Dana Milbank

You don't often see a well-known liberal media member publicly criticizing the liberal media he's a part of.

But when Dan Abrams, the former General Manager of MSNBC and founder of the left-wing Mediaite, trashes his former network - in particular Hardball host Chris Matthews - as well as the New York Times, the Washington Post, and other media outlets for their "Shameful, Inexcusable Distortion Of The Supreme Court’s Citizens United Decision," one should take notice:

The media has an "antipathy" toward Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum, asserted Dana Milbank of the Washington Post on CNN's Reliable Sources on Sunday. Given the media's treatment of Santorum after his Iowa success, that would be safe to acknowledge.

Milbank noted that the ill-will stems from Santorum's social-conservatism, adding that "liberal pundits and I think the media in general have a particular antipathy towards Rick Santorum because of the cultural differences." When asked why the media were focusing on his social beliefs when voters are concerned about the economy, Milbank lamely responded that "Whenever we focus on the economy, it's terribly boring." [Video below the break.]

While most of the media continue to obsess about millionaires supposedly not paying their "fair share" of taxes, the liberal Brookings Institution has let the cat out of the bag concerning just how absurd this whole thing is.

According to the Washington Post's Dana Milbank, he discussed this issue with Brookings' William Gale, and disclosed his findings to Chris Matthews on MSNBC's "Hardball" Wednesday (video follows with transcript and commentary):

While columnist Dana Milbank complained about "The irrelevancy of the Obama presidency" -- noting Republican laughter during the Obama speech (especially the line "This isn't political grandstanding") and Rep. James Moran (D-Va.) reading the newspaper -- TV critic Hank Stuever sat at the Tom Shales Desk of Obama Speech Puffery. "Obama reiterates his mastery of medium" was the headline on the front of the Style section.

Stuever's expert of choice on Obama was Lou Dobbs of Fox News, whom he plucked out for declaring it was "The best speech he's ever given." That's not exactly what Dobbs said on The O'Reilly Factor after the speech. Dobbs said it was the best speech of his presidency. But then Dobbs agreed with Bill O'Reilly that it was extremely political and not a transparent proposal:

Texas Gov. Rick Perry is no libertarian, he's a theocrat, at least according to Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank.

His evidence? In his 2008 book "On My Honor," Perry is unapologetic in his firm grasp of orthodox Christianity.

"Perry's politics are religious in a way not seen before in modern-day mainstream presidential candidates," an alarmed Milbank insisted:

Al Sharpton has never found a crisis he couldn’t exploit – even when they don’t exist – his claim to fame. On Friday’s pre-hurricane episode of his MSNBC show, he warned “Hurricane Irene is nonpartisan” and was threatening both red and blue states. That nonpartisanship doesn’t extend to hurricane coverage on TV, where liberals once again boast about the glories of government disaster aid, and conservatives are trashed as lunatics for wanting to limit the untrammeled growth of spending on natural disasters.

Sharpton began his show by announcing “the desperate race to get ready and keep people safe reminds us all how essential our government is.” Nonsense. It reminds us how essential personal responsibility is.

Then he turned to former Democrat Gov. Ed Rendell and asked “What is your take on this anti-government rhetoric in the middle of this crisis, unprecedented crisis for people on the East Coast?”

The Washington Post's adjectives in Thursday's coverage of the Obama press conference signaled their approval. "Obama takes tougher tone on economy, foreign policy" was the headline at the top of Page One. Post reporters Peter Wallsten and Zachary Goldfarb led off with how Obama "belittled" congressional Republicans for taking vacations during debt-limit talks and contrasted their work effort with his young daughters. But his mission was to "reassert a commanding presence" on the issues. He was not "petulant" or "whiny," he was "showing a combative side that Americans rarely see."

The front-page promo underneath hailed Dana Milbank's "Washington Sketch" full of praise. "The pugilist in chief: A press corps gathered to hear our regularly scheduled president meets a rather feisty gentleman instead."

On Wednesday's All Things Considered, NPR's Ari Shapiro let The Daily Show's John Oliver and The Washington Post's Dana Milbank cast aspersions on some of the declared 2012 Republican presidential candidates and their surrogates. Oliver mocked the talking points of a Ron Paul spokesman as "pointless" and "meaningless," while Milbank derided the candidacy of Herman Cain.

Host Melissa Block introduced Shapiro's report about the White House correspondent's first visit to a post-presidential debate spin room, and gave a hint of its overall mocking tone: "The spin room might be a good name for an amusement park ride or part of a fun house. That makes it a perfect fit for a presidential campaign, which can get a bit wacky even in these early days."

