Can Ehrlich Do This?

[Kain99]

For the Ding Dongs in the crowd who choose not to click the link. My source is the Washington Post

Just three months after taking power, the Ehrlich administration has formulated an important new doctrine, a policy so sweeping that it already carries its own political shorthand: the "Paulson Rule."

Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.'s communications shop laid down the rule this month to the State House press corps. Named after David Paulson, the spokesman and spinmeister for the Maryland Democratic Party, the rule is simple: Any reporter who quotes Paulson in print or on the air will be shunned for seven days by Ehrlich's Republican administration.

No comments, no phone calls returned, no exceptions.

Print what I like or I won't talk to you

 

[jlabsher]

I remember our president did it during his press conference a couple of months ago:

http://forums.somd.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=7894

 

[Kain99]

I remember that too. Bush didn't ban anyone quoteing Helen did he?

 

[jlabsher]

If I remember it correctly, anyone who wasn't a lap puppy of the administration's policies wasn't allowed to ask any questions.

Same general effect.

 

[vraiblonde]

If I remember it correctly, anyone who wasn't a lap puppy of the administration's policies wasn't allowed to ask any questions.

You don't remember correctly. It was just Helen Thomas, who's not even a news reporter but merely a columnist, not getting preferential treatment.

Wasn't David Paulson involved in the paid votes scam the Democrats were doing in 2002 - rounding up people, giving them money or cigarettes, driving them to the polls? Then didn't he also try to tell the news guys that it was just a get out the vote effort and there were no partisan politics involved? Then when it came out that in fact they WERE pressing these people on how to vote, Paulson gave the statement, "Mistakes happen"?

Ehrlich has a right to talk or not talk to anyone he pleases. Anyone who takes issue with this is just being petty.

 

[SmallTown]

Too bad I can't get one of those stickers "Don't blame me, I voted for the other guy". Oh well, who would have thought it would turn out this way. As messed up as the governor is in Va, at least I can say I didn't vote for him

 

[Kain99]

Anyone who takes issue with this is just being petty.

I don't know about that, Vrai. This appears to be a cowardly position. We aren't talking about a reporter who lies. So what? Paulson hates Ehrlich. Why does he care so much? My feeling is, that he has just given this guy more press and attention then he ever would have had.

To stand up and say we will not talk to Paulson is one thing. To refuse to speak to anyone who quotes him is another.

This reminds me way to much of kindergarten. "If you play with Sally, you're not my friend anymore!" Ridiculous.

 

[SmallTown]

Originally posted by Kain99

This reminds me way to much of kindergarten. "If you play with Sally, you're not my friend anymore!" Ridiculous.

My thoughts exactly.

With all the talk about democracy Vs dictator, then this pops up.

Maybe he needs to get the Fox news producers to work his camp, that way we can here both sides and let us decide.

 

[Frank]

Originally posted by SmallTown


With all the talk about democracy Vs dictator, then this pops up.

Yep - why, that is why he made it a new LAW.

Wait - no, of course not. It's just the way he does business. You know, *I* deal with people like this. I have a much more draconian rule - shut up or get out.

But *dictator*? Dictatorial? He hasn't "silenced" anyone. Nor would he. Nor would anyone else. THAT is what dictators do.

He's decided not to discuss anything regarding someone who clearly dislikes him, nor to encourage such discussion.

You know, I don't think some people have a REALLY good grasp of what freedom means - like our anti-war friends, who think their "freedoms" are threatened when they get called names when they exercise their freedom of speech. I'd like to explain to them that freedom of speech INCLUDES calling them names. I'd like to explain to them when the President or his press secretary chooses not to talk to certain people, based on any sort of criteria - that is also freedom. I'd like to tell them when country music fans choose to stop buying albums of artists or stop going to movies of certain actors, that is freedom. When I choose to NOT listen to you or anyone else, that is freedom. Don't like it? Go someplace where the government forces people to comply to what you want.

What ISN'T freedom? When the government tells you what you can, and can't say. When it tells you MUST listen to people you don't want to listen to, that stations MUST broadcast certain music, that movie studios MUST hire certain actors, and the audience MUST go.

