David Corn reports an intriguing conversation with Armstrong Williams:
Why should the IG contact me? Williams replied, noting he had been merely a subcontractor. Any thorough investigation, I remarked, would include questioning the subcontractor. He scratched his head. "Funny," he said. "I thought this [contract] was a blessing at the time." And then Williams violated a PR rule: he got off-point. "This happens all the time," he told me. "There are others." Really? I said. Other conservative commentators accept money from the Bush administration? I asked Williams for names. "I'm not going to defend myself that way," he said. The issue right now, he explained, was his own mistake. Well, I said, what if I call you up in a few weeks, after this blows over, and then ask you? No, he said. Does Williams really know something about other rightwing pundits? Or was he only trying to minimize his own screw-up with a momentary embrace of a trumped-up everybody-does-it defense? I could not tell. But if the IG at the Department of Education or any other official questions Williams, I suggest he or she ask what Williams meant by this comment. And if Williams is really sorry for this act of "bad judgment" and for besmirching the profession of rightwing punditry, shouldn't he do what he can to guarantee that those who watch pundits on the cable news networks and read political columnists receive conservative views that are independent and untainted by payoffs from the Bush administration or other political outfits?
Any pro-Bush pundits ready to step forward and announce that they're not on the take?


Blogger Zach said...

His dog, spot. http://www.presidentialpetmuseum.com/photos/Pets/spot2.jpg

unless kibbles and bits and the occasional pig's ear counts as "the take"

1/11/2005 12:03:00 AM  
Blogger Zach said...

Wait, let me do that over - his pet cow is soooo much cooler

1/11/2005 12:05:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home