more. But feel free to comment below. I would recommend using rules 5, 7 and 8. Now back to work. (And really, I am just prodding back. You all can take it. . . . um, I think.)

Guess what? I got a fever! And the only prescription... is adversarial reporting!

Thanks for reading the comments, Michael. I know that we can get obnoxious sometimes, but I hope that you're considering the main idea-- that sometimes McCain flip-flops and breaks laws in a manner for which there is no equivalent on the other side.

As to Paul Dirks' point, see Matt. 7:21-23.

Poor Michael. Readers are asking him to show a little professionalism--that's so mean!

There is only one rule Michael.
1- There never is fair criticism of Michael Scherer. It's all partisan complaining to be dismissed and followed by a self pitying post in comments.

10. Pretend like I'm not actually a reporter with access to one or more of these candidates so really what the heck can I do about it anyway?

MS, this is a good post. It raises interesting issues - and if you were really being pro-McCain here you would have mentioned Wright and Pfleger, who are doing the same thing. But it's perfectly reasonable to think that you've been biased towards McCain in general. Even if you don't agree, you must be able to see that it's reasonable others would think differently. Honestly, some of the commenters probably did overreact by focusing entirely on your past (and no doubt future...) errors. But "does your rage never abate?"! That is a huge overreaction.

If you feel that your postings aren't really being discussed, or that everything you write ends up launching a discussion on your horrible campaign coverage no matter what the subject is, join in the discussion. Explain why you think this issue is interesting and important. Give us some more info. Completely overreacting to two(!) relatively off-topic but reasonable comments is not going to improve the discussion.

Michael, have you ever actually written a post that was critical of McCain? If not, it seems to me that 2. and 4. are purely hypothetical.

You left out a few rules that you could insert in place or rules 2. and 4. or simply append as 10. and 11.

10. If the post is dull but nonobjectionable, then just discuss something you saw on ThinkProgress or TPM.

11. When all else fails, make fun of the poster's picture.

@MS...

For the record, I don't immediately and reflexively attack your reporting, but I will note that when you "put context around McCain flubs", you do so with a level of creativity that isn't evident in the rest of your work.

Other than that I'll refrain from joining the pile-on.

"..Is it electioneering if a pastor preaches that a politician is working on the side of Satan?"
What do you think, MS?
O, but we have a partial answer: "his rather blunt style would make quite a show if the charges ever come down." And a ratings-boosting show which MS and the MSM owners can't hardly wait for in this election year. Or is good MS apprehensive about it?
0) It reminds one of those pastors who wax all pious for years - before we discover that they are pedophiles who also frequent the sleazy spots well known to McCain.
1) What does the pastor want? Repentance? Fatter tithes and a healthy bite into the $millions of the Obama Nation?
2) What factors did the good pastor take into account regarding his timing? He wouldn't wait for 2 years nor did he launch his holier-than-thou diatribe 2 years ago. Is impact a consideration - and hence a choice of this election year?
3) The fair pastor is aware that there is an on-going contest between his target, Sen Obama, and Pastor Hagee's Sen McCain (whose spiritual leader and moral compass is one named Pastor Parsley.)
The pastor is not talking about John McCain. Perhaps the pastor can tell us this: On what (good or bad) side of satan is the fuzzy (or is it lying?) McPander (a.k.a McNasty)?
------
“I hated the gooks. I will hate them as long as I live." - John McCain, 2000

McCain '08, WRONG for America!

Eh, I see Michael's point-- this is a post about some silly guy. It doesn't really have much to do with Phil Gramm or what have you.

On the other hand, the past history of avoidance of dealing with Gramm etc. is what has people flipping out.

Thanks TomT. 10 and 11 are good additions. I would answer your question about 2 and 4, but that would just trigger these rules:

12. If poster defends him/herself, see that as a sign of weakness: Whatever the poster has done just proves everything the poster has not done.

13. Anything negative written about Obama or positive about McCain counts forever. Anything positive written about Obama or negative about McCain is in the past, e.g.: "You have not criticized McCain for two weeks, but you are always criticizing Obama."

Michael, to the original topic of your post, it's a good question. Unfortunately not one with an easy answer. Especially since even Scripture itself is often ambivalent and self-contradictory on the subject. On the one hand, you've got "Leave Caesar's things to Caesar, God's to God." On the other, you've got texts that tell you to evangelize, spread the Gospels, and don't hold back.

