Daily Kos

WH reporter Revolt! Scottie Mc C's Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day

Thu May 19, 2005 at 09:13:09 AM PDT

Yesterday was a Very Bad Day for White House Spokesmanatrix Scott McClellan.  It wasn't supposed to be that way.  

Much to his surprise,  the press corps proved to have a gag reflex after all.  Scotty McC finally crossed a line, and they remembered that even whipped dogs have teeth.

  the feeding frenzy started when early in the  Press Conference:


 Q: With respect, who made you the editor of Newsweek? Do you think it's appropriate for you, at that podium, speaking with the authority of the President of the United States, to tell an American magazine what they should print?

MR. McCLELLAN: I'm not telling them. I'm saying that we would encourage them to help --

Q You're pressuring them.  

Even more remarkably, the question was asked by a reporter for an American TV Network!

Take a bow Terry Moran of ABC News.

Now I can feel your shock and disbelief so you might want to sit down for this next Part (assuming you blog standing up, which, I must tell you is a terribly odd thing to do):

Q Let me follow up on that. What -- you said that -- what specifically are you asking Newsweek to do? I mean, to follow up on Terry's question, are you saying they should write a story? Are you going that far? How else can Newsweek, you know, satisfy you here? { Must...resist...Jeff Gannon joke....}

Now in the excitement of seeing a  reporter actually asking a follow-up question (and one about a question asked by another reporter!) I almost missed the identity of the questioner:

Elisabeth Bumiller of the NY Times.

Yes That Bumiller, the infamous author of the White House Letter. A recurring Puff piece on W, that's so slurpy, its a wonder she doesn't wear a blue dress when writing them

But not yesterday. Yesterday she was the Pit bull of the briefing room.  She wanted specifics

 Scotty tired to give a vague, but faintly indignant non-answer:


McCLELLAN: -- because of this report. I think Newsweek is going to be in the best position to determine how to achieve that.

And there are ways that I pointed out that they can help repair the damage. One way is to point out what the policies and practices of our United States military are. Our United States military personnel go out of their way to make sure that the Holy Koran is treated with care { Holy Koran Batman!,  Scotty better hope Dr. Dobbie and his dominionist  pals don't hear him talking like that}-

And Elisabeth wasn't havin none:


Q Are you asking them to write a story about how great the American military is; is that what you're saying here?

{and just to leave Scotty no wiggle room}

Q Are you asking them to write a story?

And dear Scotty, seeing thing veering badly off track tried to recover by launching into one of his patented Long Answers That Say Absolutely Nothing

MR. McCLELLAN: Elisabeth, let me finish my sentence. Our military -

Q You've already said what you're -- I know what -- how it ends.

Or in the vernacular "Scottie if  all you are going to do is regurgitate the same bullshit, just save your breath

(She also got the quote yesterday that must have been hardest for WH official to say with a straight face. Speaking to her about the Newsweek Story an anonymous (natch) WH official said


"There's no expectation that they're going to bring down Newsweek, but there is a feeling that there is no check on what you guys do

Because,  if there's one thing the Republicans have proven this week, they are all about them checks and balances aren't they?

Bumiller  wasn't the only one getting all up in his grill neither.   Blood was in the water and it wasn't going to be pretty. Another reporter apparently remembered  that WH press briefings aren't supposed to be a closed book exam:

Q Back on Newsweek. Richard Myers, last Thursday -- I'm going to read you a quote from him. He said, "It's a judgment of our commander in Afghanistan, General Eichenberry, that in fact the violence that we saw in Jalalabad was not necessarily the result of the allegations about disrespect for the Koran."

He said it was "more tied up in the political process and reconciliation that President Karzai and his cabinet were conducting." And he said that that was from an after-action report he got that day.

So what has changed between last Thursday and today, five days later, to make you now think that those -- that that violence was a result of Newsweek?

Ooooh now looky there!  The reporter did  his homework and came prepared!

