From the WSJ Opinion Archives
Post
Confidential
The Washington Post's Bob Woodward is back in the news, having given testimony
to special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, whose investigation into the Valerie
Plame kerfuffle is nearing the end of its second year. It turns out Woodward
learned Plame's Double Secret Identity from a government source--not Scooter
Libby--before Libby is alleged to have told other reporters about it. This contradicts
Fitzgerald's claim at a press
conference announcing Libby's identity that Libby was "the first official
to disclose this information outside the government to a reporter."
We bring this up not to bore you with more Plame minutiae--hey, we are a compassionate conservative--but because MediaBistro.com has an absolutely hilarious report that quotes extensively from "internal message boards" where Woodward's Post colleagues are either beating up on or defending Woodward. But what interests us isn't the internal bickering over Woodward; it is this post from Jonathan Yardley:
The comment of mine two paragraphs above has been leaked, presumably by someone in the newsroom, to the New York Times. Katharine Seelye called me an hour ago pressing for further comment. I declined, stressing that this is a confidential internal critique written solely for the news staff of TWP and refusing to authorize her to quote from it. She called back half an hour later to say that her editor had told her to go ahead and quote from the comment anyway. I told her I expected her to make plain that this is a confidential internal document and that she is quoting from it over the objections of the person who wrote it. She said she would. We'll see.
I hardly see any point in having critiques and comments if they are to be publicized outside the paper. How can we write candidly when candor merely invites violations of confidentiality? Many readers say they distrust us. Well, now I find myself wondering if we can trust each other.
Seelye did indeed call the post "confidential" and note that "Mr. Yardley objected strenuously to its being made public." But of course journalists quote from confidential internal documents all the time. Why should this be any different?
Well, presumably because Yardley expected that other journalists would afford him professional courtesy on the ground that respecting a news organization's internal confidentiality serves the higher goal of furthering the public's right to know.
The problem is that such a position is untenable in the wake of the Plame kerfuffle, in which many journalistic organizations urged the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate allegations that government officials provided accurate information to reporters. They allowed their partisan desire to incriminate George W. Bush to trump the public's right to know, and thereby made it a lot harder to argue convincingly that journalists deserve any special privileges.
Judy
Miller Aegaeonistes
In another bit of meta-meta-journalism, the New York Times' Katharine Seelye
reports on the Washington Post's Howard Kurtz commenting on CNN about the New
York Times' Judith Miller:
[Kurtz] showed the lengths to which a media reporter who is also a commentator can go to try to avoid sounding opinionated.
"She is a very controversial figure within journalism," he said of Ms. Miller. "On the other hand, she's won a Pulitzer Prize, and she's clearly a very tenacious reporter. On the other hand, you described her as a hero or a heroine. Not to a lot of people, even in the business, because of her background, as she engenders a lot of animosity. On the other hand, she also has gotten a lot of admiration for taking this difficult stand."
Miller might have overestimated Saddam Hussein's weapons stocks, but she sure has a lot of arms.
Murtha
Balks at Own Proposal
Late Friday night the House took a vote on Rep. John Murtha's proposal for an
immediate withdrawal from Iraq. The vote was 403-3 against, with Murtha among
the 403. The only congressmen favoring Murtha's idea were three far-left Democrats:
Cynthia McKinney of Georgia, Jose Serrano of New York and Robert Wexler of Florida.
Six Dems voted "present": Michael Capuano (Mass.), William Clay (Mo.),
Maurice Hinchey (N.Y.), Jim McDermott (Wash.), Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.) and Major
Owens (N.Y.).
Some Republicans have labeled Murtha a "coward," which strikes us as unduly personal. But he does seem to lack the courage of his convictions.
Democratic
War Stories
In the Times of London, anti-Bush hysteric Andrew Sullivan lauds Rep. John Murtha:
All you have to do is look at John Murtha to see what he represents. He's a white-haired, red-faced pro-war Democrat with a record of 37 years of service in the US Marines.
Democratic chairman Howard Dean cited the "37 years" figure in an e-mail to supporters last week too. It's true, in a sense, but misleading. It makes it sound as though Murtha was a career military man. In fact, according to his congressional biography, Murtha was on active duty for six years at most (1952-55 and 1966-67); the rest of the time, including some 16 of his nearly 32 years in the House, he was a reservist.
