Howard Kurtz goes out of his way to criticize Michelle over Kennedy’s news; Update: WaPo comments worse?
posted at 2:30 pm on May 22, 2008 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Amazing. And not the first time he’s been unfair to her, although the sheer gratuitousness of this makes it stand apart. From out of nowhere, in the course of an otherwise straightforward report on media grief over Ted Kennedy’s diagnosis, this materalizes:
(A digression: Michelle Malkin is among those conservatives asking readers to put aside political differences and pray for Kennedy and his family, and most of her commenters did just that. But there were a few, revoltingly hateful exceptions– posters who were reveling in the news and, in one case, talked of celebrating.)
And then right back to a reminiscence about Kennedy. To recap: Michelle herself asked her readers to pray for Kennedy, most of her commenters agreed, but the handful who didn’t warrant special mention in a Washington Post story that had nothing otherwise to do with blogs, commenters, or Michelle. Ace is e-mailing me asking if Kurtz has ever done a story about the oceans of vitriol that pour from the lefty blogosphere’s comment sections — and not always just the comment sections, as his “Reliable Sources” pal Arianna could tell him — when some misfortune befalls a conservative politician, to the point where HuffPo will sometimes preemptively close threads because they know what’s coming. I’m guessing that he has, simply because it would require an Olbermann-esque level of partisan shamelessness to ignore the nutroots elephant in the room here while going after Michelle, and Kurtz has never before demonstrated that. But I confess, after some cursory googling, I can’t find anything. Can anyone else? This can’t be as unfair as it looks.
Update: Charles Johnson e-mails to remind me that he’s been writing for months about how WaPo’s own comments sections often contain precisely the type of degeneracy Kurtz is tut-tutting Michelle for. A random example, plucked by CJ himself from this article:
Update: Here’s Charles’s post on this, with links to his previous posts about WaPo’s comments.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Again its the fact that Kurtz singled out Michelle for critsizim for a “few” commenters while he ignores the rest of the blogsphere and the hatemongering that goes on there.
I offer him the option to visit the daily Kos or HuffPU to see some of the vitrol there.
William Amos on May 22, 2008 at 2:37 PM
You must be referring to media bias.
There is none, don’t you know that?
HarryStar on May 22, 2008 at 2:38 PM
I guess he has never been to DKos or Huffington post. When Michelle has to shutdown/remove entire posts let me know.
Theworldisnotenough on May 22, 2008 at 2:38 PM
I take it as a measure of Michelle’s influence and impeccable record, that she is singled out for this kind of treatment.
Nyog_of_the_Bog on May 22, 2008 at 2:40 PM
I bet that, sometime in the past, Michelle found a cigarette on the street, and put it out on his forehead.
He’s still pissed.
OhEssYouCowboys on May 22, 2008 at 2:42 PM
Is he talking about the MSM Abu Graith coverage?
mred on May 22, 2008 at 2:42 PM
Another BONEHEAD!
Mr Kurtz,
HA has the threads open for public scrutiny. Thank you for pointing out to the public where they can locate conservative values. I pray that the public you just shocked takes the time to look over those two comment threads here on HA.
You may find, Mr Kurtz, that sunshine often requires sunblock.
Limerick on May 22, 2008 at 2:43 PM
I think I recall some complaints along these lines before about the WaPo: how they criticized some right leaning blogger’s commentators, while ignoring on their own pages the most vile stuff aimed at Republicans.
Kurtz I believe was involved, and completely ignored it.
Vanceone on May 22, 2008 at 2:43 PM
LOL, I read most of the comments on the subject post and, except for a few, comment were civil and wished him and his family well.
Most, if not all of us, do not care for Ted’s liberal ways but we prefer to kick a man who is standing. Kos and HuffPo could care less.
I think the mods here keep things pretty clean and they should be complimented for that.
BobK on May 22, 2008 at 2:44 PM
Oh well, just a sad little man who is upset that he and his media or descending rapdily into irrelevance.
reaganaut on May 22, 2008 at 2:44 PM
That was truly laughable. He couldn’t have found a less glaringly obvious way to slip in that dig at his rival?
joewm315 on May 22, 2008 at 2:44 PM
Freud defined this as projection.
swami on May 22, 2008 at 2:44 PM
There were very few posts like that here, but there were some. I won’t hold my breath waiting for this moron to say the same about DU/DK/HuffPost, where they were using Kennedy’s news as a way to post support for Obama.