Scotty for his part didn't appreciate facts getting in the way of his quivering moral indignation, and  tried mightily to make the truth  disappear by simply ignoring it


Well, clearly, the report was used to incite violence by people who oppose the United States and want to mischaracterize the values and the views of the United States of America. The protests may have been pre-staged by those who oppose the United States and who may be opposed to moving forward on freedom and democracy in the region, but the images that we have seen across our television screens over the last few days clearly show that this report was used to incite violence. People lost their lives -

 { See? It those darn enemies of freedom again!  We keep trying to liberate them but they say "no, no I want to be oppressed, I Hate freedom}


But the reporter wasn't going to let him get away with that:  Behold the power of Facts


Q But may I just follow up, please? He didn't say "protest," he said -- he used the word very specifically, "violence." He said the violence, as far as they know from their people on the ground -- which is something that you always say you respect wholeheartedly -- it was not because of Newsweek.

MR. McCLELLAN: Dana, I guess I'm not looking at it the same way as you do,....{ see if you hold it upside down read it backwards it clearly says "the Walrus was Paul"}

Q You don't think there's any way that perhaps you're looking at it a little bit differently, now that you understand that the Newsweek report is false?

And When Scotty tried to regain the moral high ground by denying that again, another Reporter pounced:


Q Scott, to go back to Dana's question, are you saying that General Myers was wrong, therefore, that this -- the violence he's talking about? Are you saying he was wrong in his assessment of what happened in Afghanistan?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, not at all. In fact, maybe you didn't hear me, but as I said, there are people that are opposed to the United States that look at every opportunity to try to do damage to our image in the region, and --
Q Okay - {, Eyes rolling}

MR. McCLELLAN: Hang on, let me finish

Poor Scotty, he's either got to admit he's a liar or call his top military commander in the region one.  Couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

And then there was the coup de grace a question both logical, brilliant and wickedly pointed (Ken Herman of Cox News tossed the fatal dart>


Q In context of the Newsweek situation, I think we hear the caution you're giving us about reporting things based on a single anonymous source. What, then, are we supposed to do with information that this White House gives us under the conditions that it comes from a single anonymous source?

Boom.   Nailed it.  Reporters HATE the fact that this WH won't even tell them what time it is without first insisting that the answer be used only on background.  Scotty tried to Play Dumb but Ken was having none of it.


MR. McCLELLAN: I'm not sure what exactly you're referring to.
Q Frequent briefings by senior administration officials, in which the ground rules are we can only identify them as a single anonymous source.

And Scotty tried to spin mightily, promising to reduce such background briefings (but ducking the question as why it can't simply eliminate them here and now) And then again lecturing the press about the credibility problems of anonymous sources, yada, yada

But Mr. Herman boiled it all down and exposed Scotty's hypocrisy on this issue


Q With all due respect, though, it sounds like you're saying your single anonymous sources are okay and everyone else's aren't.

Well. There it is then.    

All in all it wasn't a bad day's work for the Corps.   Not quite yet to the level of say, Latvian  TV, or Dutch High School kids perhaps, but they are making steps in the right direction.  With some dedication and good coaching they've got a solid shot at a spot on the JV squad...

What we don't know yet is if the Corps can maintain this newfound courage.  I'd be happier if the issue that threw them into open revolt didn't essentially involve protection one of their own.  It'd be nice to see the same level of outrage about,  say, a hypothetical smoking gun memo ,  or the routine use of torture by the CIA, or maybe even record deficits and a non-existent social security plan.  All in  all though,  you have to admit it's a start.  

I'd like to think that today wasn't so much about protecting turf but of the final straw being laid.  I'm hoping that the spectacle  of little Scotty openly bullying a major news magazine opened their eyes.  Maybe the cognitive dissonance finally got to be too much  and the truth began to dawn on them .  

 When they saw the WH all but giving orders to the press about what to write, maybe they realized their freedoms weren't any more secure than the rest of ours and it was time to do their job before it was to late.    That's what I want to think.  

Whether  I'm proven to be idiotically optimistic or not remains to be seen.   But at least for yesterday  we had a free and skeptical press again.  For however long it lasts, its nice to see.

Tags: (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 296 comments

  •  well said (3.93 / 29)

    Team Bush is on a sinking ship, and McClellan sounds like a wide-eyed boy on the Titanic insisting that the ship can never sink even after its struck an iceburg. They have no clue that's shit started to hit the fan.
    •  dead on (4.00 / 22)

      He also sounds a bit like Baghdad Bob. "We are routing the infidels".
    •  The boy stood on the burning deck (4.00 / 6)

         Whence all but he had fled;
      The flame that lit the battle's wreck
        Shone round him o'er the dead.

