From Jane Harman

lol

Shorter Jane Harman: "The liberals in my district don't care if our kids get the equipment they need, and I'm too craven to stand up to them when i get pressured."

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Jane Harman is completely untrustworthy, and only "responsive" to her district because she crave power above all else. Regardless of her "fox hole" conversion, Democrats in her district need to replace her, because her actions are pure, unprincipled political expediency, and she will stab progressives in the back the minute she thinks she can get away with it.

I don't know Joke...I mean Joe.

This may be because I'm already slightly mistrustful of you due to your tendency to...overlook things, or at least see things from a completely different angle than most sane people.

Still, this sounds very very suspect. Especially considering it seems to put the onus on her that she HAD to apologize to you for this, and paints her in the ugly light. And it STILL doesn't absolve you from your journalistic blunder.

Again, why is it Harman who needs to apologize for the fact you were too lazy to check the actual vote before writing your post, Joe?

What a pathetic, transparent panderer.

She KNOWS that those soldiers are going to have exactly the same weapons, armor, and equipment, regardless of whether the supplemental passed. She KNOWS that the only difference would have been the missions they were given and the date of their withdrawal from action.

And she still pretends that her motivation in (at least initially) supporting the bill was their well-being, rather than the political flack she'd get from the Republicans.

The silver lining here is that the public pressure to end the war getting so intense that cowardly pols like Harmon are becoming more afraid of offending the anti-war voters than the hawks.

Neither Klein nor Harman comes off looking too good here. Klein for his sanctimonious tone and his nakedly irresponsible "Voting against it means you're in favor of a precipitous departure from Iraq." that preceded his error, and more understandably, for not double checking her actual recorded vote. (Although, in my very humble opinion, I think that is a minor and understandable shortfall if Harman's office provided him with that quote and then she changed her vote, had it not been prefaced with the irresponsible characterization of people who voted against the bill. Otherwise, a minor mea culpa would have sufficed. A *graceful* mea culpa, though please.)

Joe, Joe, Joe:

You still don't get it.

Nobody in the world will ever give a rat's patoot what your opinion on anything is until you apologise for having writteb "Primary Colors" under the craven pseudonym Anonymous -- still, the greatest act of personal and political betrayal since Judas.

And it would be nice if you'd say I'm sorry for that NYMagazine story you wrote claiming that the release of Spike Lee's "Do the Right Thing" was gonna cause race riots.

Until then, you're just a tool.

Dude, you believed a politician?

Why didn't you check the roll call?

If you journalists would start from a position of total disbelief re every single word out of a politician's mouth (including "and" and "but") we probably wouldn't be in Iraq right now.

Honestly, steve simels, you've been writing that same comment for months, and I don't get it.

People have been writing under pseudonymns for centuries.

Of all of the reaons to distrust Joe Klein, that seems pretty far down the list.

>>>Of all of the reaons to distrust Joe Klein, that seems pretty far down the list.

ding! and thank you for acknowledging that there are many reasons to distrust you

I guess the era of personal responsibility is in fact over, huh, Mr. Klein?

"We The People" just became "We The Joe."

Pretty f'n sad. Sorry 'bout my language, Joke Line!

So when exactly did that "interview" take place? Certainly not in the time frame Joke claimed it did - or did Harman really make a 180 degree turn in just a few hours?

I'm no fan of Harman, but it would be sweet justice if a Handwringing Moderate Capitulator like herself were the one who finally exposed Joke Line as the incompetent "journalist" the rest of us know him to be...

This is what happens when a hack reports* on a panderer.

Now Time has control of one of those elements. I wonder what they'll do?

*I use the word "reporting" in the broadest possible sense.

Hey Joe, How does her call explain your past tense quote?

"...I spoke with Congresswoman Jane Harman (D-Ca.) just back from Iraq, who voted for the bill --as did a majority of Democrats who are not running for President. "Look, I would love to have cast a vote against Bush on this. We need a new strategy and I hope we can force one in September," (emphasis added)

Just asking ... you error or the error of one of your many editors?

The problem is not that Old Joke wrote under the Anonymous moniker, but rather that when confronted with the evidence implicating him, he lied and said he was not Anonymous.

So, Harmon doesn't understand that the BEST WAY to support the troops is to end the war?

That's pretty stupid. I'm glad Nancy dealt with Harmon, especially after she sold out the Constitution on warrantless surveillance.

Joe himself said he doesn't give political advice - he does "policy and horserace."

That being the case, why should anyone filter information through Joe? He's going to take your information, Rep. Harman, and put it through his own, personal "horserace-o-meter."

Maybe that would be a good idea if Joe wasn't a sterling example of the "unreliable narrator."

Joe, I, like atrios, find it very unlikely that Harman would have used the past tense as portrayed in your quote, making it look as if you modified the quote and deliberately tried mislead your readers as to when you spoke with her. That, in my years at daily newspapers would have been seen as a serious offense by my editors.

