Bush to Press: "You're Assuming That You Represent the Public. I Don't Accept That."

Press Think ^ | April 25, 2004 | Jay Rosen

[onyx]

Mighty big talk for one who couldn't carry a majority of the popular vote. He must be from Texas.




And you must be from the rear end of a donkey.

[cyncooper]

Lord love a duck, This is long and wrong.

Bottom line: The press does indeed play "gotcha" with this president.

And as for the assertion that President Bush should assume responsibility for 9/11?! (The author yearns that President Bush would have assumed a "The buck stops here" attitude), what crapola. The president was absolutely correct to point the blame to Al Qaeda.

And to further illustrate the administration is correct and this author is wrong: If that attack had happened on a democrat president's watch, there is no way in hell the press would seek--not investigate just to check facts--but move heaven and earth to prove as a point of fact before they know the facts--to blame him for an attack on our country.

[cyncooper]

The media has just figured this out??? What did they think Agnew was saying?

They ignore history unless it can be used to bash Republicans. Then they'll distort it.

[patriciaruth]

Mr. Rosen likes to hear himself think too much.

[counterpunch]

It's pretty hard to carry a majority when there is a major 3rd party candidate in the running. Just ask your pal Bill Clinton.

And by the way, Bush's 47.9% of the vote sure beat the hell out of Clinton's 42.7%

Now maybe when the New York Times' circulation reaches 50,456,002 then you may have a point to make.

[cyncooper]

Mighty big talk for one who couldn't carry a majority of the popular vote.

So your position is the press does represent the public and the public overall wanted President Bush to admit he has made a mistake?

LOL

No, I don't think so.

What is your point about "the popular vote"?

Please spell out why you raise this irrelevent issue, and remind me of when Clinton, for example, ever won the majority of the popular vote (hint: never).

[onehipdad]

He carried a majority of the People Who Count. Not the people who count as in one person = one vote, the people "who count" - you know, the ones who work to support families, their churches, the less-fortunate, their schools, their local businesses, the economy in general - the ones who produce.

[TexasTransplant]

He got this TEXANS Vote, Hammerface err whatever you are

[Grampa Dave]

The aroma of a Bush Whacking Troll is over whelming when one does a scan of what you have posted.

You sound like a Troll from DU who has posed as a conservative.

[SierraWasp]

"...and remind me of when Clinton, for example, ever won the majority of the popular vote (hint: never)."

This majorly missed point should be driven mercilessly up the differential of every media personality/celebrity and Demonicrat until they start bleeding outa their eyes, ears, noses and throats, simultaneously!!!

I don't think I've EVER heard ONE conservative radio talk show host EVER shut down these dopey dorks with an answer with such finality as yours!!!

[cyncooper]

Well, may I say your nice words just made my day.

They really did.

[wardaddy]

I agree.

I have seen far less nauseating (and more interesting) FReepers get the permaboot.

[GOPJ]

Good points:

In the "old days," journalists were people who studied things other than journalism. They were intelligent, well rounded, people who knew about the world. Most of them held jobs outside of journalism for at least part of their lives.

By contrast the "modern" journalist is someone who went to college to be a journalist and that's all they know.

Basically, the modern journalist is a poorly educated "elitist."

[Grampa Dave]

To paraphrase the sting one, Sierra Wasp, this is a great statement and needs to be driven home daily with the lunatic libs who mouth the mantra, GW never won a a majority of the votes. Superb!

Remind me of when Clinton, for example, ever won the majority of the popular vote (hint: never).

[Psycho_Bunny]

It's interesting that you should mention that....it dawned on me one day and I have to say, it's jaded every news report I've heard since then.

[ladyinred]

Very well put.

[TheLion]

"As a first step out of this trap, journalists need to ask themselves: how did we become so predictable?"

Duh....prostrating themselves before the Democrat machine in this country....for starters!

[Bob J]

Interesting idea.

[Southack]

"However, it contains one gem of an idea. Yes, both the Internet and bloggers SHOULD have a seat at the table. I hereby suggest that Jim Robinson should apply for the issuance of White House Press Corps credentials for FreeRepublic. The worse they can do is say no, but the White House (which has the call) might just see an opportunity and say yes. JimRob might also suggest that Salon.com ALSO be credentialed at the same time."

Perhaps a combined effort with both liberal and conservative blogs/chat sites could make an effort (rotating press corps member??). A level playing field certainly won't hurt us, and having a foot in the door to ask *our* questions would certainly give the "mainstream" press corps fits.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Mighty big talk for one who couldn't carry a majority of the popular vote. He must be from Texas.

He got a higher percentage of the vote than his predecessor. I don't hear a peep about that.