This is where the press corps draws the line?
There's been alot of grumbling about the Obama press shop from the White House Press corps. The latest complaint is over a perception of overuse of background briefings.
But I just want to step back a second to ask... they weren't this mad over Iraq intel? ...the years of over rosy reports on Iraq? ..."we do not torture"? ...Rove and Libby had nothing to do with the outing of Valerie Plame?...when it was revealed that the Pentagon was, in effect, paying former generals to lie to them?
No. The cold answer is that they weren't that mad over the Bush administration's lying. Why? Because the Bush press office made an immense effort to make thepress corps' day to day jobs easier.
And that's what their current whinging is about. They don't care whether the information they're given is true, good, or a violation of Federal laws. Their anger comes over an extra step in filing.
It says alot, doesn't it?
But I just want to step back a second to ask... they weren't this mad over Iraq intel? ...the years of over rosy reports on Iraq? ..."we do not torture"? ...Rove and Libby had nothing to do with the outing of Valerie Plame?...when it was revealed that the Pentagon was, in effect, paying former generals to lie to them?
No. The cold answer is that they weren't that mad over the Bush administration's lying. Why? Because the Bush press office made an immense effort to make thepress corps' day to day jobs easier.
And that's what their current whinging is about. They don't care whether the information they're given is true, good, or a violation of Federal laws. Their anger comes over an extra step in filing.
It says alot, doesn't it?
posted by mikevotes at
9:10 AM
2 Comments:
Insightful post.
"Why? Because the Bush press office made an immense effort to make the press corps' day to day jobs easier."
And that the Administration made it abundantly clear that if a reporter asked "tough" questions, they would not be called upon (or driven out of the pool).
Thus, if the press wishes to regain the "credibility" and "objectivity" that it willingly surrendered during the Bush Administration, the easiest way to do that is by challenging Obama at every step.
If they cover the failures of the Bush years, the glaring question would be "why did you wait until now to do that?".
On the "plus" side, it's possible that the public might see the press as the "check and balance" on Obama, and thus not see the need for the Republicans to serve that purpose.
In recent days, Republican leaders have floated the idea of "checks and balances" as the big factor in people voting for the Party in 2010. I'm sure you are aware of that, but I'm merely providing context.
In reality, though, the "Blue Dogs" are a more-than-adequate "check" on any possible "excesses" by the Administration.
By
Todd Dugdale , at 7:21 PM
I agree with you completely that they're being harder to get back, but I think you also have to include that there are so many new faces posted in the WH press corps.
I think they're all trying to struggle to make their names in their new jobs.
And as most of them come off campaign reporting, they';re probably extremely frustrated to only have one source to report from. On the campaign trail, you just call the opponents to get a story.
By
mikevotes, at 10:09 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home