British Press Foot Stomping Continues

You know whats funny Scherer, is that I am sure there is a British journalist writing pretty much the same things about you and your "petty politics" post. Talk about a lack of self awareness. How ironic.

AAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaagggghhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!
.
teh stupid! it burns!

Michael Scherer:
.
It seems as if you're basing a great deal of your post's premise from what's written in "The London Telegraph".
.
Both your "dislikes" link and your "Iain Martain" ("Martian"? "Martin"?) link are to this same paper.
.
When you say "The British media version", what other sources are there composing "the British media"? Couldn't you have at least linked to 3 or 4 more, in order to demonstrate the ubiquity of this sentiment?
.
Finally, what is the ideological and/or partisan orientation of "The London Telegraph"? As I'm sure you know, the Brits don't have the problem of honestly labeling themselves for public consumption with which our press is strangely afflicted, so if you wouldn't mind helping your readers out with that bit of necessary context, that would be quite useful.
.
Thanks in advance for these important clarifications, Michael Scherer.

What Schere doesn't bother to say, either out of ignorance or the usual disingenuous disinterest in facts, is that the Daily Telegraph is the hard right "respectable" paper in the UK, and so is unlikely to report anything Brown does with even remote impartiality. The quality of its writing is also quite poor, and it's about six inches away from being an upmarket tabloid. Think of the American Spectator, but better educated and slightly less obvious about its allegiance. And no-one calls it the London Telegraph. It's the Daily Telegraph.

FWIW, BBC radio did not report the story this way at all.
.
I haven't seen anyone mention Brown's little dig at Rummy: "There is no old Europe, no new Europe."

So now you know how we feel when you let your own feelings interfere with your editorial judgment.
.
The thrust of your Rush piece was that Obama's efforts to marginalize him and his many fans interfered with his ability to deal with the 'serious' issues of the day. In fact the opposite is true. By forcing Republican officials to choose whether or not to pander to dittoheads, he can peel off the 'unserious' element of his oppostion. This in turn allows him to deal directly with those who DO indeed put the interests of their country first and only disagree on the best path to get there.
.
You've allowed your personal disdain for his advisors color your reporting to the point of making a spectacle.
.
Much like the Brit tabloid reporters your choosing to call out with this post.

Its good to know that MS can get a job The London Telegraph if his whining on TIME's blog doesn't pan out.

So, what you're saying here is that there are doofuses in the British press, also?
Yes, I understand that all the best countries populate their MSMs with doofuses these days.

Very nice echo, young Michael Scherer. You play your role in the chamber very well.

I like when the British press worries that Obama could somehow hold it against them just because they imprisoned his paternal grandfather (whom the Prez didn't know) and probably tortured him.

I'm sure Obama loves the British.

My Irish family - hmmmm, we carry some grudges.

Kentucky has a prime minister?

Guess Obama would know that.

Well, I wouldn't characterize the Times Online article as "foot stomping"; and the Telegraph op-ed really says nothing about Obama at all. It chastises Gordon Brown for "how embarrassing the transatlantic wooing has become."

During Brown's visit, I watched the BBC news and didn't notice any of these silly issues that you seemed obsessed with.

I guess this is something that only "serious" journalists, like yourself are concerned about. Perhaps the Obama people and unnamed Democratic strategists are forcing you to report on this important story.

re: 3. stuartzechman:
- Finally, what is the ideological and/or partisan orientation of "The London Telegraph"?

The Telegraph, aka The Torygraph. Very pro-Conservative.

re: 8. michaelscherer:

Yes, The Times also criticises a Labour Prime Minister. You might want to have a look at the Guardian for a more pro-Labour point of view and pick somewhere in the middle for the reality.

You have to love tabloid journalism. The facts matter very little. It's all spin. The only surprising thing was that no mention was made of who else would be attending the tea besides Obama and Elton John. We breathlessly await further information.

It was an incredibly inadequate gift. It was also thoughtless: Gordon Brown is blind in one eye and has very poor vision in his other eye.
.
That said, I still think the Obama Administration's good work on health care slightly outweighs their poor gift choices.

.
pearlybaker: Its good to know that MS can get a job [at] The London Telegraph if his whining on TIME's blog doesn't pan out.
.
Well, the job market is tight. I'm considering Scherer's recent writings as an open audition for conservazines like The Weekly Standard or The National Review...seeding the ground for a later harvest, so-to-speak...

Sounds like there were things that were lost in translation. The removal of Winston Churchill's bust is a snub to the Neoconservatives, not the British. The Neocons are Anglophiles. There are great things about having England for our mother country, but they tend not to be the things the Neocons like about it.

So, Scherer, perhaps you could use your gigantic journalistic brain and sort this out for us. Because as it is, I have no way of telling which of these accounts is closer to the truth.

I think it is wrong of you to lump the entire British media together here. The Times and the Telegraph are right-of-centre publications whose columnists' pieces tend to be sneerily sarcastic - a fairer, more international outlook would be found in the Guardian or the Independent.

That you have again brought up this non-story, Michael, exposes more your distaste for Britain than it does Britain's distaste for America.

I get it now. Sludge has this story - so does Politico - MS is just part of the noise machine pipeline.

The box of dvd's was a very poor choice for a gift to a head of state. I hope they weren't marked "Previously Viewed" and had a Blockbuster sticker on them. Obama should have given him something Reagan left behind. Like Nancy.

Forward this to your British press friends, Michael.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040223/lind

Then they'll "get" Obama's removal of Churchill's bust.

Scherer has moved on, from the opposite of journalism to the opposite of meta-journalism. We can look forward to his outright disappearance in a puff of illogic and fatuousness.