The Andrew Breitbart-hating media certainly got its comeuppance Monday when Congressman Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) finally admitted that he had indeed been sending lewd pictures to young women via his Twitter account.

Sensing that he was seated with one such press member, CNN's Howard Kurtz on Sunday's "Reliable Sources" told a mopey Dana Milbank of the Washington Post, "You're just annoyed because Breitbart, who doesn't like the liberal media, has actually gotten some credit on this story" (video follows with transcript and commentary):

Amy Holmes of America's Radio News Network made a fabulous observation Sunday concerning the New York Times and the Washington Post asking readers to go through Sarah Palin's email messages to assist them in finding dirt on the former governor.

Appearing on CNN's "Reliable Sources," Holmes marvelously concluded, "The media it seemed to me it was like they were putting out an 'America’s Most Wanted' tipline to try to find something to try to nail Sarah Palin...I think the media needs to go to rehab with Anthony Weiner and get over their obsession with this woman" (video follows with transcript and commentary):

Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank wrote a love letter to President Obama Tuesday wherein he cited three college professors praising the intellectual capacity of the current White House resident.

Unfortunately, nowhere in his piece did Milbank mention that two of these academics contributed to Obama's campaign in 2008:

Dictionary.com defines "hooligan" as a ruffian or hoodlum.

This is what the Washington Post's Dana Milbank called Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker in his Sunday column:

"Let's be clear: The high-stakes standoff in Wisconsin has nothing to do with balancing the state's budget."

So began Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson's not surprisingly one-sided piece Tuesday:

After a stinging defeat at the polls Tuesday, liberal media members are rethinking the horse they backed in 2008, what with the economy struggling, unemployment near 10 percent, and the Democrats suffering their worst loss in a midterm election since before most of these so-called journalists were born.

It was therefore not at all surprising to see Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank waxing nostalgic in his Sunday piece about whether or not we'd all be much better off if Hillary Clinton had been elected president two years ago:

Fox News Channel hosts Bill O'Reilly and Megyn Kelly blasted far-left Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank yesterday for his apparent dishonesty in criticizing Fox's election night coverage.

"I think you and I should go beat him up," O'Reilly jested. Later in the segment, as Kelly preceeded criticism of Milbank by saying "with all due respect," O'Reilly interjected to say "you don't have to say 'with all due respect.' He doesn't deserve any."

In addition to hammering Milbank himself, O'Reilly singled out WaPo editorial page editor Fred Hiatt, who reportedly told O'Reilly that the paper would not take action against Milbank for supposed lies told in his column. "I just want everybody in American to know what the Washington Post has come to," O'Reilly said.

Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank attacked Fox News in Wednesday's paper for having a Republican "victory party" on air on Election Night. Nowhere in this piece did he acknowledge his routine appearances on MSNBC, and whether it had a partisan sound on Election Night (and every other weeknight). He also avoided the idea that NBC-Universal was helpfully doling out large chunks of air time for Barack Obama this fall to stave off Democrat losses. His column began:

At Rupert Murdoch's cable network, the entity that birthed and nurtured the Tea Party movement, Election Day was the culmination of two years of hard work to bring down Barack Obama - and it was time for an on-air celebration of a job well done....

 

Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank on Sunday said conservative commentator Glenn Beck is dangerous.

Discussing his new book about Beck with Howard Kurtz on CNN's "Reliable Sources," Milbank said, "When a man is frequently talking about Hitler and Nazis, and then you see the Tea Party rally with the same quotations of Tea Parties and Nazis... you have to say, where does all this come from and why is it suddenly out in the open?" 

This came moments after Milbank stated, "While you can't be blamed for any individual act, it is evidence that he is disseminating a very dangerous doctrine."

When Kurtz questioned him about whether or not he really believes this, Milbank responded, "I think it's been manifestly true that he's dangerous" (video follows with transcript and commentary):  

CNN's Howard Kurtz on Sunday said an inconvenient truth that few in his industry would care to admit: "Helen Thomas has been saying all kinds of questionable things in [the White House] press room for the past decade, but her colleagues, for the most part, had given her a pass until now."

This indeed is the real lesson behind last week's retirement of the nation's longest living member of the White House press corps: she for years was allowed by her colleagues to regularly get away with what most of them knew was unacceptable behavior.

Interesting that media members are learning this lesson only when one of their own falls from grace. The question is whether or not they'll recognize that they should always be scrutinizing each other's performance in order to maintain the integrity and professionalism key to an industry that is charged with policing government and the politicians that serve our very nation.

