Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Quick Takes

Helene Cooper and Mark Landler write in the New York Times: "As tens of thousands of Iranian protesters take to the streets in defiance of the government in Tehran, officials in Washington are debating whether President Obama's response to Iran's disputed election has been too muted....[S]everal administration officials acknowledged that Mr. Obama might run the risk of coming across on the wrong side of history at a potentially transformative moment in Iran."

Glenn Kessler writes in The Washington Post: "The administration's stance is practical -- the real power in Iran rests with [Ayatollah Ali] Khamenei, not with whoever is president -- but pressure for a shift in policy will mount if the protests continue to grow and begin to threaten the government's hold on power.

Gary Kamiya writes for Salon: "The shameless fools whose Iraq folly empowered Iran's hard-liners are back, smearing Obama as an appeaser."

Mark Z. Barabak writes in the Los Angeles Times: "President Obama offered a modest expansion Wednesday of benefits for the same-sex partners of federal employees, but failed to quell the anger of many who called the gesture inadequate....Some disappointed by the substance of Obama's act were at least heartened by the symbolism of the Oval Office ceremony."

Said Obama: "Now, under current law, we cannot provide same-sex couples with the full range of benefits enjoyed by heterosexual married couples. That's why I'm proud to announce my support for the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act, crucial legislation that will guarantee these rights for all federal employees....It's a day that marks a historic step towards the changes we seek, but I think we all have to acknowledge this is only one step. Among the steps we have not yet taken is to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. I believe it's discriminatory, I think it interferes with states' rights, and we will work with Congress to overturn it."

Scott Wilson writes in The Washington Post: "Lawmakers in many parts of the country are moving far faster and further than the president on issues important to gays. Six states have legalized same-sex marriage, which Obama says he opposes because of his religious beliefs."

Robert Pear and David M. Herszenhorn write in the New York Times: "Partisan anger flared Wednesday as senators began the public drafting of legislation to remake the health care system. By day's end, lawmakers had settled in for a long, hard slog that may not fit with President Obama's goal of signing a bill within four months."

David S. Hilzenrath writes in The Washington Post that Obama's plan to rein in federal spending on health care could make health care more efficient for everybody -- or it could end up simply shifting costs to the private sector.

Ezra Klein blogs for The Washington Post: "Health reform is, I think it fair to say, in danger right now."

There are competing views about the importance of bipartisanship on today's Washington Post op-ed page. E.J. Dionne Jr. writes: "Where did we get the idea that the only good health-care bill is a bipartisan bill? Is bipartisanship more important than whether a proposal is practical and effective? And if bipartisanship is a legitimate goal, isn't each party equally responsible for achieving it?" Meanwhile David S. Broder extolls the virtues of -- you guessed it -- a bipartisan plan.

Carrie Johnson writes in The Washington Post: "A Justice Department report focusing on possible ethics violations by Bush administration lawyers who approved waterboarding of terrorism suspects is still 'a matter of weeks' from release, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. told lawmakers yesterday.... The conclusions of the five-year-long probe are hotly anticipated because they could shed new light on the interplay between the Bush White House, the Justice Department and the CIA in formulating an interrogation policy that critics assert included torture."

Nick Baumann writes for Mother Jones: "Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), which sued the Bush White House over millions of missing White House emails, has released a treasure trove of documents relating to the loss of the emails.... CREW says the headline item is that the documents seem to confirm that emails subpoenaed by Patrick Fitzgerald regarding the leak of Valerie Plame's CIA identiy were among those missing from Dick Cheney's office."

Ann Sanner writes for the Associated Press: "The national service agency's inspector general, fired by President Barack Obama, disputed on Wednesday claims from the White House that he was 'confused' and 'disoriented' at an agency meeting." Here's more from the New York Times.

Tom Hamburger and Peter Wallsten write in the Los Angeles Times: "Neil Barofsky, inspector general of the Troubled Asset Relief Program, is embroiled in a dispute with the Obama administration that delayed one recent inquiry and sparked questions about his ability to investigate without interference."

The New York Times editorial board calls for the repeal of Congress's 2008 revisions to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act: "We do not believe that Mr. Obama is deliberately violating Americans' rights as Mr. Bush did, and it is to his credit that the government acknowledged part of the problem in April. But this nation's civil liberties are not predicated on trusting individuals to wield their powers honorably. They are founded on laws."

