This isn't about putting a stamp of approval on whatever the liberals are accusing Jeff Gannon of doing before he became a reporter, it's about the rights of citizens and reporters to exercise their First Amendment rights without fear of being personally destroyed.
When CBS News and CNN were targeted in recent months, it was because of their professional behavior--and that's what we focused on.
D.C. Chapter mega-ping.
D.C. Chapter mega-ping.
I cannot attend (picking kids up at 6).
Give 'em hell for me. 'Pod.
I've heard some wild allegations...I hope Mr. Gannon stands up and fights the Leftist devils...MUD
You mean being a prostitute?
Although I agree he has the right to pursue any job that will bring him happiness, I have to believe that if WE found out that some MSM reporter had been a fomer? prostitute....the guns would be blazing.
Right on D.C. And I'm just so sure that NYT and See BS will join you in your support of free speech!
Count me in.
Count the wife in also.
Are you sure you guys wants to show support for Gannon/Guckert? He appears to have quite a checkered past.
Just got this as a PING, it may have bearing on this issue:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1345924/posts
Exactly. Once again, the Clintonista's have reared their ugly heads and shown that the politics of personal destruction is alive and well - within their ranks.
This personal attack on Jeff Gannon just sickens me.
There but for the grace of God go you or me!!!! And that is exactly the point. It could be anyone - anyone that the Clinton's decide they need to shut up and shut down. When it comes to their interests, the First Amendment does NOT apply.
I will be with you in spirit if not in body.
Eagles up, DC Chapter!!!!!
Oh darn, I wish we could join you. We've already paid for that Reagan dinner tonight at CPAC, so can't get out of it now. We'll be with you in spirit. Hope to see you sometime today or Saturday at CPAC!
Must be a DC Chapter Activist. You all know...a guy with guts, ready to stand week after week, year after year in the face of corruption and in support of what he beleived was right.
Perhaps I don't feel as strongly about this as you do, kristinn, but if I was in driving distance I'd be there with you just to bask in the glow of your strength of character.
It will not do any conservative any good to take this guy's part - and most folks here have the stones to admit that. While y'all are whining about the "attacks" on Gannon, why not stop and think about how geared up you would be if a male prostitute was regularly admitted into the CLINTON WH press room after being denied Capitol Hill credentials and did nothing but lob t-ball questions whenever the going got a little rough for Lockhart. Think about it, and be honest with yourself about what you would be saying and doing. Then come back and explain why you think you should protest in this guy's corner.
OLBERMANN: Now to Ron Hutcheson of “Knight-Ridder” newspapers, current president of the White House Correspondents Association. Mr. Hutcheson, good evening. Thank you for your time.
RON HUTCHESON, “KNIGHT-RIDDER”: Thanks for having me, Keith.
OLBERMANN: About getting White House press credentials, obviously we can stretch a point one way or the other, and say that the legitimacy is in the eye of the beholder. One man‘s, no matter which political affiliation you have, one man‘s vanity Web site, is another‘s alternative media outlet. But how do you get a White House press credential if you aren‘t actually affiliated with anything that look like a news organization, in so much it appears as Mr. Guckert did that before the founding of Talon News?
HUTCHESON: Well, to me, that‘s what‘s this whole story is about, Keith.
What “Editor & Publisher” has brought to life, it‘s pretty easy to get into the White House briefing room. It‘s pretty easy to go to any news conference in Washington, whether it‘s on Capital Hill or whether it‘s at the White House. And the truth of the matter is, most of us in the journalistic profession aren‘t looking ways to make it harder. Certainly at the White House Correspondence Association, my goal is to get people in to the briefing room not to work with the White House on ways to get them out.
OLBERMANN: As Mr. Fleicsher said today, to quote him again, I don‘t think the party organization should have people in that room acting as reporters. They are advocates, not reporters, and a line should be drawn.
He‘s saying, I presume, that if the White House isn‘t necessarily going to draw that line or it is not fair to draw that line and say, no, opposite party Web site could be represented. Then somebody else has to. Would that devolve to being your responsibility?