Plus, now that Harman, whose judgment you respect so much, turns out to have voted with Clinton and Obama, will you now smear Harman the baseless derision (i.e. accuse of supporting "precipitous withdrawl") as you accused the senators?

Also, would it have occurred to you to ask Harman if an affirmative vote would have meant keeping our troops in harms way without proper armor or training, since that seems to be route the administration has gone to maintain its phantom successes?

Joe Klein Replies: First, the "Joe" who commented up the string is not me. Second, it is common for politicians to make comments--usually in press releases, but not in this case--using the past tense when they're about to vote on something if they assume that they'll be quoted after the vote takes place. Third, Harman called me by cellphone from the House floor as the debate was taking place. I was astonished by her last minute turnaround. I put her in the same category as Hillary and Obama.
And fourth, I continue to agree with those Senate Democrats who are in favor of a careful withdrawal and voted against the bill.

"As readers here know, I would have voted for the bill."

A readers here know now, this was written before the vote, not after.

"Voting against it means you're in favor of a precipitous departure from Iraq..."

"Yesterday I spoke with Congresswoman Jane Harman (D-Ca.) just back from Iraq, who voted for the bill--"

This. Is still a lie.

And so is this:

"Voting against it means you're in favor of a precipitous departure from Iraq..."

The liberals in my district don't care if our kids get the equipment they need..

It's interesting the warmongers are sticking with this argument. If I recall correctly, during the last election the President stated flatly: "If the Democrats win, the terrorists win".

The public immediately went to the polls and clobbered the Republicans. I think I would be starting to figure out that line of baloney isn't working anymore, but I guess they are slow learners.

My advice to Republicans: Keep accusing anyone who wants an end to the war of being against the troops. The more you do it, the more the solid majority who are sick and tired of the Iraq War want to throw you out of office.

It's a floor wax AND a dessert topping!

There are two separate statements that are both true:

The Congressperson did indeed do an abrupt about face.
and
Repoting something that didn't, in fact, happen is shoddy journalism.

Evidence concerning statement 1 is found here:
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/ca36_harman/May_24_2007.shtml
Evidence concerning statement 2 was posted by notanumber dirctly above ^

Two questions Joe:

1. Why the past tense? Is that kind of modification of something inside quotation marks ethical and acceptable to Time?

2. When are you going to correct the false statement that most Democrats voted for the bill?

Joe can never fail the truth, only the truth can fail Joe. You really have all the emotional and intellectual maturity of a fifth-grader.

And since we're here, care to explain why you constantly repeat dishonest and meaningless Republican talking points? 'Precipitous withdrawal'... Why don't you just print the RNC faxes verbatim?

Extremist Joe stands with the small 18% minority of home-grown right-wing radicals who want to prolong and deepen the terminal disaster in Iraq, and further harm our national security.

Right-wing-water-boy Joe openly insults the motives, patriotism and decency of the super-majority of over two-thirds of decent Americans who are not corrupted by the DC toxic swamp and want us out of Iraq.

Joe, any reasonable person would be excused for wondering how it is you retain your present employment.

Joe Klein is not a mensch.

So... Harman genuinely believes that she voted to "defund the troops," or something? Yikes.

Look, the plan to condition withdrawal on benchmarks is not tantamount to denying supplies to troops in a war zone. I mean, seriously, people. Can we please be serious for just a second here? No one wants to do that.

Joe doesn't look super awesome after all of this-- he should have checked on her vote before asserting it as a fact-- but he certainly did get worked over by Harman on this one.

She is a slave to a dying brand of Conventional Wisdom, where no GOP talking point is left behind, or challenged by facts. But truth, honesty, and decency are reasserting themselves, and Matt Drudge doesn't rule our world anymore.

And fourth, I continue to agree with those Senate Democrats who are in favor of a careful withdrawal and voted against the bill.

Why is this not careful? Bush is in charge of when they go in or get out. Congress only controls the purse strings.

If Bush cannot draw down the troops in a way that protects them as Congress draws down the money, it is *BUSH* that isn't being careful.

Four years of failed policy, tens of thousands of casualties and you're admonishing Democrats for not being "careful."

You should be ashamed.

I would recommend that you all check out Orrin Hatch's Web page and his OMG press release on 5-22-07 concerning his trip with Rep. Harmon to Iraq. This would seem to go to 'state of mind' and timeline.

Heck, I'd even cut Harmon a little slack since she was dealing with Hatch, Iraq and jet lag.

My guess is that Harmon checked her e-mail tallies before changing her vote which could give Joe some creds on his original post. But, Joe should know from experience to not go to the bank (press) with a politician's quote before fact checking. Joe, especially, fact check a Rep. like Harmon who has caved more than once in recent history.

Klain is a novelist, not a journalist. His specialty is historical fiction. When are you fools going to get it? Lay off of the poor guy.

two things:

1) paul dirks is correct.

2) did it ever occur to anyone that "the overwhelming opposition to the war" in harman's district is from americans who do, in fact, have the best interests of the troops and nation in mind?

