Saturday, March 19, 2005

Why 21 Republicans Are Stupid -- Or have Something To Hide

21 members of the House Judiciary Committee decided not to investigate how a male prostitute was granted unprecendented White House access. Now, Gannon/Guckert proves to the world how stupid those 21 men really were. In an interview with the NYT, he admits he tried to get -- and received -- preferential treatment:
[H]e admits that people in the White House press office “probably treated me better than I deserved.”


He quit his job at GOPUSA/Talon News last month, although in the Times interview he reveals that it was not much of a paying gig, as he only “received a kind of stipend.” He said he earned that stringer arrangement with GOPUSA, with no journalism experience, after “a breakfast meeting” in Washington with owner Bobby Eberle.

Gannon denied gaining access to the White House via a special relationship with the press secretary, Scott McClellan, although he admitted trying to “curry favor with him.”
Click here to see a full list of the 21 Committee members who think it's ok to have a male prostitute "curry favor" with the White House Press Secretary.

Tucker Carlson Interviews Gannon, is a "Dick"

Do you remember when John Stewart called Tuckert a "dick"? Well, know we know why:
Carlson: You've got a quote in your website that struck me. You said for decades gay difficultists have insisted that government stay out of the bedroom. Now we know they didn't want anyone in their way when they invaded the bedroom. To them, it's a one way street and a principles to -- principle to be easily abandoned when it doesn't suit your agenda. I understand people -- the implications, because may be gay, that you shouldn't have access to the White House.

Gannon: The hypocrisy is stunning. If I were -- hypocrisy is stunning. Because I'm a conservative, it seems to be that there are no rules and we can -- those people can leave their principles behind about personal privacy and sex doesn't matter and diversity and inclusion. They can leave all those things behind if it's useful to attack a conservative.
Tucker, who the fuck said that gays can't have access to the White House? Geez, Tucker sure knows how to throw the no-fact-softballs, maybe he should apply to be a Talon News Correspondent!

The rest of the interview is the same shit, different day. Gannon is still pontificating as if he was God's Gift To Journalism. He's still playing the victim, whining about the "liberal media."

But this interview just proves what so many knew all along. Gannon is a coward. He posted on his "blog" (for which, pathetically, he is his own "Washington Correspondent") that he would be accepting questions from both conservative AND liberal bloggers.

On March 2, members of DailyKos sent him a list of questions. Over two weeks have passed, and no response. Yet that hasn't stopped Gannon from prancing around the internets doing interviews for right-wing blogs...all of them of course framed in the "St. Gannon The Victim" manner.

Gannon likes to pretend he is all tough-talking, but really, James Guckert is just a tiny, tiny little man. He spins away in his own little world, thinking he's the star of the show, but all along, everyone peering into his self-deluded world just shake their heads and think "Poor Gannon. What a pitiful little man."

For if he had any shred of integrity (not that anyone thought he did to begin with), but if he had an iota of self-respect, he would not continue this charade. He would come clean, admit he wasn't a journalist, and stop presenting himself as someone who had the ability, much less the right, to elucidate the public about the state of the press today.

A propagandist, lecturing the public about bias in the media? Spare us the game, Guckert.

Friday, March 18, 2005

Boxer to Introduct Propaganda Amendment

Via RawStory:
Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) will introduce the following amendment to President Bush’s fiscal year 2006 budget tonight, barring any funds for U.S. government agencies that produce prepackaged news without a disclaimer that the release was paid for by the government, RAW STORY has learned.

The amendment follows; it will be introduced tonight, Boxer’s communications director David Sandretti stated.

The amendment comes in the wake of a huge spread in Sunday’s New York Times which documented a massive attempt by the Bush Administration to insert prepackaged news items into television news broadcasts.

Wednesday, March 16, 2005

Resolution on Gannon/Guckert Today

It's a simple vote, really. Are you for or against fake reporters and propaganda?

Representative Conyers issued a statement today:
We are here today because we have an Administration that is all too willing to flaunt the law, and a Congress that refuses to investigate even the most serious ethical transgressions. Whether it is torture at Abu Ghraib, sole source contracts with Haliburton, or the outing of a CIA operative, this Congress has been unwilling and unable to ask the hard questions or issue the difficult subpoenas.

We are here today because it simply defies credibility that a phony reporter, operating under an alias, who couldn’t get privileges in the House or Senate press gallery, could receives scores of consecutive White House “day passes,” without the intervention of someone very high up at the White House. Can anyone believe that while Pulitzer Prize winning journalists are being turned down for White House press passes, a fake journalist working for a Republican-controlled media front operation could receive virtually open-ended access to the White House press room in the absence of preferential treatment?

We are here today because the Administration has either rejected or ignored every bona fide request for information concerning Jeff Gannon.
Watch the internet broadcast of the vote here. Broadcast begins today at 10 AM.

Contact the members of the House Judiciary Committee here.

Tuesday, March 15, 2005

Bush Adm. Says Propaganda A-OK

The Justice Dept. has declared that propaganda is just fine by the Bush administration.

Meanwhile, those who still think propaganda is, um..Saddam-like, shall we say...are calling the government on it. Apparently, despite numerous articles about the government's deception, the Bush Administration still wants to plow forward with its fake news.

Americans used to laugh at the former Soviet Union, China and Cuba for having government-broadcast news about the successes of government policies. We can't look down on their domestic propaganda machines any more.
Meanwhile, back in California, the Governator is embroiled in his own propaganda controversy.

It seems like the GOP has its talking points lined up. It's not a "news release" or propaganda, it's a press release! Yes, that's what it is! And never mind the fake reporters who end them saying "reporting from D.C., I'm Paul Propaganda." And never mind that they aren't labelled as press releases, but rather as "news segments".

"Press releases"? Yeah.

In related news, Russia's Communist party is undertaking an overhaul of their propaganda. Shhhh. No one tell the GOP they're like Russian Communists...we don't want Cheney having another heart attack.

Sunday, March 13, 2005

Bush: No Respect for Press or the People

David Shaw reflects on the Bush Administration's "screw you" attitude towards the fourth estate:

I'm still not sure what to make of the easy White House access granted to James Guckert (a.k.a. Jeff Gannon), a conservative "pseudo-journalist" (to use Rosen's term) who asked Bush biased, softball questions at news conferences and who doubled as a male escort whose nude photos were posted on the Web. But I'm reasonably certain that any explanation of his easy access will not involve a persuasive argument that the Bush administration is committed to the societal benefits of a free and unfettered press.

Early in Bush's first term, Andrew Card, his chief of staff, said that journalists "don't represent the public any more than other people do."

To the Bush administration, journalists are not surrogates for the American people; they're just another annoying group of lobbyists, special-interest pleaders seeking not the information necessary for citizens to make intelligent decisions but only the journalists' own ego-gratification, career advancement and ideological advantage.
To see just how Bush loves to give the press the finger, let's recall his philosophy about the press: "You're assuming that you represent the public. I don't accept that."

If the press doesn't represent the public, who does? The President? With his ever-shrinking "mandate"? The Bush Administrations "fuck you" attitude towards the Press--and by extension, the American Public--is only now being discussed, as reporters are finally awaking from their stupor to realize they've been conned and scammed into being Presidential lapdogs.

Close, But No Cigar: Article Nails WH Stonewalling, But Misses On GannonGuckert

Bill Adair writes in the St. Petersburg Times about the scripted White House:
In the White House briefing room, there are lots of questions, but not so many answers. Reporters try to grill McClellan, but he deftly avoids their inquiries and recites lines he has used dozens of times before.
Press secretaries have always ducked questions, but McClellan is particularly adept at it.

"Scott is bound and determined not to be the news," said Roberts, the CBS reporter. "Every time he comes out here and he escapes without making news, I think (White House chief of staff) Andy Card pats him on the back and says, "Good job.' "

Many White House beat reporters have gotten so frustrated with McClellan's repetition that they skip the briefings.
They skip briefings. The Bush administration has turned Press Briefings into a charade, a pointless square dance where McClellan takes the lead and lead the reporters...well, nowhere. Although he does step on quite a few toes along the way.

Adair's article on responsible journalism though ironically makes one critical mistake:
But there's no evidence the White House gave him favorable treatment - or even benefited from his pointed questions.
I assume Ardair has made a full investigation and thus is able to claim that there was no "favorable treatment"? If so, then maybe in his next article he can lay out the explanations for how, which isn't even a news site, was initially granted access; or how Talon "News" was created after Ari questioned's legitimacy; or how GannonGuckert came to know about the "shock and awe" campaign hours before anyone else in the media did; or how he allegedly was privy to information in a leaked CIA ememo; or how he was subpoenaed for his role in the outing of Valerie Plame; or how his barely-known news outfit secured a much-coveted interview with Karl Rove; or how he got to sit in the fourth row, up front with the major news agencies, while Helen Thomas is shoved to the back row; or how not a single other journalist has been able to bypass hard pass screening for two years; or how he engaged in a smear campaign against Daschle and Kerry and brought his smear campaign into the briefing room...if all this suspicious and preferential treatment has been explained away, then we'd sure like to know how.