WASHINGTON POST EDITORS HELP KARL ROVE BURNISH HIS REPUTATION

[ProSense]

WASHINGTON POST EDITORS HELP KARL ROVE BURNISH HIS REPUTATION. The political media is utterly incapable of acknowledging its own role in shaping voter perceptions of our political figures. This blind spot borders on pathological.

Case in point: In today's Washington Post, there's a front page story about Karl Rove and the coming 2006 elections. The story says:

White House political strategist Karl Rove emerges from the CIA leak case with his reputation scuffed, his power slightly diminished...

Most Republicans and Democrats interviewed for this article said Rove's White House stature has been diminished only slightly, and perhaps only temporarily, by Bush's political problems and the leak probe. (Emphasis added.)

What do you suppose is the reason Rove's rep is only "scuffed" and "only slightly" diminished? Here's a thought: Maybe it has a little something to do with the editorial choices that are made day in and day out by editors at the Post and other news orgs. Incredibly, this Post story on Rove's post-Plame rep doesn't contain a single word about the very Plame-related things that should have damaged his reputation: The fact that he played a role in outing her and the fact that the White House repeatedly lied about it. That's a glaring omission. You'd think Post editors might have seen fit to include such crucial context.

Now go back to the story that was done by the Post a couple of days ago on the lingering questions about Rove's role in the Plame case. The piece was buried on page A4, ran under the headline "Bush Reaffirms His Confidence in Rove," and described those still raising questions about him as "partisans."

more...

http://www.prospect.org/horsesmouth/2006/06/post_127.html

[mzteris]

1. what else do you expect

from the Post?

[ray of light]

2. The media is complicit.

I'm not asking that Democratic Representatives or their party be treated with kid gloves like the Republicans are treated with kid gloves.

I'm asking fot the media to wallop both parties equally and perform their role assigned to them. That role is the watch dog of the government for the American people, protecting us from corruption in any party!

[BrklynLiberal]

3. and one wonders why the Dems cannot seem to get their "message" out.

:mad: :grr: :nuke: :spank: :banghead:

When the media is a wholey-owned subsidiary of BushCo, what can one expect?

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. Makes me want one of these for ALL media

https://www.tvbgone.com/cfe_tvbg_buy.tvbg.php?PHPSESSID=e52d44fd7e63404fe16a25e8064a3e6a

[BrklynLiberal]

7. ROTFLMAO!!!!

[blogslut]

5. Turdblossom

will always be remembered as nothing more than an effective underling. He's Worm Tongue. He's Barty Crouch Jr. He's Trash Can Man. The Washington Post can put all the lipstick on that pig they want, it won't change fact that little Karl will forever be a supporting player, just like them.

[CBHagman]

6. The Post spins for the administration regularly.

I've been amazed at how Post reporters have managed to put the most positive spin on nearly anything that happens to or as a result of the administration. When Bush is at, for example,a 66 percent disapproval rating, the Post will describe him as "less popular" or experiencing "sagging popularity." Today's Post suggests there have been several weeks' worth of good news out of Iraq, which they regard as a boost for the administration (but I can only count two actual events, both from the past week, that could be regarded as positve changes).

And they implicitly treat right-wing think tanks and self-described conservatives as more reliable sources than any self-described liberal. They also treat figures such as Ann Coulter in a neutral or complimentary fashion (Howard Kurtz referred to her as "a savvy constitutional lawyer").

Morally speaking, many, many people at the Post have been off the rails for years. It's very sad to see.

[spag68]

8. WP

I used to get their e-mail updates, but when they hired that rethug. blogger awhile ago I undid them.

[GrumpyGreg]

9. The Post is getting more like the Washington Times every day.

[Emit]

10. Speaking of

Anyone happen to read this editorial in the Wa Times?

Nobles: Congressional Republicans, for calling the Democrats' bluff and sending a message of support to the troops in Iraq.

~snip~

For letting their actions speak louder than their words, congressional Republicans are the Nobles of the week.

Knaves: The so-called "Angry Left," especially Kerry spokesman David Wade, who reached into their "Fitzmas" stockings only to find a lump of coal.

This takes a bit of an explanation. The left-wing blogosphere, typified by such virulent sites as DailyKos.com, dubbed the day that special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald handed down indictments in the Valerie Plame leak case last year "Fitzmas," meaning it would be like Christmas for the liberals who have long wished to see a whole bevy of Bush administration officials carted off to jail. What they got instead was the indictment of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby — a high-ranking administration official, but hardly the top dog they were hoping for.

After that disappointment, the liberal bloggers began celebrations over the "imminent" indictment of Karl Rove, truly the gem in the administration's crown. The site Truthout.org still insists its recent story on Mr. Rove's indictment was correct, despite the whole world now knowing that Mr. Rove won't be indicted after all. Readers can see for themselves what this disappointment has done to the left-wing blogosphere by perusing the temper tantrums at DemocraticUnderground.com.

~snip~

http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20060616-091741-2578r.htm