Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Explain to me again why they are called “reporters”?

    Explain to me again why they are called “reporters”?

    When Neil Munro shouted out a question to Obama yesterday as Obama was reading a statement in the Rose Garden about his unilateral thumbing of Congress and the American people in the eye, a firestorm of condemnation erupted among media-types on both the left and right.

    Forget for the moment that this is not exactly new, and the press treated Ronald Reagan with much more disrespect (h/t a reader).  That’s history, and the last thing we need right now in this country is a sense of historical perspective.

    I agree that the President should be allowed to finish reading statements without being interrupted, even when thumbing us in the eye.  After all, it’s not like he works for us.

    We must respect the Office of the Thumber in the Eye in Chief.

    What I don’t understand is why reporters show up at statement readings where they can’t ask questions.

    Exactly why were the reporters there?

    Certainly not to take video — television gave us a better recording.

    And certainly not to ask questions.  That’s why the President stands there, reads a statement, and walks away.  It’s not a press conference.

    And certainly not to report.  What exactly would these reporters be reporting?

    That the President read a statement, the text of which was released by the White House Press Office? Duh, even bloggers munching Cheetos in the basement could figure that out.

    At least at the State of the Union address part of the story is the crowd reaction.  Here, the point of the criticism of Munro is that there should have been no crowd reaction.

    It ain’t rocket science to report the following:

    President Obama, in a statement he read out loud today in the Rose Garden, stated that he was ….

    That’s not reporting, it’s transcribing.  No, actually, it’s not even transcribing.

    I don’t know what it is, but I do know you don’t need a Masters Degree in Journalism, or two years of an unpaid internship, whichever comes first, to do it.

    Did the Washington press corps ever hear the phrase, “I’m not a potted plant”?

    Neil Munro apparently did.  Which means he has no business being a reporter in the age of Obama.

    Update:  Almost forgot this post, “I’m not a potted plant. I’m here as the blogger. That’s my job.”


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    […] Conservative No comments yetOn Friday during President Obama’s announcement that he was thumbing Congress and the American people in the eye, Neil Munro from The Daily Caller asked the president a question! Munro’s question was […]

    theAmericanist | June 17, 2012 at 5:11 pm

    LOL — you guys (including the professor) need to get out more. Let’s take ’em one at a time:

    1) What reporters do. You guys obviously don’t know, and are unwilling to learn. A reporter REPORTS the news — he does not inject himself INTO the news, and certainly doesn’t take it over.

    2) That’s what Munro did — he interrupted the President while he was making a policy speech. Twice.

    3) As another example of what reporters do — you report the facts. The fact is, Munro heckled the President. It doesn’t help you guys understand the world to contradict yourselves that on the one hand, Munro didn’t heckle the President, he was just.,, yeah, it was a mistimed question, that’s it! and then say that Obama doesn’t deserve any respect, anyway. That marks you as delusional (and is the sorta thing that officers of the court used to be taught to avoid, professor).

    4) I know a bit about the Iran-Contra hearings. It is true that North “speaking for himself” made an excellent image, standing there in his Marine uniform, shot only from below or as the one lone Marine staring back at his inquisitors. You guys obviously can’t tell image from issues.

    5) The ISSUE in the Iran-Contra hearings was exactly as I stated it: North had no legal authority for hocking taxpayer property. So either he flat-out broke the law (as he did, in fact), OR he could claim that he was at least partially covered by Reagan’s authorization.

    6) See, this is where real reporting comes into play — at least, if you know what it IS. One line of questioning that Sullivan kept throwing himself in front of, was whether Reagan authorized North to hock the taxpayer’s property to fix up his own house: which North did.

    7) THAT was the origin of “not a potted plant”.

    theAmericanist | June 17, 2012 at 7:55 pm

    LOL — dog, you’d be better off knowing when you’ve been schooled.


    […] Explain to me again why they are called “reporters”?  […]

    creeper | June 18, 2012 at 1:48 pm

    “Why are they called ‘reporters’?”

    Easy. Because like good little soldiers they report for duty every time Barry-O summons them.

    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend