Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

February 14, 2008
By: Kevin Drum

BUSH IS PISSED....FILM AT 11....I saw this headline on the Washington Post's front page a few minutes ago and thought, WTF? Eve Fairbanks apparently thought the same thing:

Seriously, though, why the hell is this the Post's headline? Here's what happened: House Democrats refused to sign the Senate's version of the FISA bill, which excused the telecom companies for their past surveillance sins, rebuking the Republicans and the Senate. Even more ballsy, the 35-strong liberal bloc in the House knocked down a temporary extension, meaning FISA will probably expire on Friday night. Then the Republicans threw a temper tantrum and walked off the House floor; Bush put out an angry statement — and the tantrum made the headline.

But it's what the Democrats did that was the news! Every time Congressional Democrats do something Bush remotely doesn't like, he puts out an angry statement. It's like writing a story about the Capitol burning down and headlining it, "Many Cameramen Gather at Capitol."

All winter Pelosi et al have been sneered for caving to Republicans; now they're sneered at for getting rebuked by Republicans when they don't cave. If I were Pelosi I'd feel like I couldn't win.

I guess "House Democrats Grow A Pair" probably wouldn't pass muster with the Post's style standards, but surely they could have thought of something? I mean, I can sort of understand why walking off the House floor is news, but Bush putting out an angry statement? You gotta be kidding. It would be news if Bush ever put out a non-angry statement.

Kevin Drum 6:41 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (90)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

Careful Kevin, you might make Dear Leader angry

Posted by: The Fool on February 14, 2008 at 6:44 PM | PERMALINK

This would come under the heading of what happens when your leaders sell you down the river. Allowing large corporations to acquire media venues was perhaps one of the greatest sins ever perpetrated against the American people. We literally have no one to trust now, not each other especially not the organizations that are supposed to be our eyes and ears.

Posted by: Aaron on February 14, 2008 at 6:44 PM | PERMALINK

Give it up, Kevin. The question here is why wouldn't the House leadership allow a vote on the bill? Too much democracy for them?

Posted by: Brian on February 14, 2008 at 6:45 PM | PERMALINK

good old brian! you can count on him to produce a stupid remark for every occasion (and to repeat it, like a 3-year-old proud of a poo-poo joke).

there is a house bill that passed, yesterday, brian my sweet: the house is not constitutionally obligated to vote on the senate's version of anything: are you really dumb enough to think otherwise?

as for angry george bush, on the one hand, it's hard for me to believe that anyone cares what he has to say about anything anymore; on the other hand, there are way too many dems who don't seem to have gotten that message.

Posted by: howard on February 14, 2008 at 6:49 PM | PERMALINK

Poor Kevin.

Please, do explain why only Republicans have "tantrums"?

Posted by: a on February 14, 2008 at 6:50 PM | PERMALINK

Bush would have put out an angry statement even if the House had passed the Senate bill and sent it to him today. We've seen it before. His general attitude is, "Those assholes finally did what I told them, I can't believe it took them so long."

Posted by: skeptic on February 14, 2008 at 6:52 PM | PERMALINK

howie,

You really are dense aren't you, little one? My post was pretty straightforward. Too bad you couldn't understand it. Ask your mommie to explain it to you.

Posted by: Brian on February 14, 2008 at 6:54 PM | PERMALINK

"meaning FISA will probably expire on Friday night."

I may be misinformed, but I'm pretty sure that the base FISA law is permanent, including a ton of changes passed after 9/11 at the administration's request. What is expiring is a further package of egregious items that the democrats were panicked into allowing just before the 2006 election.

So please correct me if I'm wrong. But if I'm right, please correct what you are saying, because the idea that "the liberals are letting the whole statute that allows us patriots to keep tabs on the terrorists and are thereby inviting your wholesale destruction" is exactly what Bush wants the people to believe.

Posted by: anoregonreader on February 14, 2008 at 7:09 PM | PERMALINK

Is "Bush and Republicans say no spy bill without TeleCom immunity" that tough to do?