      Yet beautiful and bright he stood,
        As born to rule the storm;
      A creature of heroic blood,
        A proud, though child-like form.

      The flames rolled on--he would not go
        Without his Father's word;
      That father, faint in death below,
        His voice no longer heard.

      He called aloud--`say, Father, say
        If yet my task is done?'
      He knew not that the chieftain lay
        Unconscious of his son.

      `Speak, father!' once again he cried,
        `If I may yet be gone!'
      And but the booming shots replied,
        And fast the flames rolled on.

      Upon his brow he felt their breath,
        And in his waving hair,
      And looked from that lone post of death
        In still yet brave despair.

      And shouted but once more aloud,
        `My father! must I stay?'
      While o'er him fast, through sail and shroud,
        The wreathing fires made way.

      They wrapt the ship in splendour wild,
        They caught the flag on high,
      And streamed above the gallant child,
        Like banners in the sky.

      There came a burst of thunder sound--
         The boy--oh! where was he?
      Ask of the winds that far around
        With fragments strewed the sea!--

      With mast, and helm, and pennon fair,
        That well had borne their part--
      But the noblest thing which perished there
        Was that young faithful heart.

      Casabianca, by Felicia Hemans

      http://courses.dsu.edu/dakwriters/Baum/fairytales/casabianca.htm

      John McCain says women shouldn't have the right to choose.

      by Cowalker on Thu May 19, 2005 at 10:06:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  the pattern has been exposed (4.00 / 19)

      and the press is coming round to the fact that the WH doesn't have anyone they won't stab in the back if it helps further their agenda.  When it was just Rather/Mapes/CBS, and people didn't think the forged docs came from the WH, they had it coming for trying to hatchet the big man.  Now that things have played out, and the press sees the blame game being played again on one of their own, and in the most knavish way, they aren't going to bend over and take it again, at least not without some lube for a change.  Fool me once, something, something, can't get fooled again.  

      My ferverent hope is that this Newsweek thing and the subsequent backlash pulls the curtain back for the press and gets them to stop handing out free passes like flyers to nightclubs.  This is how it happens, a bulletproof celeb who's been skating over scandals crosses an invisible line and gets dog piled.  Please let it be this.

      just really tired of all the bullshit.

      by bitterguy on Thu May 19, 2005 at 10:19:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Perhaps they can read the writing on the wall (4.00 / 9)

        First they came for the bloggers
        and I did not speak out
        because I was not a blogger.
        Then they came for CBS and Dan Rather
        and I did not speak out
        because I was not Dan Rather.
        Then they came for Newsweek
        and I did not speak out
        because I was not working for Newsweek.
        Then they came for me
        and there was no one left
        to speak out for me.

        (apologies to Pastor Martin Niemöller

        Circumstances rule men; men do not rule circumstances. -The Histories of Herodotus, Book 7, Ch. 49

        by Louise on Thu May 19, 2005 at 10:44:31 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Tipping point for the WH Press Corps: (4.00 / 23)

          standing accused of murder by war mongerers.

          -- 5/18/05

          •  It's a funny kind of logic (4.00 / 8)

            According to BushCo, the Islamic world hates us because of our freedom.

            A free press is a hallmark of any true democracy.

            BushCo despises the US press corps to the extent that they've taken steps to neutralize, control and even fabricate what passes for "news."

            The press freely prints a story (which at the very least, holds some truths) that inflames the Islamic world.  Let's not mention the fact that the Islamic world is already aggravated at us by, um, let's see, deranged foreign policy, torture, wholesale murder bordering on genocide, the fixing of "free" Iraqi elections, systemic financial corruption on a countrywide scale...

            Okay, I get it.  It was that darned Newsweek article that made them so mad at us.

            "There's been a little complication with my complication"

            by dash888 on Thu May 19, 2005 at 11:48:24 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  No apology necessary (none / 0)

          That quote is engraved here in Boston at the Holocaust Memorial. I am sure that if the pastor were alive today, he would agree with the parallel.