I don't know which is more depressing--our "friends" or our "enemies." Klein's lack of journalistic ethics is so legend, at this point ,that it really doesn't bother me. But Harman's lack of intelligence and her lack of honor does. The people in her district are *also* "those kids on the plane." In fact, those "kids" are more likely to be the "kids" of her district than they are likely to be *her kids* personally.

And yes, she owes her attention and her loyalty to the people in her district because--gulp--that's her job just as it is *their* job to decide how best to protect "those kids." What about this is hard, Jane? and why do you think it is necessary to stab your own constituents in the back *at the same time* that you do something that you say is stabbing the "kids" in the back. You can be *for* the kids and *for* your district but oddly enough you can't be much of a congressperson if you are *both* against your constituents and against "the kids."

aimai

PS: never, never, never talk to Joe Klein or email him. You are simply laying yourself open to misinterpretation and calumny either from Joe himself (that's *his* job) or from his readers (who will catch both you and him in every error.) Wise up Jane, its not too late.

OK, Joe, you win.

Both you AND Jane Harman suck.

Joe Klein is symptomatic of the way in which, and the degree to which journalists have insinuated themselves into the political process--he doesn't even see anything strange about thiking that a congresswoman ought to call him to tell him she changed her mind on a vote.

Journalists like Klein who get so close that they become part of the story are no longer journalists.

This, along with the revelations in the Klein/Shrum dustup earlier this week really show just how prominent journalists don't even really seem to know or care about professional standards anymore. People like this are the reason why journalism is less like a profession and more like a modern priesthood-it's become a route to power for those who don't have other means to acquire power.

So you shoot her in the face, and she has to apologize to you?

Well, at least in this post Joe had the sense not to make some snide remark about the rabble. He chose instead to say nothing.

Progress, sadly.

Actually, I'll give Joe Klein some credit for his Iraq posts - his complete illogic finally made me see how insane the argument against timetables really is.

The argument goes like this: instead of planning for a withdrawal, and using a significant time period – like a year – to put in place the kind of security and structures that would make a withdrawal work, and would reduce its destabilizing impact on Iraq – we should, instead, just drift along until withdrawal is forced upon us, or until the tooth fairy waves a wand and Iraq is all peaceful and the Iraqis are all like, hey, build bases on our territory to attack our neighbors, cause we are all about that! And here’s some flowers and candy!

In other words, the same mutually canceling assumptions are concealed in the “precipitous withdrawal” scenario as have been revealed in the FUBAR in Iraq in general.
a. The fear that if you say a bad thing, it will happen. Thus, only say happy things, and only happy things will happen. If you say, for instance, let’s plan to withdraw under a number of scenarios, then that will make those scenarios happen. Thus, planning itself subverts the war effort. How could anybody believe such nonsense? This kind of speech magic view is common to five year olds. When you are fifteen, however, you should have outgrown it. If you retain it in your fifties, like Klein, it is a sign of early senility.
b. If you aren't going to plan your military intervention, then you will have to depend on magic. The chance that withdrawal from Iraq will be both precipitous and disastrous increases if you don’t plan it well ahead of time. The idea that you are giving the enemy a head’s up is stupid – the enemy will be given more leaway, not less, by an ill planned withdrawal. So the last resort is to say, vaguely, that things will 'settle down' and get better, without there being some intervening cause to make things better. An action without a cause in nature is called a miracle. Klein and his fellow warmongering media buddies should call just call their favorite plan for Iraq a 'course in miracles."
c. The magic thinking is given some bare rationality by the Friedman myth. In this myth, the future is completely open. The surge might work! The Maliki government might be accepted, tomorrow, by the whole of Iraq with tears of joy! In this myth, the past has no effect on the future – except insofar as it can be mined for false analogies. In Greek drama, when events came to a point that nothing could resolve, the gods would come down and resolve them. The term for this, deus ex machina, is the sum total of the Kleinian style plan for Iraq.
d. Not wanting to plan the conditions for withdrawal means, necessarily, planning the conditions for staying put. And as the U.S. stays put, it has to kill more Iraqis – thus increasing the anger of Iraqis at the U.S. – and do policing in a culture it still is clueless about – thus increasing the anger of the Iraqis at each other. So, for instance, by building walls in Baghdad between neighborhoods, the U.S. has increased, and not decreased, sectarianism – while its supposed strategy is to decrease sectarianism altogether. When your tactics contradict your strategy, then you are doing something wrong. In this case, it is easy to identify: we are involved in a war that we have no clear interest in, pursuing a goal we don’t know how to achieve. The plan, in other words, is drift.

Isn't it interesting that Joe simply says Harmon left that apology on his voice mail, obscuring that in all likelihood she was RETURNING the call to make him stop annoying her and begging her to help cover his a-s.

All things validate and reinforce the Importance of Joe Klein.

