Robert Gibbs Doesn't Read Maureen Dowd Anymore

    Gibbs really knew where to hit her where it hurts:
   
     "Former White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Monday he stopped reading acerbic New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd because “it’s largely the same column for the last, like, eight years.”

“I don’t normally read Maureen,” Gibbs said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”

     “Oh, yes, you do,” host Mika Brzezinski responded.

     “I don’t largely because it’s sort of largely the same column for the last, like, eight years,” Gibbs said.

Dowd’s column on Sunday unfavorably compared President Barack Obama’s handling of the IRS scandal to how Bill and Hillary Clinton have handled scandals in their political lives.

 http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/robert-gibbs-maureen-dowd-91608.html#ixzz2TqUdg2qO


     She deserves this and so does her friends in the Beltway media. They have such an overweening sense of their own importance. They like to think they can bring down a President. 

     http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-beltway-media-very-sadistic-people.html

     Yet the polls after a week of a feeding  frenzy over the fake scandals haven't moved at all. 

      http://www.gallup.com/home.aspx

       http://www.politico.com/blogs/politico-live/2013/05/obama-approval-rating-holding-steady-164302.html?hp=r1

     What if they all wrote and talked about a scandal and nobody cared?

      "The IRS scandal: Among overall Americans, 61 percent say what Obama has said about the matter is mostly or completely true, versus only 35 percent who say it’s mostly or completely false. Among Republicans, 68 percent say what Obama has claimed is false, and among conservatives, 56 percent say this. But independents believe what Obama has said is true by 58-36, and moderates believe this by 71-25."

     "Meanwhile, among overall Americans, 55 percent say the IRS acted on its own in targeting conservative groups, while only 37 percent say the White House ordered it. Among Republicans, 62 percent say the White House ordered it, and among conservatives, 54 percent believe this. But independents believe the IRS acted on its own by 53-36, and moderates believe this by 65-29."

      "The Benghazi story: Among overall Americans, 50 percent believe early statements about the attacks by Obama officials reflected what the administration believed at the time, while 44 percent believe they intentionally misled. Among Republicans, 76 percent believe they intentionally misled, and among conservatives, 65 percent believe this. But moderates believe the statements reflected the administration’s beliefs by 60-35. (Among independents this isn’t as pronounced, but still, a plurality sides with the White House, 47-44.)"

     "These two stories are presidential scandals only in the minds of majorities of Republicans. This helps explain why Obama’s approval is holding."

     http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/05/20/the-morning-plum-presidential-scandals-only-in-the-minds-of-republicans/

    This is really nothing new, the inability of the media to convince the public of its "narrative." The same thing happened in the 90s with Clinton. 

    "With some exceptions, the Washington Establishment is outraged by the president's behavior in the Monica Lewinsky scandal. The polls show that a majority of Americans do not share that outrage. Around the nation, people are disgusted but want to move on; in Washington, despite Clinton's gains with the budget and the Mideast peace talks, people want some formal acknowledgment that the president's behavior has been unacceptable. They want this, they say, not just for the sake of the community, but for the sake of the country and the presidency as well."

     "In addition to the polls and surveys, this disconnect between the Washington Establishment and the rest of the country is evident on TV and radio talk shows and in interviews and conversations with more than 100 Washingtonians for this article. The din about the scandal has subsided in the news as politicians and journalists fan out across the country before tomorrow's elections. But in Washington, interest remains high."

     http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/quinn110298.htm

     Just like Dowd deserves Gibbs' diss the media as a whole deserve to be dissed, first of all, Jonathan Karl's pathetic attempt to claim that nothing significant has changed in his Benghazi piece-that got all the scandal mongering going in the first place.   

     "Statement from ABC News’ Jonathan Karl: “I regret that one email was quoted incorrectly and I regret that it’s become a distraction from the story, which still entirely stands. I should have been clearer about the attribution. We updated our story immediately when new information became available.”

     http://editors.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2013/05/the_latest_turn_of_the_screw.php?ref=fpblg

     Yes, just one email which just so happened to be the entire big revelation. When you realize that this email was doctored by GOP Congressional aides, what's left of the story? If Dowd deserves it, Karl really, really deserves it.