Thursday, February 22, 2007
Legendary political journalist Helen Thomas may get booted from her seat
So here's the deal. Helen Thomas is an 86-year-old woman who has covered politics for several news outlets over an impressive span of 64 years. She is well-respected by the media, politicians and the American public, often the one asking the more hard-hitting questions at White House press meetings.
Even in her old age she is often the one making those cringe-worthy questions, such as this:
"I'd like to ask you, Mr. President, your decision to invade Iraq has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans and Iraqis, wounds of Americans and Iraqis for a lifetime. Every reason given, publicly at least, has turned out not to be true. My question is: Why did you really want to go to war? From the moment you stepped into the White House, from your Cabinet -- your Cabinet officers, intelligence people, and so forth -- what was your real reason? You have said it wasn't oil -- quest for oil, it hasn't been Israel, or anything else. What was it?"
In usual form, Bush sidestepped the question with the usual Afghanistan/al Qaeda/Taliban rhetoric, not saying a thing about the troops, Iraqis or Iraq itself.
Thomas has also called Bush "the worst president in American history."
Well now Bush is giving her a kick in the pants for being an awesome journalist. The most notable press corps member is getting booted from her front-and-center seat that she's had for 46 years and is being pushed to the second row to make way for another media outlet. And which news outlet does the Bush Administration want in her place? No surprise here, it's Fox News (otherwise known as the Propaganda Channel.)
Here's part of the report from Politico.com:
Every theater-style seat in the White House briefing room, now closed for renovation, had a brass plaque inscribed with the name of a news organization. Only one, in the middle of the front row, had a name: “HELEN THOMAS,” it said. The unique assigned seat between the chairs for CBS News and ABC News was reserved for the legendary United Press International correspondent who is now a columnist for Hearst Newspapers.
The press corps is scheduled to move from temporary facilities back into the spiffed-up, rewired briefing room in May or June. Thomas, who has been questioning presidents and press secretaries for 46 years, plans to be there. But her front-row seat won’t be. Plans call for her to be moved to the second row to make room for a cable news channel – a sign of Washington’s changing pecking order, and of the new ways that Americans get their news.
“I didn’t think I had a monopoly on that seat,” Thomas, 86, said in a telephone interview. “Since my peers have decided that I don’t belong there, I’ll bow to their – I’ll drink the – What did Socrates drink?”
Hemlock?
“I’ll drink it,” she said. “You have to submit to the will of the people, and apparently this is the will of my peers. It’s OK with me. I’ve had a good run in the front seat.”
Thomas has been at the front of the class ever since scribes just pulled their chairs up around the press secretary. Now, the assigned seats are coveted real estate – both as a sign of status and because the closer you sit to the front, the better your chance of getting called on – whether the person giving the briefing is Tony Snow or the president himself.
--------
This may not seem like a big deal to some, but it is really a show of disrespect to Thomas, one of the pioneers of journalism, particularly for females in the field.
# posted by Tyler Stewart @ 6:18 PM 
Comments:
<< Home
Hello Tyler,
I guess I sensed this question coming because I logged on with an answer in mind without knowing the question.
O.K. here's an exclusive scoop. First, I will say that "Legendary Helen Thomas's" seat is being swapped because she has indicated a severe case of amnesia. All faithful hearts of democracy know the war in Iraq evolved from 13 years of flagrant violation of UN resolutions by a labeled tyrant, multiple deadly attacks by terrorist factions against U.S. interest, and last but not least a direct assault on America's soil on September 11, 2001. With that said, Journalist Thomas is lucky to be even maintaining a seat in the auditorium for press conferences.
Second of all, in a nutshell, Journalist Thomas is out of her place. Just appease me for a moment and take this trip. "Prince Harry to be deployed to Iraq. On Wednesday, Prime Minister Tony Blair announced that Britain would be reducing its commitment in Iraq, withdrawing 1,600 soldiers in the next few months."
Now, I'm not going to even try to burst this hornets nest, but I would assume that Iraq is about to become one of the most peaceable places in the world.
My thought is, "The last thing anyone wants is for the Queen to make a personal appearance herself in Iraq." That is the issue which troubled Journalist Thomas. She asked questions fitting for a Queen, not a renowned journalist.
For instance, years ago I watched a television show that themed a mob desiring to raid a jail, take possession of a man accused of killing another man. Basically, the only two people defending the accused man were a lawyer who had his hands full. The other person was a woman whom no one dared to challenge. The accused man was found innocent after it was determined the man was killed by his brother.
That one woman made the big difference in the midst of all of turmoil and the other women present.