Posted by: dwightkschrute on February 14, 2008 at 7:09 PM | PERMALINK

The Washington Post supports immunity for the telcos and is as mad as W. Bush at the Democrats in the House for not falling in line.

Posted by: Brojo on February 14, 2008 at 7:10 PM | PERMALINK

Wahoo! We're having fun now! Take that 'cons.

Posted by: Psyberian on February 14, 2008 at 7:11 PM | PERMALINK

Well the Democrats finally grew a pair, it is long over due and it pssed the CHIMP off, SO WHAT like he has not done anything to piss off alot of people but when he does it no one is suppose to say anything to him about it, the CHIMP and the rest of the Republicans need to shut the Fvck up and get a life you bunch of lying liars and crooks.

Posted by: Al on February 14, 2008 at 7:12 PM | PERMALINK

Jesus, can anyone get this issue right? Eve Fairbanks is sloppy. anoregonreader is right.

FISA is 100% fine. All wiretapping under warrants is still allowed. All existing warrantless surveillance is unaffected. The NSA is still monitoring your foreign calls and internet traffic.

Posted by: theo on February 14, 2008 at 7:13 PM | PERMALINK

Brian, let's see the Republicans allow an upperdown vote on Dodd's version of the bill in the Senate, or does your condemnation only go one way?

Posted by: Boronx on February 14, 2008 at 7:13 PM | PERMALINK

What got into Al? He is starting to make sense!

Posted by: troglodyte on February 14, 2008 at 7:18 PM | PERMALINK

What got into Al? He is starting to make sense!
- trog

He got a good quote on a lobotomy and decided to go for it.

Posted by: optical weenie on February 14, 2008 at 7:32 PM | PERMALINK

This is to be expected, the Dems have no sense of follow-through when it comes to media narrative. IF (only) the Dems were smart, there would be one of them on every single news program tomorrow uttering the exact same talking points but there won't be, and as usual the Repubs will write the narrative, just in time for it to be repeated on the Sunday shows and papers.

Posted by: tom.a on February 14, 2008 at 7:34 PM | PERMALINK

"House Democrats Grow A Pair" ?

How about "House Democrats Grow A Heart"? It would be nice if bravery were perceived as not exclusively a male prerogative.

Posted by: Riggsveda on February 14, 2008 at 7:37 PM | PERMALINK

Eve Fairbanks and Calpundit, with all due respect, YOU DUMBASS.

"All winter Pelosi et al have been sneered for caving to Republicans; now they're sneered at for getting rebuked by Republicans when they don't cave. If I were Pelosi I'd feel like I couldn't win."

Those who criticize Pelosi for inaction are NOT THE SAME PEOPLE sneering at her today.

Posted by: anonymous on February 14, 2008 at 7:38 PM | PERMALINK

Who gives a fuck what the idiot prince thinks about any god-damned thing? If I could give him whatever I wanted for Valentines day, it would be a stroke.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State on February 14, 2008 at 7:40 PM | PERMALINK

Jeez... I read this headline and thought he was drunk again... anyway, that's the story I'd like to read into it, either metaphorically or not.

Posted by: snicker-snack on February 14, 2008 at 7:40 PM | PERMALINK

brian, did you actually have something intelligent to say? i must have missed it.

the house passed a bill. it no more has a responsibility to vote on another bill than you have the capability to think and write logically.

plus, of course, what boronx said.

Posted by: howard on February 14, 2008 at 7:47 PM | PERMALINK

For the WP, it's the usual newspapering-on-autopilot. They have somebody at the WH, and whatever happens there is news by definition. And for the past 7 years that's mostly been the case - Cheney sees the legislative branch as his personal rubber stamp, not a coequal branch of government. And he's been pretty much right in seeing it that way.

The DC press will have to be retrained so they can entertain the notion that Pennsylvania Avenue has two ends.

Posted by: jimBOB on February 14, 2008 at 7:56 PM | PERMALINK

Your liberal media at work.

It's all about Bush and terror.

Nowhere do they mention that the Republicans already killed several versions of the bill they didn't like.