Mark Silva blogs for Tribune: "In the realm of presidential interviews, the one promised on Sunday, Father's Day - 'Barack Obama, an American Dad'' - has the potential to outdo even Brian Williams' recent fawning look at the first family inside the White House. Harry Smith of CBS News will conduct this one, interviewing the president on Friday at the White House and presenting his work Sunday morning in the 9 to 10:30 am slot."

Chris Ariens wriets for TVNewswer about the reaction from Fox Newsers to Obama's comment Tuesday that he has "one television station entirely devoted to attacking my administration." "Look, we are just balancing things out. When you watch the other channels, the news channels, it's all -- you know, you don't hear a lot of the criticism," said Steve Doocy. Media Matters has footage of Charles Krauthammer calling fox "the one, only voice of opposition in the media. And it makes us a lot like Caracas where all the media, except one, are state run, with the exception that in Hugo Chavez-land, you go after that one station with machetes. I haven't seen any machetes around here, so I think we are at least safe for now."

Megan K. Scott writes for the Associated Press that some black women "say the new code word for Prince Charming has become so commonplace that they have been asked 'Have you found your Barack?' or told others 'I'm looking for my Barack.'"

By Dan Froomkin  |  June 18, 2009; 1:20 PM ET
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Amazing Shrinking Regulatory Overhaul
Next: Spending Jitters Don't Change the Fundamentals


"Look, we are just balancing things out. When you watch the other channels, the news channels, it's all -- you know, you don't hear a lot of the criticism," said Steve Doocy.

In true Colbert style - I CALLED IT!!! Not that the script for these morons is hard to figure out though...

Posted by: BigTunaTim | June 18, 2009 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Politico sez you were fired. Please tell me that Politico is FOS.

Posted by: incognita | June 18, 2009 3:56 PM | Report abuse

Dan, did the idiots running the WAPO (into the ground) just fire you? You are the only reason to visit, outside of insulting all on the right wing nuts & sycophants?

Posted by: durk2 | June 18, 2009 4:05 PM | Report abuse

The recent decision to eliminate Froomkin's blog from WaPo only underscores the increasingly irrelevance of the main stream tradiitional media.

As a mid-50s teacher, I am one of the members of the final "newspaper" generation. If the editors are making decisions that manage to alienate me, and push me further into the blogosphere, what are your hope for survival among the younger generation who feel no attachment at all to newspapers of old?

Didn't you see Comedy Central's recent foray into the editorial offices on The Daily Show? Don't you get it?

Goodbye Dan. And thanks for all your good work, especially on the use of torture by the previous administration.

Posted by: garyoke | June 18, 2009 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Just read on Politico that WaPo has given you the boot. Well, I can't say I'm sorry, because your columns since the Inauguration have indicated you're blinded by the Obama light. Don't let the door hit you in the butt as you leave.

Hopefully, you'll be replaced by a real journalist, rather than a cheerleader.

Posted by: WashingtonDame | June 18, 2009 4:29 PM | Report abuse

I can't believe they have shown you the door, Dan. Thanks for all you've done -- and for being there and giving me a reason to read the Post.
I grew up near DC, and I paid to receive the paper when I was in college and after I was married. But that was in the Watergate years, when the Post was a truly great newspaper.
It hasn't been that in a long time -- but at least it had your column.
I find it hard to imagine why I'd read it now -- much less subscribe.

Posted by: msizemore | June 18, 2009 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Obama better start thinking what he's going to say to the tens of thousands of protesters outside his own window instead of in the streets of Iran. His embrace of the worst of the Bush policies have left us no choice. It's only a matter of time. The way things are going, I'm expecting to hear that sickening 'heh, heh, heh' coming out of his mouth along with that stomach turning smirk any day now.

Posted by: davidbn27 | June 18, 2009 4:47 PM | Report abuse

I just read that Mr. Froomkin has been fired. I can hardly believe it, but it does mean one more nail in the coffin of the WaPo Op-ed page. Frankly, I see little reason to drop by here in the future, when the most consistently interesting voice on this page disappears.

I guess the editors want to make room for more neocons. They will no doubt pay for that mistake. Froomkin has a great future in the news business, unlike most of the commentators the WaPo retains.

All that remains is to wish Mr. Froomkin all the best. I hope I will be able to read his work on the net in the future. There must be someone out there who recognizes good journalism when they see it.

