How To Make Yourself Sound Like A left-Wing, Sexist Hack 101

Members of the liberal commentariat who think they’re immune to charges of sexism just because they endorse a left-wing feminist agenda, should think again. Attacking a female investigative journalist because of her criticism of the entrenched media bias at her former network – calling her “someone with temperament issues” who “sounds nuts” – looks to me like a ham-handed, sexist attempt to delegitimize and silence an inconvenient woman.

On Sunday, Attkisson told CNN’s  Brian Stelter that she felt that after she reported on stories critical of the Obama administration, Media Matters was paid to take her down.

Josh Marshall had nothing but scorn for this purveyor of “right-wing bugaboos” in his piece at TPM: How To Make Yourself Sound Nuts, 101:

After her computer was allegedly hacked by someone in late 2012 (seemingly confirmed by a network investigation) she hinted that President Obama’s surveillance operatives might be behind it. Now she says Media Matters may have been paid to go after her because of her reporting on Benghazi and other rightwing bugaboos.

“Allegedly”, “seemingly”… Sharyl Attkisson is known for flights of fancy, you see. 

“I’m sorry,” Marshall tells his readers,  “but Attkisson has some serious temperament issues.”

Let’s be frank: Media Matters is quite openly an activist media watchdog operation. Its brief is to provide a counter-balance to hackish and/or biased rightwing media and to make sure Republicans get plenty of scrutiny.

Got that? Obama’s openly political yet somehow tax-exempt media bodyguard, Media Matters, is only there to “counterbalance” the rightwing media and make sure the Republicans get plenty of scrutiny – because as we know, the Democrat media complex (aka Obama’s Praetorean guard) are just not up to that task.

Anyway, according to Josh Marshall, “it’s pretty obvious that they wouldn’t be friendly in the least to Sharyl Attkisson.” 

Well, no. What’s obvious is the hacks at Media Matters were plenty friendly to Attkisson as long as she was using her impressive investigative skills to scrutinize Republicans. The problem for the hacks at Media Matters and TPM is that the inconvenient Sharyl Attkisson (not a hack, but an actual investigative journalist) gave a Democrat administration the same level of scrutiny as she gave a Republican administration.

Attkisson couldn’t help but notice a double standard at CBS – who like Media Matters and TPM – doesn’t appreciate stories that criticize Democrats.

She said there was a tendency on the part of some of the managers at CBS to greenlight stories that “go against the grain of the Republican Party”, (of which she did plenty) but they often seemed “to feel defensive about, almost, personally defensive about stories that could make the government look bad.” 

Marshall helpfully explains that “people fund Media Matters precisely so they can keep tabs on and bust the chops of people like Sharyl Attkisson.” 

Because it is incumbent upon all state run media hacks to “bust the chops” of non-biased straight shooters who actually view journalism as a fact based profession – not partisan Democrat cheerleading.

He concludes that Sharyl Attkisson’s objection to this sad state of affairs  means she’s some kind of paranoid crazy-woman: “Again, if Media Matters’ intention was to gaslight her, they appear to have succeeded in spades.”

To make the misogyny complete, Marshall used an unflattering screenshot from the CNN interview for his post. And it’s not easy to find an unflattering shot of Sharyl Attkisson – so you know that took some effort.