Dafydd,

Please tell me that this reporter does not hold an English degree. I ask this because I do not really want to soil myself googling him.

With respect to your rhetorical question, Dafydd, I don't think he does realize how he comes across to others observing this incident. Self awareness is not, apparently, something leftist journalists possess or care about.

Well, I just soiled myself. A Google search turned up a linkedin profile that matched the criteria. This profile shows that he attended Lawrence University from 1981 to 1985. Apparently you need a login to get more profile info from linkedin. I've soiled myself enough.

A quick check for Lawrence U. reveals that it is a small liberal arts university founded in 1847 and it offers journalism degrees. Of course, this may not be our intrepid AP reporter.

Glen Johnson is a known Clinton (I love lobbiests) shill. This was both unprofessional and unethical on his part (as if that matter anymore). There is one candidate who consistanly earns the majority of conservative votes...Mitt Romney. Go Mitt!

Glen Johnson is a known Clinton (I love lobbiests) shill. This was both unprofessional and unethical on his part (as if that matter anymore). There is one candidate who consistanly earns the majority of conservative votes...Mitt Romney. Go Mitt! The bigger problem in my opinion is in Jonathan Martin at Politico and Carl Cameron at FOX spinning this as an anti-Mitt story. I guess it fits their personal agenda.

Romney should simply ignore the little twit from now on. Refuse his questions. Run him off if he interferes or interrupts again.

Johnson should be reassigned as a crossing guard at a kindergarden school. It's doubtful he could handle that correctly.

But Dafydd, why do you ask such a silly question? Surely you know that many journalists have no idea what words mean. For example, I offer the flap a few years back in which a number of journalists could not differentiate between over-topping and breach. This is simply another example of journalistic incompetence in the use of words exacerbated by their suffering from extreme cases of BDS, or to put it a little more bluntly, it is an example of their stupidity, dishonesty, and colossal egotism. If they could for an instant see themselves as others see them, they would run and hide forever. I am only a high school graduate, but I would be deeply ashamed to make such a glaring error.

The journalist is hardly a "dupe." [Actually, this bloated hack looks like he spends a lot of time getting supersized at McDonald's]

Seriously, over the years and overseas as well as in the USA, AP & Reuters and AFP have joined the Guardian & Independent & US periodicals in becoming infested with self-righteous self-important boobies who believe they have a mission other than to merely report---like paparazzi they are becoming part of the process itself rather than reporting on it.

There has to be collusion and implicit encouragement of this partisan hack Johnson's garbage & lies, especially as Capt. Ed points out, he has written disparagingly of Romney on numerous occasions, even bringing up his great-grandfather's polygamy. Also, Johnson has written soft praise and glowing admiration of Hillary's courageous response to a campaign HQ of hers taken under siege by a demented Democrat.

The mainstream media has become part of the DNC claque and should no longer be accredited if bogus hacks like Johnson are part of the baggage. AP & Reuters & Newsweak are packed with snarks who think what's fair on the left is foul on the right. [Ditto the NYT, with Linda Greenhouse & other ethically challenged Enron consultant-types coming to mind.] With few exceptions, the mainstream media is now promoting Democrat candidates and disrespecting Republican candidates pretty much across the board---McCain & Huckabee are exceptions for the moment. The press actually likes McCain's soft centrism & believes Huckabee will be a pushover if nominated.

Like the Kossacks being urged to vote for Romney to disrupt the GOP nominating process in Michigan, the press [including much-maligned Fox which is beginning to reflect liberal biases as it becomes more mainstream] is abandoning all pretense at objective facts such as who, what, when, where, and why. Instead the MSM is promoting process itself---therebye abandoning principle of any kind, and turning the election into a sporting event in which it is not only onlooker and reporter, but also referee.

Leave that to the editorial pages and report facts, not ignorant bigoted reportorial bias.

Lest it go unremarked upon, this is the same Glen Johnson who was 1 of 3 designated recipients of JOHN KERRY'S MILITARY RECORDS!

"In the tank" does not do this clown justice.

Romney should simply ignore the little twit from now on. Refuse his questions. Run him off if he interferes or interrupts again.

I disagree. Mitt should answer every question this reporter asks; and he should do so slowly, and clearly. Very slowly. The way you answer a person who is easily confused. Make it a habit... anytime a media person asks an especially stupid question or ignores what you have said, they should be answered very slowly, and very clearly. If they ask why or complain, just point out that normal conversation skills have not been in evidence, and you were just trying to help.

See how long that lasts. It would take some suave to pull off, but if you did it with a compassionate tone of voice without slipping into something condescending?

Every Republican candidate should be ready for this kind of thing, it's going to happen. Prepare for it, and when it happens, try not to celebrate until you have smacked that hanging curveball of a question out of the park: Mitt's campaign should take this opportunity to point out McCain's campaign director very clearly, and very pointedly. He should bring Ron Kaufman up to the cameras, and point him out to the public as another well known professional that is volunteering on his campaign.

Lots of possibilities to make hay out of this flub by the AP. Go for it, Mitt!

Why does the AP exist anyway? This is their claim: AP's mission is to be the essential global news network, providing distinctive news services of the highest quality, reliability and objectivity with reports that are accurate, balanced and informed.

What could be further from the truth?

It's nothing more than a propaganda organ for the Clintonistas (see Glen Johnson) and a supporter of terrorism (see Bilal Hussein). They do have a Board of Directors if anyone cares to write off a disgusted note to any of them.

The wise king Solomon said, "Answer NOT a fool according to his folly" and then immediatly after said "ANSWER a fool according to his folly".
The Rabbis were asked "How come there is this all-too-obvious contradiction in the BOOK where no contradictions should exist?"
Here is the answer: Sometimes my young son asks foolish questions; I answer him because I love him! Sometimes reporters asks candidates foolish questions....and etc.

As if more evidence was ever needed, here is a Johnson article critical of Mitt Romney's candor that was so beloved by the Democrats that they put it on their own national Party website.

Johnson is an establishment Democrat shill who worships Hillary Clinton and hates Mitt Romney.

Mr. Michael,
I like your idea, but elaborate condescension would be lost on such a mindless twit.

Here's what I don't get, sure Glen Johnson was wrong saying it is a lie, it wasn't.

But in the theme of Romney's point, that he is not tied to lobbeyists who expect favours in return, he's clearly playing a rather delicate game and misleading people when he has a lobbyist for a senior advisor, working for free.

Romney doesn't get to have it both ways, either Washington needs overhaul from corruption and lobbyists or lobbyists aren't a problem.

As for journalists challenging politicians, that is actually their job. Journalists who simply type up and print someone's words aren't 'objective', they are dictaphones and would quickly be out of a job. Historically, those remembered as good journalists are ones who do challenge their topics and subjects to be able to report what no-one else does.

The problem now is that politicians get such an easy ride from the polarised media (Fox for the red, MSNBC for the blues) that such challenges are seen as rude and bad form. Odd behaviour since this 'beyond question' rule is a return to the colonial days that Americans fought so bravely and determinedly against.

While this reporter was clearly wrong, I only hope more take his initiative so that ALL the candidates can be challenged... such as Hilary and her '35 years', Obama's ability to get anything done despite missing the majority of votes to campaign, etc.

DevsAdvocate,
If what you were asserting were accurate, it would actually be better than the actual situation. This hit on Romney was simply an efort to demean him. there is no way that Russert or Stephanopolis or any other of the media are ever gonig to ask those kind of questions of either Clinton or Obama.

This guy isn't just some "lobbyist". He's the head GOP committeeman from Massachusetts.

He's also chairman of Dutco Worldwide, a firm of over 65 professionals.

The AP allowed Johnson to engage in editorial debate today with the candidate, via an article, in which he bolstered his criticism by also alleging that former Senators Talent and Weber, both campaign advisers, count as "lobbyists". Johnson's point seems to be that Romney, uniquely among all the candidates needs to have zero contact with anyone who might have at some point in their lives registered as a lobbyist or worked for a firm that was registered, in order to claim that his future administration won't be influenced by lobbyists.

This is inane. The implication is that anyone who comes into contact with a lobbyist is corrupt, despite that little bit of the constitution allowing citizens to petition the government.

He hates Romney, and this is simply a continuation of his ongoing attempts to retard Romney's campaign.

The campaign is in a pickle: you hate to talk to idiots like this guy, but sadly this is the guy the AP has assigned to follow you around.

DevsAdvocate:

As for journalists challenging politicians, that is actually their job. Journalists who simply type up and print someone's words aren't 'objective', they are dictaphones and would quickly be out of a job.

DA, Johnson didn't "challenge" Romney; he picked a meaningless (and false) argument with him and called him a liar, interrupting his answer to a different journalist to do so.

Challenging a politician is perfectly fine; but a journalist challenges by doing research on what the politician says and bringing that to the attention of readers, listeners, or viewers... not by trying to shout down the politician and insult him.

You imply that the only alternative to what Johnson did would be to become a simple scribe, a "dictaphone." But the real alternative is actually to be a reporter of fact -- not a hagiographer, but also not a thoughtless, truculent gainsayer of every word the polician utters, as if Johnson were channeling John Cleese in the Monty Python sketch "the Argument Clinic."

And as you admit, this "gotcha" was a failure even as a "challenge," because what Mitt Romney said -- that lobbyists were not running his campaign, unlike John McCain -- was entirely truthful and accurate; Romney never said "no lobbyists are involved in any way with my campaign," which is pretty much what Johnson was trying to trick people into thinking Romney said... which in fact makes Glen Johnson the dishonest one.

Finally, as you and others noted, the job of a journalist is to challenge all politicians equally.

A sly way to be completely partisan is to strongly "challenge" politicians, nitpicking every word they say, following up on every claim and instantly reporting any discrepency with past statements as a "flip flop," no matter how trivial or how easily explainable; but then only apply this ultra-strict-scrutiny standard to politicians on one side the aisle. Politicians on the other side of whatever divide the "journalist" chooses get a free pass.

Then, whenever anyone objects to all the nitpickery, the journalist calls the pol a whiner and says, "I was only challenging his false and mendacious claims, just like journalists are supposed to do."

But that defense only holds water if the standard is applied equally across the board, which it almost never is.

Thus:

1. Johnson's putative "challenge" was in fact an argumentative (and false) counterassertion, not a legitimate, fact-based challenge;
2. Johnson applies his gimlet-eyed challenges only to politicians on the right, and not even to all of them (for heaven's sake, McCain's campaign manager is an ex-lobbyist, and Fred Thompson is himself an ex-lobbyist!)

So on two counts, either one of which by itself would explode the defense of "journalistic challenge," Glen Johnson is shown to be a simple partisan hack with no interest in speaking truth to anybody (let alone to "power"). It's an utter disgrace that this is the nitwit that the Associated Press has chosen to hang around Romney's neck like a millstone.

Dafydd

Dafydd,

I found the remainder of the exchange even worse, where he demeaned Romney's actual campaign chair, implying that she didn't ever travel with him on his campaign jet. The constant implication that Romney was lying, without any proof to corroborate his assertion was ridiculous. Did he print anything on the exchange? Romney could have a case b/c this would certainly be willful and malicious, and he could possibly show harm.

NED

The only reason for being for lobbyists is to bribe politicians to push their agendas. It is way past time for the voters of this country to demand that politicians eliminate lobbyists.

Charles:

Charles, how would you "eliminate lobbyists" without running afoul of the Constitution?

Dafydd

Thanks for hissing in, . Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)

(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)

URL:
Remember me unto the end of days? AyeNay!

Comments: (Sssselect text and bite a button to apply HTML tagssssss...)