The W
Views: 97799155
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
30.7.14 0005
The W - Current Events & Politics - The White House's Daily Double
This thread has 2 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 4.60
Pages: 1
(827 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (9 total)
Teppan-Yaki
Pepperoni








Since: 28.6.02

Since last post: 852 days
Last activity: 822 days
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.11
Yahoo!/AP reports that a third columnist was paid to assist a Bush administration policy.

Not only that, but Dick Cheney dressed in ceremonial Wyoming green to commemorate Auschwitz:



Note Lynne Cheney dressed more appropriately for the occasion than her husband; the WaPo has more.
Promote this thread!
bash91
Merguez








Since: 2.1.02
From: Plain Dealing, LA

Since last post: 713 days
Last activity: 7 hours
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.48
    Originally posted by Teppan-Yaki
    Yahoo!/AP reports that a third columnist was paid to assist a Bush administration policy.


Much ado about nothing. The president and co-founder of a group called Marriage Savers, who also happens to be a columnist who writes about his area of expertise, got hired to, gasp, train marriage counselors and then he continued to write columns supportive of initiatives designed to promote marriage. You'll have to pardon me if I find the whole thing overblown.

As for Cheney, is it really that surprising that an elderly man with a history of heart and respiratory problems would want to dress warmly for an event outdoors in sub-freezing temperatures? Overall, I'd say the media coverage of this "incident" is nothing more than a cheap shot at Cheney.

Tim



Vocatus atque non vocatus, Deus aderit. -- Erasmus
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1184 days
Last activity: 981 days
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
I'd like to point out that the reporters are more concerned with this than actually concerned with commerating and remembering this atrocity.





Another great moment in television history
Teppan-Yaki
Pepperoni








Since: 28.6.02

Since last post: 852 days
Last activity: 822 days
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.16
    Originally posted by bash91
      Originally posted by Teppan-Yaki
      Yahoo!/AP reports that a third columnist was paid to assist a Bush administration policy.


    Much ado about nothing. The president and co-founder of a group called Marriage Savers, who also happens to be a columnist who writes about his area of expertise, got hired to, gasp, train marriage counselors and then he continued to write columns supportive of initiatives designed to promote marriage. You'll have to pardon me if I find the whole thing overblown.

    As for Cheney, is it really that surprising that an elderly man with a history of heart and respiratory problems would want to dress warmly for an event outdoors in sub-freezing temperatures? Overall, I'd say the media coverage of this "incident" is nothing more than a cheap shot at Cheney.

    Tim


The problem is that happening to be a columnist means journalistic ethics should be applied (i.e. no payola/plugola); as a broadcaster, I don't find it overblown.

As for Cheney -- look at the inauguration; you didn't see him wearing a parka in very cold temps. Remember, he's our representative at a world memorial; sometimes, the way you look makes a difference (see JFK and why he wouldn't wear hats).
BigSteve
Pepperoni








Since: 23.7.04
From: Baltimore, MD

Since last post: 2756 days
Last activity: 2484 days
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.40
So we're now in a state where people are seriously criticizing the Bush Administration's wardrobe as a way to discredit them? At least the Post put it in the Style and Beauty Section where it belongs.

What would have been disrespectful would have been if Vice President Cheney failed to attend the memorial at all.

As for this journalist, it doesn't seem very improper to me. Armstrong Williams case was a little sketchy, I'll agree. The second one, I wasn't sure about, but it seemed like a violation of journalistic integrity. But this seems to be nothing to have an uproar about. AS the article says, he wasn't paid to write anything. By all accounts, his views weren't changed by the money, so his views were honest. What it boils down to is his being hired by the government to do something he believes in. Doesn't seem like the end of the world to me.
Wolfram J. Paulovich
Frankfurter








Since: 11.11.02
From: Fat City, Baby

Since last post: 2871 days
Last activity: 2241 days
AIM:  
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.48
    Originally posted by Grimis
    I'd like to point out that the reporters are more concerned with this than actually concerned with commerating and remembering this atrocity.

Did the authoritative "What Reporters Are Concerned With" spreadsheet come out already? I must have missed that in my email. Can you fill me in on it? I'd love to know. I mean, I was reading the hated New York Times, and I only noticed reverential treatment for Holocaust survivors and the speeches given at Auschwitz.