So pick and choose.

Personally, I'm with the "Leave Caesar's things to Caesar" crowd. I don't think preachers should use their pulpit as a stage to spout political ideas, to lambast this candidate/party or to support that one. This nation codified its belief that government should not intrude on a person's private faith--a huge, bold move. To me, it's just bad form not to return the favor.

"4. If post is critical of McCain or puts context around Obama flub, go to the well: BBQ sauce, sprinkles, etc."

I guess we can go back to January for those posts critical of McCain. That I cannot forgive. *shakes fist weakly*

It's all good. We all know our roles. You cheerlead McCain, ignore issues that aren't beneficial to him, are we eviscerate you in the comments. Win win. You aren't going to stop cheerleading, we aren't going to stop telling you to just SHUT THE HELL UP. We need to get back to work, and you need a terrorist fist jab in the t#sticles.

So get back to polishing McCain's you know what or they are going to make you miss recess.

Now back to work.

Posted by Michael Scherer | June 24, 2008 10:29 AM

Posted by Michael Scherer | June 24, 2008 10:41 AM

Michael I took that as a "vow" that you were going back to work.
See? We all can play your game.

Whatever the poster has done just proves everything the poster has not done.

I think you read too much Kafka and Orwell back at UCSC.

Look Michael, I don't think you are necessarily showing bias towards McCain. Or at least you don't think you are. And that's fine.

But there are so many stories out there begging for coverage that the commenters know about. There are the over 4 dozen McCain flip flops in the last year (some in the last month). There is the Phil Gramm thing, there is the finance law breaking thing, there is the not knowing how to use a computer thing, etc.

Not too many people in know about these stories because the media won't do stories about them. You are taking the heat because you are a reporter who is supposed to inform the public about the candidates. Everyone who pays attention to politics now knows about Obama opting out of public financing, but not everyone knows about those topics I listed up above.

You are a journalist, you can change this. Stop whining and do your job.

And do you feel these rules are universal? Does Karen get the smae response? If not do you wonder why?

Could someone please run to the store and pick up some more baby back ribs?

Mike here, is throwing a pity party.

The problem with being able to remove the tax exempt status from one church is that it can easily be abused and used as a bullying stick to keep the church in line. Really no church should be tax exempt if only to remove the temptation from the con man who use it as a tax shelter.

Paul-no, funny.

TomT, it wasn't Kafka and Orwell that messed me up. It was Pynchon and Baudrillard.

Now, because Paul-no has made not reading the comments a matter of personal integrity, I am really not going to keep reading the comments, so I can get something done. Please talk amongst yourselves.

Man, I thought that guy would never leave.

Seriously. Did the dishes. Turned out the rest of the lights in the house. Let out the dog. He's still sitting on the couch.

Michael, did you know Phil Gramm has a son named Marshall? Why won't anyone report this??? I challenge you to put Phil Gramm's son's name in the print edition of Time!

Also - why can't you do more real reporting like Rachel Maddow? Rachel Maddow is a real reporter, while you only obfuscate the truth. Real reporters don't bring John McCain donuts, they bring him vegetables - broccoli and peas. That's all they bring him! Broccoli and Peas!

So much for the straight talk express! More like the crooked speaking hovercraft. McCain just hovers around the truth with his hovercraft all day long. And all these so called "real reporters" eat his pudding aboard the hovercraft of lies!!! I hope you like your pudding, Michael, one day someone with real guts (like Rachel Maddow) will forcefeed him peas and make him land his hovercraft of lies in a field of honesty. Until then, eat up Michael, have your fill of crooked speaking hovercraft pudding. I hope it tastes good.

But never forget that the war in Iraq is stealing pudding from the mouths of trillions of Iraqis while you wallow in your delicious cool pudding on your fancy hovercraft.

On Friday, June 20, Karen posted a little something about interns. I immediately hijacked the comments to beg her to write something about FISA.

And do you know what she did? She, whilst on a train, got on her phone and started chasing the story down for us (us commenters, that is).

Then she came up with Nancy Pelosi's statement, which was promptly eviscerated by Glenn Greenwald, and that began the weekend.

She was thanked repeatedly by commenters (including me) for being attentive and responsive.

You don't get thanked very much, do you Mike

Link to Karen's Friday post:
http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/06/intern_survival_guide.html#comments

"Now, because Paul-no has made not reading the comments a matter of personal integrity"

Wow you read as well as you write. Honest to Pete, just amazing.

