On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 2:52 PM, JW <[email protected]> wrote: > >> ...And though >> some may commend the president for his heartfelt concluding comments, >> it only brings home the idea that this dinner wasn't for the >> corresponents at all. It was a way for the president to give a >> soundbite without having to answer tough questions. The president took >> advantage of the captive audience, ignored them, and spoke directly >> into the cameras... and that's not right. > > C'mon, Kevin. Nobody went to the Correspondents' Dinner expecting to > question the President on serious issues.
It is probably my fault for being unclear. I never meant to imply the dinner was a press conference. What it was, as I understand it, is a situation where the lions sit down with the lambs for a brief respite before getting back to the business of the day. Thanks to C-SPAN and other news outlets who cover the event, it has become a more public showcase where, much like a state of the union message, politicians and the press have to be seen clapping and smiling at the right times. Its intent seemed to be a way for two groups to break bread together in a casual (even fun) atmosphere. I didn't get that feeling this time around. And no, I'm not judging or comparing Obama's performance to Bush's. I've been watching these dinners since Clinton. My favorite guest speaker is still Don Imus, who genuinely seemed to not care about the cameras covering him (or any political backlash) when he massacred the first lady right in front of the president. -- Kevin M. (RPCV) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ TV or Not TV .... Smart (TV) People on Ice! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