This seems especially important given how the same people now admitting they let Thomas get away with media malpractice ignored all journalistic standards during the last presidential campaign and have continued to do so since Barack Obama was inaugurated.

Consider that as you watch Kurtz and his panel discuss the Thomas affair on the opening segment of Sunday's "Reliable Sources" (video follows with transcribed highlights and commentary, full transcript at end of post):  

Everyone knows that the quickest way to become a popular Republican in the media’s eyes is to denounce the Republicans as too extreme and conservative. The latest example is Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, who became an instant media sensation when he abandoned his dreadfully losing GOP campaign for the U.S. Senate to run as an independent. Chris Matthews pushed the storyline as a “Stalinesque purge” of moderates.

Obama strategist David Axelrod crowed about how great the Democrats looked as a result: “We have a big tent. They have a lean-to now.” This, from the party that hasn’t tolerated a pro-life presidential or vice-presidential nominee since Jimmy Carter tried to straddle the fence in 1976. This, from the liberals who are presently trying to “purge” Sen. Blanche Lincoln in a Democratic primary in Arkansas. This, from the party that successfully purged Sen. Joe Lieberman from its ranks.

Washington Post reporter/columnist Dana Milbank came out explicitly Sunday in favor of Florida Gov. Charlie Crist as his Senate campaign collapses. Just as he earlier called surging conservative Marco Rubio the "anti-Crist," on Sunday he wrote "The crucifixion of Crist by Republican leaders says less about him than it does about the party."

He wrote "the Crist crisis is a whole new level of Jacobin excess; in the case of [Joe] Lieberman, Democrats at least waited until he lost the primary to purge him. Not so the Republicans, who are in a dogmatic race to the bottom as they drop Crist for his far-right challenger, Marco Rubio."

But how did Milbank characterize Ned Lamont, Lieberman's far-left challenger? He never used that label in the Post. Like many other liberal media scribes, he merely called him "antiwar."

While mainstream media reporters are generally pretty supportive of the Obama administration, they bristle, and rightly so, at incidents where the administration is less than transparent or actively seeks to impede journalists from working.

Last week it was liberal Post columnist Dana Milbank snarking about how the nuclear summit was closed off to press scrutiny. Today it's Politico's Ben Smith, who shared with readers in a snarkily-headlined post "Most transparent White House ever," how (emphasis mine):

Police chased reporters away from the White House and closed Lafayette Park today in response to a gay rights protest in which several service members in full uniform handcuffed themselves to the White House gate to protest "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

People who have covered the White House for years tell me that's an extremely unusual thing to do in an area that regularly features protests.

A reporter can be seen in the YouTube video above calling the move "outrageous" and "ridiculous."

Editor's Note: Media Research Center (MRC) President Brent Bozell released the following statement earlier today -- available here on his official Facebook page. The NewsBusters publisher praised Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank for denouncing the "clinic" that President Obama put on "for some of the world's greatest dictators in how to circumvent a free press" in his April 14 column, "Obama's disregard for media reaches new heights at nuclear summit":

It's a rare occurrence that the MRC and the typically left-leaning Dana Milbank agree, but this time he is spot on. Indeed, President Obama must have made world leaders feel as if they were transported back to a ‘Soviet-era Moscow' for the media restricted nuclear energy summit instead of arriving in the capitol of the free world."

But are we really surprised? After all, this is the same President who has won lavish praise from some of the world's most brutal dictators including Venezuela's Hugo Chavez and Cuba's Fidel Castro."

The mainstream media are having a field day with the Republican National Committee spending contributor dollars for "meals" at a risqué Hollywood night spot. Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank joins in the fun with today's "RNC spends nearly $2,000 at sex-themed Voyeur nightclub."  He provides titillating details of what transpires in that joint, and then attempts a quick rewrite of history with, "And Al Gore got in trouble for going to a Buddhist temple?"

That's seriously misleading.  It wasn't going to a Buddhist temple in April of 1996 that got Gore into trouble.  It was lying about illegally raising money there that raised questions and generated skepticism about Gore's truthfulness.  And, in the end, he didn't really get into any serious trouble at all.  As reported by the New York Times in August, 2000:

For the third time, Attorney General Janet Reno brushed off the advice of senior advisers and declined to intensify an investigation into Vice President Al Gore's fundraising activities in 1996.

She said she would not appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Mr. Gore's sworn statements that neither his appearance at a Buddhist temple in California in 1986 nor his attendance at several White House coffee sessions were fundraisers.

