And Away We Go

It took the media a few days, but now Matt Drudge is blaring a headline - "Wash Post - "Open Season" on Bush Twins". He links to a Dan Froomkin on-line chat, where Dan says:

Dan Froomkin: I think it's, yeah, sort of open season now. Possibly presaged by that Sunday New York Times piece I linked to this morning. But I think we've already seen the Girls Gone Wild photos -- remember that one of Jenna?

He is referring to his column, with this excerpt and link from his (lead) section about the twins:

Of course, the press coverage may not stay all sweetness and light for long. In fact, the New York Times on Sunday ran a long diary by Coco Henson Scales, a hostess at a chi-chi New York restaurant and lounge, in which she describes a visit from the twins during which Barbara goes outside, bends over, burps and spits.

This is all very responsible, big-time journalism, folks. The Times, the Post, no worries. Where IS Dick Cheney?

The blogospheric reaction has begun - "corrente", a rather largish blog, has picked it up (and they were so excited they mistyped their lead - "Bush twin watch: All the respect they deserve — Little Babs was (sic) such a sense of impunity!"). I suspect we will see a lot more of this.

Somewhat less publicized in the forums that pick up the Scale story will be this, also from the Times:

In the Vogue interview for the August issue, conducted in a Manhattan hotel room on Mother's Day, the daughters present a picture of themselves in striking contrast to the image of fun-loving twins known for partying and under-age drinking in Texas. Barbara Bush says that after the election she plans to sign up for a program to work with children with AIDS in Eastern Europe and Africa; Jenna says she plans to teach at a charter school.

I was annoyed last Sunday. Now I am just resigned.

UPDATE: Eschaton, home of Atrios, has picked it up, so we know that the left half of the blogosphere is on board. Don't blame Atrios himself, BTW, "Hamilton" posted it. The comments are mostly what one might expect, although a few point out that Bush probaly can be evaluated on his own merits. (Did I say "blame"? This is news; see NY Times, WaPo, above.)

And it makes Memorandum

Comments

[HH]

"Open season," he said, wiping the drool off his face.

If Rush Limbaugh said "Open season on Chelsea!" it would be hell to pay... we know that because they still refer to it today, distort what was said and ignore that he apologized, repeatedly and personally to her mother, for it.

[TM]

I have decided that I am not worried - my secret theory is that when the lunatic left will go on parade, it does not hurt Bush, and that will happen here.

But better will be when "they" are called on it, and actually defend bashing two 22 year olds whose only sin is that Dad lied about WMDs. Well, they will find more sins, I am sure. But they wouldn't *be* sins if Dad were a good Democrat.

I'm ranting...

[Forbes]

I'm beginning to think that there is no longer any reason to complain, or point out, the double standard the media takes when criticizing Republicans and those related. We should just find an acronym or some cliche--point it out, by dismissing it as such, and move on.

On a slightly different point--if a Republican running for office had married someone as wealthy as Terry Kerry, there would be no debate about full financial disclosure, the press would be clamoring for it, and undergoing a full investigation into the details. End of story.

Elitist hypocracy.

[Sven]

Elitist "hypocracy?"

Does anyone recall the Times and WaPo stopped just shy of calling Judith Dean a homely, crunchy feminazi freak — a line which the crew at NRO happily crossed, followed by a goodly chunk of the redstate blogsphere?

This ain't just a tendency of the libruhl press; unfortunately, it's an ugly (how's that for an opening?) side of human nature.

[TM]

My guess is that some of your comment is based on this Maureen Dowd column. And here is the Jodi Wilgoren column to which she refers.

To which I am inclined to say, so what? Political wives tend to be fair game. Kids are normally off-limits unless it embarrasses Bush, as we have seen with the twins over the years.

A better analogy *might* be the press treatment when Al Gore's son was stopped for speeding back in 2000 (IIRC). Hmm, but there wasn't any! Not in the Times, anyway (so I say, now I need to prove a negative...)

OK, I think the "Gore's son" got glossed over, even though Gore was thrilled to use his family as politicalprops alll the time (e.g., his 1992 Convention speech; 1996, the family prop was the sister with cancer; I am blocking as to whether he had one in 2000)

Let's see, though - this blogger linked to the NY Post, Aug 20/21 2000.

Now, "speeding" is a crime, and it endangers lives - wortht remembering that Barbara Bush may be guilty only of eating some bad sushi.

And what about Al Gore III and the marijuana bust? Does anyone know if the Times noticed that?

Well, they did, so there!

MSNBC is here with an AP story;

Ms. Merritt of TalkLeft links to a NY Times website/AP story and wonders if he was only arrested because of his name. We wonder what her reaction would have been if the police had let the kid off with a warning (we infer that to be her preferred solution), and the last name was Bush.

But we are taking about crimes, here.

Contextual griping here.

[Sven]

"Fair game?" Sounds a bit like "open season."

Judy Dean's role (or non-role) in the campaign was a perfectly legitimate story (as is the Bush twins' pr blitz for ol' dad). But that was just the excuse; the real "scoop" was that she dresses like a hippie and doesn't wear makeup (hint, hint).

I think you're applying the wrong litmus test when it comes to the press (bloggers are another story). It isn't about partisanship as much as sex: Hmmmm aren't those Bush girls little whores; hmmmm Judy Dean, er, Steinberg, acts a lot like like a lesbian; hey, isn't that Kerry's daughter flashing her tits in Cannes?