You see; if the Queen made a visit or comment, she would likely be supported by the senior Mrs. Bush as well as the junior Mrs. Bush. I do believe this combination would activate a situation where the manure has hit the fan regardless of the excellent job President Bush has demonstrated as Commander-in-Chief.
Thomas
I guess I sensed this question coming because I logged on with an answer in mind without knowing the question.
O.K. here's an exclusive scoop. First, I will say that "Legendary Helen Thomas's" seat is being swapped because she has indicated a severe case of amnesia. All faithful hearts of democracy know the war in Iraq evolved from 13 years of flagrant violation of UN resolutions by a labeled tyrant, multiple deadly attacks by terrorist factions against U.S. interest, and last but not least a direct assault on America's soil on September 11, 2001. With that said, Journalist Thomas is lucky to be even maintaining a seat in the auditorium for press conferences.
Second of all, in a nutshell, Journalist Thomas is out of her place. Just appease me for a moment and take this trip. "Prince Harry to be deployed to Iraq. On Wednesday, Prime Minister Tony Blair announced that Britain would be reducing its commitment in Iraq, withdrawing 1,600 soldiers in the next few months."
Now, I'm not going to even try to burst this hornets nest, but I would assume that Iraq is about to become one of the most peaceable places in the world.
My thought is, "The last thing anyone wants is for the Queen to make a personal appearance herself in Iraq." That is the issue which troubled Journalist Thomas. She asked questions fitting for a Queen, not a renowned journalist.
For instance, years ago I watched a television show that themed a mob desiring to raid a jail, take possession of a man accused of killing another man. Basically, the only two people defending the accused man were a lawyer who had his hands full. The other person was a woman whom no one dared to challenge. The accused man was found innocent after it was determined the man was killed by his brother.
That one woman made the big difference in the midst of all of turmoil and the other women present.
You see; if the Queen made a visit or comment, she would likely be supported by the senior Mrs. Bush as well as the junior Mrs. Bush. I do believe this combination would activate a situation where the manure has hit the fan regardless of the excellent job President Bush has demonstrated as Commander-in-Chief.
Thomas
Thomas,
I respect your opinion. I also respect Helen Thomas's. You agree with the war in Iraq, she doesn't. Both of you are entitled to those opinions and shouldn't suffer in any way from having them.
Which gets me to my point. She has done so much good in her career, breaking boundaries and setting standards, and now because our president is uncomfortable with her trying to hold him accountable, he is copping out while simultaneously showing intense disrespect for Helen Thomas.
Also, Helen Thomas represents a majority of the American people; conservatives, liberals and everyone in between.
More than 65 percent of Americans disagree with the war in Iraq. Americans are seeking answers. She's one of the only ones asking the questions.
CNN and Fox News don't ask hard-hitting questions. They are interested only in ratings and advertising dollars. Helen Thomas is interested in uncovering the truth.
That's the injustice here. I don't care what her political philosophy is. She has been a dedicated servant to the people for 64 years, and she deserves respect.
I respect your opinion. I also respect Helen Thomas's. You agree with the war in Iraq, she doesn't. Both of you are entitled to those opinions and shouldn't suffer in any way from having them.
Which gets me to my point. She has done so much good in her career, breaking boundaries and setting standards, and now because our president is uncomfortable with her trying to hold him accountable, he is copping out while simultaneously showing intense disrespect for Helen Thomas.
Also, Helen Thomas represents a majority of the American people; conservatives, liberals and everyone in between.
More than 65 percent of Americans disagree with the war in Iraq. Americans are seeking answers. She's one of the only ones asking the questions.
CNN and Fox News don't ask hard-hitting questions. They are interested only in ratings and advertising dollars. Helen Thomas is interested in uncovering the truth.
That's the injustice here. I don't care what her political philosophy is. She has been a dedicated servant to the people for 64 years, and she deserves respect.
Hello Tyler,
With assurance, the principle of respect carries a lot of weight. For that reason, I also respect Helen Thomas's accomplishments as a Journalist, you as a fellow classmate, aspiring journalist and U.S. citizen, and President Bush as the leader of the GREAT United States of America.
Now, I'm going to walk a tight rope here due to a very small element of uncertainty, but if my very limited knowledge of the U.S. Constitution is correct; it isn't Helen Thomas's responsibility to hold President Bush accountable for anything because she isn't in his chain-of-command. I may be wrong about my next statement, but something to think about is who President Bush’s direct supervisor is. If I'm thinking correctly, President Bush's oath of office makes him accountable only to God toward the Presidential decisions he make.
Of course, Congress which is made up of the House of Representative and the Senate have their responsibility to balance President Bush's powers to ensure that he doesn't over step his boundaries. If President Bush has overstepped his boundaries as Commander-in-chief, the previously mentioned governmental bodies need to take appropriate actions to implement articles of impeachment to remove President Bush from office.
