Offering constructive criticism to the social cripples in our midst since early 2005.

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
No. I think it was Anita Hill and the exact quote may have been:

"18 inches of Clarence Thomas was not enough, which is why I kept coming back for more"

Unfortunately, I think this is about your best material.

[Spanky]

Going to jail makes him a hero and gives him journalistic credibility. Losing his job makes him unemployed and poor.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
Going to jail makes him a hero and gives him journalistic credibility. Losing his job makes him unemployed and poor.

Indeed.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop


Is it not a little odd that Cooper is prepared to disobey a federal court, but not his own employer? If the principle is worth serving time for, might it not also be worth losing his job?

http://allintensivepurposes.blogspot...ly-so-far.html

Time is giving up his notes, over which they exercise control (apparently). Cooper prefers that not be done, but once it is, and his source is revealed, there's not much point in standing on principle and going to jail for not naming a source that's already been named.

It does surprise me that time is folding up so easily. It's probably even more important for them to resist, because they employ numerous reporters, none of whom will now have the credibility re confidentiality they once had. What's more, Safire's point in yesterday's times is a a good one: the government's need for the information is clearly much lower now that the investigation is coming to a close. Why not reargue the facts, in light of changed circumstances? Apparently time doesn't want to do even that.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Cooper evidently was prepared to go to jail rather than reveal his source. According to the Washington Post, "told Reuters that he would rather Time not turn over his notes but acknowledged that the magazine had its own obligations to consider."

Is it not a little odd that Cooper is prepared to disobey a federal court, but not his own employer? If the principle is worth serving time for, might it not also be worth losing his job?

http://allintensivepurposes.blogspot...ly-so-far.html

I think that Time editors have possession of his notes -- at least that's the impression I got from one of the stories I read about their move.

It makes sense that the magazine would have copies of his notes -- he did write a story on it, and it relied on anonymous sources. Many newspapers, etc., require that an editor review interview notes and know the ID of the anonymous source in such a situation.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Sexual Harassment Panda
Unfortunately, I think this is about your best material.

We are still waiting for something that just doesn't suck from you. Keep trying.

eta: although, in fairness, your material probably does very well in France.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
I could support this.

Wasn't it Holmes who said, "18 years of Clarence Thomas is enough."

Katie Holmes?

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Does anyone else find Valentine's use of the phrase "the smart money" a little jarring, in that he otherwise sounds like a member of a Communist youth group?

I find the fact that you read his entire posts a little sexy.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Katie Holmes?

I'm sure Katie wouldn't do more than 5 years of Clarence Thomas.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Today's news in the Valerie Plame Defenestration Aftermath is that Time Magazine says it will comply with a court order to turn over correspondent Matthew Cooper's notes, apparently thereby revealing the identity of his source and obviating the need to jail him for contempt of the federal court's order that he cooperate with prosecutors. The Supreme Court declined to grant cert a few days ago, foreclosing Time's prospects of reversing the district court.

Cooper evidently was prepared to go to jail rather than reveal his source. According to the Washington Post, "told Reuters that he would rather Time not turn over his notes but acknowledged that the magazine had its own obligations to consider."

Is it not a little odd that Cooper is prepared to disobey a federal court, but not his own employer? If the principle is worth serving time for, might it not also be worth losing his job?

http://allintensivepurposes.blogspot...ly-so-far.html

Well, Washington Monthly supports him.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Cooper evidently was prepared to go to jail rather than reveal his source. According to the Washington Post, "told Reuters that he would rather Time not turn over his notes but acknowledged that the magazine had its own obligations to consider."

Is it not a little odd that Cooper is prepared to disobey a federal court, but not his own employer? If the principle is worth serving time for, might it not also be worth losing his job?

That's not how I read this. I don't think Cooper is giving up his notes because his employer told him too. I think Time is turning over his notes, which they have, and he is expressing disappointment with that.

Maybe he could go steal the notes back from Time, but that would be a bit much.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
I find the fact that you read his entire posts a little jarring.

I can tell you don't read Ty's blog regularly.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
That's not how I read this. I don't think Cooper is giving up his notes because his employer told him too. I think Time is turning over his notes, which they have, and he is expressing disappointment with that.

Maybe he could go steal the notes back from Time, but that would be a bit much.

Time should have taken its cue from CBS News and not required verification.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Time should have taken its cue from CBS News and not required verification.

What's the NYTimes policy on verification since the Blair thing? They still flying free and easy with the facts?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
What's the NYTimes policy on verification since the Blair thing? They still flying free and easy with the facts?

Depends. Who's being defamed in your hypo?