Here's Joe's opposite number--Democrat-bashing house 'liberal'--Jonathon Alter at Newsweek:

"The whole “support the troops” meme has become a terrible problem for Democrats. Even though, as Glenn Greenwald has argued in Salon, cutting off funding doesn't mean soldiers will have their guns and bullets and armor taken away in the middle of a battle, Americans have been convinced that it does. "

Alter and Klein pretty well sum up the Beltway Media Establishment view:
It isn't true, but we're lazy and gutless, so Republican demagogues have managed to convince people it is true, so the only mature and responsible thing to do is to act as if the GOP spin is in fact that reality. Because doing our jobs and pointing out the truth would be hard. It would be hard work.

Shorter Lukasiak: I use the false equation that "wanting to get out of Iraq/looking for ways to check the unbridled foolishness of this administration=hates the troops" because I can.

When Jokeline and Harman are on the unemployment lines the world will be a better place.

A basically intellectually honest person would apologize for getting the vote wrong, explain the reason why, and promise to do better in the future.

The bullshit excuse that some Democrats have given for their cowardly vote on the Iraq Supplemental is that they were reluctant to de-fund troops while they are in the combat zone.

By that logic, it would literally be impossible to stop funding for any war.

Second, do these Democrats honestly believe that if they cut back on funding the war, Bush would keep under-armed and under-supplied troops in a combat zone?

If that is the case, then they are making an implicit admission that Bush is not worthy of prosecuting this war. Thus, cutting off funding is the only reasonable course of action.

It's a goddamned shame that we the people have to take the time to lay out the most obvious of arguments for our elected 'leaders.'

I still don't understand why you didn't read the roll call. I was sitting here eating peanut butter and crackers and reading some dumb magazine with CSPAN in the background and found a list of who voted for what pretty quickly after the vote.

And I don't get paid for that kind of information, I'm just, you know, genuinely interested in that stuff.

So, again, why didn't you just read the roll call?

And the whole point of your post - I mean this wrong one from yesterday, specifically - not all of the other wrong ones this month - was to bash Obama and Clinton.

And now you haven't revisited that point in light of Harman's vote. You merely quote her appology -Because you're the victim here, right? You're the one that deserved the "I'm sorry," and you wanted to let your readers know that. The thought of keeping that appology to your self didn't even enter your mind, because just quoting the tape vindicated you and put the onus on Harman - who changed her mind and didn't call you to tell you? Think about that.

The issue here was your humiliation, not the truth, the facts, or the way you mislead your readers, apparenlty.

You still haven't come back to say anything about how Harman's newly discovered vote disappoints you or plays into your thesis. You still refuse to apply your scorn to Harman in equal measure, or admit in the light of her vote that there are -I don't know - GOOD REASONS for the vote. All we know is that you like Harman, you really really like her.

WTF does THAT mean? Who cares if you like her?

You're super frustrating. You're remind me of Emily Watson, the co-editor of my school newspaper.

She was twelve.

I guess that justifies your inability to do the basic journalistic task of checking to see how she actually voted in the first place.

After all, among today's so-called "journalists", who needs to worry about the facts? It's the spin that matters, right?

Bottom line - Jokeline reported it wrong and Jokeline can't do simple math. And everyone else is at fault for noticing.

Harman lacks all principles and you lack basic literacy skills.
You deserve each other, Joe.

But you do not deserve an apology. YOU were wrong.
You should apologize.

Why don't I believe you, Klein?

Sometimes (ok, many times) when I read Joe Klein's material I just want to scream. How did the national press corp get filled with such fools? I am completely serious. How do media companies evaluate the work of columnists and reporters before and after they hire them? It can't be based on an evaluation of the accuracy of their work. If any one knows, please clue me in.

Joe, did Harman offer that apology of her own accord, or did you corner her at a cocktail party? Did you stalk her and demand an apology the way you did w/ Alterman? Since when have congresspersons and senators become responsible for the accuracy of the pundit class? Wouldn't a 'reporter' just check the roll call to begin with? Joke is afflicted w/ the same disease W is, the inability to admit error. I think the reason Joke has come to dislike Bush, is that he sees a lot of the same un-desirable character traits that Bush has, in himself, which is common psychologically.

notanumber and mz are correct to question your use of the past tense in the original story.

PS: It occurs to me that this needs to be verified...doesn't it? I mean, we all know who were dealing with here right? If anyone here is in Harman's district, it would be great if we could get some comfirmation. Also, the text of her 'apology' is clearly a response to SOMETHING, not an unsolicited response. So what was that something, a desperate plea from Joke? It would be nice to find that out as well. I think we can all imagine the panic Joke must have been in when confronted w/ the possibility that he may HAVE TO ADMIT BEING WRONG!

"...in the end, my responsibility was to the people I represent."

Umm, Jane, that's your responsibility in the beginning and the middle too.

If you're confused about that, no wonder you think Joke deserves an apology.

Hey Joke,

Do your top-secret GOP sources apologize when they lie to you?

Probably not. You're a documented liar, so they must figure you'll understand.

Just wondering.

Dear Joe,

Repeat after me..."I will check the role call vote before I publish a post about that vote."

This concluded our directions on how to un**** this bed.

Yes, I know...we have depressingly high standards for journalists. Please feel free to join us in this.

