I keep reading columnist and bloggers who state that "someone" should ask Scott McClellan this or that, or that "someone" should talk with the tribes regarding their interactions with the President or Abramoff. Why can't the people saying this be the "someone?" If I were a reporter I'd certainly start investigating these many details.

The question of what access Jack Abramoff had to those in power is in important one. However, I don't think there's a chance in hell that anybody is ever going to get a straight answer from him. The only way the country is going to get answers about Abramoff or the NSA or the Energy Commission or the abduction of foreigners for extreme rendition or the administratration's endorsement of torture and its abrogations of the Geneva Accords is under subpoena, warrant and oath.

So, while it would be nice if the the Whitehouse Press Corps would grow a collective pair, I don't think Scott McClellan would answer even then. As long as there's no downside for the administration lying, then the administration will continue to lie.

I agree with the last comment. I'm tired of people sitting back and lobbing easy criticisms that "somebody' ought to do something. When I read the exchange between David Gregory and McLellan, Gregory seems to be hanging in there as best he can, face to face with the true challenge, not sitting back at his computer and opining about everyone else's cowardice.

The constant liberal whine about the press is on the verge of becoming exactly as dull and self-serving as the conservative one.

I'm not sure why they bother holding press conferences anymore. McClellan shows up and dances around the questions no matter how vague or specific they are. If you asked about whether Bush met with somebody on a specific date he'd say he'd say you were insunating and spin away madly to suggest you're just playing partisan politics. McClellan will not answer any question he doesn't want to answer and he'll only answer it in exactly the way he wants. All other things he deflects with, in essence, attacks on the press for being scandal mongers and partisans.

So, what the press should do is simple: stop showing up.

I mean, practically speaking, what do these conferences accomplish. They get some sound bites of McClellan dodgin questions to show on the evening news and that's about it. With some clever editing they could probably just recycle old clips of him not answering other questions.

While the press is braver than it was around 9/12 2001, there's no way they'd risk that. They wouldn't want to chance losing their access, credentials, etc. They'd probably get replaced by a cadre of Jeff Ghannons. But it's a fun thought to consider.

Joe:

You're well known for your brilliant work in this field. Seriously. The Hunting of the President was a masterpiece. You're not afraid of hard work. What's keeping you from hopping on the Acela and heading down to DC and confronting Scotty M. and twisting his arm?

I agree with a few who said that Scott M will always find a way to dance around & spin questions so that he doesn't give a straight answer, but that doesn't mean he shouldn't be asked. Complancency will get us nowhere!

Dear Fellow Conservatives,

As to Joe Conason going to the W.H. to demand the answers that don't seem to be available, Has it occurred to you that Joe counldn't get into the White House briefings? THey pick and chose and that is one reason the W.H. Press Corps appears to be a bunch of whimps (with the obvious exception of Helen.)

Just a reminded that the "collective pair" can be either intra or extra abdominal. I'm intrigued by the idea of a national boycott on daily briefings by the major networks and press until Scott stops being so uncooperative and obstructionist. The White House folks keep forgetting they are there to serve the people, not themselves.

Heck, they are on C-span anyhow so everyone could still keep an eye on what is going on. News seldom comes out of the briefings anyhow so let them stew in their own juices. The reporters could be out doing something really useful like investigating, following leads, getting underneath what the politicians are trying to force feed us and discover the real truths. Now THAT would be a public service.

In addition, they would all burn a few more calories and get some fresh air which might expand their thinking a bit. There has been many things going on since Bush was elected which the press never even discovered or knew and was too lazy or afraid to report. Doesn't give one much conficence in the press as an institution.

Anyone notice that McClellan looks like hell compared to when he started his job? Constantly lying and deflecting will do that to a man. I'll bet he started out as an idealistic, decent guy.

I am a heavy (news) drinker and it seems that nothing is more obvious than that it is time to begin digging into the press's policy and procedures manual. Specifically, how much control is exerted (on a daily basis) by the corporate managers.

It appears painfully clear that almost all press biggies are like the medicare actuary who'd have been fired for telling the whole truth about the cost of the latest debacle.

Anonymous sources welcomed.

Joe,

Apparently someone else has suggested that you take up the challenge of sparring with Scotty.

Even if you never got to answer a question at the briefings just the attempt could yield a revealing article.

You certainly have more reason to be admitted to the White House than a gay escort.

Maybe you and Gregory could strategize together.

Heck, a first person description of Les Kinsolving could be amusing and entertaining.

What if they gave a White House Press Conference and nobody came?

Last night I watched the Documentary on the French/Indian War. King George, George Washington, George W Bush. They all look like speculators to me.

Seems that if you are a Native American there is always some guy by the name of George figuring to pull a fast one on you in every Century.