Yes, but that doesn't stop them, does it?
Posted on 02/16/2006 4:12:16 AM PST by AZRepublican
The first revolt of the American colonists against their British rulers was immortalized by Ralph Waldo Emerson as "the shot heard round the world." Vice President Dick Cheney's hunting accident has now become the shot heard round the Beltway.
The accidental shooting of Harry Whittington, while he was on a hunting trip with Dick Cheney, has nothing to do with government policy or the Vice President's official duties but the mainstream media have gone ballistic over it nevertheless.
They are also angry that the news was not given to them more quickly, which prevented it from becoming the feeding frenzy of the Sunday television talk shows. Whether this delay was deliberate or otherwise, it is being called a "cover-up" in the media, as if there were some crime to cover up.
NBC White House correspondent David Gregory was shouting at White House press secretary Scott McClellan, as if Mr. Gregory's Constitutional rights were being violated. It was a classic example of a special interest demanding special privileges -- as if they were rights.
There is nothing in the Constitution or the laws that says that the media have a right to be in the White House at all, much less to have press conferences.
This has become a customary courtesy over the years, but courtesy is a two-way street, except for those in the media who act like spoiled brats, as if they have some inherent right to whatever serves their institutional, career, or ideological purposes.
The media love to wrap themselves in the mantle of "the public's right to know" but there is no such dedication to that right when it goes against the journalists' own prejudices.
The public's right to know what a "partial birth abortion" is has been consistently disregarded for years by whole networks, even when they have given wide coverage to abortion controversies. Whatever your position on abortions, you need to know what you are talking about but the media recognize no such "right to know."
If you knew, you might not agree with them.
The same journalists who used phony documents to attack President Bush's military service recognize no "right to know" why Senator John Kerry's honorable discharge is dated long after his service was over and during the Carter administration, when less than honorable discharges were allowed to be upgraded to honorable.
The "public's right to know" apparently extends only to such things as will not cause the public to reach conclusions different from those of the liberal media.
My favorite press secretary was Margaret Tutwiler, who treated reporters like misbehaving little boys, which is how they often acted. Nor were the reporters' antics due solely to personal boorishness.
They had before them the example of Dan Rather and Sam Donaldson, who reached the big time on TV by being snotty to Presidents. At the very least, White House correspondents can get more time on the tube by waxing indignant at what they choose to portray as violations of "the public's right to know" while the cameras are rolling.
An off-duty incident in Dick Cheney's private life has been hyped in the media as if it had some real significance for more than a quarter of a billion Americans.
The media want to know when was President Bush informed about this incident? What did the White House press secretary know and when did he know it?
The people who mattered -- doctors and local law enforcement -- were informed immediately about the hunting accident. What was President Bush supposed to do -- other than provide the media with something to print or broadcast?
The media are so full of themselves -- among other things that they are full of -- that they act as if the government exists to provide them with something to publicize. The time is long overdue to put these people in their place. Where is Margaret Tutwiler when we need her?
The New York Times informs us solemnly that, if Mr. Whittington dies, there will be a grand jury investigation.
If Mr. Whittington is so uncooperative as not to die, there will be much disappointment and frustration in Beltway media circles.
Spot on article. The press really made fools of themselves over this story. NBC and the ever-self-absorbant David Gregory thinks this is all about the media, he could care less about Mr. Withington. Shameful display of arrogance and childishness by David and his old media cohorts.
This garbage posing as ‘art’ was deemed offensive to Christians. CNN had no qualms about showing it and offending Christians. It has remained on their web site until today. Nearly five years now.
In fact, if you click on the link above, you will see this ‘work’ - still proudly displayed on CNN’s website.
Now the violent Muslims are rampaging and burning things - again - about a few cartoons, and CNN says, “CNN has chosen to not show the cartoons out of respect for Islam.”
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/02/05/cartoon.protests/index.html
Follow this link and read the last line in the article.
Hypocrisy?
Do not trust the MSM.
I might add: Scott should pass out lollipops to the whiners.
Just might work,since they don't seem to comprehend the English language.
Press helps hide what about hillary?
* 1 Black Panther Party
Her peripheral involvement had no effect on Yale activities or on the outcome of the trial.
* 2 Cattle futures
After an investigation, Leo Melamed, chair of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, concluded that Clinton had not violated the rules
* 3 Whitewater scandal
No criminal charges were brought against the Clintons themselves, as Robert Ray's final report on September 20, 2000 stated that there was insufficient evidence that either of them had engaged in criminal wrongdoing
* 4 Travel office firings
it could not be proved that she had deliberately lied about the matter, and so no charges would be brought.
* 5 Vince Foster
No credible evidence or charges were ever brought forward in connection with any of these allegations.
* 6 FBI files
No credible evidence or charges were ever brought forward in connection with any of these allegations.
* 7 Embrace of Suha Arafat
The embrace itself became a campaign issue the following year, but Clinton defended it as a formality akin to a handshake, saying that not to do so would have caused a diplomatic incident.
* 8 Book contract
However, in February 2001, the Senate Ethics Committee gave Clinton approval for the deal.
* 9 Ghostwriters
* 10 Hasidic pardons
A federal investigation launched by critics of the pardon cleared both Clintons of any illegal activity.
* 11 Attendance at funerals after September 11
* 12 Gandhi comment
Michelle Naef, administrator of the M.K. Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence said she didn't think Clinton was trying to demean Mahatma Gandhi and credited both Clintons as long having supported the Gandhi message.
* 13 Rosen's indictment and acquittal
* 14 2006 Martin Luther King Day comments
I thought reporters were paid money to go out and find stories, not have them wrapped up with a bow and hand-delivered on a silver platter to them by other people who have their own jobs to do.
It shows how out of touch the MSM is when they make their own laziness the centerpiece of this otherwise interesting story.
I read that the MSM is complaining that the VP "picked" his interviewer, i.e. Fox News. Since when has a high level politician not selected the interviewer?
Great points, Mr. Sowell.
Yes, but that doesn't stop them, does it?
Is Mary Jo available for comment?
Is Mary Jo available for comment?
Neither is Vince Foster !
The White House should start releasing news to red state local newspapers as a shot across the bow of the MSM.
bkmk
This, after all the dust settles, is all that truly matters.
"Stuff it!" should become a standard response in the White House briefings playbook.
15 The reason she wears pant suits and is OK with hubby's philandering...
I'd like to see a Freeper investigation into the left wing media. I wonder what skeletons David Gregory has in his closet. Collectively, we have the numbers to do it. It would be great just to let them HEAR we are investigating every one of them. Put the same kind of heat on them that they do the President.
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.