          My teeth aren't white enough for DailyKos, so adios.

          by DrReason on Thu May 19, 2005 at 02:13:30 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Isikoff pushback? (none / 1)

        Michael Isikoff was the top Lewinsky-pusher.  The right wing should be eternally grateful to him.  Instead, they're trying to destroy his story.  Perhaps reporters are learning that Republicans aren't their friends?

        Turn ons: progressives, Democrats with spines Turn offs: conservatives, people named Bush, John McCain

        by Unstable Isotope on Thu May 19, 2005 at 05:18:37 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Isikoff is CIA. (4.00 / 2)

          Remember them? They're not too happy with Team Bush, just like once upon a time they weren't too happy with Team Nixon. CIA to Spikey to Newsweek...White House pushes back.

          Unlike WaPo Newsweek doesn't back Woodstein (Woodward = CIA) and keep publishing. They wuss.

          Got it yet?

          -- "I decline utterly to be impartial between the fire brigade and the fire." ~Winston Churchill

          by Eleftheria on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:54:56 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Keep Plugging Away (4.00 / 3)

      I hope like hell their ship is sinking, but haven't they taken major blows before only to, unbelievably, right themselves and sail on?

      Don't get me wrong-- we need to be optimistic-- but we also need to realize that there's nothing magical about how they've been surviving. Take a seemingly-fatal hit? Just wait for some nonconforming passenger to come by, grab him -- and stuff him kicking and screaming into the hole. Richard Clarke, Paul O'Neill, and recently, George Galloway, come to mind. Indeed, imply that the person-become-patch created the hole.

      Got a real gusher? Just stuff a whole bunch of innocent people in there -- ie, all of the Democratic party, all of them liberal judges, all of Fallujha, etc. That's these guys' M.O.
      They've taken more hits recently, so, in typical fashion... gotcha, Newsweek! Quit squeaking and get in there. I suspect that's why our media are actually beginning to question the official line: they suspect that, kiss ass or not, they may become tomorrow's patch.

      I guess my point is that we've got to remember that this is a pirate ship we're aboard; that there is no code of honor, only a desire to save the captain at all cost. Yes, the ship is again taking on water-- but does that make those at the helm less dangerous or more so? We're all stuck aboard her; I'd say, more so. As such, we'd better keep pounding away at those holes already patched and turn any new leaks into gushers-- lest tomorrow we become the material of plugs.

      "A popular government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or tragedy"-- James Madison

      by Bad Cog on Thu May 19, 2005 at 04:57:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Not sure of sinking ship ... (none / 0)

      I have heard far more negative comments / snide jokes in the past week about Newsweek than about McClellan.  Sadly, the odds are still with them (BushCo) getting away with their lies and manipulation.

      Although, perhaps, the toadish MSM will wake up and actually start reporting the serious crimes against the body politic committed by Bush et al with the same passion that they salivated after stains on a blue dress ... Clinton might have stained a dress.  Bush has stained the nation's reputation and standing in the world.

    •  Let's see if any of this makes the TV news... (none / 0)

      ...if it does, then I'll be pleasantly surprised.

      But regardless, we can spread the word so that TV watchers know what they aren't being told by Bob Schieffer or Brian Williams or the other talking heads.

      John McCain will end Roe v. Wade if he's president.

      by Phoenix Woman on Fri May 20, 2005 at 09:49:45 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Roasting him alive (3.75 / 4)

    I love this!!!  Recommended, even though there was an earlier diary.  yours is by far the better (imo)

    I got nuthin (-6.88, -6.15)

    by guyermo on Thu May 19, 2005 at 09:16:02 AM PDT

  •  wow (4.00 / 9)

    If Elisabeth Bumiller is getting feisty, then we may be seeing the End Times.

    ...Though hopefully just the End Times for Simple Scotty and his nefarious bosses.

    JOHN McCAIN = George W. Bush's 3rd term.

    by chumley on Thu May 19, 2005 at 09:18:12 AM PDT

    •  I would assume she's trying to save her sorry butt (3.91 / 12)

      She's been angling to be the TV representative of the Times' Washington Bureau since the Democratic Primaries of '04 when Kerry memorably called out her breathless interruptions during the debates as inappropriate.

      One would assume that the mail the Times has been getting about her little postcards from the White House articles has not been very positive, and their tone may not be getting accurately reflected in the LTE section.