Nowhere does it state that the surveillance law that is about to expire is the one that the white house blindsided the Democrats on in 2006.

And nowhere does it state that the FISA law is still operational and the administration should have no problem getting approval for any legitimate, CONSITUTIONAL, surveillance, approved BY THE JUDICIARY.

Posted by: says you on February 14, 2008 at 8:00 PM | PERMALINK

We live in a banana republic.

How can anyone who works for a newspaper get up in the morning and look at themselves in the mirror.

Stalin would be proud.

Posted by: says you on February 14, 2008 at 8:02 PM | PERMALINK

Correct headline: "WH and Republicans want to protect Big Telecom more than they want to protect America"

Posted by: JustSayYesToTheRuleOfLaw on February 14, 2008 at 8:04 PM | PERMALINK

bush who?

Posted by: mudwall jackson on February 14, 2008 at 8:06 PM | PERMALINK

anoregonreader, i agree, let's get the facts straight. on dailykos.com today, there are several posts that get into explaining this situation:

"Let's get this straight. If the Protect America Act expires, we're still safe. Don't believe me? Believe them:

Richard Clarke, Former Chief National Security Council Counterterrorism Advisor: "On one issue in particular - FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) - the president misconstrued the truth and manipulated the facts... Simply put, it was wrong for the president to suggest that warrants issued in compliance with FISA would suddenly evaporate with congressional inaction." [Philadelphia Inquirer, February 1, 2008]

Mort Halperin, Director of U.S. Advocacy for the Open Society Institute: "Even if the President permits the PAA to temporarily lapse, the intelligence community will have the authority not only to continue on-going surveillances for a year but to add other surveillances as long as they are consistent with the existing procedures." [2/7/08]

"Kenneth L. Wainstein, assistant attorney general for national security, said in an interview that if the August bill was allowed to expire in 10 days, intelligence officials would still be able to continue eavesdropping on already approved targets for another year under the law." [New York Times, 1/23/08]

Kate Martin, Director of the Center for National Security Studies: "If the government learns of new individuals apparently plotting terrorist activities, it can immediately surveil such individuals — whether they are here or calling here from abroad — by obtaining a FISA court order... As officials have confirmed to the Congress, the court can issue an order within literally minutes of being asked and such order can be implemented within minutes. Or the government can start surveillance without a court order under the always existing FISA emergency authority." [2/7/08]

Because this is a message that can't be stated enough: Don't fall for it again, Dems."

Posted by: brkily on February 14, 2008 at 8:10 PM | PERMALINK

What got into Al? He is starting to make sense!

That's not the usual Al.

Let it expire. Unfortunately, it'll keep coming back.

Posted by: AJ on February 14, 2008 at 8:18 PM | PERMALINK

At first I thought the headline was "Bush Is Pissed"!

I was amazed, but since the NYTimes has now established that "bitch," used to refer to a sitting senator and Democratic presidential nomination candidate, appeared on the NYTimes op-ed page (thanks to MoDo repeating an unfunny joke)...well...I thought it possible!

Glad to see some sense still prevails among the headline writers of our leading newspapers.

I mean, word usage standards are falling helter skelter in these times....

Posted by: jawbone on February 14, 2008 at 8:25 PM | PERMALINK

I guess "House Democrats Grow A Pair" probably wouldn't pass muster with the Post's style standards

Especially considering who leads House Democrats.

Posted by: Vincent on February 14, 2008 at 8:37 PM | PERMALINK

"Pissed"? You mean he's drinking again?

Kevin, you'll be one of those people trussed up and sent to the detention camps when Bush cancels the elections and declares an emergency:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8067

Posted by: Speed on February 14, 2008 at 8:42 PM | PERMALINK

Please, do explain why only Republicans have "tantrums"?

It looks like nobody has addressed this question in the comments yet, which is a shame because it's an entirely reasonable and interesting question.

FWIW, my guess is that it's because they're just immature.

