According to Wash. Post journalist, editor purged "dated" Pelosi smear from profile of GOP Rep. Putnam
An April 6 Washington Post profile of Rep. Adam Putnam (R-FL) asserted that Putnam "won't apologize for trying to make headlines," and that, as chairman of the House Republican Conference Committee, his "new job is to jump on anything that makes Democrats look bad and exploit it for maximum effect." However, the article made no mention of the fact that Putnam has admitted that he baselessly accused House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) of "an arrogance of extravagance that demands a jumbo jet that costs $22,000 an hour to operate to taxi her and her buddies back and forth to California." During an April 6 online discussion on washingtonpost.com, in response to a reader's question about why Putnam's baseless accusation was not included in the article, the article's author, Post congressional reporter Lyndsey Layton, stated that she had included "[t]he Pelosi plane" in the article's lead paragraph, but "it was sliced from the final version because the editor felt the reference was dated."
As Media Matters for America noted, The Tampa Tribune reported on February 20 that Putnam, after weeks of attacking Pelosi's purported request for a "jumbo jet that costs $22,000 an hour to operate," "acknowledge[d] he had no personal knowledge" of any such request being made. There is, in fact, no evidence that Pelosi ever made such a request, and the House Sergeant-at-Arms revealed that he was the one who requested a military aircraft for Pelosi.
From the Post's profile of Putnam:
Rep. Adam Putnam won't apologize for trying to make headlines.
The Florida Republican's new job is to jump on anything that makes Democrats look bad and exploit it for maximum effect. As chairman of the Republican Conference Committee, Putnam is the face and voice of House Republicans. His agenda: to aggressively display the flaws of the new majority, to convey the ideas of the Republicans, and to work his hardest to help his party win back the House in 2008.
"Because we're in the minority, we have to work that much harder to get our message out," said Putnam, who edged out Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga.) for the job of conference chairman by a vote of 100 to 91.
At 32, Putnam is the second-youngest member of Congress and the youngest to hold the job of GOP conference chair.
His smooth face, punctuated by a dimpled smile, and tousled red hair make him look more legislative aide than congressman. He has endured nicknames including "Opie" and "Howdy Doody." Two years ago, Rep. Marion Berry (D-Ark.) was speaking on the House floor when he looked at Putnam and wondered aloud what Putnam was going to be when he grew up.
From Layton's online discussion:
Dunn Loring, Va.: Lyndsey: In your glowing profile of Adam Putnam today (gift citrus basket on the way!) why didn't you mention his gaff [sic] last month of accusing Pelosi of requesting a jumbo jet to travel back and forth to her district when no such request was made, where he later admitted he got the information from an article in another D.C. daily? Not to mention that he accepted a $1,000 donation from Mark Foley last year after Foley's troubles were known? Please tell me an editor deleted this from your story.
washingtonpost.com: Rep. Putnam Stays on Message (Post, April 6)
Lyndsey Layton: Dunn Loring, how did you know? The Pelosi plane was the original lede on that story and it was sliced from the final version because the editor felt the reference was dated.
Adam Putman... I shall keep my ears on you, you slimeball liar of the republicant's conference chair... my goal- to aggressively display the flaws of the new minority as they lie and smear about the new majority...
Any information that goes against the narrative that Republicans are great guys is henceforth to be referred to as "dated". That way, the puff pieces shine without any hint of the Republican's HALO being tarnished.
On the other hand, if it's a DEMOCRAT, that "dated" thingie doesn't apply. 20 year old failed land deals (Whitewater) are perfectly fine for YEARS of smearing headlines at the Post. Right up to the point that it is finally established that there was nothing there, and never was. Then, don't even take time to apologize ... there are too many other Democrats to attack, and too may other Republicans to lionize.
I' saw this whiner on the house floor when he got into an procedure argument with Dave Obey concerning house rules. Putnam acted like a baby because he wasn't getting his way.
so the post article, which is as the online poster noted is generally "glowing", can go back to his days being elected to the florida house, but a reference to something two months old is "dated". and that which was "sliced" by the editor is directly related to what this article is about, which is his new job "to jump on anything that makes democrats look bad and exploit it to maximum effect". clearly one would think that the fact his first big attempt to make the "democrats look bad" was based on a false premise would be pertinent to this article. because it goes right to the heart of what so much of right wing criticism is based on. which is: false and misleading spin.
And down the Memory Hole it goes...
Amazing, the wonderful world of politics. I can't think of any other line of work with the lack of accountability that's standard.And I didn't specify Republicans. although they are the uncontested champs lately.
Putnam's statement seems to have been quietly retracted, re: Pelosi's plane. Sadly, he is not responsible (legally, morally is a whole 'nother)for the righty noise machine that spewed this lie out for about 48 hours straight.
"The Giant Plane" was all over am radio for a few days, rabidly repeated by the dittoheads, I'm certain it was emailed and blabbed over the hedge by millions.
This is the first I've heard of a primary source, or a retraction.I'm sure it's gospel to the Zombie base by now.
The critical part of the story is the interference by the Corporate Media in protecting the scumbag Repugnant - ooops, I am getting redundant again - protecting the Repugnant in the narrative. We acknowledge that all politicians are primarily partisan; that some Dems are tasked with knocking the Repugnants when opportunity arises, just as some Repugnants seize (or, in their case, when nothing else presents, manufacture through lies) such opportunity.
When even the beat reporter sees the contexting value of the reference, rely on the "editor" to red-pencil and re-write as necessary to condemn the Dem and perfect the Repugnant.
It can not be coincidental that so many times when I read a WaPo story with unwarranted negative assumptions about Democrats, trivial niggling editorializing about Democrats disguised as news reporting, and distortions reflecting Republican talking points, the name Lyndsey Layton pops up. I don't often pay much attention to who the individual WaPo reporters are, but this one stands out. If she is not a right-wing hack, she sure does a good imitation of one.
Another Layton trademark is her physical caricatures of her subjects. "His smooth face, punctuated by a dimpled smile, and tousled red hair make him look more legislative aide than congressman. He has endured nicknames including "Opie" and "Howdy Doody." I don't have the link, but she recently described John Murtha in terms reminiscent of the Hunchback of Notre Dame. This is stuff one might expect to find in a tabloid gossip column, not in a news story. It's simply trivial, mean-spirited, and not relevant to anything. At least in this respect, however, she apparently bestows her condescension upon members of both parties.
Republicans are considering changing their name to Rewriters