      I think the Times will take a big hit in subscriptions if the fillibuster gets killed after the dreadful pro administration coverage leading up to the war, and their promises to do better next time. Next time is now, and the Times remains in the thrall of the conservatives, against their better judgement.

      •  great analysis n/t (none / 0)

        JOHN McCAIN = George W. Bush's 3rd term.

        by chumley on Thu May 19, 2005 at 10:03:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I am wrong... (none / 0)

        ...ALL the time, but do you mean the Post, not the Times??

        "Personal density is directly proportional to temporal bandwidth." Mondaugen's Law

        by Newton Snookers on Thu May 19, 2005 at 10:18:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  isikoff (4.00 / 8)

        I think this is about Isikoff. He's a card-carrying cool kid, one that the DC press corps admires as a "tough" reporter in the Carl Bernstein/early Woodward mode (ie, fulfills their fantasy of what they could be if they didn't have so many cocktail parties to go to every night). Someone like Eason Jordan did not paricularly seem like one of them, but Isikoff does -- and the message was clear that the WH isn't just spinning any more but trying to destroy reporters who get a story they don't want.

        That and the silly rules on background briefings, which as Atrios has written repeatedly, would be ended in a minute if just one reporter started leaking the name of the briefers.

        Now that they've imperiled  

        •  Leak the names (4.00 / 12)

          Or - I think the reporters should at least identify the cause of their source's anonymity

          How about agreeing to use a phrase like this in publishing articles:

          a source both unnamed and chosen as the sole source at the request [or the behest] of the White House

          or

          at a briefing which required this reporter to keep the source unnamed and not to corroborate the comment,  X said . . . .

        •  Again. Isikoff is a mouthpiece for the CIA (4.00 / 2)

          Remember them? They're not too happy with Team Bush, just like once upon a time they weren't too happy with Team Nixon. CIA to Spikey to Newsweek...White House pushes back.

          Unlike WaPo Newsweek doesn't back Woodstein (Woodward = CIA) and keep publishing. They wuss.

          Got it yet?

          -- "I decline utterly to be impartial between the fire brigade and the fire." ~Winston Churchill

          by Eleftheria on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:57:04 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  It's so incredibly refreshing (3.77 / 9)

    when we're always crying "bullshit!" at home, to finally hear the press cry "bullshit" openly.  Thanks.
    •  The proof will be in the pudding (4.00 / 7)

      It's one thing for them to call BS at a briefing, but the real mark will be whether their stories reflect the fact that they know the WH is full of crap.

      It'll be interesting to see whether there are stories that blast the White House for basically calling Gen. Myers a liar and for threatening the media, or whether, in the interest of appearing "balanced" all we get is crap in which they either quote McClellan's non-answers without calling him out for lying or whether they just find some Democratic or media source to bash the WH and make it a he-said, she-said story.

      It'll be an interesting follow up.

  •  asdf (4.00 / 3)

    i'd say something like 'at last, the media are growing a pair', but i've said that so many times in the past it isn't even funny.

    nice to see ol' scotty twisting in the wind tho.

    anyone born after the McDLT has no business stomping around acting punk rock

    by chopper on Thu May 19, 2005 at 09:19:20 AM PDT

    •  Growing a pair -- or losing something? (3.87 / 8)

      Everyone knows that reporters become lapdogs in part to maintain their access to White House sources. But this "access" mostly gives them anonymous, single-source stories -- which now look much less valuable. Dangerous, even.

      So the White House just destroyed the value of the currency it uses to bribe the press. No wonder they're revolting! (In a new sense, that is.)

      "C'mon -- if THAT were true, you wouldn't be getting the news from some crazy email forwarded by your brother-in-law!"

      by technopolitical on Thu May 19, 2005 at 01:12:29 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I hope it lasts a long time (none / 0)

    but I'm not holding my breath
  •  Pebble in the pond (3.83 / 6)

    Riplle effects all around.

    True, this may be initially a case of protecting their own.  But the repercussions can be big time.  It was bad enough with Gannon, and then the paid publicists and "commercials."  But this is a case of the government actually telling a member of the media what to print.

    Sure, they tried to cover it up with all nice things, but it didn't wash.

