Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Recount judge blasts Wall Street Journal

  1. #1
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,763

    Recount judge blasts Wall Street Journal

    One of the judges of the Minnesota State Canvassing Board has just come out with a blistering response to the Wall Street Journal opinion piece hit job, which smeared them and what they were doing in the recount.

    Consider the following:

    1) The canvassing board consists of one secretary of state and four judges, one of whom is the Chief Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court.

    2) Of the 5 members of the canvassing board, 2 are Republicans, 2 are independents (one of whom was appointed by Jesse Ventura when he was governor), and ONE is a Democrat.

    3) Of the 9 decisions made by the canvassing board during the recount, 9 were unanimous, and not one was a split decision.

    4) The canvassing board made all 9 decisions based on Minnesota law. Not one of them was in Franken's or Coleman's pocket.

    5) The writer of the WSJ opinion piece hit job is Trent England, member of a Neocon think tank called Evergreen Freedom Foundation. And what is the Evergreen Freedom Foundation? A private interest law firm for its contributors, disguised as a public interest policy organization. You can read more about them here.

    The Wall Street Journal is not what it used to be, now that Rupert Murdoch has taken over. At worst, this opinion piece hit job could be called libel. At best, it is yellow journalism of the worst sort, conceived by a partisan hack, for the purpose of spreading partisan lies.

    Finally, there is a good reason the WSJ opinion piece hit job has been pushed hard by FOX News today. Murdoch owns FOX News too. What a coincidence...NOT.

    Article is here
    .
    Last edited by danarhea; 01-06-09 at 09:52 PM.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  2. #2
    Count Smackula
    rathi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    10-31-15 @ 10:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,890

    Re: Recount judge blasts Wall Street Journal

    Good to see someone is standing up the pathetic standards journalism has fallen to. It must be tough to be on the receiving end of such a pathetic smear piece.

  3. #3
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Recount judge blasts Wall Street Journal

    To clarify:

    The author of that letter is a judge who is a registered independent, but was elected in a heavily democratic district. He accuses the WSJ editorial of misconstruing the facts, but does not dispute a single factual claim they made about the double counting of ballots, the discovery of new ballots, or the rulings on challenged ballots. Instead, he takes issue with their terminology, such as "meek" and "undeserving," and complains that he was wrongly maligned. Powerful stuff.

    3) Of the 9 decisions made by the canvassing board during the recount, 9 were unanimous, and not one was a split decision.
    ? There were 9 open meetings, not 9 decisions. They made hundreds of decisions, and the author of that letter merely claims that "all the major ones" were unanimous.

    4) The canvassing board made all 9 decisions based on Minnesota law. Not one of them was in Franken's or Coleman's pocket.
    What are you basing this on? Did you review the decisions?

    5) The writer of the WSJ opinion piece hit job is Trent England, member of a Neocon think tank called Evergreen Freedom Foundation.
    What are you talking about? The editorial that this letter is in response to was written by the editorial board of the WSJ, not this "Trent England" guy.

    The Wall Street Journal is not what it used to be, now that Rupert Murdoch has taken over. At worst, this opinion piece hit job could be called libel.
    No, it couldn't.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  4. #4
    Advisor SWM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    If love was cow blood, I'd be a slaugterhouse.
    Last Seen
    01-20-10 @ 08:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    310

    Re: Recount judge blasts Wall Street Journal

    Hmm...even if the article in question is in fact deliberately deceptive, which is entirely likely as far as I'm concerned, it's still just an op-ed piece; hate to say it. I read a deliberately misleading op-ed piece at least 3 or 4 times a week, and I don't pick up the paper every day. It's still crappy, but it's just not that big of a deal, frankly.

    Op-ed articles are not journalism. There's certainly nothing wrong with complaining about the most absurd ones (although 90% of them are nauseating, really), but if we expect the authors to approach them like legitimate journalism, even through the act of accusing them of criminal activity when they don't, we risk lending the art as whole a credibility that it does not deserve. Op-eds are not news. They have no more journalistic legitimacy than super-market tabloids.

    EDIT: This is surely not the last we will hear about it, the whole op-ed world is going to be tripping over itself in a rush to accuse the Minnesota recount of illegitimacy, even if the results turn around. The actual legitimacy of the recount is practically irrelevant.
    Last edited by SWM; 01-07-09 at 01:50 AM.

  5. #5
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Recount judge blasts Wall Street Journal

    Dana is slipping.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  6. #6
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Seen
    02-13-09 @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,942

    Re: Recount judge blasts Wall Street Journal

    I'm not sure how the publication of this op-ed in the WSJ reflects anything at all about the journalistic quality at WSJ. Can someone help me on this?

    And it is a fact that some ballots that were damaged and replaced were counted along with the repleacement ballot, that hundreds of ballots miraculously appeared after-the-fact, and that rulings on challenged ballots were suspect, i.e., considered dubious by third-party observers. These are indisputable facts.

    So the respondent to the op-ed piece is really carping about the tone that op-ed author took in his piece.

    How can a poster here rely then on a complaint about tone to conclude that the original piece was libelous?

  7. #7
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Recount judge blasts Wall Street Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    I'm not sure how the publication of this op-ed in the WSJ reflects anything at all about the journalistic quality at WSJ. Can someone help me on this?

    And it is a fact that some ballots that were damaged and replaced were counted along with the repleacement ballot, that hundreds of ballots miraculously appeared after-the-fact, and that rulings on challenged ballots were suspect, i.e., considered dubious by third-party observers. These are indisputable facts.

    So the respondent to the op-ed piece is really carping about the tone that op-ed author took in his piece.

    How can a poster here rely then on a complaint about tone to conclude that the original piece was libelous?
    Well you know all those elections volunteers driving around with trunkloads of ballots that they forgot about.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  8. #8
    Only Way Round is Through
    ShamMol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Pasadena, California
    Last Seen
    01-13-09 @ 12:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    1,988

    Re: Recount judge blasts Wall Street Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    To clarify:

    What are you basing this on? Did you review the decisions?

    No, it couldn't.
    He is right, though, RightinNYC. All of the major decisions that we heard about were unanimous. And, it is logical that all of the minor ones leading up to the major ones did just that...lead up to them. That means that all of the minor disputes were resolved before the major votes.

    What everyone is missing is the thrust of the WSJ article, which is that Franken picked up about 200 votes more than he should have, and that several more that he had to begin with before the recount were questionable. But, we should all keep in mind that, the original author pointed out, the majority on the board were not registered democrats and that there was a fair representation and hearing for all sides.

    The election is over, let's stop bickering. Coleman can run for governor or for Amy K's seat when the time comes.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •