DOCSLIB.ORG

I Was Wrong Reflects the Whole, Unvarnished Truth

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
I Was Wrong Reflects the Whole, Unvarnished Truth 1 2 3 Editors’ Note After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Andrew Sullivan became one of the most prominent advocates for the invasion of Iraq. He was also one of the first journalists to pioneer blogging, a then-new form of real-time, unfiltered writing. The text before you is the result of these two factors coming together – a day-by-day, hour-by-hour record of Andrew grappling with one of the most important foreign policy issues of our time. The hundreds of posts are arranged in three acts: the march to war and Andrew's case for it; his recognition, in fits and starts, that the execution of the war was deeply flawed; and, ultimately, his realization that the war should not have been waged at all. To bring this narrative to you, we first compiled an unwieldy mass of material – every Dish post related to Iraq over a seven-year period. We slowly pared it down, cutting out posts that were short, redundant, centered on other people’s writing, or that contributed very little to the understanding of Andrew’s evolving views. Some posts were edited for the sake of length, clarity, and flow. Occasionally we filled in the relevant details of certain groups or figures, such as their full names. And we removed all hyperlinks because many of them no longer work, and even if they did, certain e-reading devices do not recognize them. Every entry includes the date and time of its publication, so any reader can search the Dish archives to see how we edited any particular post. And because the full record of Andrew's blogging is easily accessible, readers can check for themselves if they feel we excluded any controversial posts. The most important point to make about the editing process is that we retained full control over the book’s contents. While Andrew read the manuscript and offered suggestions, he granted us final say over which posts were included and which ones were not. I Was Wrong reflects the whole, unvarnished truth. Patrick Appel and Chris Bodenner Executive Editors, The Dish 4 I Trauma September 11, 2001 3.47 pm The forces of barbarism have clearly struck an extraordinary blow against freedom this morning. When our shock recedes, our rage must be steady and resolute and unforgiving. The response must be disproportionate to the crime and must hold those states and governments that have tolerated this evil accountable. This is the single most devastating act of war since Nagasaki. It is the first time that an enemy force has invaded the precincts of the American capital since the early nineteenth century. It is more dangerous than Pearl Harbor. And it is a reminder that the forces of resentment and evil can no longer be appeased. They must be destroyed - systematically, durably, irrevocably. Perhaps now we will summon the will to do it. September 11, 2001 9.46 pm I have been unable to think of anything substantive to write today. It is almost as if the usual conventions of journalism and analysis should somehow remain mute in the face of such an event. How can one analyze what one hasn’t even begun to absorb? Numbness is part of the intent of these demons, I suppose. So here are some tentative reflections. It feels – finally – as if a new era has begun. The strange interlude of 1989 – 2001, with its decadent post-Cold War extravaganzas from Lewinsky to Condit to the e-boom, is now suddenly washed away. We are reminded that history obviously hasn’t ended; that freedom is never secure; that previous generations aren’t the only ones to be called to defend the rare way of life that this country and a handful of others have achieved for a small fraction of world history. The boom is done with. Peace is over. The new war against the frenzied forces of what Nietzsche called ressentiment is just beginning. The one silver lining of this is that we may perhaps be shaken out of our self-indulgent preoccupations and be reminded of what really matters: our freedom, our security, our integrity as a democratic society. This means we must be vigilant not to let our civil liberties collapse under the understandable desire for action. To surrender to that temptation is part of what these killers want. And the other small sliver of consolation is that the constant American temptation to withdraw from the world, entertained these past few years by many, will perhaps now be stifled. We cannot withdraw; we cannot ignore. We live in a world where technology and hatred accelerate in ever-faster cycles, and in which isolation is not an option. Evil is still here. It begets evil. When you look at the delighted faces of Palestinians cheering in the streets, we have to realize that there are cultures on this planet of such 5 depravity that understanding them is never fully possible. And empathy for them at such a moment is obscene. But we can observe and remember. There is always a tension between civilization and barbarism, and the barbarians are now here. The task in front of us to somehow stay civilized while not shrinking from the face of extinguishing – by sheer force if necessary – the forces that would eclipse us. September 12, 2001 1.29 am A 1995/1996 Public Interest essay on the first World Trade Center bombing sends chills down your spine with its