I have spent three hours on the phone over the past two days trying to offset the consequences of three pieces of journalistic malpractice in the coverage of Christie Romer down the hall--Kelly Evans and Brenda Cronin of the Wall Street Journal who fear she is a milksop who will not dare contradict Larry Summers, Mike Allen of the Politico and James Barnes of the National Journal who say that she is a secret supply-sider, and John Judis who says that she is opposed to Obama fiscal policy.Well, there you have it.
That's three hours I am never going to get back.
In all of these conversations, eventually my interlocutor says: "But if what you say is true, then you are saying that the journalist"--Cronin or Evans or Judis or Allen or Barnes--"is simply not competent to write the story. Is that what you are saying?"
And I have come around to replying: "Yes. That is what I am saying."
Does anybody have a suggestion as to a more polite way that I can deal with people who say: "But if it isn't true, why did this reputable news organization"--the WSJ or Politico or the National Journal or TNR--"print it?"
Anybody? Anybody? Bueller?
[ cf Rant! Rant! RANT!! Why Oh Why Can't We Have a Better Press Corps? ]
Clear Proof that the Evil Liberal Main Stream media continues to advance it same old failed Leftist leaning evil liberal Wall Street Unamericanist God Hating America Bashing....
It is just Shocking!!!
{ it is amusing that FoxNews did not make the list of evil liberal media outlets, but I guess that is because they are of course fair and balanced, and have always supported the fairness doctrine. }