Posted by Paul-no not that one....

Ahhh, that is it, you know. The criticisms aren't universal. Each contributer here has a different MO that is individual to that peron and remarkably consistent across long periods of time. Coupled with that quirk of human nature, of seeing everybody elses prejudices while being blind to your own (also extensively described and discussed in the Gospels) and you end up with a pretty predictable call and response pattern.

I happen to think that MS is in the bag for McCain. But he doesn't see it that way. I happen to acknowlege that I'm in the bag for Obama. So I needn't blind myself to my own reactions (though I do learn a lot by observing them).

It's sad that MS gets so defensive so quickly because there is indeed a learning opportunity happening.

PS.

I find this post utterly unobjectionable, so I can see why hackles were raised right from the get-go.

Mr Scherer

Reporters on Kurtz's CNN show openly admit that McCain gets better treatment on issues than Obama.

Obama breaks a "vow" on public financing. For balance why not tell us in detail how McCain is handling his campaign funding. Are their any issues with Mccain and the FEC, for example? Are McCain's hands clean on campaign finance?

Michelle is "proud for the first time". Cindy McCain has always been proud. Michelle's college thesis has been a debating point. Is there anything in Cindy McCaain's past that could equally be a debating point?

attaturk and TomT are just more vocal than many of us in voicing their displeasure. Many of us don't see balance in reporting. Many reporters when pressed also ADMIT there is an imbalance.

During the Democratic Primaries, when attention was brought to the fact that McCain was getting a free ride, the late Tim Russert said, that McCain would get scrutiny after the Democratic Primary was over. Russert himself was suggesting the lights had not been directed in McCain's direction. The Primary is over. It is time for balance.

Where is the detailed coverage of Senator John McCain?

So why bring up Keller's rather obscure ministry, or his relatively fringe views? Is it because James Dobson, the much more influential conservative Christian leader, recently leaked a statement critiquing Obama's faith views to the Associated Press, yielding a big 'ol Drudge headline? Nope.

Michael, I read you're going off to work, and perhaps you really mean it this time.

Your reference to Dobson was gratutitous: as even you point out, that was not the reason to mention Keller.

Your choice to include Dobson raises the obvious question: was your purpose for including Dr compare pen*s size in the shower with dad -- and pound square pegs into square holes Dobson...

Was your purpose in including the graf about Dobson simply to magnify Drudge's "report" about Dobson's slur re Obama's faith?

That could explain why you chose for your topic a right-wing hate preacher even you find "obscure".

Or did you just like Dobson's shower ministry?

Since you're not here, I guess we'll have to figure it out ourselves....

Michael, why won't you post your CV?

Michael Scherer - You wrote: "The question before the court: Is it electioneering if a pastor preaches that a politician is working on the side of Satan?"

Yes, it is electioneering. The man is guilty.

It is also fear-mongering. It is an attempt to alter behavior through the application of fear. It is political terrorism.

It is the wretched form of populism that Joe Klein believes is only practiced by Democrats even though the Democratic Party has not resorted to those measures since, well, since all of the practitioners of that kind of whispering hatred left with the Dixiecrats to find their rightful home amongst the Republican Party. When can we have a discussion about the odious tactics that conservatives have been using? When can we demand that our journalists push back against this form of political terrorism?

So Michael comes up with his rules fleshing out the motives of commenters. Rather than respond to what people are saying.

Ironic coming from this guy-

"But bravo, for another attempt to fit me into that box you built
But you can read into this whatever you want. Count the number of letters in each word, the number of words on each line, transcribe the numbers to letters. Record those words on vinyl and then play the album backwards. Then you will really know what I am trying to say.
Posted by Michael Scherer | June 13, 2008 2:25 PM"

Let the man say whatever he wants,most of us know a nutbag,false prophet when we see&hear one.I would hope that 2million e-mail recipients doesn't mean 2million followers!

Michael:

My journalism degree is getting a little dusty and faded, but what I learned and what you practice seem to be two very different things.

Way back when, reporters yearned for an opportunity to challenge public officials and candidates on matters that could affect the public interest – not lapel pin nonsense, but certainly questions about cronyism and self-interest of candidates' leading advisers that may have contributed to enormous adverse public consequences.