prescience. But its most important suggestion is that Iraq might have been behind the bombing. Ditto today. Saddam is not only capable but willing – especially against a nemesis like the son of the first George Bush. More evidence that Colin Powell’s tragic abandonment of the war against Saddam might well be one of the biggest blunders in recent history. If this coordinated massacre needed real state-sponsored support, which nation would you pick as the prime suspect? September 12, 2001 8.07 pm This enemy is not simply a band of thugs, but several regimes that aid and abet these people and have celebrated this atrocity. These regimes have declared war on the United States, and it is time we repay the favor. This is the most grievous declaration of war against America in history. We are no longer fighting terrorism. We are at war. And we are not at war with any old regime or even a handful of terrorists. We are at war with an evil that will only grow unless it is opposed with all the might at our command. We must wage that war with a ferocity that doesn’t merely scare these monsters but terrifies them. Merely murdering bin Laden is a laughable response. If this new war can be waged with partners – specifically Russia, NATO, China – so much the better. But if not, the United States must act alone – and as soon as we can be assured of complete success. There are times when it is not inappropriate or even immoral to use overwhelming power merely to terrify and avenge. Read your Machiavelli. We must shock them more than they have shocked us. We must do so with a force not yet seen in human history. Then we can begin to build a future of greater deterrence. I repeat: we are not responding to terrorism any more. We are at war. And war requires no restraint, simply massive and unanswerable force until the enemy is not simply defeated but unconditionally destroyed. To hesitate for fear of reprisal is to have capitulated before we have even begun. I don’t believe Americans want to capitulate to anyone. The only question is whether we will get the leadership now to deal with this or whether we will have to endure even worse atrocities before a real leader emerges. September 14, 2001 1.55 am I’m sorry for the thin dish today. I have just finished two essays for the New York Times magazine and the Sunday Times of London on this event and its meaning. I’ve written over 6 6,000 words in one day and I’m spent. Worse, it was impossible to think and write honestly about this without seeing the screen blur with the tears in my eyes. In my life as a writer, I’ve never come across an event that I could not somehow professionally analyze and dissect with some enthusiasm and zest. But this was just something I deeply didn’t want to write. I just wanted the event to be undone. I realize more than ever that, seventeen years after coming to this amazing place, I am an American now. When they placed the flag on the rubble, I wept as I have rarely wept before. And then when I saw the Queen’s Guards at Buckingham Palace play the Star-Spangled Banner, it occurred to me how deeply appropriate this was. Isn’t everyone on the side of civilization an honorary American now? September 15, 2001 7.54 pm I haven’t written today because this is surely a time for prayer not argument. But let me share a report from a small gathering in a small town on the edge of America. Just before 7 pm tonight, as people made their way to the center of town, the rain cleared and an enormous rainbow stretched across the bay. People came out of houses and stores and looked upward. And then as we gathered around Provincetown’s monument, and friends arrived from New York, their eyes and faces seared with fear, a welling low sound came from the crowd.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Murray PR.Qxd
    Media inquiries: Véronique Rodman 202.862.4871 ([email protected]) Orders: 1.800.462.6420 or 1.717.794.3800 IN OUR HANDS: A PLAN TO REPLACE THE WELFARE STATE By Charles Murray With his new book, In Our Hands: A Plan to Replace the Welfare State, Charles Murray offers a radical solution to the problems of the entitlement system: get rid of it entirely and give $10,000 a year to every American adult. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 25, 2006 The AEI Press Charles Murray offers a plan that would eliminate all income transfer programs at the federal, state, and local levels—including Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, and corporate subsidies—and would substitute an annual cash grant of $10,000 for life, beginning at age twenty-one. Murray argues that “the Plan” would end poverty, allow all Americans access to health care, and empower people to control their own lives. Murray’s book describes the financial feasibility of his ideas and their effect on retirement, health care, poverty, marriage and family, work, neighborhoods, and the larger civil society. In his seminal 1984 book Losing Ground, Murray sparked national debate by arguing that the social programs of the Great Society not only failed to help the poor and disadvan- taged, but also made things worse. Now, Murray has written a book that is, in his own words, “not a book about poverty. It’s about building a society in which people can run their own lives.” Once again, Charles Murray is ahead of his time: • Today, about 36 million people are below the poverty line.
