Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Spending Jitters Don't Change the Fundamentals

According to the latest polls, the American public appears to be increasingly uncomfortable with all that money President Obama is spending -- and its effect on the deficit.

But economists say massive government spending was essential to prevent a much deeper recession -- and that the $787 billion stimulus package passed by Congress may not actually have been big enough. Furthermore, as David Leonhardt pointed out in a seminal New York Times story last week, stimulus spending only accounts for about seven percent of the enormous projected deficit over the next decade.

So when a majority of Americans say, as they do in both of today's major polls, that it's more important to reduce the deficit than stimulate the economy, this indicates two things to me. It suggests a political vulnerability for Obama -- one the GOP is already working hard to exploit. But it also suggests that the public is underinformed about some basic economic realities.

You could say that in turn suggests a second political vulnerability for Obama -- that he's failing in his role, as George W. Bush famously described it, of "explainer in chief." But it could also say something about the media coverage of important issues. Yes, the media routinely fawns over Obama, with over-the-top celebrity coverage that devotes countless stories to what he eats, where he takes his wife and his darling new puppy. But perhaps we're not doing a very good job of reporting on what he's doing and why he's doing it.

The good news for Obama is that the public overwhelmingly thinks the economy -- not the deficit -- is the most important problem facing the country -- by a 38 percent to 2 percent margin, according to the New York Times/CBS Poll. (Jobs and health care came in at 19 and 7 percent, respectively.)

And, overall, his approval rating remains very high. The New York Times finds him stable at 63 (down from all-time high of 68 in April; but consistent with his five-month average.) The Wall Street Journal/NBC poll pegs him at 56 percent approval, down from an all-time high of 61 percent in April.

The polls also find that Americans are growing more confident about the economy. They don't think Obama has taken on too many issues. When his health plan is described to them, they like it, by a 55 to 35 percent margin in the Wall Street Journal poll. In fact, they overwhelmingly support the "public plan" part of his proposal, widely considered its most controversial element.

The problem, then, is all the spending -- and the cumulative federal intervention in private industry. Asked this somewhat loaded question by the Wall Street Journal poll -- "Recently there has been some discussion about areas in which the federal government has taken a greater role, such as taking an ownership stake in General Motors, limiting levels of compensation that corporate executives can receive, and the role the government would play in a new health care system. How much does this concern you––a great deal, quite a bit, just some, or very little?" -- 49 percent said it concerned them a great deal and 20 percent said quite a bit.

Interestingly, Obama himself weighed in on the issue of public perceptions in an interview with the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday. Consider what he said:

I think that if you have an argument made frequently enough — whether it's true or not — it has some impact. I think this particular argument just doesn't bear much scrutiny — but it's a handy cliché. If you want to attack a Democratic President, how are you going to attack him? Well, you're going to talk about how he wants more government and he wants to socialize medicine and he's going to be oppressive towards business. I mean, that's pretty standard fare.

And I'm a little amused by the argument since those who make it seem to have a pretty short memory about where we were just a year ago under all their economic theories — or not even a year ago; six months ago — where we had a pretty good experiment in the approach that they thought we should take. And we — knock on wood — had just barely averted disaster....

And so now the real argument seems to boil down to not dealing with health care or energy. I mean, that's really what this comes down to. And the question I would have is how we can avoid dealing with a health care system that everyone acknowledges is massively inefficient and that is a huge drain on our economy, that leaves 46 million people uninsured and is guaranteed, if we do nothing, to bankrupt both federal and state budgets? Or, alternatively, how can we avoid dealing with a energy dependence that not only helps fund many of our enemies and unfriendly regimes, but is responsible for huge balance-of-payment deficits and a potentially disastrous rise in global temperatures?

Now, I suppose we could just stand pat and not do anything on either of those fronts. Again, that's been tried for four or five decades. And in both energy and health care, the problems have gotten worse, not better. So I think it's my obligation to try to solve these deep-rooted structural problems, because if we are able to solve them in an effective way, then we are creating the foundation for long-term prosperity and economic growth. If we don't, then try as we might, our competitive position in the world is going to continue to erode. And that's not a legacy that I'm interested in bequeathing to my children.

In Obama's view, the stimulus spending is not so much adding to the deficit problem as it is paving the way for a solution. In an interview with Bloomberg's Al Hunt on Tuesday, Obama said he was "confident" that he won't be faced with having to raise taxes on most Americans in order to lower the deficit. But, as he pointed out, "one of the biggest variables in this whole thing is economic growth....If we've got anemic growth, if we don't have a strategy for recovery without bubbles, which is essentially what we've had over the last couple of recovery cycles, then we're going to continue to have problems."

Jeff Zeleny and Dalia Sussman write alarmingly in the New York Times:

A substantial majority of Americans say President Obama has not developed a strategy to deal with the budget deficit, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll, which also found that support for his plans to overhaul health care, rescue the auto industry and close the prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, falls well below his job approval ratings.

A distinct gulf exists between Mr. Obama's overall standing and how some of his key initiatives are viewed, with fewer than half of Americans saying they approve of how he has handled health care and the effort to save General Motors and Chrysler. A majority of people said his policies have had either no effect yet on improving the economy or had made it worse, underscoring how his political strength still rests on faith in his leadership rather than concrete results.

But Zeleny and Sussman are twisting some of the numbers here. Fewer than half of Americans approve of his handling of health care only because so many are undecided. In fact, a plurality -- 44 percent -- do approve, compared to 34 who disapprove.

And similarly, when it comes to whether his policies have made the economy better, a large plurality -- 48 percent -- say they haven't had any effect yet. Of those who do see an effect, 32 percent say it's been positive compared to 15 percent who say it's been negative.

Zeleny and Sussman do note, however:

But with a job approval rating of 63 percent, Mr. Obama has the backing of Democrats and independents alike, a standing that many presidents would envy and try to use to build support for their policies. His rating has fallen to 23 percent among Republicans, from 44 percent in February, a sign that bridging the partisan divide may remain an unaccomplished goal....

While Republicans have steadily increased their criticism of Mr. Obama, particularly on the budget deficit, the poll found that the Republican Party is viewed favorably by only 28 percent of those polled, the lowest rating ever in a New York Times/CBS News poll. In contrast, 57 percent said that they had a favorable view of the Democratic Party.

Chuck Todd began his report on the NBC Nightly News this way last night: "The honeymoon is coming to an end." Mark Murray writes for NBC News:

Obama remains a popular figure in the poll. But these numbers on the deficit and the government's intervention seem to mark a new period for the administration, as the public moves from welcoming his inauguration and first days in office to examining his initial actions as president.

Laura Meckler writes in the Wall Street Journal:

After a fairly smooth opening, President Barack Obama faces new concerns among the American public about the budget deficit and government intervention in the economy...

These rising doubts threaten to overshadow the president's personal popularity and his agenda, in what may be a new phase of the Obama presidency.

And in one more bit of poll news, Lydia Saad writes for Gallup that while the public's confidence in Obama to recommend the right thing for reforming health care (58 percent) is lower than it is in doctors (73), it's a lot higher than it is in pharmaceutical companies (40), insurance companies (35), and Republican leaders in Congress (34).

By Dan Froomkin  |  June 18, 2009; 1:21 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Quick Takes
Next: Cartoon Watch

Comments

Your "liberal" media twisting statistics to make Obama and his policies look less popular than they actually are. What a suprise. The unasked question is always, "What would things look like if Republican policies had been in place for the last 5 months?"

No stimulus
--states having to make huge layoffs of state workers and cutting services just when they are most needed
--no infrastructure money forcing more state and construction layoffs
--no green jobs initiatives which would increase unemployment
no bailout of GM or Chrysler
--thousands more auto workers out of work
-- supply chain shattered with thousands more layoffs and plant closures, making it impossible for foreign car factories to stay in business, leading to yet more unemployment
some of the largest banks failing
--increasing loss of confidence in the US financial system leading the monied to move their assets into foreign banks, leading to yet more failures

Just a sampler of a Republican strategy for recovery. Why doesn't this get any airtime?

Posted by: srw3 | June 18, 2009 2:10 PM | Report abuse

Froomiekins continues to provide political cover for Obama. Trying to find silver linings in the numbers that are out for Obama and essentially saying the public is a bunch of uneducated, misinformed dolts.
You in the press are somewhat reporting what he is doing, but you praise most of his actions to be similar to walking on water.

By continuing to add to the deficit problem and increasing the national debt, we grow closer and closer to a major jump in inflation, because we are printing so much money and agreements with other nations to buy our dollars so we can borrow more, will, sooner or later, catch up with us.

What happens when other massive nations decide to start limiting our borrowing?? A massive increase in the interest we pay for the money we have borrowed, and the dollar will devalue against most other currencies. The problem is Obama's 5-10 year plan is scheduled to really kick the rate of deficit spending into a gear that this nation has never ever experienced in the past. (These are facts from his 10 year plan for the economy, and his first budget with a $1.3 trillion deficit already built in and approved by Congress)

Even if Obama's plan succeeds, he still outlines that we will have deficits for every year of his entire presidency.


Besides, what did loaning GM and Chrysler billions of dollars result in?? the same thing that would've happened if the US had not loaned out $40 billion - bankruptcy. Except now the US owns a large slice of GM and Chrysler, and will undoubtedly influence their decisions going forward. So should we base the Government's performance in managing Social Security and Medicare, as to how well GM and Chrysler will be dealt with? If so, there will be a very unhappy ending for those companies.

Posted by: alutz08 | June 18, 2009 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Dan, have you ever considered the possibility that maybe it is the public who is right and the economists who are wrong? You are dismissing this as a perception gap, but this lifelong Democrat believes that President Obama got rolled, and that our nation will be paying for this foolish mistake for generations. Our nation has just erected a gigantic billboard which says, "take all of the risks you want to -- if you fail, you will be bailed out with taxpayer money." The unintended consequences of this well-intended but foolish bailout will haunt our nation long after this immediate crisis is over. We should have let these banks fail...

Posted by: jerkhoff | June 18, 2009 2:19 PM | Report abuse

But economists say massive government spending was essential to prevent a much deeper recession -- and that the $787 billion stimulus package passed by Congress may not actually have been big enough.

--------

I call shenanigans.

You do realize that over 200 economists, including several noble laureates signed a statement declaring that not only was the "2009 First and Fifteenth of the Month Bill" not going to work, but that it was actually going to be counterproductive?

Your cheerleading in an embarrassment to your profession.

Posted by: SharpshootingPugilist | June 18, 2009 2:19 PM | Report abuse

Oh yeah.... and how much of Obama's professing of Pay-Go is just an absolute joke?? Pretty much all of it, since he put a big caveat in for healthcare and his other major agendas.

The example Obama's administration is setting for the rest of America, is that there are no consequences for spending like a drunken sailor, or signing up for risky loans. You will be bailed out.

Posted by: alutz08 | June 18, 2009 2:26 PM | Report abuse

And as long as we are talking about deficits, tell us Dan, who was it who pushed for and who fought against the balanced budget amendment?

Posted by: SharpshootingPugilist | June 18, 2009 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Obama is spending money. His budget borrows half of all the money he is spending. And his repetition of the Bush phrase "cut the deficit in half" is disingenuous because the deficit will still be over 25% of the budget. The Democrats are spending money like the Republicans on steroids.

Posted by: bruce18 | June 18, 2009 2:33 PM | Report abuse

Funny how those who are pro-Obama only go to polls whose audiences tend to be pro-Obama. Rasmussen's numbers, which are less biased, are a little bit different. It's like getting Republican poll numbers from a Fox News survey.

Obama's numbers in the Rasmussen Reports polls are a little bit different than those cited - as shown below:

Obama Approval Index +2
Strongly Approve 35%
Strongly Disapprove 32%
Taxes Will Go Down 14%
Gov't Spending Will Go Up 67%
Obama on Economy - Ex/Good 46%
Obama on Nat'l Sec - Ex/Good 48%
Leadership - Ex/Good 51%
Views Society as Fair 45%
Politically Liberal 73%
Iraq Priority - Troops Home 59%
Troops Home - End of 1st Term 66%
Obama on Energy - Ex/Good 50%
Supreme Ct Choices Too Liberal 40%
More Ethical Than Most Politicians 39%
Ethics Ex/Good 47%

Posted by: nlynnc | June 18, 2009 2:33 PM | Report abuse

THANK GOD the washingtonpost.com finally fired this guy.

I've been posting on here for over a year that Froomkin needed to start looking for a new job what with no longer having Bush to kick around. Turns out Froomkin's percieved relevancy lasted less than 5 months into the Obama era.

Froomkin was never notable for observations or analysis, but he certainly knew how to play to the hysterics and hyperbole of the era.

Posted by: dummypants | June 18, 2009 2:47 PM | Report abuse

In the 'words' of Wilbur wright "Do You think it will fly Orville"? .... Whats that you say Wilbur? .... Oh. You mean that 'contraption' we just built. I don't know..... let's try it out. My point being that something is being attempted. Back in late 08 it was 'bi-partisan' this, bi-partisan that.... Yeah. Uh huh....

Posted by: deepthroat21 | June 18, 2009 2:48 PM | Report abuse

Dan, No one cares about the amount that the stimulus package is adding to the debt. Where Obama and the Democrats are very very very vulnerable is on the next budget. The budget Obama sent to congress is the problem (including the cost of health care reform). Thats going to make last years Bush-partially Obama's deficit spending look tiny. I mean the projection from the Congressional Budget Office is that it will add as much in one year to the national debt as was added in the entire Bush tenure, i.e. like 1.8 trillion, and will more than double the Federal Debt.

This is going to be a big problem for Democrats, Obama campaigned on a platform that was centered around 3 things: 1, Getting out of Iraq, 2, Social liberalism, and 3, Getting more done with less money, i.e. fiscal conservatism.

If he doesn't reign in Congressional Pork, and seriously change his budget to contain a smaller amount of deficit spending he is going to seriously weaken his re-election chances and the Democratic party.

Traditional Liberals who now call themselves Progressives took Obama's election as a mandate, but the American public does not want the debt their programs entail. I am just hoping some middle of the road Democrats run in the Primaries in 2010, and kick some progressives out of office, so we don't get kicked out of the white house in 2012.

Posted by: DCDave11 | June 18, 2009 2:55 PM | Report abuse

Also the President is being incredibly short sighted in his analysis when he says 'look at where those polcies got us'.

Well they got us thirty years of economic growth, put millions of American kids through college, and gave us a high standard of living. So I don't think its rational to say all of these policies were a waste. Its ridiculous.

In the fall yes things fell apart some, and yes we need to fine tune the system. But its not reasonable to say that the governement policies alone were responsible for the back slide. The American economy is just not as strong as it used to be and alot of what happened was just a natural re-ordering of the World's wealth to reflect countries actual economic standing. Not much Obama or anyone can do to fix that, and pretending that it was governmental policies that caused the fiscal collapse is I think incredibly narrowminded.

Posted by: DCDave11 | June 18, 2009 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Dan, Obama doesn't need to worry what the polls say on this issue. Just look at California. People don't want ANY tax increases of ANY kind and they also don't want cuts to ANY programs even though one or the other has to happen. It is not a subject on which people are capable of being logical (as a group of voters). So the President has done the right thing by taking strong action and leading.

Posted by: gposner | June 18, 2009 3:14 PM | Report abuse

As with all herds, the American public's views are driven by fear and ignorance waived about by shepherds with an insatiable hunger for mutton..

The Obama administration is misspending most of this year's stimulus money and, along with the Bush Administration, is misdelivering to Wall Street crooks almost all the TARP and other financial system "rescue" funds.

If, despite the compelling reasons plutocrats relish temporary deflation (makes it cheaper to steal the meager wealth of the diminishing middle class), the federal government really wants to prevent the economy from sliding back into recession or even depression next year, Obama will need to spend several times this year's stimulus funding. The sheep, though, are being nipped at the heels into their usual opposition to rational policies, and the Obama administration will not be able to get the needed funding through Congress.

Next year, the choice will be between deficits or more soup lines. Too bad for America's underfed millions that the country club gluttons who control this nation are making all the the decisions.

More likely than not, next year will empty a replenished Horn of Suffering.

Posted by: FoolontheHill1 | June 18, 2009 3:25 PM | Report abuse

I am astonished by the short term memory loss of the GOP posters on the board. It was George Bush who began the bailout process. Remember Republicans, your hero in chief, GWB bailed out AIG, GM, The Banks, TARP, Fannie Mae, Freddie MAC, all of it bailed out under the GOP Administration of George Bush. It was also all of the GOP policies that led to the economic meltdown. I am convinced that the majority of Conservatives and GOP lack fundamental critical thinking skills.

Posted by: IrishJim | June 18, 2009 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Wow, the conservative fools are out in force today.

Think back, if any of you have heard of it, to the model many cite for our present crisis: the Great Depression. FDR did his best, through the New Deal, to fight it, with some success. But what finally ended the depression? The largest stimulus spending project, so to speak, of the 20th century: World War II. Federal money going to private industry, incurring huge deficits. An economy that was moribund before suddenly was rescued by the government. And even more amazing: the war ended, the deficits stopped, industry shifted (by and large) to private customers.

Amazing!

The public isn't the expert here. Same as how the public isn't the expert on climate science (why people go to grad school for this stuff), or medicine (why we have doctors), or flying planes (why we have trained pilots). None of us are happy about huge deficits. But we also have to deal with the situation we're in. If we let all the banks go bankrupt, like Bear Stearns did, it'll affect more than just the banks. Iceland went bankrupt, and Ireland isn't far behind. Many countries in Europe, such as Spain, are in serious trouble. Their problems are tied directly to our markets. This is a worldwide problem now, and just letting all the banks collapse would cause economic catastrophe around the globe. (I suppose the go-it-alone neocons would cheer at this prospect.)

People are rightly afraid of the deficit. It's beyond huge. But the only major consumer in the US market right now is the federal government. Without deficit spending, almost nothing would be happening. But the Republicans are being as cynical as they can--grasping at straws like the banks paying back TARP funds--to claim that the problems are solved. Not only are they wrong, they're knowingly, fraudulently wrong.

Posted by: whizbang9a | June 18, 2009 3:46 PM | Report abuse

Politico says that Froomkin is soon to be out at the Post. With all the tired right wingers and neo-cons at the Post, with Kristol, Krauthammer, Will, Gerson, Parker, Kagan, et al., that's exactly what they need to do. Get rid of one of the few voices from the left. And they wonder why American newspapers are in trouble.

Posted by: HankNTennessee | June 18, 2009 3:46 PM | Report abuse

THANK GOD the washingtonpost.com finally fired this guy.

I've been posting on here for over a year that Froomkin needed to start looking for a new job what with no longer having Bush to kick around. Turns out Froomkin's percieved relevancy lasted less than 5 months into the Obama era.

Froomkin was never notable for observations or analysis, but he certainly knew how to play to the hysterics and hyperbole of the era.


and one look at the newest Pew poll which puts the number of conservatives at twice the number of liberals tells you that the media is moving to where the people are.

Posted by: dummypants | June 18, 2009 3:51 PM | Report abuse

Dan,

Where are you landing? Hopefully somewhere with a better comments discussion that this paper generally provides.

Without Froomkin, the WaPo jut fell off my bookmarks bar. Although it's true the media is doing a much better job covering Obama than they did for Bush's first 6 years, Dan I think you can be uniquely proud of the work. Thanks for the incredible run.

Posted by: bullsmith | June 18, 2009 3:53 PM | Report abuse

What the heck is going on with WAPO??!!

Dan! The news is not good today for those who love liberty and know that an unfettered press stands between the people and tyranny.

Many days I have felt deep gratitude for your devotion to truth and your obvious calling to be a witness to history -- but too many times I have failed to tell you so and failed to tell the suits at The Post.

This is an enormous loss for us all. I can barely take it in.

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

Dan was fired? That's it, I'm out of here. WaPo has become a right wing lunatic asylum, what with Chuck "Haven't Got a Leg to Stand On" Krauthammer and kooky Fred "Dodged Serving in Vietnam, HAHAHA!" Hiatt. Bye, ya'll.

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

Firing Dan Froomkin is one of the dumbest moves ever. You get rid of someone who's smart, respected, and linked to a lot, while keeping right wing shills and liars.

Is the long term plan really to destroy this newspaper? You're doing a good job if it is.

Posted by: member5 | June 18, 2009 3:58 PM | Report abuse

O sweet day, froomklin the b kisser fired, terminated, let go, unemployed, rightsized. Couldn't have happened to a more in the tank, liberal biased pipsqueak. Good bye and good riddance

Posted by: pwaa | June 18, 2009 3:59 PM | Report abuse

That bazard Fred Hiatt fired Froomkin!

Well Washingtonpost, you just fired the only columnist left I read. Goodbye and good . . . riddance.

Posted by: TboneRex | June 18, 2009 4:00 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Froomkin, I am astonished by your MSM elitist point of view, "the public is underinformed about some basic economic realities." The same Main Stream Media that told we the public that NAFTA, free trade with China, globalization, attacking Iraq, deficit spending, and a free-wheeling Wall Street was good for America! Enough!!

Out here in the boondocks we believe in living within your means. It works quite well. If you can't afford something, do without it until you save up enough to afford it. That philosophy seems to work quite well for those who work and save.

One more thought, for the Republican spinsters: shut the f... up! The Republicans drove America down, down, down through their wars, humongous deficits, and anything goes for corporate America.

Posted by: frazeysburger | June 18, 2009 4:04 PM | Report abuse

Re: Firing Dan Froomkin
The Washington Post can consider itself fired as my online news source.
I won't visit this site again.

Posted by: MikeThomas87 | June 18, 2009 4:05 PM | Report abuse

Dan you were the one decent muckraking man at the WaPo.

Congrats on all of your great work and shame on whoever fired you

Posted by: dmls2000 | June 18, 2009 4:05 PM | Report abuse

When the Washington Post gives voice to mindless hacks like Bill Kristol while firing independent voices like Dan Froomkin... it's really no wonder that our media institutions are no longer respected.

Note to the Washington Post: If you select your editorialists based on a strategy of avoiding baseless right-wing outrage, you wind up with the failure that you deserve.

Posted by: nadavtanners | June 18, 2009 4:06 PM | Report abuse

Sorry to hear the Post is closing the column down, Dan. Have followed you for years, in fact your voice was one that brought me back to reading WAPO online. Good work keeping an eye on GWB and your fellow journalists. Will the Post be consolidating with the Wash Times now?

Look forward to where you land next. Great job!!

Posted by: s_clark | June 18, 2009 4:06 PM | Report abuse

Amazing that the Post canned Froomkin.

Apparently, it's OK for a person to stir the pot and insult the intelligence of the readership, but it's a mortal sin to fact-check the Post's editorial page's "stars" -- even in cases where the op-ed columnists facts need checking.

Maybe the column wasn't sufficiently Likudnik in its orientation. And the Post was afraid to lose Krauthammer after he won an award from Fox News (where would he go though -- the Washington Times? Murdoch's new rag? The National Enquirer?).

Well, the Post's loss, is someone else's gain.

Great blog Dan, and best wishes in the next endeavor.

Posted by: JPRS | June 18, 2009 4:13 PM | Report abuse

The sad but obvious truth is that Fred Hiatt and Donald Graham are not interested in presenting a diverse range of opinions and commentary. Evidently they are not interested in profits either, since Dan Froomkin is one of their best read columnists. They are only interested in taking their paper further to the political right in the model of the Washington Times and Fox News. It is a sad day for journalistic integrity.

The Washington Post Company does not make much money off the newspaper, in any case. It's biggest moneymaker is Kaplan Learning Services. No Child Left Behind has been very good to Kaplan and the Washington Post Company. I remember hearing Graham state that his goal is to make the Washington Post Company an education company, rather than a news company. He evidently sees the newspaper in a role as a propagandist to support the other divisions of the Washington Post Company.

It is clear to me that the rapid decline of newspapers is not only due to the changing business model (i.e., competition from online sources)--it is also due to their being absorbed into corporations which do not have a true journalistic ethic.

Posted by: wasntme543 | June 18, 2009 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Froomkin, I am astonished by your MSM elitist point of view, "the public is underinformed about some basic economic realities."

You have never read this column apparently. Let's see, canned, given the boot,layed off, told to walk the plank,canned,dismissed, given the axe, sacked and deservedly so....

Posted by: pwaa | June 18, 2009 4:14 PM | Report abuse

So one of the few sane commentators at the Post gets let go. It must be expensive to keep closed-minded, self-important windbags unmoored from reality (e.g., Broder, Krauthammer, Kagan, Kristol, Will) around to defend torture, corruption, venality, lying, and betrayal of public trust and the Constitution.

Posted by: jpbelmondo | June 18, 2009 4:14 PM | Report abuse

By the way, I heard Obama has an opening for chief bootlicker, with your background, you are a shoo-in...(pun intended)

Posted by: pwaa | June 18, 2009 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Dan, is there something we can do to protest your firing? Let us know somehow. I'll be checking your site, http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm .

Posted by: monkeyonkeyboard | June 18, 2009 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Thank you Dan for all your great work over the last few years. You were one of the few people who had the courage to speak the truth. Please continue!

Posted by: bostonma1 | June 18, 2009 4:22 PM | Report abuse

I just found out this is your last column. My day is ruined. Your column was the only one who was really insightful and gave a lot of transparency about what's going on in the White House. Who do we write to to complain?
I hope you appear somewhere else Dan. I will be looking for you! Screw the Washington Post. I will no longer be reading it with you gone!

Posted by: garrison11 | June 18, 2009 4:22 PM | Report abuse

A miserable day for thoughtful, inquisitive journalism.

Dan, as a reader for over five years, I hope you land somewhere soon that appreciates your clear-headed analysis.

WaPo, good riddance. Fred Hiatt, you're the myopic captain of a beltway op-ed circle jerk.

Posted by: obnoman | June 18, 2009 4:25 PM | Report abuse

Neither most people nor most journalists seem to understand a lot about basic economics. Presidents usually get too much credit or blame for the economy, from ordinary people and those in the media, reflecting how simplistic is their "understanding" of the economy.

Despite their limited understanding, it does not require a bachelor's degree in economics to know huge government deficits and massive printing of money by the Fed, is likely to have detrimental economic consequences, quite possibly, along with rising oil prices, leading to high inflation within a couple years. So it's not a simplistic dichotomy between the economy and high deficits, they are often interrelated in influencing each other.

Posted by: Aprogressiveindependent | June 18, 2009 4:25 PM | Report abuse

Dan, if it's true they've fired you, I'm really sorry. You're one of the few columnists at the Post I enjoyed reading.

Posted by: Elkay1 | June 18, 2009 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Thanks, Dan Froomkin, for your terrific work.

You deserved better than to be let go for no real reason, but that's the WaPo for you.

And the WaPo is clearly against us, the majority of Americans who have had more than enough of the RADICAL right-wing stuff that the WaPo peddles.

Good luck -- better than you got here -- on your next stop!!

Posted by: jkrogman | June 18, 2009 4:28 PM | Report abuse

WTH? I hear they're firing Froomkin?? He's the only columnist I never missed for years! They keep Will, Broder, Krauthammer and all their other conservative idiots and fire Froomkin? Was it because you told the truth about torture and dared to critisize Krauthammer? Man, if the post cost $.01 a year I still wouldnt buy it - what a worthless rag!!!

Posted by: marcedward1 | June 18, 2009 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Well, the ONLY reason to come to the WaPo has just been canned. Time to delete all bookmarks to the Washington Post.

Posted by: sc1128 | June 18, 2009 4:29 PM | Report abuse

So I can't read anymore Froomkin, but will still be subjected to the fact-free rantings of Krauthammer and Kristol??? No way..goodbye WaPo.

Posted by: john65001 | June 18, 2009 4:31 PM | Report abuse

Dan, I'm so sorry to see you go. You were always the main reason I checked out the Wash Post - and now that you're leaving, I'll be un-bookmarking this site. Without you here, there's no reason to come back. Regardless of who you were writing about, from either side of the spectrum, or what issue you were addressing, you were always fair. I'm simply shocked to hear they let you go.

You're a talented guy and I'm sure some other news outlet will pick you up, sooner than you thing -- so please let us know where you'll be.

Meantime, chin up ducks, don't let the bastards get you down. It's the Post itself that's the big loser here.

Posted by: roseofsharon | June 18, 2009 4:34 PM | Report abuse

Dan,

Just heard that you have been fired. Well, that means they fired me too. I know I'll be reading you again soon. I won't be reading the Washington Times again. I mean Post. Hell, now, what's the difference?

Posted by: davidbn27 | June 18, 2009 4:39 PM | Report abuse

Dan, your column was one of the best places to stay informed about what was going on in the White House and the executive branch in general. And yet the Post has consistently treated you abominably. Thanks for your years of hard work, and thanks for nothing to the idiots at the WaPo.

Posted by: NotoriousBIVALVE | June 18, 2009 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Pathetic that the Post which offers the worst Op-Ed page in America decides to fire one of it's most thoughtful and talented writers. Speaks volumes about an organization that survives only by ripping off parents with their unnecessary Kaplan test "training" programs.

Posted by: LeRiverend | June 18, 2009 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Froomkin fired! Oh sweet Jesus! This is too good to be true!

Nah nah nah na, Nah nah nah na, hey hey hey ... goodbye!

Posted by: SharpshootingPugilist | June 18, 2009 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Adding to the voices of dismay- Dan, you're the best thing about WaPo. Wherever you land, your fans will follow.
I will continue to post online at WaPo only to say, lose Krauthammer, bring back Froomkin!

Posted by: dr_in_ma | June 18, 2009 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Dan sorry to see you go.

I was wondering why your articles were not on the Opinion Front Page.

You were set up by the Neocons and Fred Haitt was the Happy Hatchetman.

You told the Cold Hard Facts - the TRUTH.

Fred Haitts articles were like the rest of the Neocon cultist all prejudice and no opinion.

Best Wishes

Fei Hu - Flying Tiger

Posted by: Fei_Hu | June 18, 2009 4:48 PM | Report abuse

So it's true that you're leaving the Post?

That's the saddest thing I've read all day.

The Washington Post was a great paper once.

Posted by: CynLynn | June 18, 2009 4:49 PM | Report abuse

Sad to see that this worthless POS WaPo has decided to let you go. You were the only reason I came around.

Hopefully you will land in a better place. We will be watching and looking for your new home!

Thanks for your tireless and honest reporting. It will be missed.

Best Wishes,
Dan

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

When all you do is bash a president, when he is gone; so are you. May all of your many mindless minions enjoy your new gig at the Penny Saver.

Posted by: amazd | June 18, 2009 4:52 PM | Report abuse

Yep, guess the WAPO got tired of a one trick pony who could only survive blaming Bush for anything and everything. Maybe they will hire a real journalist who will not be in the tank for Obama and do what they should..keep an eye on those in power.

Posted by: pwaa | June 18, 2009 4:52 PM | Report abuse

As if hiring discredited neocons and refusing to retract George Will's blatant lies weren't bad enough, WaPo justifies its decreasing relevance by letting Dan go.

Listen up news editors: the internet isn't killing traditional media. Your lousy decisions and lack of integrity are killing traditional media. You've been warned (repeatedly).

Hope you have a soft landing, Dan.

Posted by: BigTunaTim | June 18, 2009 4:52 PM | Report abuse

Now I don't need to read WaPo any more. If I'm interested in that drivel, I'll go straight to the National Review.

I know you'll end up in a good spot, Dan. Good luck!!!

Posted by: lguy1 | June 18, 2009 4:56 PM | Report abuse

As I read all of the posters who claim that they will no longer read the Post, I can only hope they are telling the truth. I hope they encourage their friends to go somewhere else too, and could you do it now.

If you want to read Froomkin, try the free papers at the bus stop.

Posted by: amazd | June 18, 2009 4:56 PM | Report abuse

Wow the right wing nutjobs are on this like stink on a Republican. You knuckle-draggers can't even come up with a legitimate complaint, you just hate him because he doesn't believe in your intellectually bankrupt philosophy of strength through ignorance. Dan criticized Obama more in the past 5 months than the entire right wing media criticized Bush in 8 years. Hypocrites.

Posted by: BigTunaTim | June 18, 2009 4:57 PM | Report abuse

It looks that that today the conservatives have sent a contingent of idiotic posters to express their "phony" views and attack Dan Froomkin. But the truth is that Froomkin has been one of the few true liberals in the Post, who has never been afraid to take on Bush and the right-wingers. Sorry to see you go, Dan.

Posted by: carlfer | June 18, 2009 4:57 PM | Report abuse

At Glen Greenwalds blog at Salon the comments are 100% "Froomkin was the only guy I read at the post every day". They hold on to idiotic namecallers like Krauthammer and 'conventional wisdom' experts like Broder and dump the only young interesting voice? Maybe they are merging with the Washington Times?

Posted by: marcedward1 | June 18, 2009 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Dan, I can't believe they are firing you. As someone else noted above, there goes my reason for visiting the Post.

Best of luck for a good landing.

Posted by: wvng | June 18, 2009 5:00 PM | Report abuse

I am glad this relationship has finally been severed. WaPo has always treated Dan miserably. WaPo has lost a lot of readers today. I wish you the best Mr Froomkin and look forward to reading you again wherever you land.

Posted by: the_Stranger1 | June 18, 2009 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Thank you so much Dan for actually challenging the status quo in Washington for so many years, when everyone else including so many of your colleagues were content to play cheerleader.

I too will be deleting the link to WaPo and will anxiously await news of your new digs. I can't imagine that someone with your talent and devoted readership won't be snapped up quickly. Hang tough and where ever you land, we'll be there.

This is my first and last comment at WashingtonPost.com.

Posted by: Jim_Jenkins | June 18, 2009 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Now the liberal turds will have to go read Janeane Garofalo for her "insights"...worth about as much as froomkin's drivel

Posted by: pwaa | June 18, 2009 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Dan, is there something we can do to protest your firing? Let us know somehow. I'll be checking your site.
_________________

Yes. If you want to protest my firing, get naked and climb over the wall outside the White House.

Sincerely,

Dan

Posted by: amazd | June 18, 2009 5:03 PM | Report abuse

Hey Dan why don't you open a site and charge for your columns. I am sure (snicker) all these posters would just rush in and pay right away. BWAAAAAA!!!

Posted by: pwaa | June 18, 2009 5:09 PM | Report abuse

That's it, Wapo. I only came here to read Froomkin, but I usually then clicked on the front page too, read a few articles.

no more. How odd that they don't realize that the individual columnists and writers are what draw us to the site. I think they really are still stuck in the print mode, where you have to buy the whole dang paper. I've always been happy NOT to have to read Krauthammer and Cohen to get my Dan fix.

Let us know where you are next, Dan! I'll keep checking your brother's site, assuming he'll tell us.

Posted by: lister1 | June 18, 2009 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Are you KIDDING ME???

WaPo continues its slide into the gutter, into irrelevance. How can firing Froomkin possibly be justified??

I am absolutely disgusted.

Dan, you have a big audience. Please, please, come back in some other format. We NEED YOUR JOURNALISM. Journalism needs you, but apparently they're too stupid to understand that.

Posted by: unojklhh1 | June 18, 2009 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Dan

Don't worry--I'll read your rundowns and analysis wherever you go!

Your blog was that best thing the WaPo has going for it--

you should everybody that liberals are honest, rigorous and carriers of the Jeffersonian heartflame of liberty.

Thanks for getting me through the dark night that was the Bush era.

Posted by: lichtme | June 18, 2009 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Your blog made the right's heads explode so I know you did a good job.

The establishment is scared and one day we will go Iranian.

Sure you will find work easily.

Thank you.

Posted by: getalife1 | June 18, 2009 5:19 PM | Report abuse

If this is Froomkin's last day, it's my last
visit to WaPo (until his return).

Posted by: NYCartist | June 18, 2009 5:19 PM | Report abuse

Dan,

I'll miss your opinions in the Post. Good luck wherever you land. I'll be removing the link to WaPo from my favorites list just as soon as I submit this.

Posted by: neb1 | June 18, 2009 5:23 PM | Report abuse

So the WaPo is going the way of the NY Times and ABC--losing all journalistic credibility by joining the Obama news network.

Posted by: judithod | June 18, 2009 5:24 PM | Report abuse

Dan,
I'm sorry to hear the post is letting you go and shredding what little credibility the op/ed pages had left. I also hope you continue your blog at another site. Your coverage was for me the bright spot on the wapo site during their horrible "coverage" of the first 6 years of the Bush era, providing the only critical voice for far too many of those years.

Posted by: TEL1 | June 18, 2009 5:25 PM | Report abuse

DEAR FRUIT-KIN,

I JUST LEARNED FROM POLITICO THAT YOU HAVE BEEN FIRED FROM THE WASHINGTON POST. EXSULTATE JUSTI!

I UNDERSTAND THAT BK AND MCDONALDS ARE HIRING.

GOOD LUCK.

Posted by: aaronburr94 | June 18, 2009 5:27 PM | Report abuse

The decision to fire you makes no sense. You do amazing work -- the best at WaPo IMO -- holding the White House responsible, both when it was occupied by a Republican and now that it is occupied by a Democrat. And it's not like paying you was a matter of eating their broccoli, the "right" thing to do but tough to justify to the bean counters from a business perspective. Quite the opposite. As Greenwald points out (http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/06/18/froomkin/index.html), your columns are among the most widely read on the Post's website.

Regardless, I'm sure you'll land on your feet. Maybe the Op-Ed page at the Times?

Posted by: crust1 | June 18, 2009 5:29 PM | Report abuse

If the rumor of Dan's firing is correct, I'm shocked and devastated. I live in Maryland and need the WaPo for the local news, but I read Dan's column everyday, I look forward to it. I don't know what happened, but I think the WaPo has made a grave mistake. Literally, my reasons for visiting the WaPo every day just cratered.

Dan, wherever you end up, please find a way to let us know where we can follow you to. And thanks for the ride.

Posted by: DigiMark | June 18, 2009 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Here is the official reason Froomkin was fired:

"to make sure we're giving readers the most value when they are on our site while balancing the need to make the most of our resources."

Source:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0609/Froomkin_out_at_Washington_Post.html#comments

Tell me another one.

Posted by: crust1 | June 18, 2009 5:34 PM | Report abuse

I must say all of the boo-hoo'ing above about poor Danny-boy's termination have truly made my entire day. I hope all of you anti-american freaks find your way to the same unemployment office.

Good riddance. I hear that they might need some new writers in Tehran and Pyongyang. I think Fruit-kin's acidic style would fit-in perfectly there.

HOPE AND CHANGE, BABY!

Posted by: aaronburr94 | June 18, 2009 5:34 PM | Report abuse

some of these inane commentators are spoon-fed crap from the Drudge Report, then come here to vent.

Where's your red meat now?

Posted by: spenceradams | June 18, 2009 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Dan, do us a favor and go out with a blaze of glory, including pulling down a few Post temple columns as needed.

Posted by: SocraticGadfly | June 18, 2009 5:40 PM | Report abuse

Dan, Thanks for providing excellent reporting and insightful analysis on the news of the day. We will miss you and I look forward to continue reading you at your next gig.

Posted by: mrmoogie | June 18, 2009 5:41 PM | Report abuse

All of you anti-american bigots that love Fruit-kin need to realize that YOU are a sad and lonely minority. How does that feel?

I guess you poor saps will just have to get your "talking points" from Pravda now. LOL.

Posted by: aaronburr94 | June 18, 2009 5:42 PM | Report abuse

So what are we supposed to do with two Washington Times.

Posted by: Cognomen08 | June 18, 2009 5:46 PM | Report abuse

maybe he can join ABC and help do the infomercial for Obama on healthcare and pretend it's news and pretend they are journalists......

Posted by: pwaa | June 18, 2009 5:47 PM | Report abuse

Maybe Fruit-kin can ask Obama for a Chicago favor? I hear that there are openings as Inspector General in a number of federal agencies.

Posted by: aaronburr94 | June 18, 2009 5:50 PM | Report abuse

Dan, even though I almost always disagree with you I am sorry to see you go. I would suggest to tone down the Obama cheerleading in the next job, there are too many people doing it (Maddow, Olbberman, Robinson, etc... etc...), so the market is glutted. I am sure you will land on your feet somewhere good and good luck.

Posted by: DCDave11 | June 18, 2009 5:50 PM | Report abuse

Dan, you're a liberal hack. We're not just talking about the $787 billion in the "official" stimulus package, almost none of which will actually create jobs or stimulate anything but the election coffers of the Democrats that created this massive pork spending. Thus far, Obama is in for over $1.5 TRILLION in five months. Let's not refer to "economists" who remain nameless. Real economists know that Obama spending this year eclipses almost any other administration deficits in recent memory. It will push us into government debt to the tune of 70% of GPD within the next 15 years. We haven't even accounted for his trillion dollar healthcare package yet.

Get a clue, hack.

Posted by: RobParker | June 18, 2009 5:51 PM | Report abuse

So the Post fires Froomkin and keeps Will. For years Froomkin has written hard-hitting blogs in an attempt to hold the administration accountable. But they keep the senile and sanctimonious Will so he can keep writing columns telling us that blue jeans are evil. Yeah, good decision.