I was never tempted to comment here until reading Mr. Klein's response to Steve Simels drove me to say something.

"People have been writing under pseudonymns for centuries.

"Of all of the reaons to distrust Joe Klein, that seems pretty far down the list."

Uh, actually, despite not being a fan of the Clintons, I've always found Primary Colors and Klein's cowardly "anonymous" authorship to be beyond the pale. I NEVER take Mr. Klein at his word on anything because he has repeatedly shown himself to be a wannabe player, and not a due diligence journalist.

Mark Gisleson says:

"Uh, actually, despite not being a fan of the Clintons, I've always found Primary Colors and Klein's cowardly "anonymous" authorship to be beyond the pale. I NEVER take Mr. Klein at his word on anything because he has repeatedly shown himself to be a wannabe player, and not a due diligence journalist."

Yes, this is the core of his wretchedness on PC. It was further made ugly by Klein's smearing of the linguist who exposed him. That was a really petty, hate-filled incident, and one over which Klein should have lost any chance at a 'bully pulpit' for all time.

Journalism 101:

1) Get a quote from a politician prior to a vote on their position.

2) Check vote.

3) If discrepancy, call back to find out why

What the hell happened to steps 2 and 3 Joe? Surely your interns can take breaks from mixing your drinks and ironing your underwear to fact check this stuff for you...

post an audio link.

Joe must have been in some real trouble with the Editors at Time if Jane actually had to call and soothe the beast. Joe is a joke even at Time.

65% of voters want us out of Iraq. A more sickening display of the weakness of democracy will never be found than a Representative trying to represent that will.

Luckily we have leaders who know that greatness takes an iron will, not the soft will of ordinary people wanting easy solutions. We can have a great nation, the greatest of all time, or we can have a nation intent upon making life as easy and comfortable as possible for it's citizens. We can't have both.

We can only hope that soon another event will arrive to reinvigorate the desire of the people for true greatness.

Joke, remember when you lied about writing Primary Colors, and there was a mini-scandal, and even some talk to the effect of "will anyone employ this lying hack?" That was sure wishful thinking. Seems hopelessly naive now.

Remember how Tina Brown hired you then, when she was in the process of transforming the New Yorker from America's finest magazine into another useless celebrity rag?

Remember, Joke?

She sure succeeded at dumbing down that magazine, and helped get you and your hackery back in to the mainstream.

What a disaster.

If any kid working in a fast-food restaurant or convenience store screwed-up at his job as much as Joe Klein does at his, he'd probably be fired.

Let's get serious about no taxation without representation.

The two-thirds of decent, hard-working Americans who pay their taxes to keep the government and the military running, who buy newspapers and magazines to keep creatures like Joe Klein richly employed -- those two-thirds who want us out of Iraq have effectively no representation in Congress.

We are not only shut out of all the 'serious' mainstream publications but, to add insult to injury, we have our patriotism questioned by people like Joe Klein who would never dream of enlisting or have anyone in their family enlist. They just expect us to pay taxes and shut up. We are assumed to be unable to come to our own conclusions about what is good for the national interest and security.

Something is deeply, deeply rotten in Washington DC. Being an arrogant, petulant fool has become a virtue. Truth, honesty and plain common sense are seen as dangerous things to be mocked.

If it takes challenging every representative like Jane Harman in primaries to make they, you know, actually represent their voters, so be it. If it takes constantly berating 'serious' publications like Time and finding other forums in order to not have the voices of the majority shut out of the public discourse, that's what we'll do.

Just don't expect us to keep paying our taxes and buying your magazines while leaving the important decisions to our betters. Especially when our 'betters', of which Bush, Harman, and Klein are such shining examples, behave with all the emotional maturity and intellectual acuity of five-year-olds with learning disabilities.

Gee, so Jane Harman actually did bond with those men and women on that C-130, and decided that she loved them so much that she should vote for more money to send them to their deaths in a corrupt and impossible political cause. How brave of her and Joke Line.

But then, she got thinking about the folks in her district, the hoi-polloi who elected her, and thought maybe she'd use a variant on the Lieberman principle: do everything you can to make sure that a bill doesn't pass, wait until you make sure the bill isn't passing, and then get on the roll in a way that won't have your constituents riding you out of town on a rail.

Thanks, Joke, for exposing both your own venal soul and a Democratic representative's.

Last time I checked, Jane, Japan was where all those people were hooked on a warrior god, and they were the ones that had to sacrifice their young in perpetuity so they could go to paradise. We in America don't believe in empire, or militarism. You and Joke apparently do.

...it is common for politicians to make comments--usually in press releases, but not in this case--using the past tense when they're about to vote on something if they assume that they'll be quoted after the vote takes place. Third, Harman called me by cellphone from the House floor as the debate was taking place. I was astonished by her last minute turnaround. I put her in the same category as Hillary and Obama.

Wow - every word bullshit. Including "the" and "and".

There's absolutely no reason to believe anything Joke says - and I don't.

Let's be honest, Steve. Joke Line will ALWAYS be a tool. It's his nature.