HTH

Posted by: bobb on February 14, 2008 at 8:42 PM | PERMALINK

To be fair, calling it a "spy bill" when it has a ridiculosly misleading name like the "Protect America Act" is a step in the right direction.

Posted by: Andre on February 14, 2008 at 8:51 PM | PERMALINK

Kev: Amen.

I've been seeing these kinds of headlines for quite a while now-- I'm sure a lot of my fellow Dems and liberals out there notice them and feel the same way about them. If you ask me, it's just more proof the media is a corrupt institution and needs some sort of solution.

Posted by: Swan on February 14, 2008 at 8:53 PM | PERMALINK

[WaPo]..Even more ballsy, the 35-strong liberal bloc in the House knocked down a temporary extension, meaning FISA will probably expire on Friday night. Then the Republicans threw a temper tantrum and walked off the House floor..

Christ, the WaPo didn't even get that right. The Repubs in the House chose to go drama queen and leave before the vote to hold Harriet Myers and Josh Bolton in contempt of Congress....Boehner's speech about FISA was just a cover, and the media bought it hook, line, and sinker:

"We will not stand here and watch this floor be abused for pure political grandstanding at the expense of our national security. ... Let's just get up and leave," Republican Leader John Boehner advised his colleagues as they dramatically left the floor Thursday afternoon.

Repubs taking a stand against political grandstanding by...political grandstanding.

Your guys sure do themselves proud, Brian.

Posted by: grape_crush on February 14, 2008 at 9:08 PM | PERMALINK

FORCE CONGRESS TO IMPEACH, call Nancy Pelosi @1-202-225-0100 and DEMAND IMPEACHMENT. DC business hours only, call often, and spread it around.

Posted by: Mike Meyer on February 14, 2008 at 9:17 PM | PERMALINK

"I guess "House Democrats Grow A Pair" probably wouldn't pass muster with the Post's style standard"

Kevin, your impressions of WP standards are romantically too high, as witnessed by this Dana Milbank's movie on Hillary trip to a factory http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/11/AR2008021102656.html?sub=AR

I had so hoped that printed journalism would not go the way of Hardball and the McGroup

Posted by: Steve Colleti on February 14, 2008 at 9:33 PM | PERMALINK

Screw this. Where are the kitties? I need Friday NOW!!!

Posted by: Joshua Norton on February 14, 2008 at 9:58 PM | PERMALINK

Good on the House. This is what we all thought, a long year and three months ago, that an opposition party in control would naturally do. Then came the long long non-story of them never doing it.

So, the real headline would have been: Toothless Dog Bites Man.

Posted by: nicteis on February 14, 2008 at 10:01 PM | PERMALINK

nicteis, there were a number of times during 2006 when i wrote here and elsewhere that i wasn't in favor of the dems seizing control of congress by a tiny margin for two reasons: a.) too much shit was going to hit the fan and i wanted all the fingerprints to be republican; b.) because of blue dogs and wimps, a several-seat nominal democratic edge is meaningless: the gop still runs the show.

so i, for one, had zero expectation that we would have a powerful opposition....

Posted by: howard on February 14, 2008 at 10:22 PM | PERMALINK

For further good news, click the link & go to the comments at the WaPo. Perhaps the populace is finally starting to wake up?

Posted by: bob in fla on February 14, 2008 at 10:25 PM | PERMALINK

The Washington Post has been Bush's lap dog since day one. It's really embarrassing. Where *is* that liberal media, anyway? We need some. Hell, I'd settle for a moderate media. Good for the House.

Posted by: J. Myers on February 14, 2008 at 10:26 PM | PERMALINK

Note to both Kevin and Eva: Whether for blame or praise, Pelosi had nothing to to with progressive Democrats seeing their opportunity and seizing the chance.

Pelosi has been ineffectual as a Speaker in part because she and Reid have communicated little with each other, especially on planning strategy against the GOP on the other wing of the Capitol from their respective domains.

Posted by: SocraticGadfly on February 14, 2008 at 10:38 PM | PERMALINK

Raw Story carried the full text of Congressman Silvestre Reyes’, Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, letter to President Bush regarding the ongoing battle over warrantless wiretapping. The link is here. Read it.

