http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003578295

WHCA Officials Defend Dinner In Wake Of 'NY Times' Pullout -- Paper Will Shun Gridiron Gala, Too
By Joe Strupp

April 30, 2007 1:40 PM ET

(NEW YORK) The New York Times' decision to no longer participate in the White House Correspondents' Association dinner, first revealed by Frank Rich in his Sunday column, drew support from other Times staffers, but some disagreement from WHCA officials.

New York Times spokeswoman Catherine Mathis confirmed Monday that the newspaper had decided not to participate in the event, but gave no reason for the decision. She said the paper also would not attend future Gridiron Club dinners, while some sources at the paper said the policy could extend to other similar events.

. . . Ron Hutcheson, a former WHCA president and current McClatchy White House correspondent, defended the dinner, saying accusations of conflict are largely unfounded.

"It is driven by a misperception, largely in the blogosphere, that because we are civil to each other, we forget what our role is, which is ridiculous."

. . . But Rich, who said in his column that the dinner "illustrates how easily a propaganda-driven White House can enlist the Washington news media....," defended his views again Monday. "I don't feel that reporters should be used in presidential publicity stunts," he told E&P. "This is used by the president of the United States as a political event."

- - Editor & Publisher

Yet another example of how the "totally mean and irrational" lefties of the blogosphere are terrorizing the main-stream media.

WHCA defensiveness is apropos, since to cancel the occasions when they're "used by the president" would be to reduce the WHCA membership to absolute idleness, after which their bureau chiefs might force them go out and do something useful.

Let the White House produce and distribute its own VNRs.

The old org chart went out the window, and the new org chart didn't include Gonzales.

http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/070430nj1.htm
Secret Order By Gonzales Delegated Extraordinary Powers To Aides

By Murray Waas, National Journal, Monday, April 30, 2007

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales signed a highly confidential order in March 2006 delegating to two of his top aides -- who have since resigned because of their central roles in the firings of eight U.S. attorneys -- extraordinary authority over the hiring and firing of most non-civil-service employees of the Justice Department.

. . . "It was an attempt to make the department more responsive to the political side of the White House and to do it in such a way that people would not know it was going on," . . .

. . . An original draft of Gonzales's delegation of authority to Sampson and Goodling was so broad that it did not even require the two aides to obtain the final approval of the attorney general before moving to dismiss other department officials, according to records obtained by National Journal.

The department's Office of Legal Counsel feared that such an unconditional delegation of authority was unconstitutional, the documents show. As a result, the original delegation was rewritten so that in its final form the order required "any proposed appointments or removals of personnel" be "presented to the Attorney General... for approval, and each appointment or removal shall be made in the name of the Attorney General."

The senior administration official who had firsthand knowledge of the plan said that Gonzales and other Justice officials had a "clear obligation" to disclose the plan's existence to the House and Senate Judiciary committees -- but the official said that, as far as he knew, they had not done so . . .

- - Murray Waas

All roads lead to Rove.

Speaking of Rove, and since it's well into the cocktail hour, lets check in with Christopher Hitchens, whose new book is to be published tomorrow, Tuesday, May 1, 2007.

http://nymag.com/arts/books/features/31244

. . . Hitchens, who started questioning his faith at age 9 (and wrote a polemic against Mother Teresa called The Missionary Position), has finally written the ultimate attack book, God Is Not Great. He spoke to us about his favorite religious stories, Karl Rove (infidel?), and the one time he found himself praying.

. . . Has anyone in the Bush administration confided in you about being an atheist?
Well, I don’t talk that much to them—maybe people think I do. I know something which is known to few but is not a secret. Karl Rove is not a believer, and he doesn’t shout it from the rooftops, but when asked, he answers quite honestly. I think the way he puts it is, “I’m not fortunate enough to be a person of faith.”

What must Bush make of that?
I think it’s false to say that the president acts as if he believes he has God’s instructions. Compared to Jimmy Carter, he’s nowhere. He’s a Methodist, having joined his wife’s church in the end. He also claims that Jesus got him off the demon drink. He doesn’t believe it. His wife said, “If you don’t stop, I’m leaving and I’m taking the kids.” You can say that you got help from Jesus if you want, but that’s just a polite way of putting it in Texas.

- - "New York" magazine

So Bush's Christianity may be at least partly insincere, and Rove may be an atheist, giving instruction to Sampson and Goodling (and other devoutly Christian commissars and apparatchiks) on how they should glorify God and Bush.

Who's zoomin' who?