Politicians vs the media
Moms View Message Board: The Kitchen Table (Debating Board): Politicians vs the media
Right now I'm fed up with both. I will admit that I usually vote Republican. They do enough crap to mess up without the media drumming up stuff to make a mountain out of. It wasn't enough of a story that Cheney shot his friend. The media had to make a federal case out of "why was the media not informed immediately?" Duh, he was more concerned about his friend who had just unloaded birdshot into his face than getting news to the media. Hold on,Harry. We'll get you to the hospital in a few. The media will want to get a pic of you bleeding on the ground. Ugh!
So, my question is--Which is worse? The politicians or the media? I really don't mean to draw lines between the parties with this. Frankly, I'm more annoyed with the media. I remember when Clinton had only been in office about a month and some newscaster was blaming the price of something small like movie ticket prices or something else like that on Clinton. All I could think was that the man had only been in the office 30 days. How could it be his fault that the price of anything has gone up? Democrats and Republicans are equally good and corrupt as far as I'm concerned.
So in case you haven't figured it out yet, my vote on my debate is the media.
Check out this op-ed!
WashigtonTimes
The op-ed is, in my opinion, the typical throwing the kitchen sink and everyone else at anyone who disagrees with or criticizes any member of the present administration. This writer reports that a Washington Post reporter showed up for a press conference in hunting garb, but I haven't read that in any of the other reports I have read, and I would be very surprised if anyone in hunting garb were allowed into the White House or the press room. I'll wait to read further reports on that.
This was a terrible, but not untypical hunting accident. I'm sure that the people who feel the worst about this are Mr. Whittington, his family, and Vice President Cheney.
But I think the press has a good point. What any high elected official does is news, whether its on "public" or "private" time, and few know that better than Mr. Cheney, who has worked very, very hard most of his terms to avoid the press. The wondering about why it took nearly 24 hours for this event to be reported is only to be expected, because it is/was, after all, front page news.
What I found a great deal more upsetting was the statements from Cheney's office blaming Mr. Whittington for being where he shouldn't be. That may well be true - I'm not a hunter - but from what I have been told by avid hunters and from what I read of the NRA guidelines, when you are out hunting, whether alone or with other people but especially when with other people, you make darn sure of what you are shooting at before you shoot. I think Mr. Cheney was careless and broke the rules. And I personally would have preferred it if he had said, from the beginning, that it was a terrible accident and he made a mistake - if he had taken responsibility for his mistake from the beginning.
Much of the press frustration stems from the usual snowballing and avoidance of giving direct answers to direct questions from Scot McClellan (the White House press secretary), and this is typical of Mr. McClellan (though probably, much of the time, based on his instructions and his understanding of what the administration wants said). Scott McClellan works very hard to avoid giving direct answers to questions - some of them very important questions - and when he is pressed to give a direct answer to the question often either goes off onto another topic entirely, or derides the press for focusing on what he terms as unimportant, and sometimes makes personal attacks on the reporters asking the unwanted questions. Having read the transcripts of many White House press conferences, I can understand the frustration of the White House press corps.
Whatever the rationalizations, when a Vice President of the United States accidently shoots a hunting partner, it is front page news, and everyone in the White House should certainly know that. They all would have saved themselves a great deal of aggravation if the White House press office had put out a press release that evening, when they knew, that the Vice President had been involved in a hunting accident and accidently wounded a person in his hunting group. It would still have gotten the headlines, but a lot of the fuss wouldn't have happened.
It was the media that brought us the Pentagon Papers and Watergate, and the first reports on the present secret wiretapping program. It is often the media that surfaces the first reports on corruption, on things like the Enron mess, and digs out information overlooked or ignored by the police and prosecutors in their handling of major crimes. And dug into the Clinton mess to surface some of the information that led to the official investigation. So whether their targets are Democrats or Republicans, I bless the media, and will almost always take the side of the media over the politicians. While the media often makes mountains out of what are probably mole hills, I can rely on someone in the media, somewhere, to keep digging for the truth of the situation, and I can generally count on politicians, of whatever party, to try to cover up and hide what they don't want me to know.