Reyes absolutely destroys Bush. Utterly.

A couple excerpts:

If our nation is left vulnerable in the coming months, it will not be because we don't have enough domestic spying powers. It will be because your Administration has not done enough to defeat terrorist organizations – including al Qaeda -- that have gained strength since 9/11. We do not have nearly enough linguists to translate the reams of information we currently collect. We do not have enough intelligence officers who can penetrate the hardest targets, such as al Qaeda. We have surged so many intelligence resources into Iraq that we have taken our eye off the ball in Afghanistan and Pakistan. As a result, you have allowed al Qaeda to reconstitute itself on your watch.

and

..it is an insult to the intelligence of the American people to say that we will be vulnerable unless we grant immunity for actions that happened years ago.

Posted by: The Conservative Deflator on February 14, 2008 at 10:38 PM | PERMALINK

Its worse than you think. The thinktankers sit around and figure out what sort of unacceptable legislation they can propose that will have to be opposed by anyone with integrity (read Democrats), but which can be presented to the people, as a common sense antiterrorist tool. That way they win either way, if the Dems let it through they are complicit in the crimes,and if they oppose it, they can be painted as terrorist loving traitors. They've been playing this game successfully for years. It helps to have a compliant (no complicit) press.

Posted by: bigTom on February 14, 2008 at 11:06 PM | PERMALINK

Today the good guys won one and good for them. Now all we need to do is impeach Bush, Cheney, the USSC "Justices" who have demonstrated their contempt for the Rule of Law, in particular our Bill of Rights.

For the record, the moment you suggest that torture is acceptable then you have demonstrated your contempt for the Eighth Amendment and laid bare your unfitness to hold a seat on any court. In fact, doing so renders you unfit to hold any office of public trust either elected or appointed.

In an ideal world all those who have promoted torture, promoted the unprovoked assault on the people of Iraq, or who have supported the illegal spying on the American people in violation of the Fourth Amendment would be stripped of their offices and forbidden to hold any further ones. These people have demonstrated their contempt for America and its ideals.

Posted by: heavy on February 14, 2008 at 11:14 PM | PERMALINK

If you haven't read the full text of Reyes letter to Bush, please read it. Send it to Claire McCaskill and her friends in the Senate who are still afraid, very afraid. After reading that letter that all the President has left is fear itself. The rest is pure bull.

Posted by: corpus juris on February 14, 2008 at 11:23 PM | PERMALINK

Impeach Scalia!

Posted by: bobbyp on February 14, 2008 at 11:28 PM | PERMALINK

Bush always gets his way in the end.

Posted by: Luther on February 14, 2008 at 11:33 PM | PERMALINK

My bad. I thought the headline read "BUSH PUKES HOUSE ON SPIRO". Then I had flashbacks to 1972.

More wine, please.

Posted by: bobbyp on February 14, 2008 at 11:34 PM | PERMALINK

Geez Kevin. This is the MSM we're talking about. What could you possibly expect? Useless POS, the lot of them.

Posted by: E Henry Thripshaw on February 15, 2008 at 12:06 AM | PERMALINK

Yes, the House grew a pair - of ovaries.

Posted by: colbertocrat on February 15, 2008 at 12:50 AM | PERMALINK

Sorry, guys, but that's not really Al.

Posted by: Kenji on February 15, 2008 at 1:22 AM | PERMALINK

Give it up, Kevin. The question here is why wouldn't the House leadership allow a vote on the bill? Too much democracy for them?

Posted by: Brian on February 14, 2008 at 6:45 PM


Because it would pass.

Posted by: turtledove on February 15, 2008 at 1:53 AM | PERMALINK

Luther: "Bush always gets his way in the end"
--
Just ask Jeff Gannon.

Posted by: Jay in Oregon on February 15, 2008 at 2:20 AM | PERMALINK

Thank you colbertocrat!

As if the "pair" can only be found hanging outside the body. Heh.