    And in trying to protect their own, they still allow the public to see what the administration is trying to do.

    It won't affect the kool-aid drinkers who agree with the administration anyway, but it can impact the moderate Americans.

    Bush, so incompetent, he can't even do the wrong things right.

    by JAPA21 on Thu May 19, 2005 at 09:22:12 AM PDT

  •  Oh Joy! (3.83 / 6)

    The Rovians have kept the press corps down by intimidating them into being complacent. Should one of them find a spine they'll be sidelined like Helen Thomas. What the Rovians can't control is what happens when the entire press corps finds a spine. What are they gonna do? Stop holding press conferences? Hire a bunch of gannons?

    I hear the earth move....

    Just think how proud you'll be to tell your kids how you voted this year.

    by DyspepTex on Thu May 19, 2005 at 09:22:26 AM PDT

    •  uh, yes (none / 0)

      What the Rovians can't control is what happens when the entire press corps finds a spine. What are they gonna do? Stop holding press conferences? Hire a bunch of gannons?

      Certainly.  They'll switch to a "Town Hall" format for all Information Indoc^H^H^H^H^HDissemination, prepacked audience and """press""" corps from the dominionist mailing lists.

      And it will be explained as "Because the liberal Washington media elite have an irrational hatred for our country that we need to do this."

      Hell, if they can sweep away the Last of the Old Republic's archaic Senate rules just-because, who's gonna cry over eliminating the press conferences?

      They're thinking "why should we even tolerate a White House Press Corps at all?  We won't get mad, like Tricky Dick did.  We'll get even.  Just strangle the beast.  They'll have nothing to cover, nothing to do, and they'll get laid off.  Problem solved.  No reporter, no problem."  

      Fascism is indistinguishable from any parody thereof.

      by mbkennel on Thu May 19, 2005 at 01:07:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  ah but then (none / 1)

        you'd have a bunch of reporters trying to desperately justify their salaries, and that could lead to ---actual reporting!

        Far safer to feed a pet Tiger 50lbs of Gruel every day than to risk letting it "freelance" and potentially develop a taste for meat...

        (

        Knowledge is power Power Corrupts Study Hard Be Evil

        by Magorn on Thu May 19, 2005 at 01:28:15 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  that's where the economic control (none / 1)

          of the news media comes in.

          Sure there will be a few reporters doing actual reporting.

          Who's going to pay their salary?  Where are they going to report it?  A TV network? CNN?  Fox? One of the giant national newsrag chains?  

          Like fer shure.

          They'll be scrounging covering the local bake fair and fireman's volunteer and moonlighting publishing on One Of Them Crazy Nutbar Leftist Blogs

          Fascism is indistinguishable from any parody thereof.

          by mbkennel on Thu May 19, 2005 at 01:43:37 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Unintended consequences (4.00 / 2)

        Then herds of ambitious former White House reporters, still employed by their respective news orgs for at least the next few months, will be roaming the streets with naught but time on their hands, connections out the wazoo, and a taste for revenge.  This could get interesting mighty quick.
  •  Your diary title made me smile (4.00 / 5)

    And your diary, even more so.  It's nice to see press corps make the "bowl of quivering pudding" that is Scott McClellan quiver all the more.

    Thanks!

    Experience The Tempest! "The problem with the French is they don't have a word for 'entrepreneur'"-GWB.

    by Revel on Thu May 19, 2005 at 09:23:31 AM PDT

  •  Well... (3.75 / 4)

    ...now that the corporate media have made sure that Bush got re-elected, they can get tough again. Either that, or Bush/Rove/Cheney/McClellan just went too far with the whole media manipulation deal.
    •  We know business doesn't like (none / 0)

      the nuclear option.  Not hard to guess what the masters of the corporate media think of it.

      The influence of the [executive] has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished.

      by lysias on Thu May 19, 2005 at 11:54:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The Rift (none / 0)

        We know business doesn't like the nuclear option.  Not hard to guess what the masters of the corporate media think of it.

        More than that.  The GOP's corporate wing is getting increasingly fed up with the Fundie Wingnut wing generally.  The mullahs are starting to get in the way of serious business, i.e. Big Business and its felt needs receiving Tender Loving Care from the Republicans inside the Beltway.  Time to start yanking Chimp's chain and reminding him where the money comes from.  This percolates down to the MSM serfs and voila, Scottie gets a Bad Day at Black Rock.

