Republicans, bloggers and gays, oh my!(Ann Coulter)

In response to the public disgrace and ruin of New York Times editor Howell Raines, CBS anchor Dan Rather and CNN news director Eason Jordan, liberals are directing their fury at the blogs. Once derided as people sitting around their living rooms in pajamas, now obscure writers for unknown websites are coming under more intensive background checks than CIA agents.

The heretofore-unknown Jeff Gannon of the heretofore-unknown "Talon News" service was caught red-handed asking friendly questions at a White House press briefing. Now the media is hot on the trail of a gay escort service that Gannon may have run some years ago. Are we supposed to like gay people now, or hate them? Is there a website where I can go to and find out how the Democrats want me to feel about gay people on a moment-to-moment basis?

Liberals keep rolling out a scrolling series of attacks on Gannon for their Two Minutes Hate, but all their other charges against him fall apart after three seconds of scrutiny. Gannon's only offense is that he may be gay.

First, liberals claimed Gannon was a White House plant who received a press pass so that he could ask softball questions – a perk reserved for New York Times reporters during the Clinton years. Their proof was that while "real" journalists (like Jayson Blair) were being denied press passes, Gannon had one, even though he writes for a website that no one has ever heard of – but still big enough to be a target of liberal hatred! (By the way, if writing for a news organization with no viewers is grounds for being denied a press pass, why do MSNBC reporters have them?)

On the op-ed page of the New York Times, Maureen Dowd openly lied about the press pass, saying: "I was rejected for a White House press pass at the start of the Bush administration, but someone with an alias, a tax evasion problem and Internet pictures where he posed like the 'Barberini Faun' is credentialed?"

Press passes can't be that hard to come by if the White House allows that dyspeptic, old Helen Thomas to sit within yards of the president. Still, it would be suspicious if Dowd were denied a press pass while someone from "Talon News" got one, even if he is a better reporter.

But Dowd was talking about two different passes without telling her readers (a process now known in journalism schools as "Dowdification"). Gannon didn't have a permanent pass; he had only a daily pass. Almost anyone can get a daily pass – even famed Times fantasist Maureen Dowd could have gotten one of those. A daily pass and a permanent pass are altogether different animals. The entire linchpin of Dowd's column was a lie. (And I'm sure the Times' public editor will get right on Dowd's deception.)

Finally, liberals expressed shock and dismay that Gannon's real name is "James Guckert." On MSNBC's "Hardball," Chris Matthews introduced the Gannon scandal this way: "Coming up, how did a fake news reporter from a right-wing website get inside the White House press briefings and presidential news conferences?"

Reporter David Shuster then gave a report on "the phony alias Guckert used to play journalist" – as opposed to the real name Shuster uses to play journalist. (You can tell Schuster is a crackerjack journalist because he uses phrases like "phony alias.") With all the subtlety of a gay-bashing skinhead, Matthews spent the rest of the segment seeing how many times he could smear Gannon by mentioning "HotMilitaryStuds.com" and laughing.

Any day now, Matthews will devote entire shows to exposing Larry Zeigler, Gerald Riviera and Michael Weiner – aka Larry King, Geraldo Rivera and Matthews' former MSNBC colleague Michael Savage. As a newspaper reporter, Wolf Blitzer has written under the names Ze'ev Blitzer and Ze'ev Barak. The greatest essayist of modern times was Eric Blair, aka George Orwell. The worst essayist of modern times is "TRB" of The New Republic.

Air America radio host and "Nanny" impersonator "Randi Rhodes" goes by a fake name, and she won't even tell people what her real last name is. (She says for "privacy reasons." That name must be a real doozy.) As Insideradio.com describes Rhodes, she refuses "to withhold anything from her listeners" and says conservatives "are less likely to share such things." How about sharing your name, Randi? We promise not to laugh.

Democrats in Congress actually demanded that an independent prosecutor investigate how Gannon got into White House press conferences while writing under an invented name. How did Gary Hartpence, Billy Blythe and John Kohn (Gary Hart, Bill Clinton and John Kerry) run for president under invented names? Admittedly, these men were not reporters for the prestigious "Talon News" service; they were merely Democrats running for president.

Liberals keep telling us the media isn't liberal, but in order to retaliate for the decimation of major news organizations like the New York Times, CBS News and CNN, all they can do is produce the scalp of an obscure writer for an unknown conservative Web page. And unlike Raines, Rather and Jordan, they can't even get Gannon for incompetence on the job. (Also unlike Raines, Rather and Jordan, Gannon has appeared on television and given a series of creditable interviews in his own defense, proving our gays are more macho than their straights.)

Gannon didn't write about gays. No "hypocrisy" is being exposed. Liberals' hateful, frothing-at-the-mouth campaign against Gannon consists solely of their claim that he is gay.

