posted
And to what motivation do you ascribe the reaction of the previous Republican Presidents' press secretaries?
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Really? They are criticizing the VP for not coming forward sooner because failure to do so feeds the press' self-importance?
I guess I can see that. I was interpreting it as that these people know how to handle news related to the White House and they feel that the VP made a miscalculation...with foreseeable effects.
Every government press advisor I've ever known personally actually WAS a press person, of some experience. They were pretty matter-of-fact about how the press operates and would work with their clients to manage that operation to the best possible outcome.
And it seems to me that our press is, if anything, a bunch of pansies since 9/11 and as a result have let the country down.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Really? They are criticing the VP for not coming forward sooner because failure to do so feeds the press' self-importance?
No, they are criticizing the VP for not recognizing that the press has run amok with self importance and will therefore skewer the White House for not coming forward sooner.
quote:I guess I can see that. I was interpreting it as that these people know how to handle news related to the White House and they feel that the VP made a miscalculation...with foreseeable effects.
That's how I'm interpreting it, too. They know that when the press feels slighted, they make you pay.
It's practical advice about the press.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kayla: This is what the media and some of the rest of us are upset about.
quote:To the degree this has metastasized into something more, it reflects disquiet over the closed nature of this administration and its utter disdain for the right of the people to know. And Cheney's claim, made in the Fox interview, that somehow this boils down to media pique at having been kept out of the loop, is silly. It seems to have escaped his notice that he is the vice president of the United States. What happens to him and the president is of national interest. How many other bicycle mishaps made national news last year? You have to ask yourself: If they're this closemouthed about a hunting accident, what kinds of secrets do they keep on matters that matter? What information should you and I have that we don't? What things should we know that we won't until it's too late?
Good point - thanks Kayla.
Posts: 337 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:No one in authority is talking about charging Cheney with a crime. But Cheney and Rogerson share the ignoble distinction of succumbing to what hunters (and lawyers) call "buck fever." It is a phenomenon as old as hunting, defined by the Random House dictionary as the "nervous excitement of an inexperienced hunter upon the approach of game." Yet experienced hunters have also been known to cut down neighbors they have mistaken for bucks, ducks and other quarry.
Buck fever is a recognized defense for negligent hunters, particularly youths. When a teenager shot a local businessman dressed in orange during deer season, he was excused from civil liability because of buck fever, despite the absence of any known species of orange-colored deer.
The law governing hunting accidents has long been controversial. This is the one area where citizens routinely shoot and kill other citizens without civil or criminal penalty -- or even the loss of a hunting license. Indeed, most cases of accidental shootings are viewed as reasonable mistakes by hunters and often it is the victim who is blamed for failing to give a hunter a wide berth. Even in the few cases where criminal and civil charges are brought against hunters such as Cheney, they are often tried by a jury of their peers: jurors from communities where hunting and hunting accidents are a way of life.
That's what saved Rogerson from prison. Karen Wood had only been out in her backyard for a minute, leaving her year-old twin girls in her house, when Rogerson shot her in the chest with a .30-06 rifle. Despite a 4X power scope and a distance of only 188 feet, Rogerson insisted that he mistook Wood for a deer he had seen -- though a game warden found no tracks or other evidence.
This reiterates my desire for a strict liability misdemeanor for shooting someone. I'd also like th standards which seem to be required for criminal negligence or recklessness to be found to be slighly lowered.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
lol, after watching some Olympic coverage on MSNBC Maurie and Connie came on. They spent an entire segment mocking the Corpus Christi Times and how its stories were not as important as the stories posted in the New York Times. They even had blow ups of the front pages showing the main stories.
If that is not having a hissy fit, I don't know what is. To mock a paper because it has stories of local interest (in addition to national stories) is just being petty. Of course, some of it likely comes from the fact that the big national papers are struggling, and local papers are actually doing very well financially, and at keeping their target audiences right now might have something to do with it.
Posts: 1901 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
Four days into the Dick Cheney shooting spree, I received a call from Fox News, inviting me to be a guest on “Your World with Neil Cavuto.” The afternoon’s debate topic, said the producer, would look at the Cheney shooting from a different angle: “When this story’s all over, will it make Democrats look bad?”
Can you imagine? As I reminded Cavuto on the show: “Cheney goes hunting without the proper license, fails to observe standard gun safety rules, shoots a man in the face, doesn’t talk to law enforcement officials until the next morning, covers up the story for almost 24 hours before having a friend leak it to a local newspaper, then says nothing more for four days until he pops up with a one-on-one softball interview on Fox News. And Democrats are the ones who look bad?” That’s a stretch, even for Fox News!
---
As former Republican White House Press Secretaries Marlin Fitzwater (Bush 41) and Ari Fleischer (Bush 43) observed, the Texas hunting incident could not have been handled any worse. If only Dick Cheney had listened to . . . George W. Bush. While out on a hunting trip when he was governor of Texas, Bush accidentally shot a protected song bird and had to pay a $70 fine. After consulting with then-adviser Karen Hughes, Bush decided the best way of handing it was simply to fess up. “I then called every reporter who had been on the trip,” writes Bush in his 1999 autobiography. “In the end, it did not hurt, and it may have helped.” It’s one case where Dick Cheney could have benefited from listening to George Bush — assuming, of course, he listens to Bush about anything at all.
posted
Well, the continual use of the word "cover-up" should make them look bad, as should ridiculous statements such as "None of us could tell the sherrif to come back tomorrow." (something I've seen elsewhere)
If Cheney had done such a bad thing after the shooting (and I mean ethically bad, not bad spin-handling), then there wouldn't be a need to seize on these ridiculous issues. Especially trying to make someone look bad for exercising a constitutional right concerning interaction with the police.
It's getting so tiresome. They've turned inadequate media saavy into a moral failing.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