Posted by: Renu1 | June 18, 2009 5:51 PM | Report abuse

I'm alarmed that the Post has canned Froomkin. Just another reason to avoid the web site. If I want to read the neocon promotional sheet, I can always go to the Washington Times, or Human Events. The Post becomes more irrelevant with each passing minute. I admire journalists like Froomkin who look skeptically upon all people in power, regardless of their party. I'd much rather they kept Froomkin and put the bilious Krauthammer and the apologist Broder out to pasture. The Post is a shadow of what it once was--a very dark shadow.

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

Dan,

I disagree with the previous comment. You should really take a long, hard look in the mirror and ask yourself whether you the "stuff" to be a reporter. I think your skills are more suited for male prostitution in South Africa.

Posted by: aaronburr94 | June 18, 2009 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Hi Dan

Sorry to hear of your firing. You'll land on your feet just fine.

Astonishing how the Post of 1973 has turned into the Post of 2009. Krauthammer and Kristol, Gerson and Cohen -- a true hackfest.

Silly silly Post. Suicidial, actually.

-- stan

Posted by: Stan_Krute | June 18, 2009 5:55 PM | Report abuse

I'm appalled by the Washington Post's latest lurch rightward, but unfortunately I can't say I'm shocked.

White House Watch was my favorite feature of the Post and - in the past year or two - it has gradually become the only part of the editorial section that I follow regularly. As a physician and medical educator profoundly mistrustful of the pharmaco-industrial complex's alliance with insurers (not to mention the Faustian collusion by the AMA), I had looked forward to your skeptical analysis of all players (including President Obama) involved in the health-care debate.

I honestly cannot think of one other WaPo columnist who will represent anything besides the status quo (Marcus, Dionne, Ignatius), or the knee-jerk neocon viewpoint (Hiatt, Kagan(s), Gerson), or the terror-phobic liberty-compromising right-wingnut mindset (Krauthammer, Will, Kristol, et al.).

Aside from you, Dan, the only other even *slightly* independent-thinking columnist left at the WaPo is Kathleen Parker. And despite her conservative mindset, her relatively even-handed perspective also makes her the most "liberal" columnist remaining at the Post--go figure!

The Washington Post--once the proud home of independent thinkers, balanced journalism, and Watergate newsbreakers--has now joined Fox News and the Wall Street Journal as yet another brainless fixture in the right-wing echo chamber.

Like so many other of your readers, Dan, I'm confident you'll be writing for another (wiser) publication very soon. Drop us a line at Nieman Watchdog, and we'll be there in a heartbeat.

As for the Washington Post, this is the last straw. Between Krauthammer's torture-cheerleading (as a fellow physician, I can only say that I'm ashamed), Will's climate-change voodoo, and the witlessly jingoistic and xenophobic perspectives espoused by most of the other columnists, I had grown increasingly mistrustful of the Post's slanted opinionating. White House Watch was the only reason I still considered the other columnists; I figured I owed them a listen since they were featured alongside an excellent writer and thinker like Dan Froomkin.

No more. Starting today, I'm cutting my subscription (and deleting all my links to the Post's columns and blogs). The $ saved can go toward a subscription to whichever publication is lucky enough to land Froomkin! :-)

Posted by: ManateeMD | June 18, 2009 5:58 PM | Report abuse

"to make sure we're giving readers the most value when they are on our site while balancing the need to make the most of our resources."


Right.


Wing, that is. What happened, did the Reverend Moon purchase the Washington Post?

Posted by: artmann11 | June 18, 2009 5:58 PM | Report abuse

Dan Froomkin is the reason I visit the Washington Post site. His reasoned voice and careful research gave credibility to the editorial section. What a shame your editors don't understand the value he added.

Posted by: NMReader | June 18, 2009 5:58 PM | Report abuse

If you dim-wits think that Dan Fruit-kin is a "journalist," I must say you really need to WAKE UP. You might as well get your news from Jon Stewart.

Posted by: aaronburr94 | June 18, 2009 5:59 PM | Report abuse

I bet you leftist imbeciles do not know that Fruit-kin's wife worked for the big bad evil George W. Bush Department of Justice.

Suckers!

Posted by: aaronburr94 | June 18, 2009 6:03 PM | Report abuse

Dan, since you're a believer,maybe Obama's stimulus plan will create a new job for you. I wouldn't count on it though...

Posted by: RobParker | June 18, 2009 6:04 PM | Report abuse

Dan,

You will be missed. Just one more reason to not read the Post online. You are one of the few reasonably honest bloggers who's not afraid to take a consistent, reasoned stand on the issues of the day. And you were right about a lot of the issues, unlike the "liberal" editorial board of the Post.

Posted by: CaptainScience | June 18, 2009 6:10 PM | Report abuse

The Torture-Mongers vs Froomkin

The WaPo's statement drips with condescension:
Sometimes features must be eliminated, and this time it was the blog that Dan Froomkin freelanced for washingtonpost.com.


My italics. But Hiatt will publish op-eds peddling dishonest partial numbers to buttress Ahmadinejad, because that's what the neocons wanted. On Monday, at least. Froomkin has been a hero in exposing the torture regime of Bush and Cheney. He has also criticized Obama as this blog has done as well. Benen:
Far-right complaints notwithstanding, Froomkin has spent months scrutinizing the Obama White House, cutting the Democratic president no slack at all. Just over the past couple of days, Froomkin offered critical takes on the president's proposed regulations of the financial industry, follow-through on gay rights, and foot-dragging on Bush-era torture revelations.

Froomkin was one of the media's most important critics of the Bush White House, and conservative bashing notwithstanding, was poised to be just as valuable holding the Obama White House accountable for its decisions.

Maybe the quality of his free-lancing was showing up the hackneyed AIPAC boilerplate they publish every day on their op-ed page. Greenwald asks, understandably:
At a time when newspapers are relying more and more on online traffic, the Post just fired the person who, in 2007, wrote 2 out of the top 10 most-trafficked columns. In publishing that data, Media Bistro used this headline: "The Post's Most Popular Opinions (Read: Froomkin)." Isn't that an odd person to choose to get rid of?


And then the shoe drops:
Froomkin just recently had a somewhat acrimonious exchange with the oh-so-oppressed Krauthammer over torture, after Froomkin criticized Krauthammer's explicit endorsement of torture and Krauthammer responded by calling Froomkin's criticisms "stupid." And now -- weeks later -- Froomkin is fired by the Post while the persecuted Krauthammer, comparing himself to endangered journalists in Venezuela, remains at the Post, along with countless others there who think and write just like he does: i.e., standard neoconservative pablum.


Exposing the torture-monger Krauthammer would almost certainly have enraged Hiatt. They look after their own the neocons.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/06/the-torturemongers-vs-froomkin.html#more

Posted by: artmann11 | June 18, 2009 6:10 PM | Report abuse

"But it also suggests that the public is underinformed about some basic economic realities."

"Underinformed"? Seriously? When you cut through all the alarmist panicked economist logic, it's a very simple concept - the government should not be mortgaging our future to spend our childrens' and grandchildrens' money.

I don't like anyone to lose their job, but I will not miss any elitist who assumes someone with a different opinion is "underinformed".

Posted by: GodFamilyNation | June 18, 2009 6:10 PM | Report abuse

" Spending Jitters Don't Change the Fundamentals
According to the latest polls, the American public appears to be increasingly uncomfortable with all that money President Obama is spending -- and its effect on the deficit. "

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

While this is true, it is also true that Obama really is forced to take the money and put this government in debt for future generations. I am sure that WAPO owners know what I am talking about, because their newspaper are quiet about bankers and wealthy morrons who do give money to our government, but with interests. That pretty much answers where money comes from, but it could create total collapse of the economy and state, and guess who benefits in that type of collapse. NOT GOVERNMENT, NOT REGULAR JOES!

Posted by: BOBSTERII | June 18, 2009 6:14 PM | Report abuse

Hey Wa Po. You just lost a lot of readers when you let Dan Froomkin go. Now there’s no reason to read you at all. We have the Wash Times for the neocon view, if we wanted to bother reading that. See you.

Posted by: spencer911 | June 18, 2009 6:15 PM | Report abuse

Dan, you will be missed. The Washington Post is now increasingly just another neoconservative rag without you. I am sure you will be getting some good offers, and this may be, in the end, the best thing that could have ever happened to you. Please don't sell out, please don't give up. Getting rid of you would be like getting rid of Walter Lippmann. Good luck, you won't be needing it though.

Posted by: firstcalm | June 18, 2009 6:15 PM | Report abuse

Dan, you column was the best on the Post website. I will now have no reason at all to go to the WP at all. Thanks for all the great work you've done, we have all benefitted from your diligent, intelligent efforts. i plan to follow you wherever you go, so here's to success somewhere else !!

Posted by: fpa4356 | June 18, 2009 6:20 PM | Report abuse


Dan this is the last time I am visiting WP. This so-called paper isn't worth reading with you gone. Let the neocon scum rule the day on their way to bankruptcy.


Posted by: dogsbestfriend | June 18, 2009 6:24 PM | Report abuse

Dan, I read you every day, and I was particularly pleased to watch you call into question the growing chasm between the present administration's words and deeds. I have no doubt that you will land on your feet. I seriously doubt that the Washington Post will do the same.

Tom

Posted by: tmoore1 | June 18, 2009 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Dan Froomkin was one of your best writers. You have made a horrible business decision--he is one of the few writers at the Post that I would be happy to pay to read. Instead you will keep George Will on to write factually incorrect columns on climate change and diatribes about dungarees--wise choice.

Good luck Dan, I look forward to reading you elsewhere.

Posted by: jmglatz | June 18, 2009 6:47 PM | Report abuse

Dan,
You will be missed. With you gone, I have no reason to ever visit wapo.com ever again. Whether people consider you biased or not is irrelevant- you were one of the few voices consistently critical of both administrations over the same principles- something there is a distinct lack now. You have demonstrated your credibility- the washington post has unfortunately lost theirs. Thanks for all your work here.

Posted by: kamus | June 18, 2009 6:48 PM | Report abuse

Dan,
You were the ONLY reason I read this RAG!
I will now unsubscribe and read you at your next station as the only MSM journalist I bother to read. You deserved better.

Posted by: clausy | June 18, 2009 6:50 PM | Report abuse

Crappy news to hear that WaPo isn't renewing you. Yet they keep those hacks Will and Krauthammer? Something stinks! Tell us all about it when you escape their clutches!

Posted by: tillie630 | June 18, 2009 6:54 PM | Report abuse

The Post thinks people need to spend more time outdoors or watching TV or something. Anything but reading the WaPo or thinking critically about serious issues.
What a profoundly stupid, self-destructive move ( firing Dan Froomkin ).
They've eliminated their best online opinion writer- and a large portion of their readership!