Here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/28/international/europe/28auschwitz.html
And here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/27/international/europe/27auschwitz.html?oref=login

I guess I missed where they were ignoring the Holocaust and bashing Cheney somehow. I'm probably wrong, and I'd like to learn.



The Obtuse Angle Archive.
bash91
Merguez








Since: 2.1.02
From: Plain Dealing, LA

Since last post: 713 days
Last activity: 7 hours
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.48
    Originally posted by Teppan-Yaki
    The problem is that happening to be a columnist means journalistic ethics should be applied (i.e. no payola/plugola); as a broadcaster, I don't find it overblown.


I just don't see the "payola/plugola" connection that you see. He was paid to train marriage counselors because that's what he does. Something else that he does is write columns. Traditionally, he's argued in favor of measures that "strengthen" marriage and continued to do that during and after his time as a trainer of marriage counselors. I can't find an ethical problem here unless the argument is that you can't write or broadcast about something you get paid to do, in which case there are a lot of journalists violating that ethical precept every day.

Jeb, while I don't want to put words in Grimis' mouth, I would note that he specifically references "the reporters" in his commentary, which I would think a reasonable person would see as referring to the fashion and lifestyle reporters cited by Teppan-Yaki and not as a reference to all reporters.

Tim



Vocatus atque non vocatus, Deus aderit. -- Erasmus
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong








Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1230 days
Last activity: 29 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.00
Personally, I can't wait for the outrage the next time someone in the Bush Administration wears white after Labor Day. Or is it Memorial Day? I never remember...

This is reaching really, really far. Maybe one of these days the press and the politicians will stop being so concerned with blatant and blind political attacks, and be more concerned with discussing ideas. I know - pretty far fetched. But after this election, I wouldn't mind a couple months of at least the APPEARANCE of bi-partisanship.



Still on the Shelf.com

Updated Weekly
Wolfram J. Paulovich
Frankfurter








Since: 11.11.02
From: Fat City, Baby

Since last post: 2871 days
Last activity: 2241 days
AIM:  
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.48
    Originally posted by bash91
    Jeb, while I don't want to put words in Grimis' mouth, I would note that he specifically references "the reporters" in his commentary, which I would think a reasonable person would see as referring to the fashion and lifestyle reporters cited by Teppan-Yaki and not as a reference to all reporters.

You know what? You're right, and I apologize. I'm so used to posters on message boards making blanket generalizations based on one piece of isolated evidence that at this point I'm assuming people are doing that. That's a mistake. In my defense, I will say that I far too often read posts in which people take one article and conflate it to represent the media "as a whole," as if they were one unified entity working with singular purpose. It's that "here's this one column; look what the whole media is trying to do" argument. Like I said, I've grown so used to it that I anticipate it happening even when it probably hasn't. As with here.

While I'm here, on the subject of dress:
I don't think what Cheney did was that big of a deal, but I think the backlash against the criticism is even sillier. The fact is that Cheney could have easily put on some long underwear, t-shirt, dress shirt, wool pants, wool jacket, wool overcoat, scarf and double-layered his socks and been no more or less uncomfortable than the rest of the guys out there. If he did it for the inauguration, he could do it for Auschwitz. (I think the latter is sort of a "bigger" event.) That said, not doing so wasn't an international incident or anything, but it seems a little tacky and to others can easily seem disrespectful. If a foreign dignitary appeared "dressed down" at a re-commemoration of the Vietnam Memorial, I don't think the conservative or liberal press would have much problem with lambasting the foreigner for being disrespectful. And I think in many cases they'd be right. But Cheney shouldn't get a free pass just because he's our Vice-President. Especially not when just going through the motions, clothing-wise, would have been practically effortless. After all, a jacket and overcoat is pretty much his uniform; deviating from that takes more thought than just putting on the same old thing in the morning.



The Obtuse Angle Archive.
Thread rated: 4.60
Pages: 1
Thread ahead: Drafted as an Election worker?
Next thread: The Purple Finger
Previous thread: Ted Turner: "FOX is like Hitler"
(827 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Well after listening to Chretien speak for a decade. Pretty much anybody would seem like a good speaker LoL I caught Chretien speech at the convention. Boy did he get a big pop from the arena when he talked about not going to Iraq.
- Net Hack Slasher, Chretien steps down December 12 (2003)
The W - Current Events & Politics - The White House's Daily DoubleRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.109 seconds.