My letter to Post's Dana Milbank on DSM hearing article

[LiberalEsto]

Dear Mr. Milbank,

I find it pitifully ironic that your article on the Downing Street Memo hearing appeared in today's Post on the 33rd anniversary of the Watergate break-in. In 1972, the Washington Post backed Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward's efforts to expose a chain of criminal activity reaching all the way to the White House. Ultimately, their work led to the resignation of President Richard Nixon in disgrace, and earned a place in history.

Your article is the antithesis of Woodward and Bernstein's tremendous investigative reporting. I was a newspaper reporter for nearly 30 years (including an 11-year stint at the Newark Star-Ledger), and I am appalled that the Post permitted publication of such a biased, vitriol-filled piece of writing on an ostensible news page. To make mockery of Rep. John Conyers in such a childish and mean-spirited fashion speaks volumes, not about him, but about yourself.

I am saddened that the Post has sunk from a pinnacle of journalistic courage to become an overt shill for the Bush administration and its agenda. The Post's reportage has truly reached its nadir. We should mark a moment of silence today, the Watergate anniversary, in memory of the late, once-great Washington Post.

Shame on you.

[jojo54]

1. I emailed ABC Nightline last night 'cause they didn't keep their

promise to report on DSM hearing. I called them flip floppers. Unfortunately, I didn't save it....(slap head).

[jojo54]

2. BTW

Nice letter.

[Kahuna]

3. If you worked for the Star Ledger, I'd bet...

I'd recognize your by line. :D

P.S. Great letter!

[LiberalEsto]

4. Left the Star-Ledger in 1990

so you might not recognize it!

[samsingh]

5. well said

[pacalo]

6. Beautifully written letter from someone who knows journalism. Thanks!

[ArkDem]

7. This will put him in his place!

[AndreaCG]

8. I sent him a letter too

though it wasn't nearly as eloquent.

[senseandsensibility]

9. Please send this to the ombudsman

It is an excellent letter, and I think the ombudsman needs to read it. Try [e-mail] :-) I've already sent mine.

[calimary]

15. ALWAYS always always always send a letter CC'ed to another person

or persons. I sent my Milbank letter to the miscreant himself AND CC'ed it to the ombudsman, too. That way, each recipient is aware that other eyes have also seen this same letter, so it's harder to disavow or ignore. Milbank can't waltz around pretending he got only a load of "attaboys," or that nobody got upset about his reporting or mischaracterization, if somebody else is copied in on the complaints against him. . "Playing House" indeed! It's a way of holding people like him accountable - and of putting him on notice that we're making sure our views aren't wafting away into some vacuum.

ALWAYS CC: somebody else on letters like these. Preferably someone or someoneS farther up the food chain in that same newspaper, news magazine, or broadcast/cable vehicle. ALWAYS.

BTW: here's what I wrote to him:

Dear Mr. Milbank -

Better be careful... your bias is showing.

It's clear whose side you're on when you issue such coverage as "Democrats PLAY HOUSE (?!?!) To Rally Against the War". I hope perhaps you'll switch your title from reporter to columnist or editorialist, because you're writing more opinion than anything else.

I'm sure the mothers of dead soldiers whose lives have been squandered ON A SERIES OF LIES told by this White House to jam its precious war down our throats do NOT appreciate your cavalier description of John Conyers' hearing as merely "playing house."

Mr. Milbank, you do yourself, your credibility, and the credibility of your newspaper (not to mention the honor and service of all our troops pushed into harm's way ON A SERIES OF LIES a HORRENDOUS and UNFORGIVABLE disservice. You owe America an apology, at the very least, and more responsible, probing, and watchdog-style (NOT lapdog-style) reporting on this most critical issue. Otherwise, the casualties of this war will be blood on YOUR hands as well as on those within the White House.

Signed,

me

CC'ed to the ombudsman's email address also, so it's clear that this went to more eyes than just two.

[senseandsensibility]

18. You're right

Good reminders. The OP's letter was so eloquent that I especially would like it be seen by others. I don't think Milbank himself is intellectually or morally capable of understanding it.

[LiberalEsto]

21. I did send it

but thanks for the reminder!

[blue neen]

10. That's a great letter.

It is factual and eloquent and written from the place of experience.

Thanks for letting him know what an ass he has been.

[meppie-meppie not]

11. Very nicely done!!

[Roland99]

12. Great letter. Short and to the point. Here's what I sent earlier today:

I just read this piece of Rovian trash. Are you sure you belong at the Washington Post? You know, the paper behind the uncovering of the Watergate break-in which eventually led to the resignation of President Nixon. Are you familiar with the topic?

Your article makes me wonder how much you ranted and raved about the Republicans grilling Clinton, to the tune of a $70 million investigation, over some extra-marital activities with a certain intern.

Perhaps if the Downing Street Memo had a stain on it you'd be interested?

You disgust me.

[splat@14]

13. Great letter. You should post more of your writings, I'd like to see `em!

[Hissyspit]

14. Great Letter. Conyers' letter played up the mendacity angle.

Milbanks' editorial was simply pathetic.

Note: I would have said "the Bush administration and its un-American agenda of disingenuousness," or something to that effect.

[kitkat65]

16. Nice hatchet job, Dana

Mr. Milbank

I had a chance to read your coverage of the Downing Street Memo hearing led by John Conyers and couldn't quite figure out if it was and op-ed piece or if you really considered it "reporting."

It's hard for me to believe that this is the same newspaper that uncovered the Watergate scandal so I did a search on Katherine Graham at Wikipedia.org and found the following:

Despite its Watergate work and publication of the "Pentagon Papers" that damaged the credibility of the Nixon administration, the Post often followed an establishment line, thanks to the close contacts the Grahams had with the nation's elites. In 1988, Graham gave a speech at the CIA's Langley, Virginia headquarters, and told agency leaders:

We live in a dirty and dangerous world. There are some things the general public does not need to know and shouldn't. I believe democracy flourishes when the government can take legitimate steps to keep its secrets and when the press can decide whether to print what it knows. (source: Regardie's Magazine1/90)

end

I guess that explains your bias however it does make me curious about all the stuff you folks at the Post are aware of but don't think that we the peon readers have a right to know.

My only request is that you keep the comics, crossword puzzles and advise columns because at this rate any relevance you've had within the fourth estate ended in 1974.

Sincerely,
XXX XXX
Columbus, Ohio

I do realize that I didn't italicize "Post." Why bother?

[bejammin075]

17. What kind of article? Opinion, or "reporting" what happened?

[ProudDad]

19. Great Letter

Thanks

[ngGale]

20. Great letter to a has been newspaper...

I sure miss real journalism.

[Donna Zen]

22. Adjusting tin foil

Dana Milbank is Skull and Bones.

[susu369]

23. My message

when it somes to writing, John Conyers can run circles around Mr. Skull and Bones.

Conyer's letter is so strong and well written.

[SCRUBDASHRUB]

24. Excellent letter!

[DemReadingDU]

25. Excellent letter!

Thanks for sharing