        Look for more of this.  And stock up on Orville Redenbacher.

        Whatever is real is different.-- B. Traven

        by angry blue planet on Thu May 19, 2005 at 04:00:55 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Idea for you Magorn.... (4.00 / 23)

    How about if you provide us with a

    "Scotty's Day"

    series for DKos?  I realize it may be a lot of work, but this stuff is very uplifting, and you seem to have a good tack in packaging.  

    Plus, serializing some of these things seems to lead to a much greater exposure.  And since now there are Congressmen, Senators, and journalists perusing these pages, this type of exposure is good.

    Just a thought.  Thanks for the diary....

  •  Send E-mails Congratulat (4.00 / 5)

    Them....reward good behaviour and ask them to keep going, also tell them your what your really curous about....
  •  It's probably no surprise to you ... (4.00 / 29)

    ...Magorn, that Wretchard over at Belmont Club, which I will not link, has a different take on this story than you, to wit:

    The resentment is palpable. Not the resentment of the spokesman of a Commander in Chief of a military vilified in an article that has already been retracted, but the resentment of reporters whose prerogatives have been questioned. "With respect, who made you the editor of Newsweek?", one asks. McClellan actually cannot finish a sentence in answer, because one of the prerogatives of this particular reporter is to ask the questions. "You've already said what you're -- I know what -- how it ends." And the question, although put in different words each time, is monomanaically the same: when did you stop beating your wife? "As far as the Newsweek article is concerned, first, how and where the story came from? And do you think somebody can investigate if it really happened at the base, and who told Newsweek? Because somebody wrote a story." And because "somebody wrote a story" the presumption was that the story had to be true, the retraction notwithstanding, as if it never existed, as if the retraction were completely irrelevant from the discussion. In a sense it is, because there was never a retraction. There may have been words which resembled a retraction, but it was never, ever really made because it is absolutely impossible to ever make it.

    Astonishing how this guy - who always talks so tough and demands that Americans show some spine - gets so bent out of shape when somebody in the press corps does it.

    I am an anti-imperialist. I am opposed to having the eagle put its talons on any other land. -- Mark Twain

    by Meteor Blades on Thu May 19, 2005 at 09:44:28 AM PDT

  •  This is great (3.88 / 9)

    But I'd be surprised if it carried over to any other topic. The questioning was about attacking the news media. It's all about Me, Me, Me.

    I don't see the same level of questioning on the nuclear option, 56 lost planes by the Pentagon (among other missing equipment worth one TRILLION dollars according to the San Francisco Chronicle). Nope don't see questions about those little items.

  •  OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH! (4.00 / 5)

    I'm having a Watergate flashback and I'm loving it.  Maybe Rove can get Ron Ziegler back to help Scotty.

    No matter how cynical I get, I can't keep up these days--Lily Tomlin

    by hoosierspud on Thu May 19, 2005 at 09:46:36 AM PDT

  •  Well...YEAH!!! (4.00 / 6)

    Of COURSE they attacked.

    This threatens their jobs.

    They have mouths to feed.

    Mortgages to pay.

    Ask not for whom the bell tolls.

    It tolls for THEM this time.

    Do you really think they WOKE UP!!!

    HELL no!!!

    They are just protecting their own turf.

    Let me ask y'all something.

    Jeff Gannon/Jim Guckert sat in that press room among all the so-called investigative "heavies" for HOW MANY SESSIONS?

    And you want me to believe that they didn't know what he was about?

    Please!!!

    Say you worked in an office. Just a normal, office-working middle class kinda person. And say suddenly a rat for the bosses...one who obviously knew very little about the job being done in that office...magically appeared under some flimsy pretense or another.

    Do you think you would not NOTICE!!!???

    But since he did not directly threaten YOUR pension, YOUR mortgage payments...silence would be the order of the day.

    NOW imagine a power play by those same bosses on one of the workers...someone who was just doing his job. One that could easily be interpreted as a potential power play on the entire office staff. And that staff had options. Power of some kind, maybe a hookup to upper management or the ability to make the power play and their immediate bosses look stupid and incompetent.