Otherwise, those governmental bodies, Helen Thomas, and the American people whom are giving President Bush an unfavorable rating needs to leave him alone and allow him to do the job that he was elected to perform.
Yes, President Bush was elected to office by the American people twice. So, if anyone has erred and made any mistakes, it's the American people whom elected President Bush to office that should be receiving unfavorable ratings. See, once in office to perform duties as the President, the President is privileged to intelligence information that no other citizen is privileged to. Basically, this boils down to knowing one's job description, policies and procedures.
Try this on for size, how do you think Helen Thomas, or any other American citizen would feel if President Bush attempted to tell them how to do the job that they are paid for doing.
None of us know everything, that's why we have to depend on each other to survive in this world of uncertainty. With that said, all of us can probably relax and rests assure that President Bush isn't disrespecting Helen Thomas and the media that politicians so much depend on.
Who knows; after the news conference in question here, Helen Thomas and President Bush probably went out to lunch for the best steak dinner imaginable. Furthermore, if President Bush was disrespecting Helen Thomas, he would likely have to answer to his wife, mother, and father.
Yes, he's the President for approximately two more years, but he's their husband and son for the rest of all of their lives.
For instance, during the funeral ceremony for Coretta Scott King, a gentlemen directed a comment toward President Bush for which President Bush wasn't in a position to reply to due to respect and courtesies. Nevertheless, President Bush's father was in position to make a counter reply with courtesy and respect remaining in tact in a very effective manner.
Thomas
With assurance, the principle of respect carries a lot of weight. For that reason, I also respect Helen Thomas's accomplishments as a Journalist, you as a fellow classmate, aspiring journalist and U.S. citizen, and President Bush as the leader of the GREAT United States of America.
Now, I'm going to walk a tight rope here due to a very small element of uncertainty, but if my very limited knowledge of the U.S. Constitution is correct; it isn't Helen Thomas's responsibility to hold President Bush accountable for anything because she isn't in his chain-of-command. I may be wrong about my next statement, but something to think about is who President Bush’s direct supervisor is. If I'm thinking correctly, President Bush's oath of office makes him accountable only to God toward the Presidential decisions he make.
Of course, Congress which is made up of the House of Representative and the Senate have their responsibility to balance President Bush's powers to ensure that he doesn't over step his boundaries. If President Bush has overstepped his boundaries as Commander-in-chief, the previously mentioned governmental bodies need to take appropriate actions to implement articles of impeachment to remove President Bush from office.
Otherwise, those governmental bodies, Helen Thomas, and the American people whom are giving President Bush an unfavorable rating needs to leave him alone and allow him to do the job that he was elected to perform.
Yes, President Bush was elected to office by the American people twice. So, if anyone has erred and made any mistakes, it's the American people whom elected President Bush to office that should be receiving unfavorable ratings. See, once in office to perform duties as the President, the President is privileged to intelligence information that no other citizen is privileged to. Basically, this boils down to knowing one's job description, policies and procedures.
Try this on for size, how do you think Helen Thomas, or any other American citizen would feel if President Bush attempted to tell them how to do the job that they are paid for doing.
None of us know everything, that's why we have to depend on each other to survive in this world of uncertainty. With that said, all of us can probably relax and rests assure that President Bush isn't disrespecting Helen Thomas and the media that politicians so much depend on.
Who knows; after the news conference in question here, Helen Thomas and President Bush probably went out to lunch for the best steak dinner imaginable. Furthermore, if President Bush was disrespecting Helen Thomas, he would likely have to answer to his wife, mother, and father.
Yes, he's the President for approximately two more years, but he's their husband and son for the rest of all of their lives.
For instance, during the funeral ceremony for Coretta Scott King, a gentlemen directed a comment toward President Bush for which President Bush wasn't in a position to reply to due to respect and courtesies. Nevertheless, President Bush's father was in position to make a counter reply with courtesy and respect remaining in tact in a very effective manner.
Thomas
In actuality, and according to the Constitution, which I know quite a bit about, the American people, as well as the judicial and legislative branches of the federal government, are the President's supervisors.
As a fellow Christian, I understand why you see the importance of God, theologically, being Bush's "supervisor" so to speak. But we aren't a theocracy. We're a democracy, which literally means it's a government for the people and by the people.
Also, keep in mind that Bush's perception of God may be completely different from yours and mine. These are some dangerous grounds. He may think God tells him to blow up Jerusalem one day (highly unlikely, but bear with me). Would you stand by that? I know I wouldn't.