What was the point in that digression? There wasn’t one that I could see and if I were the editor, I would have called him on that piece of useless text.
Torch on May 22, 2008 at 2:46 PM
I don’t know: some of you guys can be right bastards (see yesterday’s “why do you hate fat people” thread.) And I’m not crazy about the anti-Mormons, either.
WasatchMan on May 22, 2008 at 2:47 PM
But enough about the left’s comments after Tony Snow got cancer.
amerpundit on May 22, 2008 at 2:48 PM
Oh, stop playing coy, AP. You know as well as anybody here that whether it is or isn’t, obvious it can.
Blacklake on May 22, 2008 at 2:48 PM
Id stack this blog up against the leftie ones when you consider it was mostly fair comments with a few bad ones while on the left its mostly nasty comments with very few good ones.
William Amos on May 22, 2008 at 2:50 PM
Pulling my comment from the headlines.
- The Cat
MirCat on May 22, 2008 at 2:51 PM
Frankly I don’t care what Kurtz thinks of conservatives.
Is that too mean?
Good!
omnipotent on May 22, 2008 at 2:52 PM
I thought the below was important. howard Kurtz does “reliable sources” a CNN show based on reveiwing how the media treats issues. Who watches the watchers ?
William Amos on May 22, 2008 at 2:57 PM
At least Michelle got, and most conservatives, got credit for being human. If Bush were to have the same medical problem, Huffington would be joining in with the sick B _ _ stards on her site and the KOS.
orlandocajun on May 22, 2008 at 2:57 PM
Kurtz is being disingenuous. But then we knew that.
Say, what did he write for the occasion of the passing of Ronald Reagan? Here’s the link. His main thesis is wondering why the press was being nice upon his death when they were mean to him while he was alive, and then he goes into specifics as to why the press was mean. Evidently the press shouldn’t have shown any inconsistency. Or something.
JohnTant on May 22, 2008 at 2:58 PM
Do we need reminders of their tactics? Regardless of any decent intent on the Right, the Left will assign (by inference) the Right’s real intent underneath via party organs. This is why it’s a mistake to give them an inch or assume they’re not continually scraping for advantage on every single issue under the sun.
These are the people that want to regulate your toilet paper usage. Do you really think they’re beneath demagoguing sympathies for a dying senator? It doesn’t even matter who the senator is. This is just another not-to-miss opportunity to get out the truncheon and remind libtards and zombies that Conservatives are somehow fundamentally flawed–”you know, not like us enlightened metrosexual Progressives”. Wink-wink.
Forget ever meeting these people in the middle. Victory is the only viable strategy.
Western_Civ on May 22, 2008 at 2:59 PM
Amen!
That is why I refuse to PRETEND I care at all about Teddy.
omnipotent on May 22, 2008 at 3:01 PM
Another one from Kurtz re Ronald Reagan.
JohnTant on May 22, 2008 at 3:02 PM
Actually history must have got that wrong. They do so much of that. Other things I defined as projection. This that you refer to I would simply call poo throwing. Poojection if you want to make a longer word out of it I suppose.
Sigy on May 22, 2008 at 3:09 PM
Just another MSM moron. Any idiot could expect a mixed bag on Teddy. I wonder what MaryJo would have to say about him.
saiga on May 22, 2008 at 3:14 PM
That’s why holding back is such a farce. No matter they will take whatever they can and turn it around. A few of us did not have the “utmost” sympathy for him. Although most had sympathy for his loved ones.
Teddy’s a big boy, he has tried to destroy enough people to know that he is a sitting duck.
Here is quick list
Bork
Thomas
Alito
Souter
The last four jurists were ravaged by his evil temper, he tried to destroy Bork.
How many people has he destroyed, while living as a “ruler”.
right2bright on May 22, 2008 at 3:14 PM
Like you I cannot agree with those who rank less than completely heartfelt public displays of sympathy among the virtues. To the logician all things should be said exactly as they are, and to overstate one’s sympathy is as much a departure from truth as to exaggerate one’s lack of same.
