Darky
May 4th, 2009, 14:17
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22072.html
Asked in his Monday briefing if the White House would consider bailing out the newspaper business, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters the government may not have the power to reverse the industry’s decline.
“I don’t know what, in all honesty, government can do about it,” Gibbs said in response to a question about the Boston Globe’s financial struggles.
Noting that it's a "bit of a tricky area to get into," given the relationship between the White House and the media, Gibbs said President Barack Obama “believes there has to be a strong free press" and expressed "concern and sadness" over the state of the industry.
But Gibbs wasn’t just sympathetic — he also twisted the knife a little, digging into reporters who questioned the Obama administration’s commitment to cutting spending.
“You guys didn’t think $100 million meant a lot a few weeks ago,” Gibbs said. “But looking at some of the balance sheets, $100 million seems to mean a lot.”
Wow, what a professional response! I agree on the no bailout, for many reasons, chief among them that the gov't shouldn't be buying the newspapers, but his response You guys didn’t think $100 million meant a lot a few weeks ago. But looking at some of the balance sheets, $100 million seems to mean a lot.
Hello? We're dealing with budgets on a completely different scale here! If you're spending multiple trillions, you can't claim frugality by saving 100 million. If 100 million is more than you spend in an entire year, than yeah, it's a big deal to your budget. It seems that there are a lot more smart aleck responses coming from this administration than in past administrations. From Obama's little mini stare down when a reporter asked a question he didn't like to this, just seems a lack of professionalism.
Asked in his Monday briefing if the White House would consider bailing out the newspaper business, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters the government may not have the power to reverse the industry’s decline.
“I don’t know what, in all honesty, government can do about it,” Gibbs said in response to a question about the Boston Globe’s financial struggles.
Noting that it's a "bit of a tricky area to get into," given the relationship between the White House and the media, Gibbs said President Barack Obama “believes there has to be a strong free press" and expressed "concern and sadness" over the state of the industry.
But Gibbs wasn’t just sympathetic — he also twisted the knife a little, digging into reporters who questioned the Obama administration’s commitment to cutting spending.
“You guys didn’t think $100 million meant a lot a few weeks ago,” Gibbs said. “But looking at some of the balance sheets, $100 million seems to mean a lot.”
Wow, what a professional response! I agree on the no bailout, for many reasons, chief among them that the gov't shouldn't be buying the newspapers, but his response You guys didn’t think $100 million meant a lot a few weeks ago. But looking at some of the balance sheets, $100 million seems to mean a lot.
Hello? We're dealing with budgets on a completely different scale here! If you're spending multiple trillions, you can't claim frugality by saving 100 million. If 100 million is more than you spend in an entire year, than yeah, it's a big deal to your budget. It seems that there are a lot more smart aleck responses coming from this administration than in past administrations. From Obama's little mini stare down when a reporter asked a question he didn't like to this, just seems a lack of professionalism.