Helen Thomas is by no means out of place. As journalists, our role is to inform people and hold public officials accountable for their actions. We're written into the Constitution for a reason.
The Consitution explicitly and undebatebly states that the government is ruled by the people. Not God. He is part of his followers' lives, not part of our government. Also remember these words of Christ:
"Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s" Matt. 22-21. He is implying that these entities are seperate.
Even as a Christian, I prefer my religion to not be a part of the inner workings ad foundation of our government. Not because I prefer our counrty over god, but because it goes against our founding fathers' visions and is open to so much abuse. Not everyone is as wholesome as they may seem.
As a fellow Christian, I understand why you see the importance of God, theologically, being Bush's "supervisor" so to speak. But we aren't a theocracy. We're a democracy, which literally means it's a government for the people and by the people.
Also, keep in mind that Bush's perception of God may be completely different from yours and mine. These are some dangerous grounds. He may think God tells him to blow up Jerusalem one day (highly unlikely, but bear with me). Would you stand by that? I know I wouldn't.
Helen Thomas is by no means out of place. As journalists, our role is to inform people and hold public officials accountable for their actions. We're written into the Constitution for a reason.
The Consitution explicitly and undebatebly states that the government is ruled by the people. Not God. He is part of his followers' lives, not part of our government. Also remember these words of Christ:
"Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s" Matt. 22-21. He is implying that these entities are seperate.
Even as a Christian, I prefer my religion to not be a part of the inner workings ad foundation of our government. Not because I prefer our counrty over god, but because it goes against our founding fathers' visions and is open to so much abuse. Not everyone is as wholesome as they may seem.
Hello Tyler,
You make some very good points. Nevertheless, according to dissatisfied citizens, over the last few years, there still appears to be a problem with President Bush's job performance. Everyone is still disapproving of his job performance and decision making as Commander-in-Chief.
Considering the severity, of this problem with President Bush, the American people, as well as the judicial and legislative branches of the federal government, are proving themselves to be ineffective supervisors by allowing one little man to reap so much havoc that has cost the lives of so many people for so long of a period of time.
What does Helen Thomas, the journalist, the American people, and the judicial and legislative branches of the federal government plan on doing as supervisors to rectify the problem, and hold President Bush accountable for his actions other than bad mouthing his performance and allowing him to do what he pleases when he pleases how he pleases?
Thomas
You make some very good points. Nevertheless, according to dissatisfied citizens, over the last few years, there still appears to be a problem with President Bush's job performance. Everyone is still disapproving of his job performance and decision making as Commander-in-Chief.
Considering the severity, of this problem with President Bush, the American people, as well as the judicial and legislative branches of the federal government, are proving themselves to be ineffective supervisors by allowing one little man to reap so much havoc that has cost the lives of so many people for so long of a period of time.
What does Helen Thomas, the journalist, the American people, and the judicial and legislative branches of the federal government plan on doing as supervisors to rectify the problem, and hold President Bush accountable for his actions other than bad mouthing his performance and allowing him to do what he pleases when he pleases how he pleases?
Thomas
Iraq: no link to al-Qaeda. Iraq: no involvement in the Sept. 11 attacks. Iraq: a hotbed of religious and political unrest for as long as has been recorded in history. Iraq: a nation that basically equals a giant frying pan American just keeps tossing troop flavoring into. Unfortunately, the dish isn't getting any tastier. Furthermore, 13 years of avoiding the U.N. is not that much, especially when the U.N. is basically the United States with funny accents. If you don't agree with the U.S., you pretty much automatically don't agree with the U.N., so of course you're going to avoid its regulation. Think about how Iraqis feel about the U.N. instead of just how you think Iraqis SHOULD feel about the U.N.
That aside, journalists are supposed to hold those in power accountable. Otherwise, why even report on anything? This just in: everything is perfect because Bush said so. Thanks, Hannity, good to know.
We as Americans are supposed to question the president. He's not God. He's not a tyrant, and Helen Thomas knew that. She questioned his actions and got no response. She pushed harder, and it got her burned. That's the fault of a lousy, no-account president who will not take the blame for anything he screws up. I bet he blames the pretzel on his dog.
Post a Comment
That aside, journalists are supposed to hold those in power accountable. Otherwise, why even report on anything? This just in: everything is perfect because Bush said so. Thanks, Hannity, good to know.
We as Americans are supposed to question the president. He's not God. He's not a tyrant, and Helen Thomas knew that. She questioned his actions and got no response. She pushed harder, and it got her burned. That's the fault of a lousy, no-account president who will not take the blame for anything he screws up. I bet he blames the pretzel on his dog.
# posted by 
: 3:59 PM
: 3:59 PM << Home