"Equivalence," in the form of a superficial mention of a "balancing" issue as an afterthought in a serious piece about a significant issue, is just lazy reporting. If there are two issues worthy of coverage, write two stories. There's nothing less illuminating than merely quoting two competing but zealous advocates, and asserting that you've provided useful balance. A pro-Nazi quote (to hypothesize an extreme case) is pretty much always unnecessary, and ignoring Nazism absent such a quote is extremely irresponsible. Try pursuing substantive issues on each side independently, and see whether balance or imbalance appears over time. In your case, in my subjective view, it's hard to find balance.

The frustration of many commenters regarding your posts over time is, I believe, entirely justified. Your posts appear to carry at least an eerie congruence with McCain's campaign talking points and nonsubstantive attacks, and you appear to refuse to delve into serious questions about McCain's positions and policy advisers. Your apparent insistence to maintain this pattern, together with your simplistic defensiveness when you respond at all, is the source of much of the personal recrimination.

You have ignored the opportunity to pursue significant questions and issues (with citations to supporting sources) virtually handed to you by other commenters. At some point readers will naturally, reasonably and predictably conclude you have an ulterior motive.

It was Pynchon and Baudrillard.

Come on, Michael! If these guys really messed you up, you would agree with everyone who ever called you a corporate hack.

I'm kidding, to an extent. But surely your profession can't look so splendid after the murder of reality (the perfect crime). Or did you just want in on it?

Let's talk Pynchon, though. Doesn't McCain remind you of Brigadier Ernest Pudding?

I was going to do my trademark fake MS response but I see the real one beat me to it.

Come on, Michael! If these guys really messed you up, you would agree with everyone who ever called you a corporate hack.

What makes you think he doesn't?

Bill Keller? I thought he was that editor of al Qaeda's press release producer, the New York Times, whose employees were all of absolutely identical minds and whose employees have never known a single person who has voted for a presidential candidate in the last 30 years who received a majority of the popular vote (i.e., the Republican candidate).

McCow!
http://tw3k.net/Political_Art/John_McCain_Maverick_Branded.jpg

Taken by itself, I liked this post.
Shorter Keller:
"I'm not trying to make Obama lose, God is!"

As for the whole Whiny Commenters theme going on here:
Along the lines of what Paul Dirks said above, it seems like Scherer views us as some sort of hive mind, like we all get together and conspire about how to drive him mad, and so have come up with this set of rules.

Which is strange.

What's also strange is that it's only the most antagonistic ones, like attaturk and TomT, that get MS to respond. Scherer pretty much ignores the reasonable responses. Which makes me think there's kind of a love-hate thing going on here.

"What's also strange is that it's only the most antagonistic ones, like attaturk and TomT, that get MS to respond. Scherer pretty much ignores the reasonable responses. Which makes me think there's kind of a love-hate thing going on here."

Hear hear!

Cliff:

Count me out on the "love" part. And it's not so much hate as frustration at MS's disdain for professional responsibility.

I think the love-hate thing is on Michael's part - hence the attention given to the squeaky wheels.
I'm pretty sure no one here is secretly writing love letters to Scherer.

FlownOver:

Professional responsibility and employment at Time are mutually exclusive. There are always exceptions, but it likely occurs by chance rather than design.

Andy:

I don't know about all of his colleagues (see compliments to Karen, above) but Scherer's coming perilously close to proving the truth of an old joke from the history of American journalism:

In the first half of the Twentieth Century Henry Luce introduced two new magazines – Life, for people who can't read, and Time, for people who can't think.

This has been another episode of Michael Scherer's I'll post ANYTHING so I don't have to acknowledge Maverick's blatant breaking of campaign finance law or Phil Gramms role in UBS.

"More power to you, I guess. I think it is great when people find their life's passion, whatever it may be. "

So what's your passion Mikey? Oh, yeah...Press Secretary for President Maverick.

"aww you guys always getting mad at me for defending john mccain."
-Michael Scherer
http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/04/truthiness_in_action.html#comment-471654

Back on topic:

Michael, would you please ask McCain about Dobson's view – that it's OK for a majority of one faith to act through the government to impose its beliefs on al other Americans?

Michael, would you please ask McCain about Dobson's view – that it's OK for a majority of one faith to act through the government to impose its beliefs on al other Americans?

Now that's a good question! Throw it on the other stack of excellent questions to be asked.

Hmmm. Maybe someone should start keeping a list.

{crickets chirping}

Michael, at this point in your 'career', whom are you writing for exactly? You clearly have no audience...what keeps you going?

