Howie wrote this today:

"John Amato at Crooks and Liars says: "The Washington Post continues to become more and more a mouthpiece for the GOP by hiring a rightwing blogger." I don't get it. One conservative blogger? It's not like The Post doesn't have a left-leaning blogger, or liberal columnists. Is the New York Times a GOP mouthpiece because it employs David Brooks and John Tierney? If people don't like what Domenech has to say, don't click on him. It's not like you can say "cancel my subscription!" since the Web site is free."

I'd just like to know who the actual liberal blogger is? That's all I'm asking because nobody really seems to know either. Let's talk about it Sunday.<snark> Obviously, it's more than just Ben's hiring that makes them a mouthpiece. Couple that with the way John Harris treated Dan Froomkin and James Brady's appalling behaviour regarding Deborah Howell and you get a bit more of the total picture.

With all the commotion made over John Harris's beef with Dan Froomkin a little while back because he sucked up to a right wing operative named Patrick Ruffini and called him a blogger. (Ruffini is pals with Ken Mehlman and the eCampaign Director) A person might figure that Deborah Howell would try and hide the fact that she is shilling for the RNC that is desperately trying to make Abramoff's scandal bi-partisan. In her latest column.
"The second complaint is from Republicans, who say The Post purposely hasn't nailed any Democrats. Several stories, including one on June 3 by Jeffrey H. Birnbaum, a Post business reporter, have mentioned that a number of Democrats, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.) and Sen. Byron Dorgan (N.D.), have gotten Abramoff campaign money.

So far, Schmidt and Grimaldi say their reporting on the investigations hasn't put Democrats in the first tier of people being investigated. But stay tuned. This story is nowhere near over."

My God, does Deborah Howell bend over every time a republican asks her? Why does she care what the republicans think about a story that the WaPo is working on? The story takes it's course and the chips will fall where they will for everybody involved.

FireDogLake: "That she does not understand the thrust of this story -- that Abramoff was fundamental to the architecture of the GOP money machine -- is obvious. But beyond that, she can't even master the simplest detail -- that Abramoff's VICTIMS, the people he fleeced, the Indian tribes, are free to give money to whomever they feel will help them serve their interests. That is quite a different thing than contributions given by Abramoff himself; Abramoff is the one currently under indictment, not the Indian tribes. What part of this does Howell not understand?...read on

I have a feeling that Deborah isn't going to like checking her technorati links today.

As Bloomberg notes: "Between 2001 and 2004, Abramoff gave more than $127,000 to Republican candidates and committees and nothing to Democrats, federal records show....read on"

John posts a republican donation list too.

(Update): Insiders tell me that the best place to express your displeasure over Howell is to post it at the post.blog.

(Update II): Check out the comments at the washingtonpost.blog.

I'm sure we'll read how awful she is being treated by the angry blogs, but I challenge her to drop me a line so she can explain herself. I'd certainly like to hear her side of the story. Here's my email: crooksandliars@gmail.com

Froomkin:

"In Sunday’s Washington Post, the paper’s new ombudsman, Deborah Howell, writes that The Post’s political reporters don’t like my column. She states that the column is "highly opinionated and liberal" and concludes that it should no longer bear the name "White House Briefing," because the title may lead some readers to think it is the work of the paper’s reporting staff. Such a belief, Post political editor John Harris told her, dilutes the credibility of the newspaper...read on"

Do you think Bob Woodward's source exposing Valerie Plame has something to do with this? Will David Corn list all the wonderful things Dan has done in his career to help him out?

Jane writes a detailed piece on the attack of Froomkin:

"...What the WaPo writers are viewing through their Technorati tags is only a tiny crumb of a rage that threatens to sweep them into irrelevance. If they care about the preservation of superstar journalists and the politics of access above all else they blind themselves to the sea change that is taking place in how information is exchanged.

Dan Froomkin is the future. They say they want to balance him out by adding a conservative voice? That's great, just what the Mighty Wurlitzer needs, another outlet. As I've said before, this isn't about right vs. left, it's about people on both sides who are sick of the machine...read on"

John Harris on WMD's in Iraq

link

"The fact is, all the intelligence sources and elected officials in both parties did believe there was WMD in Iraq . It seems hard to imagine that the press could easily counter that."
John F. Harris on washingtonpost.com October 20, 2005

Need I say more on that GOP talking point?

Brad DeLong interviewed Harris as a follow up to Jay Rosen's excellent piece the day before about the complaints logged against Dan Froomkin's on-line column for the Washington Post.

"I cannot comment," was a common response that Harris fell back on to most of DeLong's questions. Brad's conclusion was:

"My belief--but since he won't answer the questions, I do not know--is that John Harris knew full well that Patrick Ruffini was a onetime Republican operative when he characterized him as a "conservative weblogger" to Jay Rosen, but was trying to pull a fast one...read on"

Harris sounded like he was on a Law & Order episode and was told to keep his mouth shut by his attorney. What a bizarre interview. How can he not be able to answer a rather simple question- whether he knew Patrick Ruffini had been a Republican campaign operative in 2004? I think you know the answer.

Jane: "George W. Bush has picked new nominees for the FEC.-Bush is also appointing a Democrat, Robert D. Lenhard, who was quite helpful to the 1600 Crew as part of the legal team that challenged the constitutionality of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law. But there is perhaps another reason why Mr. Lenhard is being rewarded by BushCo. at just this moment. He's the husband of Viveca Novak, whose testimony now provides the foundation for Karl Rove's defense in the CIA leak case....read on'"

They don't even try to hide it anymore. Why doesn't the Washington Post report this little tidbit? Let's ask John Harris shall we?