We don't mean to disparage Murtha's service, but why do the Democrats always seem to exaggerate these things? John Kerry* was a "war hero" for serving 120 days in Vietnam and earning an improbable number of medals. In 2002 pro-Saddam Rep. Jim McDermott claimed that he and then-Rep. David Bonior served in Vietnam. In fact, McDermott served as a naval psychiatrist and Bonior as an Air Force cook--both in California.
Let's honor the service of all veterans--including, by the way, those who wore the uniform of the Texas Air National Guard, and those who criticize John Kerry. But all this phony jingoism in the service of weakness on national security has us nostalgic for the days when the Democrats nominated an honest-to-goodness draft avoider for president.
* The haughty, French-looking blankety-blank who on Friday e-mailed his supporters: "Yesterday, an extraordinary congressman, former Marine Drill Sergeant and decorated Vietnam veteran, spoke out on the war in Iraq. He didn't come to that moment lightly. He spoke his mind and spoke his heart out of love for his country and support for our troops. No sooner had the words left his lips than the vicious assault on his character and patriotism began."
John Kerry**, Marxist
"If there hadn't been a vote, we would never have had inspectors. And if we hadn't voted the way we voted, we would not have been able to have a chance of going to the United Nations and stopping the president, in effect, who already had the votes."--John Kerry, Democratic primary debate, Sept. 9, 2003
"Just remember, my little cabbage, that if there weren't any closets, there wouldn't be any hooks, and if there weren't any hooks, there wouldn't be any fish, and that would suit me fine."--Groucho Marx, "Monkey Business," 1931
** Fop cit.
Better
Red Than Dem
From a Time magazine report on President Bush's visit to Red China:
Beijing's desire to normalize relations with Washington saw it downplay Bush's provocative comments in Japan on Wednesday. Bush had proclaimed Taiwan "free and democratic and prosperous," and implied that the democratic political system in the territory that Beijing considers a renegade province would make a fine model for China.
Such comments might once have set off a diplomatic firestorm, but this time, Beijing is unlikely to make them an issue. The U.S. president's remarks were not printed in Chinese newspapers, and a foreign ministry spokesman admonished that "all countries should communicate based on the principles of fairness and respect, and not interfere with each other's internal affairs."
But China's leaders seem likely to let Bush's comments pass. "We'll pretend not to hear," says Shen. "We're mature enough not to oppose everything he says."
If only America's opposition party were as mature as the Chinese communists.
Spot
the Idiot
Author Kurt Vonnegut "has praised terrorists as 'very brave people' and
used drug culture slang to describe the 'amazing high' suicide bombers must
feel before blowing themselves up," reports the Weekend Australian:
In discussing his views with The Weekend Australian, Vonnegut said it was "sweet and honourable" to die for what you believe in, and rejected the idea that terrorists were motivated by twisted religious beliefs.
"They are dying for their own self-respect," he said. "It's a terrible thing to deprive someone of their self-respect. It's like your culture is nothing, your race is nothing, you're nothing." . . .
Vonnegut suggested suicide bombers must feel an "amazing high." He said: "You would know death is going to be painless, so the anticipation--it must be an amazing high."
The paper describes Vonnegut as a "peace activist" and notes that his "latest comments are likely to make many people wonder if old age has finally caught up with a grand old man of American letters."
Sorry
About That
Here's a classy letter to the editor from yesterday's New York Times:
Re "Yale Law Frets Over Court Choices It Knows Best" (front page, Nov. 13):
You say: "Students these days make jokes at Justice Thomas's expense, said Stephen Townley, a third-year student. 'It's a question about intellectual rigor.' "
I was wondering whether Yale would have embraced Judge Robert H. Bork (had he been confirmed) more warmly than it has embraced Justice Clarence Thomas. After positing that it would have, I wondered why. I did not personally question the "intellectual rigor" of Justice Thomas, nor did I mean to suggest that students frequently make jokes at his expense.
While Yale students sometimes repeat popular saws about Justice Thomas, our attention ought to be focused on his now-considerable body of work. In any event, I owe the judiciary respect, and I should have taken greater care to ensure that I did not propagate rumors that might lower a member of that body in the estimation of your readers.
Stephen Townley
New Haven, Nov. 15, 2005
If a mere law student can apologize, why can't Harry Reid?
If
He Makes Good on This, We May Just Resubscribe
"Time to Leave"--headline, former Enron adviser Paul Krugman column,
New York Times, Nov. 21
Good
to Hear Things Are Back to Normal
"France Braces for Rail Strike"--headline, CNN.com, Nov. 20
Spanish Fascists Imitate Us
"Generalissimo Francisco Franco died in Madrid on Nov. 20, 1975. Thirty years later, he is still dead."--Best of the Web Today, Nov. 18
"Spanish Fascists Mark 30th Anniversary of Franco's Death"--headline, Scotsman, Nov. 21
Life Imitates the Onion (but Who Cares?)
"Apathy Outpacing Lust as Leading U.S. State of Mind"--headline, Onion, Aug. 30, 2000
"Students Apathetic Over Debate: Turnout poor for apathy discussion"--headline, Wildcat (University of Arizona), Nov. 17, 2005
Fog
in Channel; Continent Cut Off
"Rhodes Scholars Named, None From Harvard"--headline, New York Sun,
Nov. 21
World
Ends, Etc., Etc.
"African-Americans, Women in Europe Hit Worst by AIDS: UN"--headline,
Agence France-Presse, Nov. 21
What
Would We Do Without Experts?
"Experts: We're in Serious Financial Trouble"--Argus Leader (Sioux
Falls, S.D.), Nov. 20
'Sometimes
It Feels Like It Took a Million Years for Me to Be Happy'
"Bono Says His Music Will Last 100 Years"--headline, Associated Press,
Nov. 21
Thanks
for the Tip!--XIV
"Health Tip: Talcum Powder Can Be Toxic"--headline, HealthDayNews,
Nov. 21
We're
Having Trouble Reading This One
"Health Tip: Check Your Eye Glasses"--headline, HealthDayNews, Nov. 21
So
May You, I or the Lawyer
"Lawyer: Kevorkian May Die Before '07 Parole"--headline, FoxNews.com,
Nov. 19
Fine
Macropodining
"A competition has been launched in Australia to find a new way of describing
kangaroo meat," the BBC reports:
Organisers want to find a name less offensive to diners sensitive about eating a national symbol. . . .
Hundreds of suggestions for a new name have already been put forward.
They range from the obvious--including Skippy, the name of an old television series that featured a very sensible kangaroo--to others that will probably make the judges wince, such as Yummy and Kanga.
Since the panda pamperers ignored our suggestion, how about Toast?
Your
Punctuation Is Prejudiced!
The News-Journal of West Volusia, Fla., reports on the latest effort to stamp
out hate on campus:
A question mark imposed over a photo of a gay-pride flag prompted Stetson University officials to halt distribution of a student-run magazine.
The students who launched Common Sense, a politically conservative publication, say they're being labeled intolerant when it's the university that's gagging free speech.
Editors at Common Sense decorated the back cover of their inaugural October issue with a photograph of student Ian Wasser's dorm room window, which is draped with the rainbow colored Gay Pride flag.
Superimposed on the flag is an almost transparent question mark, something Wasser, 21, feared could be interpreted as hostile to homosexuals. He complained to university officials, who agreed and asked magazine staffers not to distribute it on campus.
"I was afraid that back cover could be seen as an attack on myself or on the people that flag represents, or the movement, which makes it a hate speech," Wasser said Friday.
Laugh all you like, but if you don't think a question mark is hate speech, you've obviously never encountered a Unitarian Klansman.
(Carol Muller helps compile Best of the Web Today. Thanks to M. Gilbertson, Thomas Brueckner, Ruth Papazian, Brian O'Rourke, Errol Phillips, Joe Seely, Edward Himmelfarb, Storrs Warinner, Greg Reiman, John Kneeland, Ed Lasky, Ethel Fenig, Rochi Ebner, Don Surber, Michael Segal, Larry Pollack, Ross Firestone, Chris Bradley, Eber Weinstein, John Dubas, Michael Dowding, Ken Crosson, Harold Leiendecker, Peter Huntsman, Andrew Robinson, Israel Pickholtz, Fred Hallanger and David Klayman. If you have a tip, write us at opinionjournal@wsj.com, and please include the URL.)
Today on OpinionJournal:
- Review & Outlook: Congress decides not to build the Bridge to Nowhere.
- John Fund: "Blue Dog" Democrats go to obedience school.
- Pete du Pont: The U.N.'s war on Internet freedom isn't over.