You really have to wonder what was running through Vice President Joe Biden's head when he leaned toward President Barack Obama and said "this is a big f**cking deal." Did Biden think that after nearly a year of campaigning for health care reform he was alerting Obama to something new?

But Biden isn't the first vice president to allow an expletive slip in a public forum in this day and age of a geared up media apparatus. Back in 2004, then-Vice President Dick Cheney let the F-bomb slip in remarks he made to Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., over political disagreement between the two.

However, the media, particularly The Washington Post, MSNBC and CNN, took Cheney's indiscretion seriously. But Biden's indiscretion - which was actually captured on national TV - wasn't seen as so serious.

Comparative Videos Below Fold (Warning: Also Includes Explicit Language)

 

The Washington Post wasn't hiding its contempt for tea-party protesters on Monday morning. Right at the top of the front page, they ran a commentary from Dana Milbank, who described the protesters with their Kill the Bill signs and Don't Tread on Me flags, and then declared:

It was a hideous display, capping one of the ugliest and strangest periods of the American legislative process: the town hall meetings, the death panels, the granny killing, the images of Nazi concentration camps, the Cornhusker Kickback, the Louisiana Purchase, Joe Wilson's "You lie!" moment, the middle-of-the-night and Christmas Eve votes, the Massachusetts special election, the Stupak Amendment, the Slaughter Plan, the filibusters, the supermajorities, the deeming and passing.

Fifteen months of episodic battles over health-care reform has often ended, as the finale did, with epithets and shouts.

Milbank began the article by saying the road to reform "has been long and gruesome," making it clear which half was gruesome. Democrats, by comparison, were the saintly victims of rhetorical assault:

The Washington Post couldn’t provide a solely objective analysis of the health "summit" in Friday’s paper. Instead, they put liberal columnist Dana Milbank on page one to crow that Obama had badly paddled the Republicans. The headline was "Prof. Obama walks tall and carries a big paddle." The opening came with a heaping spoonful of sugar for Obama:

Republicans had been hesitant to accept President Obama's invitation to participate in Thursday's White House health-care summit. Their hesitance turned out to be justified.

An equal number of Democratic and Republican legislators assembled around the table....But members of the opposition party may not have fully understood that they were stepping into Prof. Obama's classroom, and that they were to be treated like his undisciplined pupils.

The headline on the Post website also echoed that idea: "Professor Obama schools lawmakers on health-care reform." Obama called out John McCain’s "tirade," he wrote:

The comedic ingenuity that is adorning the pages of The Washington Post these days is astonishing, but not exactly in a good way.

Dana Milbank, one-half of the duo that sent panic throughout the newsroom at the Post last year after producing a video with his colleague Chris Cillizza that suggested President Barack Obama would serve a brew called "Mad Bitch Beer" to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton if she were to attend a White House-style beer summit, is still at it with the shtick.

In his Feb. 19 "Washington Sketch" column, Milbank declared Marco Rubio, an opponent of Florida Gov. Charlie Crist in that state's GOP Senate primary "the anti-Crist." Get it - "anti-Crist," as in "anti-Christ?"

The Washington Post's Dana Milbank Sunday said the recent snowstorms in the nation's capital were inconvenient for Nobel Laureate Al Gore.

Such a remark seems destined to draw the ire of climate alarmists from coast to coast who have been burning the candle at both ends to not only convince the public that these storms are evidence of global warming, but also to criticize anyone that has jokingly claimed the contrary.

What will also likely anger Gore's sycophants was Milbank's use of facts in his column Sunday:

Dana Milbank of The Washington Post couldn't contain his glee over Joint Chief of Staffs chairman Admiral Mike Mullen's Feb. 2 testimony in favor of overturning "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

"Mike Mullen's 42 years in the military earned him a chest full of ribbons, but never did he do something braver that what he did on Capitol Hill on Tuesday," began Milbank's Feb. 3 ode to the admiral. "In a packed committee room, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff looked hostile Republican senators in the eye and told them unwelcome news: He thinks gays should be allowed to serve openly in the armed forces he commands."

"If they awarded decorations for congressional testimony, Mullen would have himself a Medal of Honor," concluded the columnist.

Mullen explained his "personal belief" to the Senate Armed Services "that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly would be the right thing to do."

"No matter how I look at the issues, I cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we have in place a policy which forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens," he elaborated. "For me personally, it comes down to integrity - theirs as individuals and ours as an institution."

Milbank's praise of Mullen's testimony is a complete 180 from how he characterized the testimony of Elaine Donnelly at a House Armed Services personnel subcommittee hearing about the same topic in 2008.