The CNN Sandbag
In contrast to Hillary Clinton's well-known reluctance to venture anywhere that tough questions might be asked, Lynne Cheney went boldly nto the belly of the beast -- CNN -- and gave better than she got. (Transcript at Hugh Hewitt's blog, video here).
With Mrs. Cheney having obviously agreed to appear in conjunction with the release of her children's book, "Our 50 States", it was remarkably revealing to watch Wolf Blitzer sandbag her with loaded, adversarial questions about the conduct of the war on terror and the upcoming elections.
But Blitzer really scraped the barrel's bottom when he broached the topic of Jim Webb's book. Here and elsewhere, I've written on the unfortunate sexualization even of politics -- that's why there's been no discussion of the sordid passages from Webb novels purveyed by the Allen campaign on this blog. And when an erstwhile "journalist" begins quoting DNC talking points about the vice president's wife having written about a "lesbian love affair" -- and actually has the temerity to challenge her on that topic (asking "There is nothing in there about rapes and brothels?") -- well, it simply defies comment.
Why would Wolf Blitzer act as Jim Webb's waterboy? The fact that Webb, in a desperate earlier statement, dragged Mrs. Cheney in to the controversy doesn't justify Blitzer's raising the issue -- especially when there's no merit to the charge. The patent bias, the lack of decorum, the utter unapologetic tackiness of the entire episode is like an ugly train wreck -- it makes normal people want to avert their eyes. And take a mental shower. Pronto.
Mrs. Cheney was rightfully disgusted, but at least she wasn't surprised by CNN's tactics. At the interview's conclusion, Wolf Blitzer effectively conceded defeat, telling her, "You came armed. I guess you knew what you wanted to do."
So did the people at CNN, Wolf. They just weren't as good at it.
With Mrs. Cheney having obviously agreed to appear in conjunction with the release of her children's book, "Our 50 States", it was remarkably revealing to watch Wolf Blitzer sandbag her with loaded, adversarial questions about the conduct of the war on terror and the upcoming elections.
But Blitzer really scraped the barrel's bottom when he broached the topic of Jim Webb's book. Here and elsewhere, I've written on the unfortunate sexualization even of politics -- that's why there's been no discussion of the sordid passages from Webb novels purveyed by the Allen campaign on this blog. And when an erstwhile "journalist" begins quoting DNC talking points about the vice president's wife having written about a "lesbian love affair" -- and actually has the temerity to challenge her on that topic (asking "There is nothing in there about rapes and brothels?") -- well, it simply defies comment.
Why would Wolf Blitzer act as Jim Webb's waterboy? The fact that Webb, in a desperate earlier statement, dragged Mrs. Cheney in to the controversy doesn't justify Blitzer's raising the issue -- especially when there's no merit to the charge. The patent bias, the lack of decorum, the utter unapologetic tackiness of the entire episode is like an ugly train wreck -- it makes normal people want to avert their eyes. And take a mental shower. Pronto.
Mrs. Cheney was rightfully disgusted, but at least she wasn't surprised by CNN's tactics. At the interview's conclusion, Wolf Blitzer effectively conceded defeat, telling her, "You came armed. I guess you knew what you wanted to do."
So did the people at CNN, Wolf. They just weren't as good at it.
posted by LadybugUSA at 4:10 PM
6 Comments:
Why do people still support CNN? They seem as useful as Pravda was to the USSR.
I'll bet the V.P. doesn't get away with much from her, either. Good thing they're ideologically compatible.
Carol have you read any of the books in question? Webb's or Cheney's?
Allen desperate to appeal to those who feel that sex in fiction is somehow dgenerate as he appealed to racists with his comments caught on film in Breaks VA was the one who brought up the sex in Jim Webb's novels.
Wolf Blitzer having her on and having had Webb make comparisons to her novel Sisters which does have a deeply intimate relationship between two women in the 19th century featured in itwas doing his job as a journalist. I find it odd that people who are pundits and not journalists always think we have an agenda. If the news is bad for your opposition we report it. If it is bad for your guy we report it.
And another thing carol America isn't a monarchy the last time I check Lynne Cheney, nor her husband nor the President nor anyone else as much as you would like to have it be so is above the law, or above being asked to defend their position. Blitzer wasn't acting as Jim Webb's waterboy he was acting as the People's waterboy. That because people like yourself and elites like Lynne Cheney are so separate from the People in acts and in hubris.
I have been wrong in these many years in saying that race was the most divisive barrier to the ultimate success of America. Truly it is the idea that class places you above reproach. You think that Ms Liebau and to my embarassment both Hillary Clinton and Lynne Cheney feel the same way. Sadly, until all of those who feel that way are swept into the dustbin of history there will be little hope of America making any progress forward in any serious manner other than conspicuous consumption.
Since I am certain this has offended you, the truth has that effect oftentimes, I know it will not be posted. So as is my right, in my nation, I will post it at my own blog.
And for the thousandth time Monica Lewinsky, the woman with whom William Jfferson Clinton had an adulterous affair within the walls of the White House, was 22 not 19 as you parroted from Sean Hannity.
The difference madam between poor punditry and good journalism is objectivity and the use of well researched facts.
Good day
C.E.
"I find it odd that people who are pundits and not journalists always think we have an agenda. If the news is bad for your
opposition we report it."
[Yes, of course. But it would be on B12, below the fold. Once.]
"If it is bad for your guy we report it."
[On page A1, above the fold, for weeks on end.]
I find it amusing when "journalists" get all huffy about bias. What makes a "journalist" think he or she is so immune to their own biases and predilections?
After Lynn Cheney left, Blitzer and his CNN guests, including Lou Dobbs, piled like high school flunkies... they looked up her book, googling on the air, and make comments about the contents of her book that were false. Blitzer couldn't let it go -- I think he though he was having a Clinton vs. Fox moment and didn't realize how childish he and the our reporters were acting.
I probably shouldn't ask, but I'm going to.
"Lied about WHAT exactly?"
Post a Comment
<< Home