Posted by: NeoLotus on February 15, 2008 at 2:22 AM | PERMALINK

I guess the Post was reading your blog? The online edition (at 2:29am) reads: "House Defies Bush on Wiretaps." Best news I've heard all year...

Posted by: Bruce on February 15, 2008 at 2:31 AM | PERMALINK

Obama: "Yes, we can!"

Bush: "No, you can't."

Posted by: slanted tom on February 15, 2008 at 6:35 AM | PERMALINK

Look out for another attack like 911 orchestrated by Bush and Cheney to put more fear into this country because Congress will not extend their spy policy. Pelosi finally grew a pair and Reid is still a Pussy.

Posted by: Al on February 15, 2008 at 9:25 AM | PERMALINK

As if LEGALITY makes any difference to those guys. Can't you hear Poindexter chuckling from whatever hole he operates out of?

Posted by: JeremiadJones on February 15, 2008 at 9:42 AM | PERMALINK

Grapecrush:

[WaPo]..Even more ballsy, the 35-strong liberal bloc in the House knocked down a temporary extension, meaning FISA will probably expire on Friday night. Then the Republicans threw a temper tantrum and walked off the House floor..

This statement is wrong not only because it implies all of FISA will expire--it's wrong because the Democrats are not the ones refusing to pass a temporary extension. Bush has threatened to veto an extension. Republicans don't want a temporary extension. They would rather let the temporary FISA patch expire (even though this would result in an immediate terrorist attack) than permit a bill to go forward that doesn't immunize the telcoms.

Posted by: just wondering on February 15, 2008 at 9:43 AM | PERMALINK

Artifical Intelligence,

Look out for reality orchestrated by no one because it will destroy your perception of the world.

Posted by: turtledove on February 15, 2008 at 9:48 AM | PERMALINK

Artifical Intelligence,

Look out for reality orchestrated by no one because it will destroy your perception of the world.

Posted by: turtledove on February 15, 2008 at 9:48 AM | PERMALINK

Boronx,

Dodd's bill should definitely get an up or down vote. The faux filibusters that go on in the Senate these are extremely annoying. At some point, legislative bodies need to hold votes.

Turtledove,

You have nailed it, of course.

Posted by: Brian on February 15, 2008 at 10:10 AM | PERMALINK

Silvestre Reyes is the MAN. That letter has the substance and tone just right. Why can't all Democrats in Congress call bullshit on Bush's fearmongering like that?

Posted by: The Fabulous Mr. Toad on February 15, 2008 at 10:20 AM | PERMALINK

Turtledove, what are you smoking?

How about this: look out for purported reality that is actually orchestrated by someone because if you can't tell the difference you will fail to perceive the world. And then you will do some stupid-ass thing like invade the wrong country or vote to eviscerate the Constitution.

Posted by: The Fabulous Mr. Toad on February 15, 2008 at 10:28 AM | PERMALINK

The real question is why does Kevin act surprised when the corporate-owned media, like The Washington Post, shills for the corporate-owned Republican Party?

Posted by: SecularAnimist on February 15, 2008 at 11:12 AM | PERMALINK

Riggsveda,

It would be nice if bravery were perceived as not exclusively a male prerogative.

Huh? Females don't have gonads?

I know what you meant though, and props on spelling 'prerogative' correctly.

How about "Bush angry, we must be doing something right."

Posted by: Tripp on February 15, 2008 at 11:14 AM | PERMALINK

The Post story today

House Defies Bush on Wiretaps
...The episode was a rare uprising by Democrats against the White House on a terrorism issue, and it inspired caterwauling on both sides about the dire ramifications of the standoff....
...Several Democrats said yesterday that many in their party wish to take a more measured approach to terrorism issues, and they refused to be stampeded by Bush. "We have seen what happens when the president uses fearmongering to stampede Congress into making bad decisions," said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.). "That's why we went to war in Iraq."
White House officials and their allies were angry that the Democrats did not "blink," as one outside adviser said. The decision to defy the White House came in the form of a weeklong adjournment of the House yesterday afternoon. ...

Note the use of the word caterwauling, "the cry of cats; a harsh, disagreeable noise or cry like the cry of cats."
Do you think they would have used this term if the Speaker was a male?
The contributing staff writer was Paul Kane , Washington Post hack who tilts their longstanding bias against Democrats.

Posted by: Mike on February 15, 2008 at 11:37 AM | PERMALINK

Apparently Kevin missed the actual headline on the front page of the Post today which says in big, bold letters:

House Defies Bush on Wiretaps

Posted by: Hacksaw on February 15, 2008 at 11:37 AM | PERMALINK

Well Hack, this post went up yesterday, before todays headline, but you know that. Perhaps Kevin's crystal ball was in the shop? Or more likely, the scores of comments on the WaPo site taking them to task for their blatant headline spin got a copy editors attention?

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State on February 15, 2008 at 11:52 AM | PERMALINK

BG, RS,

Well Kevin could certainly have provided an update but my bad, I didn't check the date on his post.

But wouldn't someone be just as justified complaining about "House Defies Bush on Wiretaps" as Kevin and others were about "Bush Rebukes House on Spy Bill." Aren't they just as one-sided?

And I think a lot more people saw the front page of the Post today than read Capitol Briefing online after 6:00 yesterday.

Personally, I'm fine with both headlines and think people who get upset about either one likely have too much time on their hands.

[Interesting IP information, Hacksaw. Would you like to share with the class where you are posting from on the taxpayers dime?]

Posted by: Hacksaw on February 15, 2008 at 12:02 PM | PERMALINK

Hack,

No, they're not equally one-sided. When the newsworthy event was an action taken by the House, the appropriate thing would be to have a headline about that action itself. Instead, the original headline was about Bush's reaction to it. That headline makes Bush the protagonist, not Congress, when in fact it is Congress that is taking action here, while Bush is just commenting on that action.

This sort of media ploy is called "framing". You may have heard of it. If not, read up.

Toad

Posted by: The Fabulous Mr. Toad on February 15, 2008 at 12:29 PM | PERMALINK

What Mr. Toad said.

Also, nice try at a headfake, but no cigar. Kevin hadn't even posted yet this morning when you said you hadn't checked the date on the post.

Oh! And do tell! Where are you posting from? The Pentagon?

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State on February 15, 2008 at 12:35 PM | PERMALINK

hacksaw's is never even well-constructed propaganda. When someone violates the Hatch Act, I like them to do it with style and grace.

Posted by: as it unfolds on February 15, 2008 at 12:46 PM | PERMALINK

For a little perspective on this, note that the headline Bush Rebukes House on Spy Bill was from Ben Pershing's blog, Capitol Briefing, which appears only on washingtonpost.com. The more recent headline, House Defies Bush on Wiretaps, tops the story on the front page of this AM's dead-tree Washington Post, which is also carried on washingtonpost.com. Serendipitously, this week's Washington City Paper has a cover story on the tensions between these 2 separate newsrooms, 1 locaated in DC proper, the other across the Potomac in Arlington VA. Check it out at www.washingtoncitypaper.com/display.php?id=34569

Posted by: Walsh on February 15, 2008 at 12:47 PM | PERMALINK

Toad,

The problem with your claim is that, in fact, Bush and the GOP did rebuke the House for failing to bring the bill to a vote. In fact if you scroll down the Capitol Briefing blog you find the previous story "House Will Let Surveillance Bill Expire" which begins "Upping the ante in their standoff with the Bush administration over national security, House Democrats are planning to leave town today for a one-week recess without any further action on the terrorist surveillance bill and will let the measure expire tomorrow night, according to multiple sources." It has an update which notes Bush's reaction to the House Democrats' action. Which naturally feeds into the story whose headline had Kevin so upset.

So the progression of headlines matches the way the news unfolded, which is appropriate enough for a blog. And the headline in today's Post frames the story to capture the idea that it was the House's action (or inaction) that was the primary event of the day.