I am also a republician and I am ticked at Cheney's decision (and bush) not to put it out there. Cheney KNEW that the corpus paper was going to print a story, they should of had something released a little wider. The reality is, he was hoping it wouldn't get out. Since I have been around many hunters, I do feel like the way the wording was handled was appropriate. Cheney should have looked beyond his target, but the other guy did very clearly break the rules. One thing you have to consider is this guy was 30 yards from Cheney, it wasn't point blank, far enough away for cheney not to hear him. Also I don't have any idea was the terrain was like. Ultimately Cheney pulled the trigger and it was his fault. But I am far more irriated that he made a conscious decision to hope this wouldn't come out. He is the next in line to be the leader of the free world, I pay him, I elected him, I have the right to know what he is doing 
However the guy who was shot does deserve some privacy, so I feel like the initial story should have read, Cheney in hunting accident with friend and his name withheld until his family was onboard with it.
Here's my only issue with this. I think it should be treated as it would with any other person. Around here, if any hunter shot another hunter, it would be headline news right away, and there would be an investigation. This is what I expect out of this incident. Just because he is the VP does not give him special privleges and crap, I know that spelling is wrong.
Yes, I think he should have taken the blame immediately and a lot of what is going on would be better. But all in all, I want this treated as it would be if it were any lay person in the country.
The problem, Adena, is that he isn't "any other person". So it won't be treated just like any other person, and probably shouldn't be.
It would be really, really nice if politicians would learn from history. Over and over we have politicians doing something wrong or stupid, trying to hide it (though I don't believe Cheney really tried to hide it - he just kept it quiet for much longer than it should have been), not taking full responsibility for their own actions and either blaming the other guy or saying (or sort of saying), well, everybody does it.
If these guys (and gals) would learn that it is better to be up front, immediately, about what happened, accept responsibility, and apologize - they and we would be a lot better off. (And we could avoid a lot of media furor and no few very expensive special investigations).
Thank GOD for the media!! (My effort to include God in this debate.)
The media is all we regular folks have to keep people in power and companies and industries in check. We would be run over, exploited, lied to, ripped off, stolen from every day of our lives if we didn't have the media looking into things, investigating, getting documents via open records act, asking the tough, sometimes stupid, questions, taking the pictures, making the connections.
We don't want to be in the dark. We want to know what is going on. The media is the best thing we have and it's often very effective. The corruption and lies we have learned about from investigative reporters can't be learned anywhere else.
Cheney hates the media. He's a secretive guy looking out for himself. He accepted the VP nomination and with that acceptance he gave up a whole bunch of privacy. He should have made those comments he made yesterday Saturday night. He should not have put the property owner in the position of having to report that the vice president has accidently shot someone. I bet it will come out that Cheney said, "I'm not going to tell anyone" and Mrs. Armstrong said, "If you aren't, than I am bec it happened on my property and I feel a responsibilty to tell the public."
The media is all we regular folks have to keep people in power and companies and industries in check. I couldn't agree more. We all, to a certain extent, rely on the freedom of the press to be our eyes and ears where the government is concerned.
Call me a skeptic, but the tendencey of politicians in history to cover up or hide things from the public makes me suspicious. And the fact that it took that long for it to be reported makes me even more suspicious. Yes, he could have been concerned for his friend, he could have felt like **** for what happened and not wanted to subject himself to public and media scrutiny, but as the second highest offical in this country, he knew that it was part of the job description. There should have been more information at the outset. Is it too much to aks for our elected representitives to be forthright with its constituients?
From MSN Money http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.asp?feed=FT&Date=20060216&ID=5501435
"When George W. Bush, then a gubernatorial candidate, accidentally killed a protected deer during a dove shoot in 1994, he and his press aide swiftly decided on a strategy: confess fast.
