I hope Dana Milbank isn't covering the CIA hearings for the Post....

[jackstraw45]

Will the CIA hearings get ANY honest corporate media attention?

[SteppingRazor]

1. Ah, Milbank's conservative, is he?

The conservatives don't seem to think so:

http://www.conservativenews.org/bozellcolumn/archive/2005/col20050330.asp

[jackstraw45]

2. This was his piece slamming John Conyers last month

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/16/AR2005061601570.html

Read it and you should have a good idea about what kind of "journalist" he is.

[SteppingRazor]

4. I already read it. I read the Post almost every day.

My point is, he slams conservatives just as readily. He once refered to Tom Delay as "slinking around the hallways of Congress like a fugitive."
I think a lot of us are too quick to cry political bias without stopping to consider the style of the writer. I don't really find Milbank politically biased. I think, much like Maureen Dowd, he sees the idiocy in both sides. Of course, when you're on one of the sides, you don't like your boys being called idiotic.

[jackstraw45]

6. Easy...read what I said...

I think we both know there's a difference. I call him a bad JOURNALIST...not a conservative.

I read the post daily for 3 years and I know he likes to poke fun at all parties.

[Mandate My Ass]

5. That slam came from the top echelon at WaPo -

no way that piece got "accidently" placed in the news section. They wanted to mock that hearing because C-Span aired it and they couldn't ignore it anymore. Factually inaccurate and dripping with scorn but they didn't print Conyers response.

"First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win."

The first three are out of the way, it seems.

[SteppingRazor]

7. THERE'S the rub...

The piece didn't belong in the news section, perhaps. I think Malbank is far from a bad journalist, far from a conservative, and gets a lot of uncalled-for hits from both the right and the left. But the Conyers piece was certainly riddled with opinion, and should have stayed in the Op-Ed section.

[Chipper Chat]

3. Milbank will report that:

1) There were no Republicans present, so it was not a legitimate hearing.
2) Conyers "horned his way in" to the hearing.
3) The room was too small.
4) The witnesses were not credible.
5) Democrats are grabbing at straws.
6) Democrats are wasting their time.
7) No tablecloths (not even cheap ones) on the rented tables.
8) Jeff Gannon was not invited.
9) Valerie Flame was not covert, but actually in a back-up band for Cheap Trick.
10) No pizza was served to the reporters.