Holmes on May 22, 2008 at 3:18 PM
These quotes from Kurtz on the passing of Reagan…what a gem.
right2bright on May 22, 2008 at 3:19 PM
There’s a big difference, though, between having certain sentiments about Kennedy’s ill fate and spouting off about them in public.
Blacklake on May 22, 2008 at 3:21 PM
Funny how idiots have one way vision.
drjohn on May 22, 2008 at 3:22 PM
There were a lot of comments on Michelle’s site that had to be deleted but I’m guessing Howie saw the nutjob ramblings of Ombre Rose over there and made a big deal out of it.
SnarkVader on May 22, 2008 at 3:24 PM
Ok, who started it?
http://michellemalkin.com/2007/03/26/moral-equivalence-at-the-wapo/
Who threw the first stone?
I am reminded of an effort to promote a HotAir posting to the front page on Digg.com.
rockhauler on May 22, 2008 at 3:26 PM
I just looked through that thread, doing a search for “celebrat”. Nobody talked about celebrating his death. Several people said the opposite.
So Kurtz is flat out lying.
flenser on May 22, 2008 at 3:28 PM
Don’t I remember a few funerals a while back that were over the top? Wasn’t President Bush a rather captive audience during one funeral where he was berrated constantly by the lefties. These folks know no shame where their power is concerned and will do anything to keep it, both the pols and the msm.
TimothyJ on May 22, 2008 at 3:30 PM
::clap::clap::clap::clap::
This style of journalism is celebrated over at CNN.
fogw on May 22, 2008 at 3:35 PM
No, he’s not. A lot of comments were deleted, including one that wished Kennedy had AIDS so that he’d suffer longer and another that was praying for the malignancy. That’s just a couple of them. You don’t know when Kurtz went online and saw them.
SnarkVader on May 22, 2008 at 3:40 PM
Sounds pretty fair to me. It seemed to me as a quote that was complimentary of MM. He made clear that she requested prayers for Sen. Kennedy, only pointing out that there were a small number of distasteful commentors, which is true.
No matter our political affiliation, the blogs that we visit contain hateful rhetoric from some unsavory individuals who take advantage of anonymity.
I personally have a problem with anyone who would make fun or celebrate an illness or injury. Politics are important, but life is precious. Republican or Democrat, Conservative or Liberal, no group retains a monopoly on hateful rhetoric. We a going to drive ourselves crazy pointing the finger at anonymous bloggers. I use to do that myself, and I’m a happier person without hating on anyone. I still have disagreements, but tempered ones.
By the way, I hope and pray for the best for Sen. Kennedy. I also hope and pray for all who are aflicted with this terrible sickness, cancer. We often aknowledge publiic figures battling cancer, but all of us are likely affected, personally with the disease.
I think that we can all agree that a cure is needed, and the sooner, the better.
sandman on May 22, 2008 at 3:42 PM
I think that Howard Kurtz has a huge crush on Michelle that he doesn’t know how to deal with, so he is trying to convince himself he doesn’t have a crush on her by attacking her.
BigD on May 22, 2008 at 3:45 PM
Um, isn’t it Howard Kurtz? Please.
benrand on May 22, 2008 at 3:45 PM
I read a bunch of the comments and although a couple refused to wish him well I did not find one that said they were going to celebrate. My guess is that kurtz didn’t either. He probably did the tried and true liberal tactic and made it up without reading any.
peacenprosperity on May 22, 2008 at 3:50 PM
This is why many of us were not thrilled with yesterday’s post about Michael Savage. “Gosh, if we don’t browbeat Michael Savage …who will?!?!?” I understand wanting to disassociate from low-class behavior and Savage is certainly not above criticism but, the thing is, it won’t matter to the mainstream media. The media will see what they want to see to suit their politics just like they always do. I think some folks still don’t truly understand the extent of the total, utter contempt the media have for those of us who don’t toe their party line.
Django on May 22, 2008 at 3:54 PM
These MSM types are hopeless. I think that Teddy is one of the worst senators in the history of the republic. However, I hope that he recovers. You don’t kick people when they are down and you don’t wish bad things on sick people.
duff65 on May 22, 2008 at 3:58 PM
Any tut-tutting for attacking Cheney? I am not impressed by this guy Kurtz
RobCon on May 22, 2008 at 4:11 PM
still celebrating the Kennedy news!!!!!!!!
meanwhile Mary Jo Kopechne still can not be reached for comment.
bill30097 on May 22, 2008 at 4:13 PM
Garrick Utley called from 1978, and he wants his haircut back.
Lee on May 22, 2008 at 4:17 PM
sandman said:
This is the equivalent of saying Miss Oklahoma was beautiful, except for a mole on her cheek with a hair sticking out, and visible cottage-cheese cellulite on her hips.
I wonder that Kurtz enjoys finding fault with someone who tries to be moral, and Lord knows Michelle does try, as it’s fun for the left to point out hypocrisy, and it will be there, because no one is perfect. But I’ll go along with Bill Bennett who says it’s better to be a hypocrite and sometimes betray your values than to have no values at all. And yes, I know it wasn’t a failing of MM herself, but of some of her commenters.
Limerick wrote:
That’s a terrific quote. Despite MM’s best guidance, some people will post jerky things. That’s what happens when you give people a voice.
Paul-Cincy on May 22, 2008 at 4:23 PM
“This can’t be as unfair as it looks.”
The hell it can’t. AP, you’re being far too generous.
Mike H on May 22, 2008 at 4:24 PM
Kurtz looks like the kind of weasel who would complain on his show about a comment that he himself anonymously placed on some blog earlier in the day.
Buddahpundit on May 22, 2008 at 4:41 PM
Kurtz is not being honest with himself when he wrongly compares Michelle’s posters with those of other blogs. The hate on the Daily Koz, Move.on and the Huffo Post are so hateful that to say they are the epitome of evil is cutting them slack. This is hypocrisy that cannot be matched.
volsense on May 22, 2008 at 4:51 PM
Howard, Howard, Howard…..
Is this what passes for journalistic integrity for you? What a shame.
GT on May 22, 2008 at 5:03 PM
Exactly.
Ex. Act. Ly.
Professor Blather on May 22, 2008 at 5:41 PM
Exactly. Howard Kurtz did not execute good journalism or civility by swerving left to take a futile swipe at Michelle. I’d say that he’s just bitter because he realizes that he is not as talented as Michelle.
Zorro on May 22, 2008 at 6:10 PM
He’s probably just mad he didn’t get to see the ping pong ball thing.
Lonetown on May 22, 2008 at 6:21 PM
If you’re only holding back because you think it might get you Kurtz’s approval, you might as well go ahead and let it rip. Personally I think that displaying self control and respect for others is what mature people do. And I am trying to mature a little before I die.
snaggletoothie on May 22, 2008 at 6:56 PM
Michelle Malkin is a beautiful woman of color (non-whitey); a minority if you will. How dare she preach a conservative ideology! Doesn’t she understand that people of color belong to the whitey dominated Liberal ideology! Doesn’t she understand where her place is!
They hate any minority that doesn’t fall in line, esp. those who have achieved a powerful status. Threatened they are. These creatures have put a few men/woman of color in positions of power in the Liberal brotherhood; however, these folks know there place, and they know the position of power can be taken away as easily as was given.
People such as Michelle and Condi are hated by the left just as much as they hate GW Bush. It’s no surprise that Kurtz (or anybody at the WAPO) would stoop to this childish behavior when it comes to the Michelle.
Keemo on May 22, 2008 at 6:58 PM
Go here to write Kurtz, and nail his sorry hypocritical ass.
AntonK on May 22, 2008 at 7:42 PM
This is why I don’t worry about what The Left thinks of me. They play dirty and will never change. When will y’all learn?
SouthernGent on May 22, 2008 at 7:47 PM
Done
Texyank on May 22, 2008 at 10:09 PM
I always thought Kurtz did a pretty unfair job because of his ultra liberal slant - especially about two years ago when CNN was trying (and probably did) destroy Bush.
Travis1 on May 22, 2008 at 10:35 PM
Watch out MM, I think MR. KURTZ has a thing for you!!! Maybe even to the point he has a TINGLE in his LEG!!! WHOOOAAA!!
pueblo1032 on May 23, 2008 at 12:18 PM