"People watch the way you handle things. They get a feeling they like and trust you or they don't," said a biography of Mr Bush."
They are equally disgusting. I have my own issues with the media because of the way they handle military stories, but as far as politics in general, everything you see is based on opinion, usually paid for by the candidate.
Now, for the VP shooting, I agree with
Adena, he SHOULD be treated the same way any of us would be treated. He SHOULD be charged with neglect or a similar charge for not taking precautions, but he's the freakin' VP, and is basically allowed to do whatever and an "I'm sorry" is enough. Remember when Haliburton was caught running empty trucks in Iraq just to increase profits? They still are allowed to have the contract there, and KBR is a subsidiary, so basically Halliburton has a near monopoly on "rebuilding" Iraq and getting supplies in. What's the saying? It's not what you know, but who you b..."
My understanding is that he didn't even have all the proper paperwork he needed to be hunting, something about a $7.00 stamp.
I have absolutely no love or liking for VP Cheney. In fact, he scares me half to death. I think he is very much the "power behind the throne" in this presidency and has guided much of the policies I detest so much.
Having said that, I think it was a plain and simple stupid hunting accident and, from my reading of the reports, there was some fault on both sides but in the end, the guy with the gun is the one who is supposed to be most careful and takes (or should take - as Cheney did in the end) the blame. I don't think there would be any criminal charges for Jack Smith in the same circumstances, especially with several witnesses (including the victim) who support the description of the accident. As for the $7 stamp, I suspect that most of the time ordinary people are allowed to do just as Cheney did - get a warning, and pay the $7 after the fact. His hosts did ask the licensing authority for "all" the forms, and to some extent that office probably has some blame. (Of course, Whittington could sue the pants off of Cheney, but I doubt he will.)
Now, Halliburton - that's a whole other story and you really don't want me to go into that. My posts would be deleted.
The media
Excerpt from her current column, by Ellen Goodman:
"But many suggest that the furor over the cartoons was actually ratcheted up by Middle Eastern governments trying to turn the attention of their citizenry from their own ineptitude to the culture wars. In that case, the peppering of Dick Cheney is an international reminder to both sides that the real reason to protect free speech is to criticize the people who govern you. The real reason for satire is to make fun, with impunity, of your leaders.
My uncle, a World War II veteran, tells the classic story of Soviet and American allies in a bar. An American soldier decides to illustrate the difference between the two countries. ``In my country'' he announces, ``I can stand up and call Franklin Roosevelt an a--hole.'' The Soviet solder says there's no difference. ``In my country, I can also call Franklin Roosevelt an a--hole.''
The fundamental difference between us and them isn't who can insult whose sacred cows, but who can criticize whose leaders. For that we tolerate excess.
The other difference, of course, is that in countries with a free press, leaders actually do have to tell the people when they shoot someone. Promptly. "
http://www.postwritersgroup.com/archives/good0216.htm
>>My understanding is that he didn't even have all the proper paperwork he needed to be hunting, something about a $7.00 stamp.>>
Yep. And I bet he didn't have his lawyer hunting permit either.
*ducking and running*
I do agree that Cheney should have spoken out sooner. Now, as far as waiting to report it, I can see both sides of it. Yes, I guess we, the public, feel that we have a right to know everything that happens right away. But, I don't know what was going through Cheney's mind. It sounds like he feels just horrible about what happened. Who wouldn't be in this situation. So, maybe his first thought wasn't, hey I need to talk to the media. Maybe, he was just more concerned about the well being of his friend. My understanding is that he was at the hospital from the minute Mr. Whittington was transported there.
Ginny, as far as Cheney blaming Mr. Whittington, I thought it was the ranch owner, who made the original statement about the accident, that put some of the blame on Mr. Whittington.
Dh is a big hunter. He is actually from South Texas, close to where this accident happened. He hates Quail hunting because it is a very reactive hunt. As far as not having the proper stamp, this happens all the time. Doesn't make it right, but it is a common occurance.
