Maybe Judy needs to find women with information.
Miller lives in Sag Harbor. Are the Liberal "leading lights" "Down island" snubbing her now, as she shops in town? I wonder if she "pals around" with Betty Friedan.
Posted on 10/21/2005 11:49:38 AM PDT by advance_copy
We've got a Republican President, a Republican Senate, and a Republican House of Representatives, and damn-all to show for it.
If you're satisfied with empty promises and no results, how nice for you.
Concur. Libby gave Miller (and everyone) authorization to speak over a year ago. What Miller needed was Fitzgerald to promise he was not going to ask her about her tip-off to the Hamas- and al-Qaeda-connected Holy Land Foundation that they were about to be raided by the FBI.
Miller's got to be pretty career-desperate by now. She's on the outs with everybody at the times. Raines, her protector, is gone, and Pinch, her other protector, had to make a choice of Judy or the paper. Given that the paper is the only thing that distinguishes Raines from the guy covering town meetings in Caribou, Maine, Judy comes in second no matter how frequently or recently she bumped uglies with him.
Furthermore, Miller's success, such as it has been, has depended on (1) sleeping with guys who have information and (2) sleeping with senior editors, etc. so that she can attach her byline to the work of her juniors. The problem with being a whore, which is the essence of Miller's career, is that it is a trade which values youth over experience. In Judy's case, her youth is long spent, and her experience is not of interest to Bill Keller (unlike, evidently, Raines).
So Miller is done at the Times. All over. And she needs to find another job. But it has to be a paper that (1) obsesses about Washington inside information, and (2) has a Times-style "Star System" of the sort that enables Miller, Jayson Blair, Charlie LeDuff (a plagiarist like Blair, kept on because?) and others to dispense with the norms of normal behaviour (let alone journalistic standards).
And she needs to find some new sources: men with information that will give it up to a sixtysomething, very unpleasant woman whose only positive is that she, too, "gives it up."
d.o.l.
Criminal Number 18F
She (Judith Miller) and her boyfriend Steven Rattner, also a Times reporter, became close friends of Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr., the son of the then-publisher of the Times, whose first job at the Times, starting in 1978, was also as a reporter of the Washington bureau. For several summers, Miller and Rattner shared a weekend house on the Eastern Shore of Maryland with Sulzberger and his wife, Gail. (Sulzberger would become publisher of the Times in 1992 in his own right.)
That's precisely the point on which we disagree.
Bush has achieved some results and is still trying for his other goals.
I can't imagine how any other person would have done a better job, especially considering
1) the co-ordinated lies and obstruction from the (still powerful) Left,
2) the WOT, and
3) the vagaries of Mother Nature.
What living person do you think would have done better than Bush?
Great post.
Maybe Judy needs to find women with information.
Miller lives in Sag Harbor. Are the Liberal "leading lights" "Down island" snubbing her now, as she shops in town? I wonder if she "pals around" with Betty Friedan.
What difference does it make who I think would have done a better job than Bush? That's a side issue, which has no bearing on the fact that the argument that he's lowered taxes, reformed Social Security, and put great jurists on the bench is bogus.
Didn't happen. Exhibit A, Harriet Meirs, for God's sake.
A big difference.
That's a side issue,...
Not at all.
If you can't name anyone alive who would have done better, that means Bush hasn't done such a bad job as you say. All things (WOT, vagaries of Mother Nature, Lib lies and obstruction) considered, I think he's done well.
Thanks for the idea for the tagline.
The DOJ logo makes me laugh. Who came up with it? Stephen Bochko?
We've gotta include the historical perspective.....Web pages for usdoj.gov, in general, were much scarcer in starr's time.
See:http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.usdoj.gov
Then again...I remember reading some of the Starr documents online....Documents from Independent Counsel Ken Starr Released 10/2/98
LOL! Well, at least you are no longer arguing that Bush cut taxes, reformed Social Security, put brilliant jurists on the bench, or accomplished anything to forward the ideals of conservatism.
Instead, you invite me to invent a fictional administration and then we can argue about which one is better, the Bush administration or an imaginary administration.
My kids like to argue about whether Frankenstein or Wolfman would win in a fight.
I prefer to talk about the real world.
But, you'll notice, I haven't changed what I said about Bush's success with some of the issues.
I've merely changed the argument to looking at the forest, rather than the trees.
Since you can't agree with me that Bush has had very real successes, I thought I'd ask if you can see the overall picture of what Bush has accomplished.
Encouraging you to write of anyone else, currently living,* who might have done as well as Bush has, seemed like a good way to discuss presidential success with you, in a more general way. We could compare and contrast the two presidential styles.
I'm more than willing to incorporate what I learn from people who hold opinions opposed to mine. I might even change my mind, when others provide a strong argument. Your willingness to participate in this discussion is very helpful.
After all, being blind to the reality around me, isn't going to help me. I need all the help I can get, in figuring out how the world really works.
* How about Condi, or Cheney, Gore, or Kerry, for example? How would they have fared as President these past 5 years?
that's what the people at the bars on bourbon street were saying when Katrina hit.
What an odd argument.
They didn't do what they said they were going to do.
Period, end of story.
They've done some of what they said they would do.
Period, end of story.
They've got 3 more years....
James Moore is a psychotic bozo obsessed with smearing Karl Rove. I pay less credence to anything he says than I do to Michael Moore (no relation, I believe?). In other words, James Moore's words are worth less than zero.....
What makes you think he is a liberal?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.