"Third, Harman called me by cellphone from the House floor as the debate was taking place."

This woman seriously needs to get her priorities in order.

Ummm still doesn't matter Joe. You should have checked. It would have taken a couple of minutes and it is you know, ultimately your responsiblity to get basic facts correct. Maybe the elite are judged by different standards than the rest of us common folk but when I'm at work I can't use "well so and so told me so" as an excuse. Must be nice to have a job that lacks accountablity.

A big debt of gratitude for causing Jane to vote against the bill goes to Marcy Winograd. Marcy challenged Jane last primary season, and starting late, underfunded, and a complete unknown, managed to get 38% of the vote. I guess she put the fear of God - or a political loss - into Ms. Harman. Jane knows that Marcy, and her constituents like me, are watching her. A vote for this war, or this horrible blank check funding bill, would have meant a new challenge next year, and maybe a successful one this time.

I guess the point to be taken is that Democracy can sometimes work, and obviously, more primary challenges are needed.

Joe,

If you read my response to your original posting, you would have already known thats why Harmon changed her mind. Her district is incredibly anti-war, and being the coward she is, she voted against what she thought was right to stay in power. I can't respect someone who thinks continuing this war is good policy then voting against the funding bill. She is a hyporcrite of the worst kind. That is why Pelosi bumped her from the committee: she is unprincipled and untrustworthy.

Not surprising for her, but it does make one ask: Is this what you like about her, that she will do or say anything to remain in power?

It's hard to tell which is worse: that Harman cravenly got on her hands and knees to apologize to Klein for voting as her constituents wished, or that Klein used her mea culpa, then turned right around and stabbed her in the back in the comments. Both are examples of disgusting behavior, but the edge goes to Harman, who if she had a conscience and even a scintilla of intelligence would have voted "NO" without prodding from her constituents.

Harman reminds me of my representative, the odious Al Wynn. Wynn had a strong record of supporting every pro-war and pro-corporatist bill he could find. He strongly supported the hideous bankruptcy bill that passed a couple of years ago and could be counted on to vote for every initiative the repug leadership floated. That all changed after last year's primary, which he nearly lost to a strong challenger precisely because of his right-leaning voting history. With next year's primary looming and many of us even more committed to dumping him, Wynn can be counted on to meekly toe the line. If people in Harman's district mount a strong primary challenge, she will likely become as docile as Wynn. Which is exactly as it should be since Congress serves us, not vice versa.

Joe:

You predicted that Clinton and Obama would vote for the bill and were wrong. You claimed that Harman voted for the bill and were wrong. These are just the latest instances in your long record of things you have been wrong about. You have no credibility whatsoever. Why should anyone listen to you? Why is Time wasting its money paying you?

Oh please. The problem isn't that the troops haven't been funded. For the amount of money we've spent on this war, the troops should be driving around Iraq in Lamborghinis.

The problem is that the funds aren't going to the troops--this war has always been about the Republicans' mission to form a conduit between the US Treasury and their biggest donors. And that's what'll happen with these funds too.

You really want to see Bush wet his pants?
Next time, don't tie the funding to a timetable.
Tie it to an audit.

So, when can we expect Joke Line to admit that he -- or his editors -- should have checked the roll call BEFORE publishing his piece?

It is ignorance and stupidity topped by arrogance such as Klein's that put people off the MSM.

Joe,

I don't understand why Harman is apologizing so profusely. It's your fault, you should have checked the roll call.

Joe Klein responds: She apologized because, like it or not, I am an important person who has the ability to affect her public image. This is the same reason John Kerry regularly called me and begged me to agree with his positions. It goes with the territory when you're a prominent columnist.

Good Lord, when will the stupidity end?

Joe Klein responds: She apologized because, like it or not, I am an important person who has the ability to affect her public image. This is the same reason John Kerry regularly called me and begged me to agree with his positions. It goes with the territory when you're a prominent columnist.

Alas, this is true. Your institutional connection gives you (and dozens of others) a power which cannot be justified by your writing. This is something that we hope to change. The American media have performed wretchedly since about 1994 (perhaps even earlier).

mz: "Joe Klein is not a mensch."

In fact, Joe Klein is the anti-mensch.

"Joe Klein responds: She apologized because, like it or not, I am an important person who has the ability to affect her public image. This is the same reason John Kerry regularly called me and begged me to agree with his positions. It goes with the territory when you're a prominent columnist."

This speaks volumes about what is wrong with the Beltway insider media.

I hate the fact that people like you are allegedly important people. People like you and the rest of the beltway are destroying this country.

I think George W. Bush has made the position of Broder, Klein, and the White House clear.

We can't have a plan in Iraq! If you have a plan, the enemy can figure it out.

So, let's wait it out. We have enough money and it isn't our kids being slaughtered.

Florida's quote from Joe Klein (above) and lipreader's make interesting cross reading. Its a fact that Joe "important person" Klein who "has an ability" to affect politicians images and our public policy because he's a "prominent columnist" was deaf, dumb, blind and entirely foolish when it came to the biggest story of his day--the selling of the Iraq phony war, the gutting of the DOJ, the failures of Fema etc...etc...etc...