It's kinda odd. We are the audience for journalism. Those of us who are politically passionate and actually know what is going on are big consumers of news.

If we were pandered to for a bit, maybe it could be a decent business model.

Hey Michael, I can play your game too.

Rules for posting on Swampland:

1. Never discuss whether anyone powerful has broken a law.

2. Never write about anything that involves dead bodies.
2a. "Iraq" involves dead bodies, of course, but if one is to write about "Iraq" one must always discuss it in terms of partisan agendas. One must never directly discuss the dead bodies.

3. If there is something important to be discussed (say, something involving constitutional principles), discuss it 3 days after it matters to anyone.
3a. On landmark legislation, present Republican and Democratic points of view on the problems and solutions addressed in said legislation as equivalent.
3b. Pretend that Republican motives are always legitimate and honorable, and that Republicans are always honest and just even when their rhetoric is transparently craven.

4. If and when TIME/Swampland does get around to talking about important issues, it is necessary that the issues be presented as stupidly as possible. I'm not even talking about the 7th grade audience you guys shoot for--I'm talking about how you present issues without ever discussing how they might impact actual people, the functioning of government, etc. In general, be stupid.

5. Complain about comments objecting to stupidity.

6. Talk about controversial topics in a detached way, without actually getting into the controversy (for example, Carney on government sanctioned torture). Conversely, Swamplanders may insert themselves and express emotion if and only if they are writing about someone's treatment of the Press. See, for example, Jay N-S on Obama's waffle breakfast.

****

There is a whole other set of rules for Joe Klein, but that's a road I'm not interested in going down right now.

What Michael Scherer seems to have difficulty grasping is that many people think he does a really lousy job of being a journalist. We're not trying to offer you constructive criticism, because we think you need to find a job that you're good at, which would be something other than journalism. It may seem ad hominem to say you're a supercilious twit, but it's really just the best way to describe your writing.
Maybe you would be good at writing advertising copy. Or cleaning toilets. Really, whatever.

What's also strange is that it's only the most antagonistic ones, like attaturk and TomT, that get MS to respond. Scherer pretty much ignores the reasonable responses.

Am I supposed to apologize for knowing what I'm doing?

M4V Converter free download center- ALL M4V conversion tools which help you feel free to convert M4V to MP3, AVI, WMV, MPEG, FLV, 3GP, WMA. And useful Guide on How to Deal with M4V files.
m4v converter
convert m4v
Ultra Quicktime M4V converter currently is the best M4V converter which can convert Quicktime movie M4V to AVI, MPEG, MP4, MPG, WMV, ASF and Vob. As we know Quicktime movie usually has the video formats of M4V, MOV, QT, MP4, and M4V, With this M4V Converter, you can feel free to Convert them all with fast speed and high output quality.
m4v to avi
m4v to wmv
With the fast and powerful QuickTime video decoder inside, Ultra QuickTime M4V Converter supports almost all MOV, QT, MP4, M4V files, even QuickTime Player has not been installed. Integrated High-speed MPEG-2 encoder which let you convert M4V to DVD-Video files(VIDEO_TS, AUDIO_TS) and VCD/SVCD image(*.bin,*.cue), so you can burn VCD/SVCD/DVD disc easily from QuickTime files by using third-party buring tools. It is a software program for converting video formats at fast speeds and high quality. Very user-friendly interface and Quality Profiles.
m4v to mpeg
m4v to mp4

MPEG4 Converter for MacAVI to MPEG4 OS XFLV to MPEG4 OS XMPEG4 Converter for Mac is the best video Converter for Mac that supports various video formats. Such as iPod Video MPEG4, iPod Touch MPEG4, iPod Nano MPEG4, iPhone Video MPEG4, iPhone Video H.264, Apple TV MPEG4, M4v-MPEG4 and so on. MOV to MPEG4 OS XVOB to MPEG4 OS XDat to MPEG4 OS XConvert FLV to MPG Mac OS X Convert FLV to MP4 Mac OS XWith it, you can watch videos on almost any portable devices including iPod, iPhone, Apple TV, Zune, PSP, Video capable MP4 players and so on. Convert FLV to AVI Mac OS X Convert FLV to DIVX Mac OS X AMV to MPEG4 Mac OS X

