In defense of Capitol Hill Blue

:rant:

Normally I can't stand inaccurate reporting, media laziness or the speculation that often passes for journalism today. It's a waste of time that could be spent arming myself with facts to use in honest discussions with Republicans whom I respect, or to throw in the face of some inane right-wing zealot who couldn't find his ass with both hands.

However, there is much to be loved about political raw meat. Sometimes I tire of searching for news nuggets and I just want political titillation. That's where Capitol Hill Blue delivers. If you don't believe me, read Doug Thompson's "The Rant" column. Witness his thoughts on Ann "the Man" Coulter's recent abortive speaking engagement at UConn:

link here: http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7786.shtml

For Annie Coulter, Stupider Is as Stupider Does
By DOUG THOMPSON
Dec 10, 2005, 09:04

If we need any more proof of just how out of touch conservatives are with reality, consider those on the GOP side of the fence who think of acerbic columnist Ann Coulter as the right-wing’s sex symbol.
. . . . .
Right wingers, of course, love Coulter for her ball-busting rhetoric. Those with an IQ above that of an average plant find her boring, tedious and lacking in either style or substance. She’s a bomb thrower, a babbling blonde bimbo who preaches the outrageous theory that all things conservative are beyond question while all things liberal are beyond shame.
. . . . .
We learned long ago that O’Reilly is a few neurons short of a working brain. Someone should hand him a history book so he can learn that the Nazi movement grew out of the right wing in Germany, not the left, and that attempts to silence free speech is a hallmark of his fellow conservatives.


Maybe the reporting isn't top-shelf. They don't always get it right. They don't have the best sources. But its mission is clear - to be a thorn in the butts of the powerful. There aren't many better reasons one could have for being a reporter.

I, for one, am going to start reading CHB every day if for no other reason than to raise my awareness and my ire.

/rant off


Edit: Tried to fix link...hope it works.

think I hear Will Pitt hyperventilating. ;-)

...but I love validation, too. And, since this is America, I can have both! :D:thumbsup:

He is SANE. He is a bit opinionated, but he is completely SANE. He used to work on the Hill back in the Reagan years, as a GOP staffer. He knows EVERYONE.

Quite frankly, I don't think he is making shit up. I think he is not sourcing very well to protect his old friends who have moved up the food chain in the last twenty years.

On edit, I could not get your link to work, so if anyone else has the trouble I did, go here http://www.capitolhillblue.com/ and hit the first story--self evident.

I think I have it fixed now as a standalone link.

I agree that he's probably not making anything up. The only problem I see is sourcing in that he sometimes uses sources that are less than credible. Knowing this White House, I wouldn't be surprised if they plant bogus info to undermine him. They do it all the time.

I think he has some civil servant friends who are getting near to pension time, who are pretty disgusted. I think he goes out of his way to protect them. He has reported that the Monkey is on meds, off his meds, ranting like a loony, and that is pretty consistent with a lot of little tidbits that leak out about how he is dealing with his staff. We've got him yelling at Rove http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/357107p-304312c.html and angry and bitter http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/358714p-305660c.html and even toadie Robert Novak reported on his pique with his staff over the SA visit http://townhall.com/opinion/columns/robertnovak/2005/11/12/175201.html ...so it isn't like his temper tantrums are really a surprise. I just think Doug has a few pals from the Reagan years in factotum-type positions on the inside--and that is where he is getting his gouge!

we have tendency to label people and things, and then assume that everything they do or say reflects that label . . . the world's a lot more complex than that . . .

sometimes CHB is off the walls, but other times they are right on the mark . . . same can be said of, for example, the New York Times . . .

Lots of times publications and blogs like those have a lot of truth to them, but usually they are there in an early, raw, stage. When the truth comes out later in a more concise fashion, odd ones like CHB were the first.

...a good part of the general suspicion about CHB is based on the incident where Karl Rove ran a caper intended to DISCREDIT Doug Thompson as a source. The caper was successful. CHB was largely ruined, by Rove.

Rove didn't want people believing what Thompson would say in the future. He set him up, in the most "evil genius" type of scheme. Thompson was badly burned.

That in itself makes me read what he has to say, to thwart Rove. I'm always skeptical, no less with CHB.

I'm more and more inclined to think CHB was fed disinformation. It's Rove's M.O.

Other posters have made a good case. NYT, LAT, CNN, and plenty of others get it wrong sometimes. Drudge and all the Scaife papers have plenty of readers despite most of what they print being propaganda and sleaze.

It's time to give it a second look.