A columnist, like a tailor or a barber, is judged by the quality of his work not by how scared his customers are that he will *botch the job* and make them look foolish. On the most significant story of our time Joe Klein has demonstrated beyond a doubt that he is a foolish, childish, trivial person unable to see beyond his own self aggrandizement to his actual role in our political discourse. He is either informing the public of something they don't otherwise know, or he is simply a cog in a publicity machine selling the public a bill of goods. His post about how he thinks about himself says it all--he thinks of himself primarily as an important person and not as a journalist. His job is to screw or suck up to important people (make them look "good" or "bad") not to actually inform the public.

Thanks for making that clear Joe.

aimai

I guess it's lucky for you that being an "important person" and being an "ignorant braying jackass" are no longer considered mutually exclusive or incompatible.

Joe Klein is an important person--that's why kerry begged him to "agree with his positions."

Does anyone OTHER than Klein and Kerry think that Klein's opinion would have mattered? Seriously?

Klein is actually quite important to me--he's a daily reminder of the uselessness of the mainstream media, its intellectual laziness, its irresponsibility, its love of insider gossip and unending self-regard. Klein is an outstanding example of why the blogosphere is the best thing too happen to American politics in 100 years. Thank you, Joe Klein--stay exactly as important as you, and keep your dwindling circle of irrelevance

"Joe Klein responds: She apologized because, like it or not, I am an important person who has the ability to affect her public image. This is the same reason John Kerry regularly called me and begged me to agree with his positions. It goes with the territory when you're a prominent columnist."

No, this is only true if you abuse your position of power. I happen to be a "prominent" financial analyst (at least for now, according to polls of my clients). But I work very hard NOT to let my stock research be influenced by what companies say to me that is irrelevant to the facts. To do this, you need to treat the subjects of your writing dispassionately. Stop socializing with them. Stop coveting their power. Just do your job. This is why the "cocktail weenie" criticism of political journalists is so apt. There are a huge number of ways a Wall Street analyst like me could be corrupted. I have an obligation to work hard to make certain it doesn't happen. You and too many other journalists clearly don't agree, and your comment shows it. It's just that simple.

Todd Bault
Senior Analyst
Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. LLC
NOTE: This comment is solely my opinion, not that of my employers or colleagues.

How much money has been *budgeted* for this war so far?!!!! Yet the troops have been ill-eguipped, ill-fed, drivng around in humvees that are missing armor. We're hearing that money is missing, completed projects were done so poorly that they're been deemed failures, and the Iraqis have even less electricity and other services than ever.

The troops weren't being supplied, and they're not going to be better supplied now, and you know it!!! This is an outrage!

At least be honest about this.

"I am an important person who has the ability to affect her public image. This is the same reason John Kerry regularly called me and begged me to agree with his positions."

You little, little man.

Todd Bault gets its. More like him please.

Joe Klein is a petty corrupt pr!ck. Fewer like him please.

It's that simple.

I saw this:
"She apologized because, like it or not, I am an important person who has the ability to affect her public image. This is the same reason John Kerry regularly called me and begged me to agree with his positions. It goes with the territory when you're a prominent columnist."

Today I cancel my sub to the ever thinning Time Mag. There will be one less Time reader and one more critic pushing my party to shun pompous personalities like yourself and do The People's work.

"Joe Klein responds: She apologized because, like it or not, I am an important person who has the ability to affect her public image. This is the same reason John Kerry regularly called me and begged me to agree with his positions. It goes with the territory when you are a prominent columnist and get things large and small consistently wrong."

Fixed that for you.

Wow.

Harman apologized because Joe got a story wrong on a simple question of fact because he's so important?

I actually don't doubt the story--that she told him how she was gonna vote, that he wrote it up like it was a press release issued before the actual event took place, that she changed her mind at the last minute, deciding, apparently, that she had to represent her voting constituents over her donors or those donors could lose the seat.

And I actually don't think, having read through all this, that this is a huge issue.

But Joe has made it into a much, much bigger issue with his comments. He (and apparently Harman) see Joe Klein as an incredibly important arbiter of public opinion. Kerry "begs" him for support.

I've thought things were really bad in the beltway wrt the MSM/politician axis. But, jeez, was I wrong. They're way worse than I thought.

This also illustrates just how broken the Democrats are. Do you think Karl Rove begs Joe for coverage? Even if Joe is exaggerating here, don't you think that it goes entirely the other way when dealing with the official part of the Wurlitzer? Did they have to beg him to push the line that Bush vetoing legislation in an emergency supplemental meant that Democrats didn't "support the troops?" It's such a shocking failure that I really still have a hard time wrapping my mind around it.

And, making it still worse, Joe sits their, blithely remarking on his "importance" while peddling the administration's goods. An administration that has manifestly failed at pretty much everything it has attempted, and stonewalled any attempt to determine why those failures happened.

