Archive   |   Live Q&As   |   RSS Feeds RSS   |   E-mail Dan  |  
Clarification to This Article
An April 23 article in the New York Times quoted presidential advisor Karl Rove one time. In asking "What's the point of sitting next to a newsmaker if you can't quote him when he makes news?," this column's Rove Blows item suggested that the Times article didn't quote Rove.
Page 2 of 5   <       >

A Delusional Dinner  

Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

But from what I see, the critics of the dinner are not saying Washington journalists should hate their sources -- just hold their sources accountable. I'm quite sure the dinner would be forgiven if the media was seen to be doing its job the rest of the time.

A leading concern appears to be that in the Bush era, where spin and message control and confabulation have been taken to unprecedented new heights, the old rules aren't serving journalism or the public as well as they once did. Where once a general coziness with sources gained journalists valuable information they could impart to the public, now it is more likely to win them little more than a returned phone call full of obfuscation.

That's why the dinner rubs so many people the wrong way. It is increasingly widely seen as the celebration of a con -- by the conned.

Here is C-Span video of Scully, Bush and Little.

Rove Blows

But first, the big news of the night: The Karl Rove Blow Up!

Amy Argetsinger and Roxanne Roberts write in The Washington Post that "singer Sheryl Crow and 'Inconvenient Truth' producer Laurie David walked over to Table 92 at the Hilton Washington to chat with Karl Rove -- and the resulting exchange was suitably heated.

"'I am floored by what I just experienced with Karl Rove,' David reports. 'I went over to him and said, "I urge you to take a new look at global warming." He went zero to 100 with me. . . . I've never had anyone be so rude.'

"Rove's version: 'She came over to insult me and she succeeded.'

"Things got so hot that Crow stepped in to defuse the situation and then got into it with Rove herself. 'You work for me,' she told the presidential adviser, according to singed bystanders. 'No,' was his response. 'I work for the American people.'

"News of the dust-up filtered quickly through the room. Some witnesses said David was very aggressive with Rove; a shaken Crow later said that Rove was 'combative and unresponsive.'"

Anne Schroeder of Politico has a picture of the meeting of the minds. Schroeder quotes an anonymous witness who "came to Rove's defense: 'Laurie David was in his face, being very aggressive, (which was) really inappropriate for the setting. She was intentionally picking a fight so that she could get it written about. Crow came over, she was less aggressive, a little sheepish. Then David walked away. Then Crow left,' reported our source, who claimed to have no reason to side with Rove on the controversy, but considered what the women did to be, 'so wrong.'"

David and Crow post their own account of the incident on Huffingtonpost.com: "We asked Mr. Rove if he would consider taking a fresh look at the science of global warming. Much to our dismay, he immediately got combative. And it went downhill from there.


<       2              >


© 2007 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive