Tom Brokaw Doubles Down On WHCD: ‘If You Go, It’ll Steal Your Soul’ (VIDEO)
The Huffington Post | By Jack Mirkinson Posted: 05/08/2012 Updated:
Article:
Tom Brokaw doubled down on his criticism of the White House Correspondents Dinner during a Tuesday conversation with the Daily Beast’s Howard Kurtz.
The NBC News veteran caused a major stir on Sunday when he said that it was time to “rethink” the dinner, which has become one of the biggest nights on the Washington social calendar.
Fox News’ Ed Henry and Greta Van Susteren both responded to Brokaw’s comments on Monday. Henry, the incoming overseer of the dinner, chided Brokaw for failing to mention the charitable aspect of the dinner.
Brokaw also inspired people such as the American Journalism Review’s Rem Reider, who wrote on Monday that it was beyond time to can the dinner.
Reider wrote that, the last time he attended the event, “I was appalled by what a misguided celebrityfest it had become,” and that things have only gotten worse.
Brokaw told Kurtz that people he talks to feel that political reporting has become a “closed game” that “doesn’t address what their real concerns are.” But he saved his most stinging words for the dinner itself.
“I do feel strongly that it’s gone way too far,” he said. He added that the dinner, which has drawn more and more Hollywood celebrities ever year, gives off a “let them eat cake” air to the rest of the country, and seemed to say that “we’re more interested in celebrities than we are in the concerns of real folks who are out there.”
It was, he said, “just the worst kind of symbolism,” as well as an “exercise simply in hedonism.”
Brokaw finished by saying that he refuses to attend the event anymore. Playing off of what he said was an old Native American belief that a photograph will steal one’s soul, he said, “If you go it’ll steal your soul.” (end of article)
Loading...
“My political premises begin with the notion that “standing by and merely disparaging” is akin to giving permission. I refuse to give permission, but I also refuse to stand above the fray preening in my purity.”~Mike Spindell
————————————————————-
durn you Mike Spindell….now I have to think about this ALL DAMN DAY!!!
Loading...
“I would much rather have a president that knows what he’s doing and has experience”
BC,
Um, you mean someone who made millions by buying up viable companies, gutting them for profit, firing their employees and then taking them into bankruptcy? Perhaps you mean someone who initiated the same health insurance program that this administration did in his home state, with the same provision to force people to buy health insurance that’s before the Supreme Court? Then again maybe you mean the Viet Nam war hawk, who avoided the fighting, or maybe you mean the politician whose opinions change with the wind?
Cut the crap. When it comes to politics, you’re like the football fanatic who goes shirtless at the game, in minus ten degree whether, loaded up on Coors, belly jellying in the wind.
Loading...
Vote out incumbent and prepare to impeach whoever fallows,
most other discussion is petty at this point.
Loading...
“Vote out incumbent and prepare to impeach whoever fallows, most other discussion is petty at this point.”
Oscar,
A not unreasonable plan with absolutely no chance of working other than in ones fantasies.
Loading...
“All kidding aside, that President is the most gracious and yet charming person to inhabit the White House since Harry Truman”
TalkinDog,
No matter what one thinks about his performance in office politically, your statement above is absolutely true.
==============================
I would much rather have a president that knows what he’s doing and has experience, and a good track record that wasn’t gracious and charming, than to have one that can deliver one highly polished speech off of a teleprompter, but have absolutely zero experience, and doesn’t know what he’s doing, and has a horrible track record.
Take your “gracious” and “charming”, and add a dollar, and it will get you a cup of coffee.
Loading...
anon nurse, I was speaking of his almost endorsement of Ron Paul.
Loading...
.Guess he isn’t very pure when it comes to republicans. (Swarthmore mom, addressed to Mike S.)
Swarthmore mom,
Could you elaborate?
Loading...
DonS,
If you see politics as a spectrum and I do, then the fringes on each end tend towards the totalitarian in belief systems. Just as in religion they are the fundamentalists. As is the case with religion, so with politics, rigidity of belief causes grief.
Loading...
anon nurse, An October surprise for Obama and Romney wins? Mike S., Greenwald was a Ron Paul fan. Guess he isn’t very pure when it comes to republicans.
(Mike S., Are Greenwald and Engelhardt Nader fans?)
Loading...
So Mike, it sounds like your definition of “left fringe” has to do with tactics and not substance. Unless you align your idea of substance with the ‘center’. Or are finding problems with substance too, hence the need for a ‘center left’, or even a ‘left left’, to differentiate from a ‘left fringe’. Personally, I’ve got enough gripes with the right . . . and the center.
http://buyloxitane.com/#loxapine-safety-90 Purchase Cheap Loxapine Medication – metabolites of loxapine
“If you go it’ll steal your soul.”
You tell ’em, Tom!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/08/tom-brokaw-white-house-correspondents-dinner-soul_n_1499454.html
Tom Brokaw Doubles Down On WHCD: ‘If You Go, It’ll Steal Your Soul’ (VIDEO)
The Huffington Post | By Jack Mirkinson Posted: 05/08/2012 Updated:
Article:
Tom Brokaw doubled down on his criticism of the White House Correspondents Dinner during a Tuesday conversation with the Daily Beast’s Howard Kurtz.
The NBC News veteran caused a major stir on Sunday when he said that it was time to “rethink” the dinner, which has become one of the biggest nights on the Washington social calendar.
Fox News’ Ed Henry and Greta Van Susteren both responded to Brokaw’s comments on Monday. Henry, the incoming overseer of the dinner, chided Brokaw for failing to mention the charitable aspect of the dinner.
Brokaw also inspired people such as the American Journalism Review’s Rem Reider, who wrote on Monday that it was beyond time to can the dinner.
Reider wrote that, the last time he attended the event, “I was appalled by what a misguided celebrityfest it had become,” and that things have only gotten worse.
Brokaw told Kurtz that people he talks to feel that political reporting has become a “closed game” that “doesn’t address what their real concerns are.” But he saved his most stinging words for the dinner itself.
“I do feel strongly that it’s gone way too far,” he said. He added that the dinner, which has drawn more and more Hollywood celebrities ever year, gives off a “let them eat cake” air to the rest of the country, and seemed to say that “we’re more interested in celebrities than we are in the concerns of real folks who are out there.”
It was, he said, “just the worst kind of symbolism,” as well as an “exercise simply in hedonism.”
Brokaw finished by saying that he refuses to attend the event anymore. Playing off of what he said was an old Native American belief that a photograph will steal one’s soul, he said, “If you go it’ll steal your soul.” (end of article)
“My political premises begin with the notion that “standing by and merely disparaging” is akin to giving permission. I refuse to give permission, but I also refuse to stand above the fray preening in my purity.”~Mike Spindell
————————————————————-
durn you Mike Spindell….now I have to think about this ALL DAMN DAY!!!
“I would much rather have a president that knows what he’s doing and has experience”
BC,
Um, you mean someone who made millions by buying up viable companies, gutting them for profit, firing their employees and then taking them into bankruptcy? Perhaps you mean someone who initiated the same health insurance program that this administration did in his home state, with the same provision to force people to buy health insurance that’s before the Supreme Court? Then again maybe you mean the Viet Nam war hawk, who avoided the fighting, or maybe you mean the politician whose opinions change with the wind?
Cut the crap. When it comes to politics, you’re like the football fanatic who goes shirtless at the game, in minus ten degree whether, loaded up on Coors, belly jellying in the wind.
Vote out incumbent and prepare to impeach whoever fallows,
most other discussion is petty at this point.
“Vote out incumbent and prepare to impeach whoever fallows, most other discussion is petty at this point.”
Oscar,
A not unreasonable plan with absolutely no chance of working other than in ones fantasies.
“All kidding aside, that President is the most gracious and yet charming person to inhabit the White House since Harry Truman”
TalkinDog,
No matter what one thinks about his performance in office politically, your statement above is absolutely true.
==============================
I would much rather have a president that knows what he’s doing and has experience, and a good track record that wasn’t gracious and charming, than to have one that can deliver one highly polished speech off of a teleprompter, but have absolutely zero experience, and doesn’t know what he’s doing, and has a horrible track record.
Take your “gracious” and “charming”, and add a dollar, and it will get you a cup of coffee.
anon nurse, I was speaking of his almost endorsement of Ron Paul.
.Guess he isn’t very pure when it comes to republicans. (Swarthmore mom, addressed to Mike S.)
Swarthmore mom,
Could you elaborate?
DonS,
If you see politics as a spectrum and I do, then the fringes on each end tend towards the totalitarian in belief systems. Just as in religion they are the fundamentalists. As is the case with religion, so with politics, rigidity of belief causes grief.
anon nurse, An October surprise for Obama and Romney wins? Mike S., Greenwald was a Ron Paul fan. Guess he isn’t very pure when it comes to republicans.
As I’ve said before, maybe an October surprise?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_surprise
(Mike S., Are Greenwald and Engelhardt Nader fans?)
So Mike, it sounds like your definition of “left fringe” has to do with tactics and not substance. Unless you align your idea of substance with the ‘center’. Or are finding problems with substance too, hence the need for a ‘center left’, or even a ‘left left’, to differentiate from a ‘left fringe’. Personally, I’ve got enough gripes with the right . . . and the center.