WSJ trying to stir the pot - comparing a DOJ event highlighting Donna Brazile to Karl Rove

[sabra]

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/03/26/politicization-charges-at-doj-over-brazile-appearance/

Politicization Charges at DOJ over Brazile Appearance

Evan Perez reports on the Justice Department.

New leadership at the Justice Department is aiming to erase memories of the highly-charged political controversies from the previous administration.

But already some of the same “politicization” charges are being flung at the Justice Department, under Attorney General Eric Holder, as the department prepares to host veteran Democratic Party strategist Donna Brazile for a “Women’s History Month” event.

...

A flyer sent to Justice Department employees advising of the March 31 Brazile appearance, says “Supervisors are encouraged to grant official time to employees to attend this event.”

“During my remarks, I will pay tribute to women who dare, women of courage and the many milestones we have achieved and the path ahead,” Brazile said in an e-mail. “I am going in my capacity as an Adjunct Professor in the Women and Gender Studies at Georgetown University — not as a CNN contributor, ABC news consultant or Vice Chair of the DNC . Perhaps, I am going as a woman of valor — a woman of courage to pay tribute to women who work at the DOJ and elsewhere.”

...

To some the Brazile event seems odd, given the months of turmoil and inquiries that hung over the Justice Department over allegations of political meddling in the firing of U.S. attorneys. The uproar forced Alberto Gonzales to resign as attorney general.

At about the same time as the prosecutor firings scandal was raging, the Bush Administration acknowledged that political operatives, including Karl Rove, held partisan briefings at more than a dozen government agencies. At the briefings in 2006 and 2007, employees were told of House Democrats who Republicans were targeting for defeat, as well as the prospects for some Republicans. The White House at the time defended the briefings as appropriate.

:crazy:

[BuyingThyme]

1. When you're a Republican, Blackness is a political subversion.

[niyad]

2. so honouring women is political? on the same level as firing attorneys for NOT toeing the party

line? the snow must be getting to me, because I truly do not "get it"-- can someone explain this to me?

[D-Lee]

3. Go to the WSJ blog page and post a comment

AControversyabout nothing, based on sheer negativity and one griper. There is a need to point out that this sort of thing is hardly "news."

Here was my comment:

Sounds like an attempt to make a controversy out of nothing.

Literally thousands of Women’s History Month events are scheduled all over the country — at government units, bar associations, public and civic service groups, etc. Almost universally, prominent women are asked to speak, especially professors of women’s history or women of historical prominence. Donna Brazile clearly fits into both of these categories and is an entirely logical speaker at a Women’s History event.

Interesting that the person with the gripe points to no other instance in which there has been a debate about the selection of a Women’s History event speaker. A lone nit-picker really doesn't make a worthy news source nor one who can justifiably be classified as creating a “controversy.”

[gratuitous]

4. Compare and contrast, class

How does this prospective coverage of a non-controversy compare with the Post's reporting on Lurita Doan hosting a mandatory meeting for her GSA staff in which Scott Jennings, assistant to Karl Rove, made a powerpoint presentation on the 2006 election results and the prospects for Republican candidates in 2008, and Doan asked him what the GSA could do on behalf of the Republican party, and how its resources could be used to help them win elections.

Did the Post think that was a big deal? Why or why not?

You have five minutes from . . . now!