Beg pardon......if you care to look it up, that was name of the policy that your hero Slick Willy made up.

Yeah you rite.
Just like Slick Willy "made up" Bush's precise compromise on Stem Cell funding necessary to open the door to human farming. Or the Democrats (then decrying abortion as targeted genocide) "made up" the pop-control and environmentalism policies instituted by the GOP's 1970 task force "Earth Resources & Population" (GHB, Chairman).
As into "real sex and marriage" as the contracepting right claims to be, it's astounding to me that they've absolutely no gaydar when it comes to their own.
It's not as if the facts of the matter haven't been spelled out for all and sundry more than once. Even beyond reports of candidate W's "feeling like a better man" for having met with the Log Cabin Republicans, we have Barbara Bush to thank for establishing the "don't ask, don't tell" template.

Not for commercial use. Solely to be used for the educational purposes of research and open discussion.

First lady not worried about hookers' tour of White House Paul Bedard The Washington Times; Part A; WORLD; Pg. A10 July 10, 1989, Monday, Final Edition

WARSAW, POLAND
First lady Barbara Bush said yesterday that the Secret Service investigation of a late night White House tour that reportedly included two male prostitutes has not raised security questions the first family is worried about.

Mrs. Bush added that "I'm not into all of this" and said it was "good" that The Washington Post wasn't following The Times' story.

Speaking publicly for the first time about the July 3, 1988, tour arranged by former Washington lobbyist Craig J. Spence, Mrs. Bush said she and her husband have no fears of a security breach.

"Not at all," she told reporters on Air Force One shortly after it took off from Andrews Air Force Base en route here for the first leg of a 10-day European trip by President Bush.

Mrs. Bush, noting that she reads all of the stories printed in the Daily Press Summary, a half-inch thick digest of stories in the print and electronic media, said the reports about the scandal uncovered by The Washington Times haven't alarmed her.

"There haven't been a lot of stories in our house about it," she said.

Mrs. Bush added that "I'm not into all of this" and said it was "good" that The Washington Post wasn't following The Times' story.

Ever since The Times first reported the tour on June 29, the White House has avoided comment. Last week, Treasury Secretary Nicholas Brady, who heads the Secret Service, reluctantly confirmed reports of a Secret Service investigation.

Presidential spokesman Marlin Fitzwater said the service hasn't raised security concerns for the White House as a result of the probe.

White House officials have said that the midnight tours such as those arranged for Mr. Spence do not threaten the First Family's security because they are allowed only in office areas and not the residence.

The tours for Mr. Spence, who has been linked to a federal investigation of a Washington homosexual prostitution ring that catered to government, media and business officials, were set up by Reginald A. deGueldre, a uniformed White House officer who moonlighted as the lobbyist's bodyguard.

Mr. Fitzwater said the Secret Service is "looking into the action" of the officer.

White House officials have said any staff member with the proper credentials such as those held by Mr. deGueldre can give private tours, and after-hours tours are encouraged because they don't disturb those working during the day. The tours commonly include a view of the Oval Office.

"I think they've [The Times] overblown the White House angle. No one knows who these guys are," said one administration official, referring to the associates of Mr. Spence named so far in The Times.

But, he added, the White House continues to closely follow the story.

After all, actions speak louder than words ... Sex, Lies, Videotape, Teenagers, Drugs, Blackmail, and Death

For all the hype about Bawney Frank and his boyfriend's call service, the fact of the matter is that the male homosexual elite of the GOP is "Top Man" and has the jarhead lesbo and girlie boys of the Dems do their dirty work for them.

liberals claimed Gannon was a White House plant who received a press pass so that he could ask softball questions – a perk reserved for New York Times reporters during the Clinton years.

. . . Democrats in Congress actually demanded that an independent prosecutor investigate how Gannon got into White House press conferences while writing under an invented name. How did Gary Hartpence, Billy Blythe and John Kohn (Gary Hart, Bill Clinton and John Kerry) run for president under invented names?

"Objective journalism" is an Establishment, indeed the Establishment.
Like any Establishment, "objective" journalism hides in plain sight. All its members are visible; indeed they exist by being visible. And the way that "objective" journalism coheres as an entity - an establishment - is obvious too, for anyone willing to look at it. "Objective" journalism coheres in a go-along-and-get-along guild of journalists who will never say that any other journalist is not objective.
But an establishment is not a legal entity, and it must not speak its own name. Here we have the Democratic Party carrying the water of that establishment, demanding that that establishment have the right to exclude those who are not "made" in it.
The Constitution forbids the Congress to decide who may be a reporter and who may not. If the president wants to conduct something he calls a "press conference" in a phone booth, he is entitled to do so; if he wants to hold a "press conference in RFK Stadium he is entitled to do so, and if he does not want to hold anything he calls a "press conference" he is entitled to not do so.

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.