People, the Joe Klein responds thing I wrote about him being important was a joke!

Is he really so pompous normally that that wasn't obvious?

Jeez. You even fooled atrios.

Moderators, you really don't want to have your lead posters editing comments as a means of response, assuming that the first time this happened it was actually Joe. Slate has a graphical indicator of a lead poster. Glenn Greenwald posts his comments as separate posts, which can be deleted if they are not really his.

"Jeez. You even fooled atrios."

I just left an apology on atrios' voicemail.

I don't really get it. Joe Klein is a prick, but if this Harman person gave him a story about how she was going to vote, and didn't tell him she changed her mind, it's really not wrong for Klein to be mad. I wish they would be upset more often when sources burn them. But Harman made Klein look foolish, and she did it without much cause. She should have apologized to him, because she chose to give him a bad story.

"The American media have performed wretchedly since about 1994 (perhaps even earlier)."

Sorry, Mr. Emerson...You're off by about 50 years...

The "Media" went completely to hell with the advent of TeeVee...

That Marvel bloke is right...

"I guess the point to be taken is that Democracy can sometimes work, and obviously, more primary challenges are needed."

The last vote did us the favour of drawing up the final hit list. It contains every cowardly, spineless, Democrat who voted for the blank check strategy in Iraq.

Oops, just saw that the specific comment I responded to was not Klein. I apologize for assuming it was--careless of me. But otherwise, I stand by everything else I said. I've been meaning to put that analogy (worship of power corrupting journalism, and one's duty to avoid it) in public for a while, and this seemed like a good forum. Klein's total output is still worthy of that criticism. Still, pwned, as the kids say.

Todd Bault

re: Joe Klein responds:

It's been pointed out on several forums that satire is dangerous, precisely because no matter how far over-the-top and ridiculous your attempt, reality will catch up to you in no time whatsoever.

Joe may not be willing to go on record with your quote. But you can be damn sure it's what he's thinking.

The problem is that the funds aren't going to the troops--this war has always been about the Republicans' mission to form a conduit between the US Treasury and their biggest donors. And that's what'll happen with these funds too.

Klein, Harman et al. are part of that world. They live in its constant drizzle.

You really want to see Bush wet his pants?
Next time, don't tie the funding to a timetable.
Tie it to an audit.

There will not be any audit. The drizzle-people know that numbers do not lie.

"I just left an apology on atrios' voicemail."
- Jane Harman

Best comment ever! I laughed out loud!

Joe -- I warned you. It's dangerous to start a practice of responding in others' posts. It facilitates spoofs like this.

But I'll tell you, I wouldn't have been shocked if that was your actual response.

If I were you, I take a swallow of a huge helping of humility and start recognizing that the posters here are -- at a minimum -- your equal in perceptiveness, political astuteness and dedication to the successful future of this nation. I have no doubt that you emphatically reject that notion, but it's true.

As a great philosopher once said: "Read it. Learn it. Live it." (Fast Times at Ridgemont High")

You people need to get a grip, quit trashing Joe Klein for perceived past wankery, and stick to what you can currently prove. Everything Joe has posted on this Jane Harman incident has the ring of truth to it. There have been stories about Harman being a "finger in the wind" Dem for years, and this just proves it.

Simels, if that's your real name, I think you really really need to drop the Primary Colors shtick. That was long ago now, I liked the movie, but nobody but you cares about it anymore. It's 2007, not 1997, and you're not Bob Somerby. It's starting to just be Klein-trolling.

Well OK, Joe, that about settles it.
You are never wrong even if congresswomen are.
Even when you are losing, you keep digging.
I love it. Keep up the good work!

thanks alot
برامج
دليل مواقع
منتدى

منتديات
الرياض

كول

 بنات كول

 شباب كول

 كول كول

 قياس
سرعة الاتصال

منتدى الرياض

جنس ثقافه
جنسية

بنات كول شباب كول

الطب
بالاعشاب
منتديات عامة

وظائف

التوظيف

وظائف حكوميه

وظائف شركات

وظائف
بالسعودية

حوادث

جرائم



الاسره والطفل

العنايه
بالاطفال

ازياء

ميك اب

فساتين

العناية بالشعر

مكياج



ثقافه جنسيه

سكس

اداب الجماع

ليلة الدخله



وصفات للاكل

اكلات مغربيه

اكلات سعوديه

وصفات عربيه لبنانيه سوريه خليجيه

طريقة اعداد الطعام



منتدى الصحة

الحفاظ على الصحه

صحة الاطفال

الامراض والوقايه منها



منتدى الشعر

خواطر

قصص



صور حصرية

صور

مقاطع صوتيه style="text-decoration: underline;">



بلوتوث

فيديو

مقاطع



صور سياحية

معلومات سياحيه



الرياضه



السيارات



برامج



توبيكات

برنامج الماسنجر

صور ماسنجر



تصاميم

صور للتصاميم

برامج التصميم

تصاميم جاهزة



الاتصالات

جوالات

رسائل

مسجات

العاب جوال

ثيمات

برامج جوالات