Posted by: BradW_S | June 18, 2009 6:57 PM | Report abuse

Dan, yours is the only Washington Post opinion column I read, and is the sole reason I visit the WaPo web site multiple times a day.

I am also a print subscriber and your involuntary departure is one more reason for me to reconsider my subscription. With conservatives already dominating the opinion section, ending your column comes across as an attempt to further narrow the range of viewpoints expressed in the Post. I'd like to see the opposite.

Thanks for all your hard work over the months and years; you have done a great service keeping so many important issues in the spotlight. Wherever you end up next, I'll be there.

Posted by: chris_d | June 18, 2009 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Best of luck to you wherever your new web address might be, Dan.

I've read you here daily for years and recommended the same to everyone I know.

Now, I'll delete my last remaining link to the Washington Post.

Posted by: WileQuixote | June 18, 2009 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Dan,

TODAY IS A GREAT DAY. THANKS TO THIS DECISION, I JUST SUBSCRIBED TO THE WaPo AGAIN.

GOOD RIDDANCE.

Posted by: aaronburr94 | June 18, 2009 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Apparently the neo-con/sane ratio at the Post wasn't high enough for Fred Hiatt. So Dan Froomkin has to go.

Well, Dan, we'll find you wherever you end up. As for the Post - well, I certainly won't be buying any of your dead tree editions anytime soon. It really is shameful what you guys are doing here.

Posted by: rick_desper | June 18, 2009 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Oh Dan, we will miss your hard-hitting, Obama-slobbering pieces and your bigoted views towards Israel. Most importantly, we will miss your love for the terrorists and UBL. What will we do without you???? Oh my, what will we do???

You people are pathetic. Get a life!

Posted by: aaronburr94 | June 18, 2009 7:05 PM | Report abuse

This is the hope and change that you morons voted for. Eat it.

Posted by: aaronburr94 | June 18, 2009 7:07 PM | Report abuse

I've never done more with Krauthammer's work than skim the title of his columns.

On the other hand, I have never EVER missed anything Dan Froomkin wrote. I hated when he took vacations because I missed his commentary.

I can't believe you folks did this. But, seeing that you did do something this dumb, I'm back to the Gray Lady fulltime. I've had it with the Washington Post.

Posted by: sherirogers | June 18, 2009 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Sorry to see you go, Dan.

Posted by: Boomslang | June 18, 2009 7:22 PM | Report abuse

And as long as we are talking about deficits, tell us Dan, who was it who pushed for and who fought against the balanced budget amendment?

Posted by: SharpshootingPugilist | June 18, 2009 2:28 PM |
=======================================

That would be this guy's party, correct?

Cheney cut him off. "You know, Paul, Reagan proved deficits don't matter," he said, according to excerpts. Cheney continued: "We won the midterms (congressional elections). This is our due."

~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | June 18, 2009 7:25 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Froomkin, your column has been the best commentary in the Washington Post since you joined.

I'm sure you can do better, this cesspool of neocon 'thought' doesn't deserve you.

Good Luck, and I'll read you where ever you go.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | June 18, 2009 7:29 PM | Report abuse

I guess Froomkin was the only person left who they could fire without an age discrimination or hire-the-handicapped lawsuit.

Posted by: jimk8mr | June 18, 2009 7:29 PM | Report abuse

See you later WaPo. How ironic, on the anniversary of Watergate too, the last time you did anything for your country. And that was a fluke.
As they say, glad to see the back of you.

Posted by: crestthree | June 18, 2009 7:31 PM | Report abuse

I go where Dan goes. And the WaPo sees me no more. Hacks like Krauthammer offend my intelligence. Dan Froomkin was the real reason I paid any attention to the WaPo....best wishes Dan, see you soon somewhere else!

Posted by: wknjh | June 18, 2009 7:32 PM | Report abuse

Dan Froomkin was not only the best writer on the Post "opinion" staff, he was about the only one not wedded to an outdated 1992 model of journalism and politics. The Washington Post can't wait for its own demise, but has to speed it up.

Dan, I'm looking forward to reading you on Neiman and wherever else you pop up

Posted by: corrycorry2005 | June 18, 2009 7:34 PM | Report abuse

Dan, you will be missed you were the only columnist at the Washington Post who was not to be missed. I find the opinion page at the Post has become as right wing as the WSJ. MSM is losing a star. I hope you have a soft landing at another publication .

Posted by: IdeaMary | June 18, 2009 7:40 PM | Report abuse

Good bye, Dan. Good bye, Washington Post.

I guess all things need to come to an end and my subscription will lapse now that I hear of Dan's departure.

Dan- Let us know where you land, I for one look forward to continue reading your work wherever that may be.

Posted by: yan-pundit | June 18, 2009 7:58 PM | Report abuse

Dan: I'm sorry the Washington Post will no longer carry your White House Watch column. Your original perspective and voice added a lot to public debate during the Bush Presidency, and I hope that in the years to come you will subject the Obama administration to the same scrutiny.
I look forward to continuing to read your work wherever you may go next.

Posted by: VirginiaIndependent | June 18, 2009 7:59 PM | Report abuse

DAN

THIS PAPER SUCKS AS OF LATELY ANYWAY!!

YOU WILL BE AL'IGHT

Posted by: danders5000 | June 18, 2009 8:06 PM | Report abuse

Dan,

Good luck in whatever you decide to do next. With the work you've done here, you should be able to raise some capital to start your own project if that's something you're interested in.

Posted by: mthawki | June 18, 2009 8:14 PM | Report abuse

At a time when newspapers are relying more and more on online traffic, the Post just fired the person who, in 2007, wrote 2 out of the top 10 most-trafficked columns. In publishing that data, Media Bistro used this headline: "The Post's Most Popular Opinions (Read: Froomkin)." Isn't that an odd person to choose to get rid of?


And then the shoe drops:
Froomkin just recently had a somewhat acrimonious exchange with the oh-so-oppressed Krauthammer over torture, after Froomkin criticized Krauthammer's explicit endorsement of torture and Krauthammer responded by calling Froomkin's criticisms "stupid." And now -- weeks later -- Froomkin is fired by the Post while the persecuted Krauthammer, comparing himself to endangered journalists in Venezuela, remains at the Post, along with countless others there who think and write just like he does: i.e., standard neoconservative pablum.

-------------

And you think, you really think "No one can be this stupid, especially given the downward trends of newspaper readership."

But they are.

I mean, they will go bankrupt, and they will fail, but they will never, ever figure out why.

Live, in action, this is how NOT to manage a paper.

Or a country.

Posted by: thegreatpotatospamof2003 | June 18, 2009 8:16 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, I hope Dan starts his own White House Watch blog, then, if he hasn't already.

I don't read the blogs anymore, but I'd make an exception, here.

Dan is one of the best writers the Post had, the only one I read on a regular basis.

Posted by: thegreatpotatospamof2003 | June 18, 2009 8:19 PM | Report abuse

way to go, washington post! fire the one half-liberal columnist on your staff, while keeping the plethora of right wing and moderate right wing columnists on staff. you should be ashamed.

Posted by: igglevideo | June 18, 2009 8:23 PM | Report abuse

To quote someone from above: I go where Dan goes, too. Now I have NO reason to visit the WaPo site. Hey, WaPo, how's that gun-shot wound to the foot feeling?

Posted by: TuiMel | June 18, 2009 8:25 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for taking us through the dark years, Dan. We need you now more than ever, and, if you're moving on, I look forward to reading your work elsewhere.
J. Barry
Baltimore

Posted by: jrbarry63 | June 18, 2009 8:25 PM | Report abuse

When I lived in DC in the 80s and early 90s the Post was my daily news crack. When I left DC I missed the Post but happily in 2000 I discovered Yahoo homepage and to this day it has been one of my bookmarks that I turn to day in a day out. During the Bush years Dan's posts offered me critical insight into things the MSM ignored. In recent years Dan was the first thing I looked for each 'mid-day' wondering when that day's post would finally get, er, posted. As of today I'm removing the Post from my bookmarks. It's kind of like a funeral but then again time for new pastures. Ungracious and unworthy of you WAPO. Ben Bradlee should saunter into the building and give 'em the what for (Kay Graham too, God bless her soul: she could award 'em the 'Mitchell Memorial Wringer Award'.)

Posted by: flynns1 | June 18, 2009 8:27 PM | Report abuse

Dan,

I am really sorry to see you go. I thought you were fair, both to the previous and present administrations. You criticized them when it was deserved. Now, it seems that Dionne is the only reason to come to this site.

Sigh! At one time, the Washington Post was a great paper.

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

Mr. Froomkin, you were one of the major reasons I read WaPo. Condolences RE the gig, and here's hoping to see your writings from elsewhere soon.

WaPo, 'bye.

Posted by: ExperimentalTheologian | June 18, 2009 8:33 PM | Report abuse

So long Dan. You did the kind of noble work that the Post was once known for.

Posted by: g9fool | June 18, 2009 8:34 PM | Report abuse

I have been a subscriber to the Sunday Washington Post for over 25 years, but this is the last straw. Hiatt has loaded the Post with neo-cons and conservative idiots like Will, Krauthammer, Gerson, and Ponnaru, and gotten rid of quality progressives like Dan Froomkin. Who's next: Robinson and Dionne?

I will be terminating my subscription. The Post should just merge with the Moonie Times and be done with it.

Good-bye Post. It was fun while it lasted.

Posted by: robndipayne | June 18, 2009 8:46 PM | Report abuse

I miss the Post. It is stunning to see how far it's sunk. Firing Froomkin is pretty much the end of its op-ed bona fides. It still has several good reporters, but I have to assume it's circling the drain to have done something this stupid.

I look forward to seeing Froomkin at his next venue. Between Dan Froomkin and the Post, I'll put my money on the honest, fearless journalist.

Posted by: BentonWilliams1 | June 18, 2009 8:46 PM | Report abuse

As Cheney says; "Reagan proved deficits don't matter", well deficits DO matter, and we will spend the next lifetime or so paying off these deficits.

However, what else can be done? We spent our way into this mess and the Republicans not withstanding, we will not solve this recession by giving tax cuts to the wealthy.

Government spending and redistributing wealth are the real answers to a broad, all inclusive recovery.

