MONDAY'S LETTERS: Colbert and Press Incompetence, Possible CIA Chief and the 4th Amendment

By: E&P Staff In today's letters, readers say Colbert's barbs hit the mark, Mitchell's columns hit the mark, and maybe General Hayden's interpretation of the 4th Amendment isn't so far off base.


***

Press Incompetence, Censorship and Colbert

Good for [Greg Mitchell] for taking the WCHA journos to task. As a [Stephen] Colbert fan, I have to admit: it wasn't his best performance. But his arrows all hit the mark. And the arrow that hit home most forcefully wasn't directed at the president. Lampooning a president is funny, but it's easy -- each and every late-night TV host does it nightly.

The most damning arrow bullseyed the shameless incompetence of the big-time press over the past five years. What really galled those reporters was being called out...and that's why they're reacting so negatively.

It's not that the emperor has no clothes; it's that the press corps covering the emperor has no clothes.

Luke Smith
Anchorage, Alaska



As I was told in journalism school, we have no censorship in America.

No, what happens is that reporters self-select what is and isn't newsworthy.

Funny or not, [Stephen] Colbert was [at the WHCA dinner] and part of the story. News outlets review un-funny movies all the time -- yet there essentially no coverage at all of Colbert's routine.

Why?

If my bread and butter came from maintaining access and ability to ask questions in White House press conferences, I too would bite my tongue rather than laugh at Colbert. White House folks were certainly watching the audience reaction and deciding who would be on the newly revised "There's Adam Clymer. . ." list.

At least we'll all be able to look forward to some fine, "... you know -- fiction." in the next few years.

Steve Hamlin
Beaverton, OR


***

Mitchell Speaks for the Redbeards of the World

[Greg Mitchell's] editorials have been a life preserver for me lately, especially since the whole Scootergate/Judygate/Plamegate affair began spinning over the top. Thank you so much for your insightful words. Although the chorus does (finally) seem to be growing, you always manage to be one of the first to point out the glaringly obvious that somehow evades others in your profession. Your May 5 editorial is but one fine example of finding an original, right-on angle that speaks to a larger truth.

Redbeard Simmons


***

Constitution Notwithstanding...

General Hayden may well be right. After all, the 4th Amendment does say:

"... no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation..."

And indeed, in the Administration's "spyGate" program, no warrants have issued. So who needs "probable cause"? (The Attorney General has already expressed the opinion that the Constitution is a "quaint" document, and if president Bush had the opportunity to do so, he'd undoubtedly issue a "signing statement" explaining why he sees no need to abide by it.)

J.G. Berinstein
Northridge, CA