    There y'are...

    The only thing these cynical sons of bitches woke UP to was that their own position was threatened.

    And here we are again with my leitmotif for the month.

    NEWSTRIKE!!!

    (See my original diary here for more on this idea.)

    Threaten the entire NEWS STRUCTURE with the loss (or at least reduction) of their OWN jobs, and watch them start to take care of business.

    NEWSTRIKE!!!

    I'm telling you...this is an idea whose time has come.

    AG

    "Let the intelligent read and understand, and let the ignorant stay that way." From the earliest known piece of writing. A Mesopotamian shopping list. Nice.

    by Arthur Gilroy on Thu May 19, 2005 at 09:51:26 AM PDT

    •  A News Strike Sounds Interesting (none / 0)

      Great Diary

      A News Strike Sounds Interesting, I will check out that Diary.

      •  Thank you. (none / 0)

        Recommend it and/or mention it in your diaries/reples as well.

        AG

        "Let the intelligent read and understand, and let the ignorant stay that way." From the earliest known piece of writing. A Mesopotamian shopping list. Nice.

        by Arthur Gilroy on Thu May 19, 2005 at 12:00:06 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Been asking for this since JG/JG (none / 0)

          Might even have asked during Rathergate.

          The press should have up and walked out on Bush during the campaign, before the election, when it became apparent that the terror alerts were used to manipulate Bush's approval rating.

          At what point could the press or the public separate the approval rating of President Bush from the approval rating of Candidate Bush, after all?  He, Rove, Cheney were deliberately misusing the offices of the White House as not only a propaganda distribution center, but misusing their access to the press for their reelection campaign.

          I refuse to watch MSM news.  I will check the local newspaper for MSM articles only to dog the local paper for printing such propaganda.

          I'm already on strike -- already boycotting -- taken my eyeballs and my money and left the bastards that own those profit-driven advertising vehicles.

          •  But "we"... (none / 0)

            ...we few who are really doing this...are not enough.

            That's why I am trying to organize a real mass boycott/walkout/newstrike.

            Something that woiuld produce LARGE NUMBERS...the only thing a corporation really understands.

            If this were an industrial strike situation and only 1% of the potential strikers walked out...what good would THAT do?

            So...start talking about this.

            On dKos and anywhere ELSE that you can get some traction.

            NEWSTRIKE!!!

            Let us invent a NEW kind of STRIKE.

            NEWSTRIKE!!!

            AG

            "Let the intelligent read and understand, and let the ignorant stay that way." From the earliest known piece of writing. A Mesopotamian shopping list. Nice.

            by Arthur Gilroy on Thu May 19, 2005 at 02:19:14 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Hi, Arthur (none / 0)

      I read your diary last night and wondered how, if I go on a news-strike, I'll ever know that the strike was successful?
      •  Nice (none / 0)

        I am hoping that this is a sarcastic and/or humorous comment. But I am going to treat it as if it were serious.

        I got two words fer ya, and they ain't happy birthday.

        The web.

        Being on "Newstrike" would mean not:

        1-Buying corporate media newspapers and magazines.

        2-Not watching mass media news whenever possible and certainly not either taking it seriously or patronizing the sponsors.

        3-Concentrating on the blogs and unattributable web searching (block your cookies) in order to stay in some sort of touch with the culture if you were to so desire.

        OK?

        AG

        "Let the intelligent read and understand, and let the ignorant stay that way." From the earliest known piece of writing. A Mesopotamian shopping list. Nice.

        by Arthur Gilroy on Thu May 19, 2005 at 07:24:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  News strike already long in progress (none / 1)

      On the macro level:  other diaries document that Fox News has lost 58% of its audience since October, in pretty steady and substantial increments.  

      On the micro level:  I stopped watching all TV nearly 9 years ago. And then the most amazing thing happened -- I suddenly got a new life because I had all this extra free time.  Also stopped reading the MSM publications

      In the end, "news" and "entertainment" are there for the same reason:  to make money for the broadcasters and advertisers.  It's all "programming", and they call it that for very good reason.  All of it poisons your mind equally.  

      A coordinated news strike is a great idea, but why stop there?  It's a pretty simple message to just tell people to turn the whole damn thing off.