The folks complaining about all this have been spoiled. They're used to calling the administration a bunch of morons to crowds full of applause. They're used to calling the names, throwing the insults, without response. They don't like being called names, or being shut out. Ain't life a b*tch? It works both ways. You know, when it was the other way around - like for example, when Newt was on Air Force One during the govt shutdown, and all were aboard to attend a funeral in Israel, and he tried to discuss matters with Clinton - and Clinton decided to shut the door and play Hearts with his staff - Newt got pilloried in the press and drawn as a crying baby in diapers. Anyone remember Dan Quayle? It's not as though liberals don't ridicule - they just don't like getting it back. When someone says Kerry "looks French" they get upset. Deal with it.

I LOVE freedom.

 

[Kain99]

I LOVE freedom

Does Freedom include attempts to "silence" the press?

Sorry, but that's exactly what Bob's done here.

 

[SmallTown]

Originally posted by Frank
Wait - no, of course not. It's just the way he does business. You know, *I* deal with people like this. I have a much more draconian rule - shut up or get out.

But *dictator*? Dictatorial? He hasn't "silenced" anyone. Nor would he. Nor would anyone else. THAT is what dictators do.

Oh frankie, sometimes to just crack me up. I've seen partisan people before, but you really take the cake.

If he just didn't want to talk to this guy, fine. Shut him out. But when you threaten others to not talk to him, then yes, you are dictating how the media is supposed to do their job. Like I said, he needs Fox to work for him so we can hear both sides and let us decide.

since you obviously didn't read the article, i'll post what the issue is.

" Any reporter who quotes Paulson in print or on the air will be shunned for seven days by Ehrlich's Republican administration.
No comments, no phone calls returned, no exceptions.
"

 

[Kain99]

Very interesting that you hold me (a nobody) to high moral standards when it comes to reporting the News factually, yet you excuse Bobby for picking and choosing what the public should read.

I am a huge Ehrlich supporter but I know when to call a spade a spade.

My Republican values, do not include agreeing with a politician when he is clearly wrong.

 

[SmallTown]

Originally posted by Kain99

I am a huge Ehrlich supporter but I know when to call a spade a spade.

Same here. Heck, I even rushed my wife to the polls before they closed so she could cast her vote for him. He has a lot of maryland history to break through to be a good republican governor in that state, and this isn't a very good way to start off.

 

[SmallTown]

Originally posted by http

HEADLINE: "Governor office not discussing new policies with opposition party"

That isn't even the problem



But don't worry. I don't want to keep you away any longer, go ahead and put your Fox News IV back in.

 

[SmallTown]

Originally posted by http
WRONG ABOUT WHAT? WHY DO YOU CARE? WHY WOULD ANYONE CARE? WHAT PART ABOUT THIS EXACTLY BOTHERS YOU? DON'T YOU HAVE SOMETHING MORE IMPORTANT TO WORRY ABOUT?

In otherwords, who cares? What does this have to do with me, my money and my family. Ever ask yourself that?

I wonder why people in power would want to dictate what the media prints.

Typical "you shouldn't care speech" in order to try and bury a story you don't like. Cute.

 

[Kain99]

Originally posted by http
In otherwords, who cares? What does this have to do with me, my money and my family. Ever ask yourself that?

Ever ask yourself why you, "Don't Care?"

 

[vraiblonde]

ST, don't you ever get bored baiting people with your pretzel logic? Please show me where Ehrlich has had anything to do with what the Wash Post prints.

Again I say, anyone who thinks this is a big deal is a petty person with too much time on their hands. Wake me up when Ehrlich does something more scandalous than refusing to talk to the press. *yawn*

 

[SmallTown]

All of this agreeing with Kain has made me sick to my stomach... So i'll bend just a bit. The legal matter behind this would be an interesting debate for lawyers who know this stuff much more than us. Perhaps Kain would have been better off saying "Should Ehrlich Do this" as opposed to "Can Ehrlich do this"

 

[Kain99]

Originally posted by SmallTown
All of this agreeing with Kain has made me sick to my stomach...

So I guess this means the affair is off.

 

[http]

Originally posted by SmallTown
I wonder why people in power would want to dictate what the media prints.

Typical "you shouldn't care speech" in order to try and bury a story you don't like. Cute.

What is it with this dictate? He's not dictating anything. No one is holding a gun to reporter's heads telling them what to print. That's dictating. Did I miss something in the article.

And as far as the "speech" are you talking about me? Its not that I don't like the story, I REALLY couldn't care!!!!! REALLY!!!!!