This is one of those stories that throws cold water on the claim that we have a "liberal media".
Why would a liberal media outlet higher a schmuck like Rove?
It's more like big media is more corporate, interested in what sells,
willing to overlook faults and un-American indiscretions:
Quote:
Karl Rove avoided prosecution in the Valerie Plame case by admitting that he had lied about not being involved. He eventually told the grand jury that he had in fact leaked her name to several reporters and
misled Scott McClellan and the whole country about it earlier. Yet, people still take him seriously and he just got a column in Newsweek to print more of his fabrications.
So, that's the other story behind the Rove hiring. A comglomerate that smells a contribution to the bottomline.
It gets people like Rove hired and causes the following:
When senior Democrats, such as House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, explain why impeachment of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney is off the table, they cite their fears of hostility from the American news media.Quote:
On Amy Goodman’s “Democracy Now” on Dec. 20, Conyers said the U.S. news media has become such a problem that any Democratic attempt to hold the President and Vice President accountable might end up achieving the opposite result.
“There is a very stark reality that with the corporatization of the media, we could end up with turning people, who should be documented in history as making many profound errors and violating the Constitution, from villains into victims,” the Michigan Democrat said.
In Conyers’s view, it’s kind of Watergate in reverse. Instead of the old Washington press corps holding President Richard Nixon’s feet to the fire for his Watergate abuses, today’s careerist news media would treat the idea of accountability for Bush and Cheney like some kooky conspiracy theory.
...
And give someone traitor like Rove a pass on his past.
