Pitt responds:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5411524&mesg_id=5412680
So here's my question: if you are, in fact, wandering around Washington with a big skewer in your hand, and this is known, and it is also known that you have it in for every politician you meet, how is it you get so many 'sources' to talk to you? If you're such a badass, who in their right mind would tell you anything? Especially in this White House?
I, flatly, don't believe you. Whenever I use a source, I name them. Period. You have disdain for teachers of journalism, but this former journalism teacher thinks sticking to the basic protocols is a wise idea. Yes, anonymous sources are part of the game. For you, for the 'big stories' that always seem to get this place in a twist, anonymous sources are the whole game.
Yes, you apologized for Terrance Wilkerson. But how many more Wilkersons are there lurking beneath your by-line? How many people are selling you hooey, which you are more than happy to print under the anonymous-source rubric?
It is hard enough working to make the alt-mdia a legitimate news source without having publications like CHB roll the rock back down the hill. If it satisfies you to burnish your credentials and publish hatchet-pieces with bad facts under your name, so be it. I don't trust you any further than I could throw you, many feel the same as I do, and you have no one to blame for that but yourself.
But you won't see this, because you don't pay attention to forums. Alas. It's too bad, because post 34 above asks a bunch of good questions.
DUmmies throwing spitballs at each other is such a funny sight....