HUTCHESON: It could be if we wanted to take it on. And frankly, it is funny, and frankly, I agree entirely with Ari. I looked at Gannon or whatever his name is, his Web site early on. My initial reaction was this is the Republican National Committee thing. That‘s outrageous. I looked a little closer, it is not really R.N.C.
You know, one thing that‘s overlooked, we have a long not so proud history of coconuts in that briefing room. We get questions from the left. We get questions from the right. We get questions from outer space. And for most of us, most of us are in there to try to get—try to listen for information, not to promote ideology. So, we all sort of resent it when the briefing gets hijacked for ideology.
On the other hand, trying to figure out how to solve that problem, the solution is probably worse than the problem. So, you get a couple questions that come from the left, come from the right, come from presumably nowhere. So what? We can live with that.
OLBERMANN: But judging by what Ms. Dowd “New York Times” wrote today, and judging by Mr. Fleicsher‘s surprise about the real name of Jeff Gannon and somewhat contradicting Mr. McClellan‘s statement, obviously somebody does decide who gets in and who doesn‘t. Is that one person the press secretary to the president? And if not, who is? And what are the rules?
HUTCHESON: It is definitely not the press secretary. It‘s somebody at a lower level. The bar is pretty low.
And in fact, I guarantee you if Maureen Dowd wants to go there tomorrow, all she has to do is call up and get a daily pass.
It is harder to get what we call a hard pass, which is a regular White House credential. For that, you have to undergo some certain checks that you don‘t go for a daily pass, which is really intended for people, say, the mayor from their town goes up, their local sports team comes up, they want to get into the White House, they have a legitimate reason to go there on a short-term basis, but not on a regular basis.
OLBERMANN: And you just brought it up so she clarify this. This whole question that has just been raised about whether or not Guckert had a hard pass or a daily pass. He apparently had nothing but daily passes. And what people thought might have been a hard pass was his own he lanyard, his own thing around his neck that‘s really had a plastic card that said Talon News. That‘s what we‘ve been able to see from video.
HUTCHESON: Yes. That‘s certainly my belief.
OLBERMANN: OK. Ron Hutcheson of Knight Ridder, president of the White House Correspondents Association, great thanks for an inside view of what‘s going on there. Thank you, sir.
HUTCHESON: Thank you.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6993032/
kristinn, this guy has stained us. He asked a smartass question which drew attention to him. You guys bring up Helen Thomas and cry about a double standard. Well, there is one and it sucks, but we are supposed to hold people on our side to a higher standard.
When his possible role as a male prostitute is brought up, you guys talk about Barney Frank. Fallacious reasoning. Barney is open about his homosexuality.
If you go forward with this demonstration, you will hand our enemies an excuse to paint all of us at Free Republic as clueless extremists. There are many thoughtful people here at Free Republic. They help make FR the top conservative site on the net. And some of them have spoke out on this thread.
Please call this off, kristinn. There is still time to do so.
Guys...
While I certainly share your concerns about the targeting of independent journalists who dare to break from the party line, "Jeff Gannon" (i.e. James Guckert) is hardly the guy to use as a rallying point for this issue.
Gannon got a White House press pass under a fake name for a site that had only been publishing for five days when he got the pass. His site is an extension of the partisan site www.gopusa.com
Whiel we may agree with Gannon, if a liberal used a fake name to get a White House press pass representing a newly-created (at the time) news outlet that was part of a partisan Democrat site, we'd be here crucifying the peson, and rightly so.
Are we going to engatge in the same kind of double-standard we always accuse liberal of having?
A more effective thing to do IMO is to go after Helen Thomas for her (lack of) objectivity and to attack the double standard.
I don't see anything positive as a result of defending this guy, or even the perception of defending this guy.
I did a web search and Mr. Gannon has some serious sexual issues. I'm not condoning the media attacking him for it but I see no reason to rally around a person who is a pervert. I would like to know too why he was allowed in the White house to ask questions. I take it the Press does'nt have to pass any background checks.