Beltwaybabble squared

Milbank writes that the Woodward flap was yet another frivolous edition of "inside baseball" and thus "a textbook case of why Americans hate Washington." It was but this week's classically inconsequential cause célèbre--mere Beltway flatulence passing for news in an imposing fiscal hurricane--which Milbank then desperately attempts to render consequential. That's the bad news.

The good news is he succeeds, though doubtless in an unintended way.

I'm not a forensic psychiatrist, but the psychiatric sleuthing into Milbank's column is about as demanding as sifting through a bit of the stunningly conspicuous evidence and concluding that a really pissed O.J. did it. In Dana Milbank's case it's clear that he, like Bob Woodward, has had his feelings hurt by an expletive-hurling, hardball White House at least once too often, and therefore by God he's going to repeat such imbecilities as "Woodward made a legitimate policy point" (see 'goal posts,' moving of) no matter what the repeatedly corrected record says.

Milbank has to know that he's committing a foul in his Woodward defense and he has to know that his pissy tantrum of kicking dirt the WH's way is just petty payback for personal injuries sustained--at least one reason why, as he laments in his lede, that "Americans hate Washington." I know Milbank has to know these things, because I know he's too damn smart to be so otherwise stupid.

Milbank's intent was to expose the trivial silliness of Beltwaybabble. He succeeded. "And it’s a !&%@#$ shame."

Comments

[AnneJ.]

He and the rest of the beltway media are so busy scrambling for access, how would he or any of the rest of them know how we feel about Washington? They don't pay attention to the people, they're just too busy trying to tell us all how we're supposed to feel.

[Robert Lipscomb]

I attended a speeech given by Woodward to the state chamber of commerce in the late 90's. I went as a fan and returned as a skeptic.

He held the audience in the palm of his hand by giving them an insider's look into the Clinton administration. The audience went all a twitter with each miniscule observation. One in particular stands out.

He told the story of his first interview with Clintonin the Oval Office. The play-by-play slowed to a time warp as he described Clinton listening to Woodward's question while drinking a glass of water.

Clinton stared at Woodward the whole time he was drinking ....

(pause) ...

And never once broke eye contact ...

(pregnant pause)....

He even looked eye-to-eye through the bottom of the glass!!!

(Giggles and Laughter)

This is Woodward's schtick. he gets inside access because he has a history of inside accesss and tosses out little facts to let you know that he (and vicariously through him, you also were) was there. I mean REALLY THERE!

Unfortnately, neither you nor he come away with any really useful information - except something about a water glass.

His initial story and the follow-up smack of this.

[pamelabrown53]

Interesting anecdote, Robert. It reminds me of of Noam Scheiber's book review at the NYTBR where he nails Woodward for reaching conclusions that contradicted his stenography.