The Democrats Gloat Thread

But you appear to object when they are asked?

No, I don't. I object to the asking of barbed questions by reporters who are not impartial and not objective, and who can't even mask their bias when they ask their questions. They have an agenda and their questions are in furtherance of it (e.g., anti-war or anti-Bush). And we both know that asking some questions is a way of making a covert statement, don't we?

Lol.

But you have not proven bias, though it MAY exist.

Are you saying she never asked such questions of other administrations?

Those she personally favoured?

And my comment referred only to questions asked via little white squares.

heehee

Lol. I don't expect you to agree that Helen is biased. Nimh wouldn't even admit as much until the very end, when he conceded that opinion columnists probably shouldn't be asking questions at WH press gatherings.

Helen Thomas, someone you aren't even familiar with, but for some reason have decided to defend, is clearly biased and not impartial or objective. She is decidedly anti-Bush, anti-Cheney, and anti-Iraq War. Her bias is evident in her questions and her columns.



Too late.

Actually, as I said earlier, since lash et al began viciously slamming her for her appearance, cos they didn't like her politics, I studied her.

Just as I had a good look at Coulter, after Snood and the left attacked me for expressing disdain for THEIR disgusting attacks on HER appearance.


I think you will find that she has not always been an "oped" writer, that she has a long career as a respected and fierce White House journalist. Unprecedented for a woman before her time. One of the strong women that the ilk respect so much IF they also worship Bush.


I probably know more about her than you do.


And my understanding is that she has been fierce with everyone.


She may have gone overboard now as she sees what Bush is doing, especially as I know she is shocked at how the White House is progressively removing itself from press scrutiny, a process which she identifies as really accelerating with the Kennedy administration, despite her personal liking for the President and that administration.

I don't know whether you know more about Helen Thomas than I do or not, but you have certainly done more apologizing for her than I have. She worked for UPI for many years. She was the one who usually got the first question at a news conference, and she historically ended news conferences by saying, "Thank you, Mr. President." That ended with Bush. She quit her job when Moon bought her company, and now works for Hearst writing an opinion column. She is apparently now incapable of asking an objective question, without advocating her position. She is completely biased.

In doing your research, did you run across this article:

So, your own article says this:

" Helen Thomas, who has barbed and grilled every president since John F. Kennedy"


She may be biased now, as I said.

Or not.

She may be speaking the dead truth.


She certainly has a lot of presidents to compare this administration with, no?

It IS, indeed, sad if she is destroying her credibility with her manner, and unwise of her.

This does not take from her her past brilliance.

I certainly honour her for resigning from UPI.



What, BTW, is your opinion of the aspects of the Bush White House mentioned in the article?

Do you agree with what Bushinc is doing in relation to press scrutiny?

"Or not"?

Did you read this part of the article:



If you're not going to be honest with me, why am I being honest with you?

Is any of what she said not true?

She may think not, but I don't think she's being honest if she can't admit the obvious: Helen Thomas is currently a biased, partisan hack. She is not impartial or objective. The fact that Deb thinks she's speaking truths doesn't alter this.

"She is not impartial or objective." Please tell us why this is so. I'll give you "impartial," but that's to be expected. "Impartial" only has value in your argument if you can prove righties don't have "impartial" pundits/reporters/op-ed writers.

Tell you why this is so? Because she's a liberal "pundit" now, that's why. Pundits and op-ed writers don't need to pretend to be impartial ... it isn't a job qualification. "Reporters," on the other hand, should at least pretend to be unbiased, impartial, and objective. You want Ann Coulter asking questions at a WH Press Briefing if you guys ever get elected again?

tico, I'm asking about Helen Thomas' "objectivity." We all know she's biased. Please show how her reporting is not "objective."

The definition of "objective" I'm using is "uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices." (The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company)

She is not objective.

No, no, no. Show us by her writings how she is not objective.

Hell, c.i, read any of her columns ... I've spent enough time talking about the wind bag. Some people just won't admit the truth. The fact that she's not objective is damn obvious. You know she's biased ... you see the bias in her questions (don't you? ) ... how can you not see the bias in her columns? She's not reporting the news anymore, ya know? She's a pundit, a columnist ... free to express her anti-war, anti-Bush opinion, and she does it whenever she can. And she does it whether you admit it or not.

tico, Examples please. I can separate the bias, if you can provide her writings that is not objective. Or do you determine objectivity for everybody?

