Ana Marie Cox: Evidence is for Lawyers Not Journalists
In a recent interview with Ana Marie Cox, self described journalist for several magazines and currently author of the Wonkette blog, on the "Rathergate" memos on MSNBC, she said "I think [the bloggers] did a disservice to the debate because they made the debate about the documents and not about the President of the United States." We tracked her down to clarify her position."George Bush may have been up to something," she said, "that is what we should have been discussing. Instead, we discussed evidence. What are we, lawyers? You know, I find it really hypocritical of the Right to rip on trial lawyers all the time, and then when there are accusations against a Republican, all of a sudden they're like 'show me the evidence.'
"They should have been talking about the accusations against Bush, not trying to determine if there was evidence for them or not. I mean there were, like, six months of missing Bush military documents, don't they care? There were, like, six years of missing Kerry documents, from '72 to '78. But we never looked into Kerry's past. You don't see us looking for 'evidence' of his 'dishonorable discharge,' or pressuring vets to 'lie' about war crimes. What would be the point of that?
"Why is the Right so obsessed with evidence? Like with Powell at the UN talking about photos of trucks and missle tests. And needing more intelligence. I mean like, whatever. Yeah the Right does need more intelligence. Ha ha. You don't see us harping about evidence all the time. We support the Kyoto Accord even though it won't lower pollution at all. We want to make people feel better, not just look for 'evidence' that a plan works.
"And when I say 'we', I am speaking both as a Democrat and a journalist. Journalists are always unbiased, it is our job."
posted by Pluto's Dad @ 12/22/2004 04:16:00 AM
<< Home