A few days ago Kilpatrick called me and asked if Romney had paid me to write A Mormon In The White House?
I blogged about the call and the insulting question on the day it occurred. Today’s article does not mention the call or my post about it. How many other groups and individuals did Mr. Kilpatrick call and ask if Romney had “spread cash around” in their direction, to quote Mr. Kilpatrick from our call, only to be told “absolutely not?” Would it matter if Mr. Kirkpatrick had been fed a dozen rumors from anti-Romney activists and called each of them only to be told in no uncertain terms that no such payments had occurred? This is why MSM loses credibility every day with the center-right: An MSMer starts with a thesis and meticulously compiles all the evidence that supports it and leaves off with all the stuff that doesn’t.
Mr. Kirkpatrick also quotes the group “Mass Resistance” as being critical of conservative groups accepting support from Romney, but does not offer any background on the group. A bit of reading, research and reporting on the group and its founder Brian Camenker might have been useful to the Times’ readers. Quoting Mass Resistance without context is a lot like quoting “The Clinton Chronicles” about Bill and Hill without comment.
If you total the donations “uncovered” by the Times for this article, they total less than $150,000 –hardly chump change, but so small compared to the budgets of the organizations involved as to mock the premise of the article. The article fails to indicate the number of dry holes Kilpatrick dug and doesn’t provide background on the “critics” it cites. Mr. Kilpatrick was personable, and certainly skilled. But this isn’t objective journalism. It is agenda journalism.
A suggestion for Mr. Kirkpatrick: Perhaps he can next work on an article on the Clintons –not the groups they have been donating to, but the groups that have been donating to them –via speeches and contributions to the Clinton Library.