Democrats ask White House for documents on conservative blogger

Knight Ridder Newspapers ^ | March 8, 2005 | Elana Schor

[prion]

"The test will be, is that reporter producing some objective, newsworthy matter that's not slanted to one political ideology or another?" Avant said.

Pff! If only there were such a test!

So has anybody heard of mediabistro? I thought I was pretty blog-savvy, but it's a new one on me.

[thoughtomator]

I guess this is what they do in lieu of having any actual influence.

[KC_Conspirator]

Why? What about Sandy Berger?

[Peach]

LOL.

Old Media has nothing left except complaints. Nothing.

[Enterprise]

So, why don't Republicans ask for files on liberal reporters?

[Peach]

That's what I'd do.

[mowkeka]

Are they still going on about this? My goodness, you'd think they'd have just a little bit of outrage at Eason Jordan.

[SoFloFreeper]

White House response should be: "yeah, we'll release those documents the moment you guys get that Form 180 signed by your Presidential nominee....how many weeks ago on Meet the dePressed did he say he'd sign that??"

[Peach]

They are going on about it because they are nutjobs.

[Pikamax]

""The test will be, is that reporter producing some objective, newsworthy matter that's not slanted to one political ideology or another?" Avant said."


That sounds a bit intrusive there.

[Dilbert56]

Democrats: "We are not irrelevant. Irrelevant is our goal and this investigation is a big step in that direction."

[Montfort]

It's not like the guy was really hiding anything. Anytime anyone asks a question of President Bush or his Press Secretary that is not overtly hostile, everyone knows that the reporter must be some "conservative hack." Of course, when all the other people in the room pose overtly hostile questions, we know that they are all responsible journalists with no bias or agenda that would justify calling them "partisan hacks" or "liberal hacks." Funny how we seldom hear the term "liberal hacks."

This is the best "scandal" the Democrat whiners can come up with now? This is pathetic.

[big bad easter bunny]

Barney Frank is still allowed in the White House!

"The story itself deserves to be told, and it say a lot about the direction of the government under the Clinton Administration. Loeb, however, was careful not to tell the truth about Barney Frank, who was reprimanded by the House of Representatives after his relationship with a gay prostitute became known. The prostitute, Stephen Gobie, ran a prostitution ring out of Frank's house, although Frank claimed he didn't know anything about it. Frank also tried to fix some parking tickets for Gobie, who had been selected as Frank's lover after running an ad in the Washington Blade promoting himself as a "hot bottom." Loeb said nothing about Frank's sleazy past. "

[massgopguy]

That would be a Witch Hunt.

[Enterprise]

A witch hunt? I found one!

[sportutegrl]

Q. Why doesn't Barney Frank use bookmarks?
A. He prefers to use bent over pages.

[The_Victor]

"The test will be, is that reporter producing some objective, newsworthy matter that's not slanted to one political ideology or another?" Avant said

That standard should disqualify everyone in the room.

[ClearCase_guy]

"The test will be, is that reporter producing some objective, newsworthy matter that's not slanted to one political ideology or another?" Avant said.

They'll be excluding Helen Thomas, right?
And CBS?
And PBS?
And Bill Russert?

If you've got a slant, you become persona non grata, right?

[Peach]

LOL. Why yes. I do believe you're right.