Posted by: hadenuff1 | June 18, 2009 8:57 PM | Report abuse

I considered the WaPo to be my hometown paper. I was born in DC; I have fond memories of childhood early morning trips (with a grownup) to go buy a Post, and on weekends, Milk and Donuts. The best thing was copying the funnypages with Silly Putty. Recently, I've been scanning the headlines, skimming the metro/NoVa section and reading Froomkin. I'll be following Froomkin wherever he takes his excellent reporting and analysis and reading blogs like Firedoglake for my news from here on out.
RIP Washington Post

Posted by: Sheeshak | June 18, 2009 9:17 PM | Report abuse

What a sad, troubling and embarrassing development for the Post. I have been following Froomkin at the WP for years - why, I had lunch with White House Watch every day. I had no idea that today would be the last.

How unfortunate. I have been reading the Washington Post for 15 years. I can't really say I have any reason to keep reading it. I'll follow Froomkin and leave the Post behind with the tired, old likes of George Will and his climate change distortions, Krauthammer and his celebrations of torture, Broder and his out of touch Beltway wisdom, the editorial page and their neocon cheerleading and so on. How sad.

Posted by: jms9z | June 18, 2009 9:19 PM | Report abuse

THE DECLINE AND FALL OF USA

Before Obama Day, there were repeated warnings.

North Korea assured the world it had weaponized nuclear material, and promised to shoot a missile towards Hawaii. Iran bragged about its nuclear capability and the need for the Little Satan and the Big Satan to be wiped off the map.

President Obama pledged publicly to halt the USA anti missile defense program at precisely the wrong time, in the wrong way, to the wrong people.

The CIA was demoralized with leaks and cynical White House manipulation of confidential documents endangering agents. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi publicly called the CIA briefers liars and never rescinded her comments, although everyone knew she was lying. Don’t stick your neck out became the new mantra as Obama even gave Miranda warnings to captured Al Qaeda enemy combatants on the battlefield.

President Obama continued in his earnest, but misguided, drive to socialize the entire United States. Secretary Geithner’s policies insured that his publicly announced approval of the decline of the US Dollar in favor of a global currency was a self fulfilled prophecy.

What was never appreciated by Team Obama was just how quickly the US declined economically as a result of the mutually reinforcing effects of the loss of the dollar as a world currency, economic chaos as a result of socialism of the private sector, and the rampant inflationary erosion resulting from the Obama stimulus and Congressional earmarks. Geithner had assumed a pro forma response in a world in which the USA economic slowdown only receded because the USA was reaching terminal velocity.

But in the final analysis, Obama Day occurred because President Obama never appreciated that failure was not only an option, but a virtual certainty, under his policies.

Posted by: JaxMax | June 18, 2009 9:33 PM | Report abuse

I used to love the Post and used to believe I was getting the straight story from the paper.

Not anymore. Hire Kristol, keep Krauthammer, and fire Dan Froomkin? That's just terrible judgment.

And as successful as his column has been, it stinks of something besides logic at work.


Posted by: fritz5 | June 18, 2009 9:38 PM | Report abuse

I can't disagree more with your decision to fire Dan. I have been a loyal reader of his blog for three years, and plan to transfer my readership to wherever he next ends up. When much of the rest of the MS media was sleeping or taking everything from the WH at face value over the past 8 years, Dan was asking the right questions and getting us to think critically about what was going on. He was way ahead of everyone else.

Liberal bias? I have no doubt that if the Obama administration tried or tries what the last group did, Dan would be the first to point it out.

Posted by: WarriorMtn | June 18, 2009 9:48 PM | Report abuse

Dan,

I am very sorry to read that you will be leaving the Post, which I think has really shot itself in the gonads with this decision. Color my subscription GONE.

I will set my Google scanner to see where you land, and I hope to read you there.

You will be missed. Good luck! :)

Posted by: Pablo01 | June 18, 2009 9:55 PM | Report abuse

Dan's firing is a very poor decision. He was a tenacious and wisely critical reporter of the federal branch of the government. This makes me deeply question the Washington Post's judgement.

Good luck to you Mr. Froomkin.

Posted by: schujo | June 18, 2009 10:04 PM | Report abuse

With the exception of Froomkin, and maybe a few others, I only read the comments section of the Post.

The editorial staff, and perhaps most of the journalism, stopped being relevant a long time ago.

Isn't this true?

Posted by: thegreatpotatospamof2003 | June 18, 2009 10:08 PM | Report abuse

This is truly a sad day in journalism. What has happened to the WaPo I knew and loved for years?

Dan, thanks for being bringing us information about the White House that the normal media ignores. Thank you for directing us to sources we didn't know existed. Your column will be missed.

I look forward to you finding a new home to post your blog. And to WaPo, see ya, you just lost an avid reader.

Posted by: tatwood | June 18, 2009 10:11 PM | Report abuse

The Post FIRED YOU?

How can any review of your work over the last several years conclude that you have given them traffic and enriched the nation debate.

At every turn from you have given a fresh, engaging and insightful perspective on what is happening in the center of the world.

The Post will regret this day as they watch their roster of repeaters of CV sinking the franchise.

I know you will end up in an important and increasingly influential place I know. Too bad the Post won't Post won't be able to share in your future success. But as my ma used to say: "they made their bed..."

Posted by: porsillo | June 18, 2009 10:19 PM | Report abuse

Dan - I have enjoyed a great deal reading your work and your analysis. I hope you continue to do what you're doing, I will bookmark wherever you land - you are an excellent writer and reporter.

Post - You just severed one of the last few major reasons I still visit the Post website. You still have a few good things going on, but this makes no sense. I'm not even talking left or right, I'm talking just good journalism - and Dan was a good journalist. Heck, he was a great journalist, and this is coming from someone who didn't always agree with him. But he did his due diligence at least, which is a lot more than some of your remaining writers ever seem to do with any kind of consistency.

Posted by: skye34 | June 18, 2009 10:26 PM | Report abuse

Stimulate during a downturn. That's practically a law of physics.

Folks, the federal government is not a household economy -- it is absolutely CRUCIAL that it spend when we can't, otherwise the whole system freezes up.

We've gotten to be a culture that is like children playing soccer: everybody chases the ball, with no strategy or foresight. We buy when the market is overheating. We sell when the market is dropping. We go into deficit spending during flush times and get thrifty when times are dire.

No foundation, all the way down the line.

Now the Washington Post has eliminated one of its fresh thinkers from its ranks with the firing of Dan Froomkin. Has the WaPo decided to go the way of the Republican Party -- shrink away into irrelevance out of a fear of maturity?

Off my Bookmarks goes wapo.com and this dark cave of American Taliban comments posters, hatching your theocratic notions and plotting your Klannish rants.

Ugh.

Posted by: TerryOakland | June 18, 2009 10:33 PM | Report abuse

Dan:
Best of luck in your new ventures. I just wrote WaPo to say this is my last time online with them. Between their dropping you and their increasingly odd reporting (gee do you think we might get a story on say, Iran?) there is no reason to read WaPo anymore.
I'll be watching for your cogent analysis elsewhere.

Posted by: concernedcitizen8 | June 18, 2009 10:39 PM | Report abuse

Dan, Why not start your own site like Daily Kos or TPM? I too am bowing out from reading WashPost. My husband has refused to read it for months but I kept telling him that I supported them because they supported you. That's another argument he has won. Look forward to seeing where you end up and I'll keep reading.

Posted by: Barbara5 | June 18, 2009 10:56 PM | Report abuse

I am shocked and appalled that the Post decided to let you go. Do you not even get a final column? This is insane.

Just for the record, I admired your wrestling with the new direction of the blog, which had been created during the Bush years and now confronted a very different era. You were open and authentic and eager for input from readers as you thought this through.

I liked where you had ended up, as an honest broker or honest critic. You had clear and specific critiques of the process of the new White House, particularly its lack of real transparency. There are very few other sources for this perspective. One camp of writers is interested in actual policy (health care, war, etc.) and couldn't care less about process issues like transparency.

The other group are the knee-jerk Obama haters, who hate that he took his wife to Broadway, hate that he has network TV reporters do softball interviews in the White House, yada yada. They are more interested in "What can we throw at him today?" rather than actually evaluating what they are seeing, pro OR con.

You had found a third and much smarter way, taking Obama's claim to change Washington (in specific ways) seriously enough to point out when he didn't live up to his promises. I hope you find a new perch soon and I will find it and read you there. In the meantime this is not your loss. It is the Washington Post's.

Posted by: fairfaxvoter | June 18, 2009 11:00 PM | Report abuse

Well, the Washington Post has completed it transformation from the pride of journalism of the Kay Graham era to being a clone of the Washington Times.
It is now a totally conservative rag.
And papers wonder why they are in trouble.
As long as Wapo chases after the neocons and the 25 percent of those and continues to ignore us, the other 75%, they will continue to be in trouble.
It is sad to see how papers and networks are dedicated to the conservatives, and the so called mainstream also caters to and chases after them but, there is no room for liberal and progressive voices in the media anymore.
This is why we flock to blogs.

Posted by: vwcat | June 18, 2009 11:05 PM | Report abuse

I'm shocked that the Post has let you go. Your blog was something that I looked forward to daily and will miss. Your reporting and holding both administrations accountable has been exceptional and something that many in the media do not do. I will not visit nearly as often as I have in the past (but will be visiting niemanwatchdog.org more).

Posted by: zaboo65 | June 18, 2009 11:13 PM | Report abuse

Just found out that the WaPo fired you, Dan. It's one more step on the Post's determined march to irrelevance, in my opinion.

Sure, I understand that all the important insiders behind the Beltway (and at your paper) want all this "torture talk" to just go away! and you weren't about to let that happen. But do they need to be so craven about it?

Posted by: eztempo | June 18, 2009 11:20 PM | Report abuse

Dan
You are one of three reasons to bother reading this paper any more. Has WaPo decided to drop its online presence? What are they thinking?
Breaking news we can get elsewhere. The commentary matters, if a "paper" has sentient writers. Not this one apparently.
Too many of WaPo's columns are dialed in. The dinosaurs have five or six ideas and they just rerun them no matter what happens.
What a waste. The blowhards will probably bloviate about the sad decline of a great tradition. But it's WaPo's editors squandering that legacy.
Thanks for nothing, Fred.

Posted by: walshgen48 | June 18, 2009 11:40 PM | Report abuse

For those of your who may not have heard, Dan Froomkin was fired earlier today, apparently for daring to stand up to Charles Krauthammer in an argument with that well-known advocate of warrentless wiretapping and torture.

This will be the last time I read the Washington Post. However, it will not be the last time I read Dan Froomkin's column-wherever he takes it. I just wanted to announce me support for him in the pages of the Washington Post one last time, before I leave this worthless neoconservative-dominated piece of garbage forever.

