In today's Washington Post, Dana Milbank strikes a blow for objective journalism in his "Taking One for the Team, When He Could Remember."
Kyle Sampson, former aide to Attorney General Gonzales, testified Thursday before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Cutting to what genuinely matters, Milbank writes: "Sampson was indeed a bit pudgy and jowly, and he spoke in a nerdy voice that sounded strange coming from a man whose combative e-mails had been released by the Justice Department in recent weeks."
This isn't the first time Milbank felt the urge to call a Republican a nerd. He said U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. was one when Alito was nominated. As I pointed out at the time, it's not likely Milbank himself would be confused for James Bond.
Milbank also highlighted how many times Mr. Sampson's memory failed him during the seven hours of testimony: "He used the phrase 'I don't remember' a memorable 122 times."
That may be memorable, but it's hardly a Washington record. Former President Bill Clinton, in his Paula Jones' deposition, couldn't remember 267 times. Of course, Clinton didn't say "I don't remember" that many times, only 71. He offered some variety with not recalling, not recollecting, not having any memory, not having direct knowledge and not having any idea. Clinton, who in high school was a drum major and won first chair in the state band's saxophone section, could never be accused of nerdiness.
Not by Dana Milbank, anyway. That characterization seems reserved for Republicans.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
As I've said before, the mo
March 30, 2007 - 10:44 ET by DyneAs I've said before, the moment you resort to personal attacks, name-calling, or foul language is the moment you lose the debate and your credibility.
The choice between being among most of the Republicans or Democrats within the government today is a choice on what you'd rather sell your soul for: money or power.
the moment you resort to pe
March 30, 2007 - 22:04 ET by motherbeltthe moment you resort to personal attacks, name-calling, or foul
language is the moment you lose the debate and your credibility.---dyne
And the first line of attack for those oh-so-sensitive and caring liberals, is always the personal. Just like they say skin tone or ethnicity doesn't matter, but they always describe someone by that attribute first.
Colored people
March 31, 2007 - 12:10 ET by Michael M. BatesJust like they say skin tone or ethnicity doesn't matter, but they always describe someone by that attribute first.
Which reminds me: Why is "colored people" not acceptable (unless you're referring to the NAACP) while "people of color" is OK? Who decides these things anyway? Jesse Jackson?
Well, one thing dana knows al
March 30, 2007 - 11:06 ET by bassndudeWell, one thing dana knows alot a bout is nerdy. The guy lives with a mirror.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Mirror, mirror
March 30, 2007 - 11:32 ET by Michael M. BatesThe guy lives with a mirror.
Lucky him.
Faulty memory is required in
March 30, 2007 - 11:32 ET by KC MulvilleFaulty memory is required in the post-Libby world. What's sad is that very soon, no one will say anything definitive, on advice of counsel. It must be obvious that if anything you say can be used against you, say nothing.
The irony is that congressional hearings depend on testimony. You need witnesses to talk. Congress could always prosecute witnesses for deliberate lying, but prosecuting harmless misstatements discouraged testimony. After all, we’re human, and no one had an interest in punishing simple human fallibility. Now, after Libby, your opponents will prosecute for misstatements of any kind, even if no crime was involved. All it takes is for one statement to contradict another. There is no concession for harmless mistakes.
Until that climate changes, then, congressional hearings will be a parade of witnesses who will say nothing, and will cover themselves legally by claiming poor memory. You can’t prosecute a poor memory, and you can’t prove it legally. (That’s if Republicans are smart. If they blab away anyway, they deserve prison for the crime of stupidity.)
Democrats in Congress are excited now, because they’re looking forward to pontificating against witnesses. But every action provokes a reaction, and Republicans will simply stop testifying freely. Democrats will have nothing to pontificate against. That won’t stop the Democrats from their blowhard speeches, however. That’s their Achilles heel. The public will see Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer shrieking bloody murder over nothing at all, and will conclude that Democrats shriek for shrieking’s sake.
Once they convicted Libby, this cycle became inevitable.
Ruff memory
March 30, 2007 - 11:49 ET by Michael M. BatesBob Woodward wrote in a 1977 Washington Post story:
''If called to testify someday at such an inquiry, Ruff (Charles, who later was Clinton's impeachment shyster) said he knows just what to do, just what to do, quote, 'I'd say, gee, I just don't remember what happened back then, and they won't be able to indict me for perjury,' and that 'maybe that's the principal thing that I've learned in 4 years. I just intend to rely on that failure of memory.' ''
New term for it now
March 30, 2007 - 11:50 ET by tumbler_2007Yes, KC; thanks for a great post. The way we should now see these watersheds is just as you say. They now call it "Borking" when Democrats destroy outstanding personages like Robert Bork; and I see Scooter Libby as a term for sandbagging hapless Republicans by a virtually stunted Congress in Democrat majority control. They'll be saying: "Democrats plan to SCOOTER that guy; beware!" It'll be "Take the 5th, or get yourself Scootered."
Hey, tumbler, if Pat Riley co
March 30, 2007 - 13:16 ET by KC MulvilleHey, tumbler, if Pat Riley could get the term "three-peat" copyrighted, you should do the same for "scootering." I mean, after all, you have the evidence that you invented it right here. Nice one!
be big about it
March 30, 2007 - 13:32 ET by tumbler_2007Thanks, KC,
But I must be big about it. We'll give NewsBusters the credit. If Tumbler ever gets subpeonaed to a congressional food-fight, must take the 5th and say NewsBusters warned me about Scootering Democrat schmucks.
Congress Seeks Source Of Pervasive Ailment
March 30, 2007 - 11:48 ET by Daniel DiRitoThe daunting ailment that has plagued those in the service of the White House continued to take its toll on the President's minions. Today, members of a congressional investigative committee continued their efforts to find the source of the ailment as it seems to be highly contagious. The most recent strains seem to be far more pervasive yet determining its origin continues to remain elusive. Senator Chuck Schumer closed his questioning by offering the hypothesis that the ailment was a virulent form of lying.
Many within the media stepped in to immediately offer the public a layman's interpretation of the symptoms as well as analysis of the ongoing implications if a cure for the ailment could not be administered soon. The White House continued to downplay the seriousness of the ailment as it sought to allay the growing fears within the American public that the disease might soon decimate the bulk of their elected officials. A growing number of pundits continued to suggest that the President is in denial as to the severity of the ailment and what it might do to the Republican Party.
See a tongue-in-cheek visual spoofing an upcoming episode of Saturday Night Live featuring a guest appearance by "The President's Prevaricators"...here:
http://www.thoughttheater.com/2007/03/the_presidents_prevaricators.php
Speaking of spoofs, Dan...
March 30, 2007 - 12:02 ET by RJSpeaking of spoofs, Dan, that pedantic spiel was a pretty good spoof of intelligent analysis.
Spoofin'
March 30, 2007 - 12:06 ET by Michael M. BatesSpeaking of spoofs, Dan, that pedantic spiel was a pretty good spoof of an intelligent analysis.
Where would we be without cut and paste?
Aww..comeon RJ...ya gotta lov
March 30, 2007 - 12:46 ET by bassndudeAww..comeon RJ...ya gotta love this stuff. These guys just keep me laughing. Remember..this is the best they've got...
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Daniel Dorito thinks his writing is "all grown up"
March 30, 2007 - 12:55 ET by RJI was laughing at his concept of intelligent writing, Bass. It reminded me of a little girl over-dressing in Mommy's clothes, applying garish lipstick, and thinking she's "all grown up." ;^>
President's Prevaricators
March 30, 2007 - 12:04 ET by Michael M. BatesI didn't look at the link you provided. Does it include a lackey who claimed he lied to himself in his diary?
better days are coming
March 30, 2007 - 12:08 ET by tumbler_2007Dear Daniel,
We'll have better days after the upcoming presidential election. The Democrats' old crying towels will be once more deployed. The leftist pundit media are all sure to ask themselves, "What went wrong? Dukakis, then again: Al Gore, then John Kerry. Now Hillary Rodhorns Clinton ! All LOSERS !!! This never-ending defeat ! WHY ???