عقار
عقار
عقار
عقار
عقار
عقار
عقار
عقار
عقار
عقار
عقار
عقار
عقار
عقار
عقار
عقار
عقار
عقار
عقار
عقار

eve isk eve iskGPS导航 防盗器 车载mp3 润滑油 汽车音响 轮胎 蓄电池 汽车用品 氙气灯 汽车坐垫 汽车美容 汽车维修 汽车配件 汽车保养 汽车装饰 贴膜 汽车改装 汽车影音
货架 货架厂 数控火焰切割机 数控等离子切割机 电焊机 焊机 指纹锁
会计网校 会计职称考试 会计考试 会计职称考试 会计考试 会计考试 会计职称 注册会计师考试 注册会计师考试 注册会计师考试 注册会计师考试 会计考试 会计考试 会计考试 会计职称 会计职称 会计职称考试 会计职称考试
拓展训练 Chinese antique furniture car wash systems car wash systems car wash equipment car wash equipment automatic car wash automatic car wash car washing machine car washing machine car wash car wash
北京汽车租赁 网络地板 防静电地板 白癜风 疱疹 生殖器疱疹 毛刷 工业毛刷　 毛刷厂 清洗毛刷
除皱 隆胸 吸脂 瘦脸 开眼角 隆鼻 鼻头 双眼皮 眼袋 隆下巴 阴道紧缩
除皱 除皱 双眼皮 眼袋 眼袋 眼袋 阴道紧缩 吸脂 吸脂 隆胸 隆胸 瘦脸 隆鼻 开眼角
北京设计公司 展览展示设计 标志设计 vi企业形象设计
无机钢筋锚固料 锚固料 融达 北京融达 北京融达建业 渗透性聚合物砂浆 聚合物砂浆 高强渗透性聚合物砂浆 灌浆料 灌浆 北京灌浆料 不锈钢钢绞线 粘钢胶 植筋胶 结构胶 灌浆剂 高强无收缩灌浆料 建筑结构胶 水泥灌浆剂 加固料 碳纤维胶 碳纤维胶 灌注粘钢胶 树脂灌缝胶
APW机柜 ATEN切换器 ATEN切换器 威宝机柜
办证 环氧地坪 环氧自流平 帕金森 办证 血管瘤 铜门 肝血管瘤 福联升老北京布鞋 防爆电器
指纹锁 周界报警
拓展训练 拓展训练 拓展训练
品牌服装 服装加盟 服装代理 服装经销 品牌男装 品牌女装 男装加盟 女装加盟 服装厂 品牌服装 服装加盟 服装代理 服装经销 品牌女装 品牌服装 服装代理 男装加盟 服装经销 品牌男装 品牌女装 男装加盟 女装加盟 服装厂
汽车影音 汽车改装 贴膜 汽车装饰 汽车保养 汽车配件 汽车维修 汽车美容 汽车坐垫 氙气灯 汽GPS导航 防盗器 车载mp3 润滑油 汽车音响 轮胎 蓄电池 汽车用品
黄金矿工小游戏 黄金矿工小游戏 美女餐厅小游戏 美女餐厅小游戏 拳皇小游戏 拳皇小游戏 三国麻将小游戏 风水 起名
vi企业形象设计 北京设计公司 展览展示设计 标志设计
尖锐湿疣 尖锐湿疣治疗 生殖器疱疹 生殖器疱疹治疗 疱疹治疗 疱疹的治疗 疱疹图片 病毒性疱疹 单纯疱疹 疱疹病毒 疱疹症状 男性生殖器疱疹症状 男性生殖器疱疹 什么是生殖器疱疹 生殖器疱疹的治疗 生殖器疱疹怎么治疗 生殖器疱疹如何治疗 生殖器疱疹治疗方法 生殖器疱疹怎么治 生殖器疱疹的治疗 生殖器疱疹的治疗 中药治疗生殖器疱疹 复发性生殖器疱疹 治疗生殖器疱疹的药物 治疗生殖器疱疹的特效药 生殖器疱疹治疗 尖锐湿疣症状 什么是尖锐湿疣 宫颈尖锐湿疣 阴道尖锐湿疣 男性尖锐湿疣 假性尖锐湿疣 尖锐湿疣怎么治疗 尖锐湿疣治疗方法 尖锐湿疣的治疗 中药治疗尖锐湿疣 治疗尖锐湿疣的药物 治疗尖锐湿疣的特效药 男性尖锐湿疣 尖锐湿疣复发 尖锐湿疣图片 铜门 写字楼巡展 写字楼巡展