Posted by: SteinslandRune | June 18, 2009 4:50 PM | Report abuse

I've just read that Mr. Froomkin has been fired by WP.
The WP was once a paper that did its job, reporting the news, now it is only a voice for the neo-cons.
Mr. Froomkin you are a voice of reason and reporting in a sea of know it all nothings.
You will be missed.

Posted by: lkoti | June 18, 2009 5:08 PM | Report abuse

I also just read, via Glenn Greenwald, that Dan has been fired. What a tragedy. But you could see it on the wall. Adding more conservatives like Kristol, etc. Defence of Wills shoddy work. Where you go, Dan, keep me posted. Your blog was the only reason I read WAPO.

Posted by: mickster1 | June 18, 2009 5:53 PM | Report abuse

Dan, you were the only reason I bothered with the Washington Post site. Now I guess I won't. List your blog in "White House Watch" and I'll switch. Thanks for years of good information and reading!

Posted by: thrh | June 18, 2009 6:01 PM | Report abuse

Let Froomkin go, but keep George Will around. Ugh!

What a shame! Thanks, Dan!!!

Posted by: hoof32 | June 18, 2009 6:17 PM | Report abuse

I just fired the Washington Post!

Bye bye Post, never again, how idiotic that you can favor the liar Krautheimer and get rid of Froomkin. It shows you'd rather have deliberate falsehoods than the truth! You're outa-here, erased from my bookmarks. Good riddance, bird turd catcher.

Posted by: tjallen | June 18, 2009 7:06 PM | Report abuse

This was the only column I read with regularity on this site. I will continue to read Dan's work wherever he ends up, but will probably not find any use for the Washington Post.

Here is Dan's personal page. Hopefully he'll land on his feet and we can continue to profit from his nose for news and his oversight of the administration.

Posted by: fletc3her | June 18, 2009 7:23 PM | Report abuse

If it's true that Dan is being fired, I'll be canceling my electronic subscription. Dan is the main reason I come here, outweighing everything else the paper has to offer.

I won't pay money to read Krauthammer, or that idiot George Will, or Michael Gerson, or Fred Kagan. I come here for White House Watch.

I couldn't have gotten through the Bush administration without Dan.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | June 18, 2009 7:27 PM | Report abuse

Dan Froomkin was by far the most honest columnist the Washington Post had, and frequently my only reason for turning to its pages. This is a sad day for the Post, and hopefully a great opportunity for Froomkin.

Posted by: wcrockett | June 18, 2009 7:54 PM | Report abuse

I think your blog is great, have really appreciated it and will miss it. I expect you will land well, and hope to follow you there.
Keep up the good work.

Posted by: jfnorman2 | June 18, 2009 8:32 PM | Report abuse

I just heard, from reading the comments here, that White House Watch may be ended. I wondered about that possibility when a front page link to the column seemed to be appearing less and less frequently. If true, it is indeed a sad passing.

Fred Hiatt is one of the last of the die hard Neocon journalists around. Too bad he is taking a once respectable news source down with him. Now we are left with only the New York Times for clear open eyed journalistic content. Conservatives once complained about the liberal bias of the mainstream news media. They really don't have much left to complain about.

Posted by: svand | June 18, 2009 8:36 PM | Report abuse

There really isn't any reason to go to the Post any more.

Posted by: dickdata | June 19, 2009 12:31 AM | Report abuse

Thank you so much for helping us endure the Bush years. Without you and Krugman, I would have gone completely insane. I can't wait for your book about this era and your part in it.

Posted by: slomike | June 19, 2009 7:06 AM | Report abuse

Goodbye Washington Post - The Conservative Right Wingnut, Neocon Chickensh*t Chickenhawk, White Males' Best Friend. Froomkin has long been the best, last offering WaPo had covering the 21st century. I eagerly await to see where Froomkin will land...'cause I'll be there. Good riddance to: Bill Kristol, George Will, Jim Hoagland, Michael Gerson, Robert Kagan, David Ignatius, Fred Hiatt, Ruth Marcus, David Broder, Richard Cohen, Howie Kurtz, John Bolton, Joe Liebermann, Pat Buchanan, Doug Feith, John Yoo, and MOSTLY Charles Krauthammer. P.S. DON'T EVEN THINK ABOUT A TAXPAYER BAILOUT WHEN WAPO GOES BELLY UP! Bye, Bye.

Posted by: innovator101 | June 19, 2009 9:27 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company