Outrageous Friday Irony (Actually, Not So Much)

That's too f*cking funny, Michael Scherer.
.
That said, I can't wait for these papers to finally meet their ignominious end, with all the lack of dignity that pompous fruits like Ruth Marcus deserve.

Laugh Michael, thank you so much for this, best post ever.

don't tell this guy: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2009/02/12/ST2009021203554.html

I kinda think most of the problems with the press as of late are problems of over-relying on acess and not doing research. That's why we get so many stories that are basically oppo-dumps that don't illuminate the issues. There's a lot of original and important reporting going on; but a lot of stupid stuff too.

For example: Some folks in Congress said they knew about the bonus issues but they didn't get het up about it all 'til this week. No one bothers to wonder why the legislation we're seeing didn't come forward earlier. No one is also bothering to wonder why we've had three folks step back from being nominated to Treasury or put forth the idea that as we devour Sec. Geithner (and I go back and forth on whether it's fair or not really) what message we're sending to folks who might come forward to staff the place.

TPM has been doing great work on the fraud going on at AIG and the issue of it's counter-party risk; I don't see enough of that in the MSM frankly.

These are the things being distracted by folks chasing down who struck the retroactive bonus seizure stuff from the recovery act (and the valid point that there were concerns a court challenge on retroactive seizures could make the entire stimulus moot).

Which is my long-winded whine about the MSM, lol.

You should laugh, ironies should always be met with laughter.

Think-Can I have the chicken salad and hold the chicken?

Gunny: Where should I hold the chicken?

MS: Good post. Cocktail weenies are being served on the Titanic. (Read that either way...)

Michael Scherer:
.
The news organizations at the event are expected to report its contents...
.
Expected by whom?
.
the White House regularly gives exclusive access
.
So...the guests cover the party?
.
Nothing is expected...
.
Expected by whom?
.
...to be off the record.
.
Does that mean that everything is on the record?
.
It might not be as wrong as it sounds, but it doesn't sound terribly right, either.
.
Thanks for clarifying, Michael Scherer.

You updated while I was posting, Michael Scherer.
.
Thanks for the update.

Did you really say "skin deep?"

What?

You mean this would have surpassed the faux outrage about the special olympics crack?

[...] In our reality, the president will be speaking to the National Newspaper Publishers Association, granting them an exclusive interview. There’s obviously transparency, since the journalists will report on what Obama has to say. [...]