Roger L. Simon: The Washington Post in Desperation Mode

If you're looking for further proof... assuming that any is necessary... that the daily newspaper as we know it is headed for extinction, look no further than McCain: A Question of Temperament by Michael Leahy in today's WaPo. It reads somewhere between a discarded talking points memo for party functionaries and a post on some minor blog by a third-string research assistant to Howard Dean. And yet the WaPo has it on the front page!

As with most journalistic enterprises of the standard biased form, you can skip down to the ultimate paragraph for the writer's final "impartial' point....

One man's bulldozer is another's bully. "I don't think that he forgets anyone who ever opposed him, that he can ever really respect or trust them again," said Karen Johnson, the targeted secretary-turned-state senator. "That goes for people here and overseas."

For a moment there it seemed as if McCain's temper might not be such a big deal--one man's bulldozer is another's bully, after all--but NO! Karen Johnson--whoever she is--gets the last word: McCain is a hothead who never forgets... people here...and lest we forget...overseas. [Does that mean he'll hold a grudge against Ahmadinejad? -ed. Beats me.]

Well, since this is my blog, I have the last word for Mr. Leahy: "You're a hack!"

UPDATE: McCain collaborator Mark Salter (who is frequently quoted, or rather misquoted, in the article) says the whole thing is BS and has plenty of citations to prove it. He goes on: "But for the infamous NYT story, I'd say it was the worst smear job on McCain I'd ever seen." Undoubtedly, he's right. But if I were McCain I'd be a pretty happy camper if this puerile nonsense is all they could dredge up.

Comments

Comments require registration through TypeKey. Abusive remarks may be deleted. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Roger Simon.

I'll admit, McCain's temper and what seemed to be vulnerability to press flattery were reasons I preferred other Republican candidates to him. But, having seen him handle himself in the extended grilling he got from reporters after the NYT "affair" article and on the plane with the (again) NYT reporter over the possibility of having been offered the VP slot under Kerry, my fears have been allayed.

Besides, maybe it would be a good thing for an American leader to blow his stack with a foreign dictator or two. :)

Karen Johnson gets a long anecdote in this piece where she claims to have been persecuted by John McCain over an incident involving Evan Mecham. Mecham was a ridiculous little man who somehow got elected governor of Arizona and promptly embarrassed the state so badly that the Republicans (his party) cooperated with the Democrats to impeach him.

Johnson herself is a couple baskets shy of a picnic. She's a paleoconservative of the Pat Buchanan ilk with none of Pat's wit or intelligence. She chaired his campaign in 1996, and this year signed on with the Ronulans. She's a big believer in the North American Union nonsense, and that gays are undermining marriage in the USA. She ought to know, since she's on her fifth husband.

I suspect that more than a few members of the MSM are severely criticized by their friends for "wimping out on John McCain." The latter are especially angered by the so-called undue recent attention given to "Barry" Obama. Thus, the MSM "elites" feel compelled to post some sort of story concerning the Republican presidential candidate---even if it doesn't make any sense. They just want the screaming in their ears to cease.

Ah, yes, McCain's fabled temper. No one bothers to ask how he could have survived torture in a POW camp if he was unable to control his temper. But, with Barry's judgment a shambles and Hillary a certified liar, the liberal media has to come up with some counter flaw for McCain. Can't have him elected in a walk without at least trying to cut him down.

Between this and the NYT story on retired military officers as expert consultants with knowledge of the military, tomorrow could well bring a series of stories about dogs biting men and chasing cats.

Perhaps during the first snows next winter they can investigate road-salting preparations!

This is an excess of white noise - I wonder if the next Obama story is about to break, the timing is right.

The story of McCain and David Ifshin (a Vietnam-era protester with whom McCain reconciled) is a must-read on this topic.

Michael Lewis did a very interesting piece on this relationship for This American Life (Act I, starts at 11 minutes in).
http://www.thislife.org/Radio_Episode.aspx?episode=139

Here's a reference to the situation in the print media:
http://www2.nysun.com/article/32880

Recently saw a piece on Eisenhower's very hot temper. Did a google search turned up a 1944 TIME article which mentions "the Eisenhower temper..." (!)

Someone along the way mentioned that President McCain might actually keep some of our adversaries awake at night, having second thoughts ...

I wouldn't mind that kind of a president, given the other offerings out here. And the adversaries out there.

Roger, as usual, is being kind. What if I told you that the conclusion, the gist, the cuttle of the cobutle, the umf that is supposed to impel the curiosity. The stuff of the first five paragraphs of this so call journalistic article is and I quote.

"It is unclear precisely what issue set off McCain that day"
"though he (the presumptive victim of Mac's wrath declined, through a spokesman, to discuss the specifics of the incident."

If that is supposed to pass for the other side... it is unclear?

One of my favorite scenes in "No country for old men" is when the gas station "married into" manager thinks he is just making conversation and he is as though abruptly awaken to the question "you don't know what you are talking about, do you?"

Or when Woody is standing in a movie line and someone in front of him is pontificating about some presumably well known work. Woody brings the author that the guy was berating and the author says something to the effect "that's not what my work is about, you know nothing of my work" and the Woody says if only something like 'if only life was like this?'

The best defense, if any is to be had, is that they are getting lazy. Lazy, Lazy.

Watching the Red Sox yesterday, somehow knowing (yes they can) that they were going to win, it occurred to me that if Hillary is going to beat Obama it will be the way Boston beat Texas yesterday.

Texas walked in the go ahead run in the 8th for a Boston win, after leading 5 to 1 for the entire game. Texas after securing two outs in the 8th 'allowed' (somehow that's not the right word) 5 runs. How did Boston score the 5 runs? (tataaaa.. this is my point) a bloop single here, a walk there, a runner beats the throw here, a stolen base there. (btw - all after two outs) Lets say the outs are Hillary missing Obama ;)

If Obama looses (and it seems unlikely) it will not be a dramatic bases clearing home run by Hillary. something more akin to an slow erosion of Obama's lore.

one last thing.... to paraprase The Grand Canyon (the movie) - All the answers to life's questions can be found in baseball.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0101969/quotes

The invention of the game was divine insperation.
They are going to be playing in about an hour, at 11 in the am!
hush, i took the day off.

"Or when Woody is standing in a movie line and someone in front of him is pontificating about some presumably well known work."

When I saw that some of the worst quotes in that article were from Bob Smith, I knew the story was going to be stuffed with BS.

Smith works with the Ted Sampley MIA-scammers. He's a liar and a conspiracy nutter. I hope all will please keep in mind this one thing: every person associated with Ted Sampley is a con-man and/or a nut.

That the WaPo used Smith and that Johnson woman as sources proves that the editors are either very stupid, or they deliberately produced a deceitful hit piece.

Hillary has temper too and Obama hangs out with bug eyed America haters who definitely have a temper problem.

Your post has clearly had the desired effect of exposing their perfidy. The editors have now amended the article: "An earlier version of this article misspelled the surname of former Arizona governor Evan Mecham (R)." I for one respect their second look at this piece and willingness to rigorously address its errors and shortcomings.

Everyone who would be President in the modern era (since national television) is a really tightly wound Type A. He* will undoubtedly have a temper. The press will ignore it if he is a Democrat, and task him for it if he is a Republican.

Doesn't Bill Clinton have famously red-faced, vein-popping, finger-pointing temper tantrums? I do not remember that any Democrats ever questioned his fitness to lead, based on his bad temper. *Sigh* In this political season, I am bone tired of the double standards and the media slant.

April 20, 2008: The Washington Post in Desperation Mode

Comments

Post a comment

Email This Post