I believe tico's answer was adequate - google up any half dozen of her colums from the past 4 or 5 years and see if you can find one that is dispassionate, objective, devoid of personal opinion, and without intent to persuade.

Show me.

I thought democrats would enjoy this article from the NYT more than the conservatives.


September 15, 2005
Ready? Cue the Sun...
By DAVID BROOKS

Arlen Specter Welcome to Day 3 of the confirmation hearings of John Roberts. I'd like to take this opportunity to remind the nation of what a wonderful job I'm doing chairing this committee, and I'd like to let the ranking member tell me so.

Patrick Leahy Absolutely, Mr. Chairman! And let me kick off this morning's platitudes about the grandeur of our Constitution by quoting its first three words, "We the People." That means that here in America the people rule - except on issues like abortion, where their opinions don't mean spit.

Specter Very well put, Senator Leahy! And welcome Judge Roberts back before our committee.

John Roberts Jr. Aw, shucks. This has been a humbling experience, Mr. Chairman. To think that a boy from an exclusive prep school and Harvard Law could grow up and be nominated for the Supreme Court - it shows how in America it's possible to rise from privilege to power! That's the hallmark of our great nation.

So while, of course, I can't talk about specific cases, or any emotions, weather patterns or sandwich meats that may come before the Supreme Court at any time between now and my death in 2048, I do want to reiterate that I feel humbled by this experience. I feel humbled that my wife is dozing off behind me. I feel humbled by this committee's inability to lay a glove on me. And I feel modest. You see this suit? I skinny-dip in this suit. That's how modest I feel.

Tom Coburn Well put, Judge Roberts. Yet when I think of the polarization that still divides this great nation ... waaaahhhh ... waaaahhhh. (Senator Coburn breaks down weeping.)

Jeff Sessions This may be a good moment to remind my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that in this country unelected judges don't write the laws. We have unelected lobbyists to do that. Under our system, judges merely interpret the law and decide presidential elections.

Specter Senator Sessions, let me interrupt you right there. We're not here to argue among ourselves and ignore the nominee. We're here to deliver 30-minute speeches disguised as questions and ignore the nominee. So let me turn to Senator Bid - -

Coburn And when I think of the flaws in the reconciliation process! And the gerrymandering! Oh, the suffering! Oh, the humanity! Waaaahhhh ... waaaahhhh. (Senator Coburn collapses and is taken back to his office on a stretcher.)

Specter As I was saying, Senator Biden, you have the floor.

Joseph Biden Jr. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thought this might be a good moment to give the committee a complete history of my heroic sponsorship of the Violence Against Women Act, but before I do that I'd like to interrupt myself by mentioning that I ride the train every day, often speaking with regular Americans, but before I do that I'd like to interrupt my interruption of myself by asking the chairman to restrain the nominee. During my first round of questioning, the nominee continually interrupted my questions by trying to give answers. I could barely keep up my train of thought on stare decisis.

Edward Kennedy Starry De Cysis? Didn't she do a fan dance down at that old burlesque house in Providence?

Roberts Mr. Chairman, I certainly don't mean to draw attention to myself, for, as I have said, judges are like umpires - not home plate umpires, but those umpires stuck way out by the right-field foul pole. Nobody ever went to a game to watch the umpires.

But as you know, Judge Ginsburg, during her confirmation hearing, had herself wrapped in duct tape for fear that any involuntary reflex gestures she might make would mar her impartiality in deciding cases later on. Following her example, I have decided to spend the rest of these hearings in a soundproof booth, sunk in a tank of ravenous sharks and accompanied only by the illusionist David Copperfield. But before I go into isolation, I would like to mention the intense modesty I feel at this moment, notwithstanding the fact that not a single one of you slobs could have charged $700 an hour the way I did in private practice.

Richard Durbin Judge Roberts, before you go, one of the ways we in the Senate prove our superior souls is by emoting mawkish sentimentality on cue. Would you please emote sadness and pain on behalf of politically powerful but downtrodden groups?

Roberts I am emoting, senator.

E-mail: [email protected]

* Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company