BG,RS - I think you misread my first sentence. I didn't mean Kevin could have updated in the sense that something actually was posted today. I simply meant that given the headline today, Kevin should have noted it. No headfake.

Posted by: Hacksaw on February 15, 2008 at 1:15 PM | PERMALINK

aren't you supposed to be working, hacksaw? why are you doing this on federal gubmint time? you could really get in trouble for it.

Posted by: as it unfolds on February 15, 2008 at 1:26 PM | PERMALINK

Hacksaw:

Have a gander at this:

The Hatch Act: Its Importance to State and Local Government Employees:
In 1939, Congress approved landmark legislation known as the Hatch Act which limits the political activities of federal employees, employees of the District of Columbia government, and certain employees of state and local governments. With the enactment of the Hatch Act, regulations governing the political activities of these employees were written into the United States Code for the first time.
In passing the Hatch Act, Congress determined that partisan political activity by federal employees, employees of the District of Columbia government, and certain employees of state and local governments must be limited for public institutions to function fairly and effectively. Through the years, various challenges to the Hatch Act have only reaffirmed this basic premise.

Any bells going off? Any sense of shame creeping in? Guess not...

Posted by: Pale Rider on February 15, 2008 at 1:34 PM | PERMALINK

Federal employees must scrupulously comply with the Hatch Act restrictions because the presumptive penalty for a knowing violation is removal and the minimum penalty is a 30-day suspension without pay.

Man, the things people do to get time off these days...

Posted by: Pale Rider on February 15, 2008 at 1:37 PM | PERMALINK

Well that just goes to show that you can quote the Hatch Act and still not understand it. In any event, it's funny how people are so sure about where I work (not that it's particularly important).

[You are posting from the GAO, and Lurita Doan, the director, is already in trouble for Hatch Act violations.]

Posted by: Hacksaw on February 15, 2008 at 1:39 PM | PERMALINK

I didn't misread anything.

Now, where are you posting from? Which department of the government? Are you a paid shill, or are you fucking around on my dime?

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State on February 15, 2008 at 1:42 PM | PERMALINK

In any event, it's funny how people are so sure about where I work

that's true. it could be that you don't work at the place you're posting from right now. in fact, we're pretty sure very little work other than hamhanded propagandizing gets done at your desk.

hatch act violation or not, this is pretty embarrassing stuff for you that could lead to several unpleasant repercussions.

Posted by: as it unfolds on February 15, 2008 at 1:44 PM | PERMALINK

[You are posting from the GAO, and Lurita Doan, the director, is already in trouble for Hatch Act violations.]

wow, the gao, where employees were instructed to be especially assiduous about following the hatch act after doan made such a towering ass of herself trying to cover up blatant violations. and here's hacksaw blithely posting on the taxpayer's dime all day long, which is in and of itself highly unethical, and his posts include many, many items that are wide open to interpretation as hatch violations. this is interesting stuff that deserves closer review.

Posted by: as it unfolds on February 15, 2008 at 1:57 PM | PERMALINK

The only question remaining is...Are you a careerist (please, god, no...) or a political appointee, i.e. "Loyal Bushie"? My money is on the latter. Or maybe that's just wishful thinking.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State on February 15, 2008 at 2:04 PM | PERMALINK

Is the Post owned by some telecom company? Or some even bigger company that also owns telecom companies?

Or is it just lazy?

Or does in really think that everything Lame Duck George says is newsworthy?

So many explanations, and none mutally exclusive.

Posted by: Cal Gal on February 15, 2008 at 3:10 PM | PERMALINK

Wow. Busted!

Posted by: Tripp on February 15, 2008 at 3:44 PM | PERMALINK

Hey, Hacksaw? You still there? Or, are you posting under different name from home, now that you're starting your 30-day "vacation"?

Posted by: SocraticGadfly on February 15, 2008 at 4:22 PM | PERMALINK


bush is pissed?

doesn't that usually mean...

someone must die?

Posted by: mr. irony on February 15, 2008 at 5:13 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly