Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt So then as a columnist she isn't free to express her opinion, no matter how wrong headed it may be, if it doesn't jive with the administration's agenda? What's the point of free press then? For the record she was not fired - she has retired from her post as a White House correspondent for Hearst News.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Do you think she retired on her own? I'm not saying she was fired because of the administration. I'm saying she embarassed her employer and they "encouraged" her to make an exit.
Originally Posted By Mr X I think she might have opted to retire rather than get drummed out...it was pretty sudden and if she'd really wanted to fight it I'm guessing she could've hung in there a while longer. Not saying she wasn't already feeling the pressure though, I'm sure she was.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan When someone's 89 and still in the trenches, you have to think the intention was to stay in the game as long as humanly possible. But it's pretty clear that the uproar this incident caused was only going to end one way, and Thomas surely knows that.
Originally Posted By Mr X Yeah, that's probably true. I'm very bummed that she blew it in such an obviously stupid way (she could've gotten away with "tell them to get the hell out of Palestine", if she hadn't got a step WAY further and into "OMG did she actually SAY that!?" territory).
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan It is interesting how just one phrase winds up defining a person, no matter what else they have done. It can drive a person nuts trying to figure out which thing is going to be the final gotcha in a political or political journalism career. Double standards and a lot of subjectivity all over the place and like I said, some people make a career out of saying intentionally hurtful, offensive things. Which isn't to say that he comment wasn't offensive and dumb, of course. Like you said, she could have worded it a little more artfully and no one would have thought much of it. But it's weird how some of these things go viral and others not so much.
Originally Posted By Mr X Yup. It depends on the circumstances and the timing as much as anything else, too (not the fact that what she said was so bad, or not, but the fact that she had to bail because of it while others have weathered far worse). Someone on a left-wing site mentioned something quite disturbing though...that being the simple fact that this Helen Thomas controversy has conveniently quashed the outrage towards the Israeli's deadly assault on that peace envoy...quashed it but good lest anyone else dare say anything remotely "anti-Semitic". If I were a conspiracy minded guy, I might just go "Hmm?" about the timing of it all. But on the other hand, noone held a gun to Helen Thomas and forced her to say anti-Jewish stuff. Perhaps Israel paid her to say it?
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>that being the simple fact that this Helen Thomas controversy has conveniently quashed the outrage towards the Israeli's deadly assault on that peace envoy...quashed it but good<< Indeed.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan In a way, it brings to mind Dan Rather and the issue of Bush's national guard service. Whatever was there in the way of evidence was lost because they were so sure they were right, they ignored expert advice telling them the documents didn't seem right. And his career was basically over, and it'll be the thing he is most remembered for. Overall, it's good that journalists are held to a high standard. People should be held accountable for what they say. But it's strange how, depending on one's politics, the level of outrage over a comment can be inflated or deflated, and careers can be destroyed or built on similar types of statements. Like you said, it's circumstances and timing to a large degree. But it's also how motivated your opposition is, too.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Dan Quayle can tell you: misspell "potato" one time and you are screwed.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan But Sarah Palin's Improbable History lessons only make her more popular. Go figure.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Well, Dan wasn't a bad looking guy but Sarah has him beat in that department.
Originally Posted By xrayvision I heard they're using Palin's hair bun to help absorb the oil spill. I love that woman! Way to use your head Palin...you totally rock my world!
Originally Posted By DAR Well she can go back to her old job. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPDT_LAQxmw&feature=related" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...=related</a> I mean Hollywood is always remaking stuff.