As far as Cheney being charged. Crystal, I think you are letting your personal feelings get in the way here. Everyone involved, including the victim, has said it was an accident. Whey would he be charged? Anyone else in this situation, wouldn't be charged either. Unfortunatley, this is the risk of hunting. Whenever you put several people in an area with guns, accidents can happen.
My understanding is that he was at the hospital from the minute Mr. Whittington was transported there.
I think this is wrong information. I believe I read on AP that he had dinner with the ranch owner and awaited news. I think that was the right thing to do, the vp doesn't need to close down the whole hospital and you do have to worry about his safety.
Kaye, I could very well be wrong. I have heard lots of bits and pieces while watching the news, but am usually half listening while cooking dinner. What you said, makes sense.
Dang, I had a long reply, and my server went down.
My opinion is that the media in General is hungry for the story, regardless of accuracy, speed is the winner in this. Look at the different versions stated above of the same incident. Americans have come to point where "voyerism" is taking over our common sense. So we are in essence feeding the media to act like the boneheads they are! Liberal or conservative, I'm a republican, but I'm fairly certain if this was a democrat (OK saving the quail not hunting them)LOL, the conservative media would be doing the same thing. It's the way our society is today.
I heard the press conferences with MacClellan the first day he answered the questions, the second and third and fourth, he was irritated and rightly so, he was being "harrassed" to answer the same •••• questions over and over, I would have re acted the same way I believe in his position. Reporters were simply not interested in the "important matters" as Whittington himself stated today, that are issues for the country. But rather why/who/where and how a story came. If he'd have come right out and said, OOPS big accident on the ranch today but no worries, Harry just fine, and he'd have been actually in serious (but unknown at the time)condition, we'd have cried cover up. If he'd have come out and said OOPS big accident at the ranch, and Harry is in grave danger, than he risked a family member hearing from the TV rather than personally, it's really a no win situration no matter your stature.
Think back to Chappaquiddick
, I know Kennedy was neither Pres of VP, but I'm pretty sure he was an elected official, he not only went back to a party, but called a lawyer and pow wow'd with freinds before the Police, let alone the press corp, this is not to start a partisan debate, but just to show the times have changed.
Personally I think the current issue is not one of National Security by any stretch of the imagination, I'm glad to know our officials are still doing things us commoners do, and feel horrible on both sides of the Accident, the Cheneys and the Whittingtons, I can't imagine shooting someone I care about, nor being shot.
Lisa, the column you linked is correct. A Washington Post opinion writer, Dana Milbank, did appear on MSNBC in hunting garb, and according to fellow Post writer, Deborah Howell, the Post's Ombudsman,
Milbank wore hunting gear -- an orange stocking cap and striped vest and gloves -- on Keith Olbermann's show Monday night and made several meant-to-be-humorous remarks about Vice President Cheney's hunting accident.
Personally, I think Milbank crossed whatever invisible line there is when he did that, and, from Howell's column, he has appeared on MSNBC other times "acting" parts in which I would also think he crossed the line.
Howell labels it a "mistake in judgment", which I am inclined to think is rather mild.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/18/AR2006021801098.html
My short answer to your question is the media. If all they reported was fact and truth, I wouldn't feel that way. I do feel it is a very important avenue to keep the government in check, but you can only believe about 25% of what they report.
My dh accused me of a hit and run. Started trouble then haven't posted since. Sorry! LOL! Not my intention. I was just so annoyed the other day and had to get it off my chest. Then I've worked 9 to 14 hrs a day for the past 4 days. Too busy to catch up.
I'm exhausted now and going to bed.
I would never have thought of you as a "hit and run". If I had thought about it at all (you not posting after your opening post), I probably would have thought you were judiciously sitting back and seeing how people responded to the topic you opened.
If you hadn't "fessed up", we'd never have known. ;-)
|
Members