Take a guess why, Daniel. Because it isn't enough to lie and to pander. Image isn't enough, glib words won't help them. The Democrat Party has declined, you cannot revive a rotten cadaver.
Lies and pandering
March 30, 2007 - 12:41 ET by Michael M. BatesBecause it isn't enough to lie and to pander.
Unfortunately, in some states it is.
Another hit and run, cut and
March 30, 2007 - 12:34 ET by Airforce_5_OAnother hit and run, cut and paste liberal strikes again.
Who can argue with Chuck &q
March 30, 2007 - 12:46 ET by MightyMouthWho can argue with Chuck "the Smuck" Schumer about virulent forms of lying? It seems every single democrate did that in the last election.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Schumer's "friends"
March 30, 2007 - 12:51 ET by Michael M. BatesIn a recent Newsweek, Schumer writes of a couple of acquaintances:
"Biking through New York's boroughs in 2005, I thought about some old
friends, Joe and Eileen Bailey. Though they are imaginary, I frequently
talk to them. To me, they represent the hardworking and often-ignored
families who are not tuned in to special-interest newsletters or
editorial pages, but want a little something more from their government
and their leaders."
Talking to imaginary friends again, heh? I wonder if any Democrats have
imaginary friends who DON'T want a little something more from their
government.
Daniel Dorito is a troll. He
March 30, 2007 - 12:45 ET by mastersofdeceitDaniel Dorito is a troll. He spams the NB site with his silly No "thought theater" website. When he pops up you can ignore it.
General Patton had a nerdy vo
March 30, 2007 - 13:09 ET by Amy RidenourGeneral Patton had a nerdy voice. Dana Milbank should be so lucky.
So he's not chubby and jowly
March 30, 2007 - 13:16 ET by waka wakaSo he's not chubby and jowly and doesn't speak with a nerdy voice? Did you watch the hearing?
Reality has a well known liberal bias.
Reality and a liberal bias
March 30, 2007 - 14:20 ET by Michael M. BatesSo he's not chubby and jowly and doesn't speak with a nerdy voice? Did you watch the hearing?
How often in the Washington Post are liberals characterized in such unflattering terms?
M Bates...They (all the msm)
March 30, 2007 - 19:28 ET by bigtimerM Bates...
They (all the msm) rarely if ever watch the hearings..(I did)
...let alone Mr. Somebody plopped a head on a pair of wimpy shoulders of a little man, littler brain Dana Milquetoast...
I saw this earlier today and did not get to get to it....then I thought forget about it...he and his little miniature opinions do not matter.
I personally think he is a freak of nature....
So there.
I detest the orange out-fitted nit-wit.
Yep, but it's the classical
March 30, 2007 - 14:33 ET by sarcasmoYep, but it's the classical variety rather than the modern NewSpeak favored by almost everyone, from lefties like you to this rightwing site. (And this is new, Wiki editors are now apparently annoyed at their tiny libertarian-editor faction over this article. Example for conservatives? Decide for yourselves.)
JMR
Why didn't Newsbusters incl
March 30, 2007 - 15:45 ET by John in CAWhy didn't Newsbusters include the usual nerdy picture of Dana Milbank?
Give a Democrat Party free America a chance!
John Wayne
March 30, 2007 - 17:10 ET by Michael M. BatesWhy didn't Newsbusters include the usual nerdy picture of Dana Milbank
Nerdy? I thought Dana was doing his John Wayne impression in that pic.
I swear, until that picture
March 30, 2007 - 19:16 ET by John in CAI swear, until that picture of him showed up last year on Newsbusters, I had always thought Dana was a girl.
Give a Democrat Party free America a chance!