The blogger is James Wolcott, contributing editor of Vanity Fair. His writing is hilarious. He took on the NY Times controversy in Gripes of Wrath. The best section:
Consider what's happened in the last 24 hours. Bush has called the disclosure "disgraceful," looking far angrier (or fake-angrier) than he ever did about the Katrina fuckup. Cheney, of course, released some deep-stomach rumbles. Tony Snow made his displeasure known. And in a cloud of dust rode the Ox-Bow posse, fashioning a necktie for Bill Keller and company.
And a runner-up favorite sentence:
I didn't bother listening to talk radio, but I'm sure they're baying for blood between commercials for bladder control.
More Rantings About The Evil Twins in Charge of This Country
Sorry...I hate stupidity and things that don't make sense. What can I say? I'm a ranter! The Washington Post had a great 'Media Notes' column today titled Over the Top Times-Bashing.
My favorite paragraph:
Some of the outside commentary is so over the top that I think those folks would repeal the First Amendment tomorrow if they could. And most of those proclaiming horror at the leaking of classified info were willing to give the White House a pass for the outing of the covert Valerie Plame.
Ha! That is so true - when the vice president and president leak the identity of an undercover CIA agent, it's OK, but when a newspaper talks about something that terrorists are probably already aware of, it's treason.
I'm sorry, but we would've won the 'war on terror' a long time ago if terrorists weren't able to figure out that we're probably looking into their financial transactions. Talk about a no-brainer. Heck, I figured that out before the Times printed it and I can barely keep my shoelaces tied.
New York Times Strikes Back
Just one more quote, I promise. I loved the response from Bill Keller, executive editor of the Times:
It's an unusual and powerful thing, this freedom that our founders gave to the press. Who are the editors of The New York Times (or the Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post and other publications that also ran the banking story) to disregard the wishes of the President and his appointees?
And yet the people who invented this country saw an aggressive, independent press as a protective measure against the abuse of power in a democracy, and an essential ingredient for self-government. They rejected the idea that it is wise, or patriotic, to always take the President at his word, or to surrender to the government important decisions about what to publish.
I have so much respect for the Constitution and the Founding Fathers (although I think there should have been Founding Mothers too), that it pisses me off when stupid branches of the government think they're above it.
That's exactly why we have a free press, and if we want any sort of future as a nation, we'll keep it that way.
No comments:
Post a Comment