Will the N&O Cover This Story?
The N&O covered a story about a reporter who was in the White House press pool and who asked questions from a conservative angle. So will they cover the story below as related at www.hughhewitt.com?
Posted at 4:40 PM, Pacific
Will "Elizabeth" be the next Gannon/Guckart?
From the President's press conference this morning:
THE PRESIDENT: Elisabeth.
Q Paul Wolfowitz, who was the -- a chief architect of one of the most unpopular wars in our history --
THE PRESIDENT: (Laughter.) That's an interesting start. (Laughter.)
Q -- is your choice to be the President of the World Bank. What kind of signal does that send to the rest of the world?
Recall that the investigation by the blogs of the left into Jeff Gannon/Guckart began after Gannon/Guckart asked a leading question at the president's last press conference. The rationale was that a partisan with a press pass was a suspicious thing. I don't know who "Elisabeth" is, but her framing of her question is as partisan and leading as any that could be asked of the president. So, will the mob that went after Gannon/Guckart now be sifting through Elisabeth's past for intriguing clues on the source of her partisanship?
UPDATE: "Elisabeth" is Elizabeth Bumiller according to Instapundit's latest sources.
The question could just as well have been from the New York Times' Elizabeth Becker. Check out her amazing filing this afternoon (co-authored with David Sager.) Talk about deep, deep bias free of even a thin attempt to disguise it. There is not one attributed quote from a diplomat, but Becker claims the Wolfowitz appointment was greeted with "quiet anguish in those foreign capitals where the Iraq conflict and its aftermath remain deeply unpopular," and that Wolfowitz has the "almost radioactive reputation of a committed ideologue."
And consider this line from the Becker piece: "Mr. Wolfowitz is also likely to be a target - especially in the Mideast, where he ranks among Israel's strongest defenders in the administration...." Paul Wolfowitz is Jewish, but he is no stronger defender of Israel than the president, the vice-president, the Secretary of State or the Secretary of Defense. Would the New York Times have run such a comment if Wolfowitz hadn't been Jewish?
Here's a bit of bio on Becker. But sticking to the Gannon/Guckart precedent, the investigation should be into the background of the asker of the loaded question, Elizabeth Bumiller.
Of course it won't happen because the left wants to protect MSM's near monopoly on biased questions and reporters. And I am not arguing for a vetting of the lefty reporters like the two Elizabeths, or Dana Milbank or many others. Just pointing out the risible idea that Gannon/Guckart was uniquely partisan. He was just a mirror image from the right side of the partisan spectrum of these White House press pass carriers.
Posted at 4:40 PM, Pacific
Will "Elizabeth" be the next Gannon/Guckart?
From the President's press conference this morning:
THE PRESIDENT: Elisabeth.
Q Paul Wolfowitz, who was the -- a chief architect of one of the most unpopular wars in our history --
THE PRESIDENT: (Laughter.) That's an interesting start. (Laughter.)
Q -- is your choice to be the President of the World Bank. What kind of signal does that send to the rest of the world?
Recall that the investigation by the blogs of the left into Jeff Gannon/Guckart began after Gannon/Guckart asked a leading question at the president's last press conference. The rationale was that a partisan with a press pass was a suspicious thing. I don't know who "Elisabeth" is, but her framing of her question is as partisan and leading as any that could be asked of the president. So, will the mob that went after Gannon/Guckart now be sifting through Elisabeth's past for intriguing clues on the source of her partisanship?
UPDATE: "Elisabeth" is Elizabeth Bumiller according to Instapundit's latest sources.
The question could just as well have been from the New York Times' Elizabeth Becker. Check out her amazing filing this afternoon (co-authored with David Sager.) Talk about deep, deep bias free of even a thin attempt to disguise it. There is not one attributed quote from a diplomat, but Becker claims the Wolfowitz appointment was greeted with "quiet anguish in those foreign capitals where the Iraq conflict and its aftermath remain deeply unpopular," and that Wolfowitz has the "almost radioactive reputation of a committed ideologue."
And consider this line from the Becker piece: "Mr. Wolfowitz is also likely to be a target - especially in the Mideast, where he ranks among Israel's strongest defenders in the administration...." Paul Wolfowitz is Jewish, but he is no stronger defender of Israel than the president, the vice-president, the Secretary of State or the Secretary of Defense. Would the New York Times have run such a comment if Wolfowitz hadn't been Jewish?
Here's a bit of bio on Becker. But sticking to the Gannon/Guckart precedent, the investigation should be into the background of the asker of the loaded question, Elizabeth Bumiller.
Of course it won't happen because the left wants to protect MSM's near monopoly on biased questions and reporters. And I am not arguing for a vetting of the lefty reporters like the two Elizabeths, or Dana Milbank or many others. Just pointing out the risible idea that Gannon/Guckart was uniquely partisan. He was just a mirror image from the right side of the partisan spectrum of these White House press pass carriers.
posted by SCP at 10:14 AM
<< Home