Posted by: Anglia123 | June 18, 2009 11:41 PM | Report abuse

Tell me it isn't true.
You can't be leaving Dan, you're one of WaPo's very finest journalists .. oh wait, I just answered my own question.

Posted by: headylilacs | June 18, 2009 11:43 PM | Report abuse

Dan, your coverage of the Bush years was singular, and dogged. Your analysis, timeliness and perspective stand up to anyone else's in American journalism, blog or print.

I have every confidence you'll land on your feet. Catch you at the next pop stand, and at Nieman in the meanwhile.

Posted by: FormerSubscriber | June 18, 2009 11:52 PM | Report abuse

dan froomkin: the best thing to happen to the wapo since watergate coverage. sorry ol' boy. you alone got me to come to this site when everyone else was all "insider" during the bushy years. you, almost alone alongside the beltway idiota, knew colbert had bush exactly right at the correspondent's dinner YEARS before everyone else caught on.

clear, succinct, erudite, never pushy yet always taking you somewhere interesting, dan froomkin THANK YOU! you smart, truthful person. you did the nation a favor -- a much needed-voice among all the petes and repeats.

how incredible that the crass, small-minded, elitist neo-cons of the post flourish -- even now! -- despite how wrong they have been time after time. meanwhile a sharp, even-handed voice WITH SOMETHING TO SAY, not simply echoing some corporate-generated talking point, is let go.

adios amigo! you done good!

Posted by: johndog | June 19, 2009 12:01 AM | Report abuse

What a total shame, for Froomkin and for what was once a great an courageous paper. Katherine Graham published the Pentagon papers and the Watergate articles, even as she was trying to take the paper public. She new the blow back might jeopardize her financial plans, but she published because it was news, it was important, and it was the right thing to do. Now WaPo fires their most fiercely independent critic - a man who probed and analyzed and wrote the truth, regardless of the party affiliations of those whose actions he questioned. I am done with WaPo. I have removed them from my Bookmarks and could give a rat's ass what any of their neocon mouthpieces have to say in the future!

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

I'm stunned by the news that the Post has purged your blog, but it fits the direction they been headed for a decade or so. I just canceled my WaPo subscription. I'm certain you will land a better gig somewhere else.

Judging by some of the comments here, a lot of conservatives assume anyone who criticizes George Bush must me a liberal. Maybe you are, but in my book you are a principled journalist who loves and respects his craft and understands how important a principled journalist is to democracy.

I admit, you helped me keep my sanity during the Bush administration and I appreciate your criticism of Obama when he began breaking his campaign promises.

I know White House Watch will surface somewhere else soon. Best of luck.

Posted by: Trakker | June 19, 2009 12:26 AM | Report abuse

Dan;

Thanks for all those great column's over the years. You were a rare beacon in what was becoming an increasingly RW paper. I will look forward to reading your future commentaries wherever you may end up.

As for the WAPO, since they just removed my primary reason for coming, it looks like I will be going elsewhere for my daily dose of comics.

Posted by: frisbeejon | June 19, 2009 12:44 AM | Report abuse

Good Luck Mr. Froomkin. Base on your writings, you will have no problem landing a perhaps even better and high profile job. The Post is so lacking from its early days. All that is left now are liars and hyperbole, in the likes of Krauthammer and Will.

Posted by: sandnsmith | June 19, 2009 12:46 AM | Report abuse

I join all the others who have said -- and it's no exaggeration -- that the only reason I come to the WaPo site is to read Froomkin.

It's quite obvious he's being dumped because he offended the fossilized Charles Krauthammer, whose recent defenses of torture Dan blew to bits with logic. Krauthammer and most of the WaPo's opinion writers have become caricatures.

Meanwhile, Dan also offended the Obama idolists.

In other words, he has done exactly what a real journalist is supposed to do -- and, with rare exception, that will never do at the WaPo.

Posted by: grazer | June 19, 2009 1:01 AM | Report abuse

Say it ain't so, Dan.

I have appreciated your dogged determination to hold the press and the White House, regardless of the occupant, accountable.

You have brought sunshine to the relationship of the press to the dark, dank tunnels of executive branch power. And you have done so with good humor and a light touch.

You will continue to do well and to do your good wherever you land. Washingtonpost.com has foolishly divested itself of a valuable asset and I, for one, will be visiting its Web site a lot less often.

Good luck and keep on dogging.

Posted by: 2D3D | June 19, 2009 1:05 AM | Report abuse

Thursday, June 18
The Washington Post fires it's only real remaining journalist. Definitely on a suicide mission. We'll miss you Dan, although I doubt it will be for long.

Posted by: Convolutor | June 19, 2009 2:23 AM | Report abuse

Dan, I've just heard the news. "Stunned" is the only way I know to describe my reaction.

Your column has been a daily must read for several years. Not only do you know the nuts and bolts of DC, but I appreciate how you're able to read between the lines and sift through the BS of a story that some reporters buy into without thinking.

I'll continue to seek you out via Nieman or wherever else you write.

Now I must write to Mr. Hiatt

Posted by: whenpigsfly | June 19, 2009 2:34 AM | Report abuse

This is an outrage. They keep Will, Kraut, Gerson,Dionne, and let Dan go?? This is nuts. I knew the editorial staff was off the mark, but apparently management, like Limbaugh are getting some help from the powers that be. They sure wouldnt want Froomkin here when Cheney's attacks materialize again. They must be in on it with them. It will be all neocon , all the time. Just like radio, and Fox. How sad for our country. No dissent please.

Posted by: waawaazaire | June 19, 2009 6:29 AM | Report abuse

Dan,
Honestly, you're better off not working for these idiots. I look forward to reading you in whatever venue is lucky enough to get you. As many have said, there's not much reason to read the Post's web site any more.

Posted by: evenadog | June 19, 2009 6:44 AM | Report abuse

Dan can be found at NiemanWatchdog.org. He's also on twitter altho not sure if that particular acct is under WaPo or not. Let's put it this way - if it's fair, articulate, balanced, intelligent, and insightful - it's not WaPo. So to Dan - thanks for swimming upstream for all of us who give a damn about this country and the global village. And to WaPo - hoping you drown in LOTS of red ink & no government bailout. Maybe Murdoch and Ailes will ride to the rescue and bring you more fully under their wing. You're already nothing more than FoxNewsLite.

Posted by: cymric | June 19, 2009 7:23 AM | Report abuse

Echoing the comments of most here, Dan's firing is an appalling mistake. The neocons who have been wrong, wrong, wrong on everything for the last 8 years continue to get a voice, and one the best gets canned? Pathetic.

Goodbye journalism, hello Washington Times redux.

Posted by: luvadog | June 19, 2009 7:52 AM | Report abuse

This is good for John McCain.

Posted by: hoof32 | June 19, 2009 7:55 AM | Report abuse

I agree with Dan. One thing the TV media does is attack under the disguise of giving the other side. And they don't really discuss either side well. For example, the arguments on health care. There are several committees looking at health care options. And so far, the GOP hasn't really fielded a detailed plan. Yet, you'd never get that from the networks. And NBC really loves polls. These are meaningless since Obama, like Bush, doesn't follow the polls.
Obama has been in office for 6 months. The Great Depression lasted more than a decade. And some of the greated social changes happened during that period. However, FDR didn't have to contend with an illiterate media that can't be bothered to provide information instead of statements of opposition.

Posted by: sander | June 19, 2009 8:40 AM | Report abuse

It is sad that we have go to blogs and The Daily Show so we don't loose faith in the media, and hence our country. I was heartsick when we went to war w/ Iraq. I knew we were being lied to – it will quick, easy and inexpensive. Thanks WaPo you don't owe us anything, except pushing us down the path that has been so successful for the past 8 years. Another reader who will leave w/ Dan Froomkin. -DanJ in NoVA

Posted by: danwesjac | June 19, 2009 9:03 AM | Report abuse

So sorry to see that the Post decided that Dan's scrutiny of elected officials had "run its course". They just lost me as a reader. I've deleted all WashingtonPost.com bookmarks in my browser, and will not click through to any WaPo content from anywhere on the internet. WaPo can keep the Krauthammers, Broders and Kristols who are actually wrong about almost everything.
If I were Eugene Robinson, I'd be sending out resumes and leave before getting his pinkslip.

Posted by: nffcnnr | June 19, 2009 9:12 AM | Report abuse

The WaPo fires the only person willing to stay critical of Obama in a serious manner (the Krauthammers, Wills, Kristols, Broders et al are nothing more than silly caricatures).

Washington Post, you have lost my readership for taking one more step away from true journalism and one step closer to meaningless celeb-voice punditry.

Posted by: outlawtorn103 | June 19, 2009 9:40 AM | Report abuse

You nattering nabob republicans are laughable. I am sure you still don't understand why the VAST majority of citizens have a negative view of your utterly failed party AND ideas. You are the very epitome of the word - LOSERS. Your party is in disarray with no one able to identify a leader, a plan, or a clue for that matter. You are morally, ethically, and intellectually bankrupt. No one, except, that 22% or so of ignorant racists, cares at all what you have to say. Luckily for you we have freedom of speech here, but that doesn't mean we have to listen to your verbal tripe. Spew on, it is free entertainment after all, but we aren't listening to your words. We are only laughing at your histrionics.

Posted by: kgeakin | June 19, 2009 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Well, Dan, thanks for the memories and the intelligent analysis. You probably are better off crawling out of this cesspool of horribly biased nonsense. I'm sure your opinions will be welcome in the reality-based community.

And goodby WaPo. I don't think there's anybody on your staff I want to read anymore.

Posted by: Kalukan | June 19, 2009 12:32 PM | Report abuse

Well, well, well. This certainly isn't Katie Graham's paper any more. The last upholder of free speech and thoughtful debate ignominously "unhired" by a tottering, intellectually bankrupt Post. I'd pay to read what you write, Dan, you've always been the primary reason for me to stop here. Heaven knows, between Krauthammer, Wolfowitz (what?), and their ilk, coming here will soon become like diving into a cesspool.

Best of luck, Sir! I'll be looking for you, wherever you land.

Posted by: thepoliticalcat | June 19, 2009 11:03 PM | Report abuse

McClatchy for real news; NYT for the occasional Op-Ed; blogs for everything else. Anyone wanting the neocon viewpoint can always get it from blogs. Goodbye Washington Post, you were a fine paper once.

Posted by: thepoliticalcat | June 19, 2009 11:19 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company