Salon | Newsreal: Blowback

T H E
C L I N T O N
C R I S I S
The unholy alliance between Starr and the media
By Joe Conason
(2/12/98)

T A B L E+T A L K
Should a 35-year-old teacher who had a child with a 13-year-old boy be sent to jail? Join the Free Mary Kay Letourneau debate in Headlines

D A I L Y+Q U O T E
Mormon lib

R E C E N T L Y
The Reich stuff?
By Andrew Ross
President Clinton's former Labor secretary thinks his old boss is off course -- but not in the way Kenneth Starr thinks
(02/11/98)
The horny dilemma
By Fred Branfman
Former Gary Hart aide speaks up for sexually satisfied presidents
(02/10/98)
Germ war games
By Jeff Stein
If the U.S, finds itself back in the desert against Iraq, get out your gas masks
(02/09/98)
The lady is not a tramp
By Jenn Shreve
The lurid coverage of Monica Lewinsky's sex life tells us more about aging geezers in the press corps than it does about a young white house intern
(02/06/98)
The roots of the Clinton smear
By Gene Lyons
How Gennifer Flowers and other fast buck artists spawned the Clinton smear
(02/05/98)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Browse the
Newsreal Archives
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

spacer

BLOWBACK | PAGE 2 OF 2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Of course it's Will's right to remain silent on such a personal matter, a right that he grants the embattled president -- up to a point. "Clinton has been guided by the rule that silence is a difficult argument to refute." But Will also cautions that "staying silent, like invoking the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination ... invites an invidious reference."
Others argue that it is wrong to compare members of the press to politicans, the elected custodians of the national trust. But much of the press, especially in Washington, has become a virtual arm of government. Some, like Will, have openly crossed back and forth between being a moral commentator and a partisan political advisor.
In the take-no-prisoners atmosphere that has descended on the capital, questions might well be raised about Will in this latter role. As was reported widely at the time, in practice sessions for the 1980 presidential debates, Will secretly prepared Republican candidate Ronald Reagan, using a stolen copy of President Jimmy Carter's debate briefing book. That Will saw himself more as a partisan Republican than a journalist who should have reported on the theft may be defensible: The lines between punditry and partisanship have been blurred since the days of Walter Lippmann.
What is a little harder to justify ethically is what Will did after the debate was over: Concealing the fact that he had prepped Reagan, Will, in his role as an ABC commentator, joined the network's televised post-mortem of the debate. Pretending he had heard Reagan's answers for the first time, Will declared him the winner.
But media pundits like Will may not be the only ones caught in the cross-fire of a war launched by White House attack dogs. Some of those summoned to sit in judgment on President Clinton, should he be impeached, will also have cause for concern. House Speaker Newt Gingrich, for example, may have to explain all over again why he tried to get his first wife to sign divorce papers as she lay in hospital recovering from cancer.
A more immediate target is Rep. Bob Barr, R-Ga., who has publicly raised the idea of impeaching the president, even before the Lewinsky scandal broke. A recent profile of Barr in the Washington Post cited a Georgia newspaper's description of Barr "licking whipped cream from the chests of two buxom women" at a Leukemia Society luncheon. The Washington Post profile also notes that Barr, an anti-gay crusader who supported the 1995 Defense of Marriage Act, is himself thrice-married and that his divorces became issues in his 1994 campaign.
Such airing of dirty linen fills many in the nation's capital with disgust as well as dread. "This is just the latest step down on the Clinton moral escalator," Dowd wrote in her Wednesday column. Embattled supporters in the White House bunker might call it payback. Observers of military expeditions that have been launched without thinking through the consequences might call it blowback.
SALON | Feb. 12, 1998
Jonathan Broder is Salon's Washington correspondent.
A L S O The unholy alliance between Kenneth Starr and the media

T H E C L I N T O N C R I S I S The unholy alliance between Starr and the media By Joe Conason (2/12/98) T A B L E+T A L K Should a 35-year-old teacher who had a child with a 13-year-old boy be sent to jail? Join the Free Mary Kay Letourneau debate in Headlines D A I L Y+Q U O T E Mormon lib R E C E N T L Y The Reich stuff? By Andrew Ross President Clinton's former Labor secretary thinks his old boss is off course -- but not in the way Kenneth Starr thinks (02/11/98) The horny dilemma By Fred Branfman Former Gary Hart aide speaks up for sexually satisfied presidents (02/10/98) Germ war games By Jeff Stein If the U.S, finds itself back in the desert against Iraq, get out your gas masks (02/09/98) The lady is not a tramp By Jenn Shreve The lurid coverage of Monica Lewinsky's sex life tells us more about aging geezers in the press corps than it does about a young white house intern (02/06/98) The roots of the Clinton smear By Gene Lyons How Gennifer Flowers and other fast buck artists spawned the Clinton smear (02/05/98) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Browse the Newsreal Archives - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
		BLOWBACK \| PAGE 2 OF 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Of course it's Will's right to remain silent on such a personal matter, a right that he grants the embattled president -- up to a point. "Clinton has been guided by the rule that silence is a difficult argument to refute." But Will also cautions that "staying silent, like invoking the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination ... invites an invidious reference." Others argue that it is wrong to compare members of the press to politicans, the elected custodians of the national trust. But much of the press, especially in Washington, has become a virtual arm of government. Some, like Will, have openly crossed back and forth between being a moral commentator and a partisan political advisor. In the take-no-prisoners atmosphere that has descended on the capital, questions might well be raised about Will in this latter role. As was reported widely at the time, in practice sessions for the 1980 presidential debates, Will secretly prepared Republican candidate Ronald Reagan, using a stolen copy of President Jimmy Carter's debate briefing book. That Will saw himself more as a partisan Republican than a journalist who should have reported on the theft may be defensible: The lines between punditry and partisanship have been blurred since the days of Walter Lippmann. What is a little harder to justify ethically is what Will did after the debate was over: Concealing the fact that he had prepped Reagan, Will, in his role as an ABC commentator, joined the network's televised post-mortem of the debate. Pretending he had heard Reagan's answers for the first time, Will declared him the winner. But media pundits like Will may not be the only ones caught in the cross-fire of a war launched by White House attack dogs. Some of those summoned to sit in judgment on President Clinton, should he be impeached, will also have cause for concern. House Speaker Newt Gingrich, for example, may have to explain all over again why he tried to get his first wife to sign divorce papers as she lay in hospital recovering from cancer. A more immediate target is Rep. Bob Barr, R-Ga., who has publicly raised the idea of impeaching the president, even before the Lewinsky scandal broke. A recent profile of Barr in the Washington Post cited a Georgia newspaper's description of Barr "licking whipped cream from the chests of two buxom women" at a Leukemia Society luncheon. The Washington Post profile also notes that Barr, an anti-gay crusader who supported the 1995 Defense of Marriage Act, is himself thrice-married and that his divorces became issues in his 1994 campaign. Such airing of dirty linen fills many in the nation's capital with disgust as well as dread. "This is just the latest step down on the Clinton moral escalator," Dowd wrote in her Wednesday column. Embattled supporters in the White House bunker might call it payback. Observers of military expeditions that have been launched without thinking through the consequences might call it blowback. SALON \| Feb. 12, 1998 Jonathan Broder is Salon's Washington correspondent. A L S O The unholy alliance between Kenneth Starr and the media