    [Show full text]
  • National Security and Local Police
    BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE NATIONAL SECURITY AND LOCAL POLICE Michael Price Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law ABOUT THE BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE The Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law is a nonpartisan law and policy institute that seeks to improve our systems of democracy and justice. We work to hold our political institutions and laws accountable to the twin American ideals of democracy and equal justice for all. The Center’s work ranges from voting rights to campaign finance reform, from racial justice in criminal law to Constitutional protection in the fight against terrorism. A singular institution — part think tank, part public interest law firm, part advocacy group, part communications hub — the Brennan Center seeks meaningful, measurable change in the systems by which our nation is governed. ABOUT THE BRENNAN CENTER’S LIBERTY AND NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAM The Brennan Center’s Liberty and National Security Program works to advance effective national security policies that respect Constitutional values and the rule of law, using innovative policy recommendations, litigation, and public advocacy. The program focuses on government transparency and accountability; domestic counterterrorism policies and their effects on privacy and First Amendment freedoms; detainee policy, including the detention, interrogation, and trial of terrorist suspects; and the need to safeguard our system of checks and balances. ABOUT THE BRENNAN CENTER’S PUBLICATIONS Red cover | Research reports offer in-depth empirical findings. Blue cover | Policy proposals offer innovative, concrete reform solutions. White cover | White papers offer a compelling analysis of a pressing legal or policy issue.
    [Show full text]
  • 2005 ANNUAL REPORT CONTENTS 6 Economic 10 Studies Global Economy and Development 27 Katrina’S Lessons in Recovery
    QUALITY IMPACT AND INDEPENDENCE ANNUAL REPORT THE 2005 1775 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20036 www.brookings.edu BROOKINGSINSTITUTION 2005 ANNUAL REPORT CONTENTS 6 Economic 10 Studies Global Economy and Development 27 Katrina’s Lessons in Recovery 39 Brookings Institution Press 14 40 Governance Center for Executive Education Studies 2 About Brookings 4 Chairman’s Message 5 President’s Message 31 Brookings Council 18 36 Honor Roll of Contributors Foreign 42 Financial Summary Policy Studies 44 Trustees 24 Metropolitan Policy Editor: Melissa Skolfield, Vice President for Communications Copyright ©2005 The Brookings Institution Writers: Katie Busch, Shawn Dhar, Anjetta McQueen, Ron Nessen 1775 Massachusetts Avenue, NW 28 Design and Print Production: The Magazine Group, Inc. Washington, DC 20036 Jeffrey Kibler, Virginia Reardon, Brenda Waugh Telephone: 202-797-6000 Support for Production Coordinator: Adrianna Pita Fax: 202-797-6004 Printing: Jarboe Printing www.brookings.edu Cover Photographs: (front cover) William Bradstreet/Folio, Inc., Library of Congress Card Number: 84-641502 Brookings (inside covers) Catherine Karnow/Folio, Inc. Broadcast reporters zoom in for a forum on a new compact for Iraq THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION featuring U.S. Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware. he Brookings Institution is a pri- vate nonprofit organization devoted to independent research and innovative policy solutions. Celebrating its 90th anniversary in 2006, Brookings analyzes current and emerging issues and produces new ideas that matter—for the nation and the world. ■ For policymakers and the media, Brookings scholars provide the highest-quality research, policy recommendations, and analysis on the full range of public policy issues. ■ Research at the Brookings Institution is conducted to inform the public debate, not advance a political agenda.
    [Show full text]
  • America in the Post-Watergate Era: Politics of Distrust and the Myth Of
    America in the Post-Watergate Era: Politics of Distrust and the Myth of Ronald Reagan Senior Honors Thesis for Department of History Ryan Long Tufts University, 2012 Table of Contents Chapter One: Foundations of Distrust 3 Historical Background 4 Immersion in the Public Consciousness 13 Chapter Two: Reform and Revision in the Post-Watergate Era 19 Common Cause 20 Post-Watergate Reforms 25 Chapter Three: Presidential Image in the Post-Watergate Era 47 President Ford and President Carter 48 Economic Performance in the 1970’s 56 President Ronald Reagan 61 The Myth of Ronald Reagan 71 Chapter Four: Politics of Distrust 80 References 85 2 Chapter 1: Foundations of Distrust One of the most interesting facets of American politics is that the name of every current political scandal receives the suffix “gate” attached to the end. This pattern goes back to the Watergate Scandal. Stephanie Slocum-Schaffer states that Watergate had a significant impact on the 1970’s and the rest of the century. She argues that Watergate caused the public to see government service as ignoble but that it also proved that the American system of checks and balances could effectively contain corruption. 1 Ted Sorensen, a former Kennedy speechwriter and advisor, stated that Watergate significantly effected every subsequent presidential administration. He stated that: Removing the perpetrators of Watergate, even without altering the environment in which they operate, should teach some future White House occupants the necessity of not trying something similar. But it may only teach others the necessity of not being caught. History has never proven to be a strong deterrent.2 These accounts make it clear that Watergate completely reshaped the political system in the United States and fundamentally changed the way the Americans thought about the government.
    [Show full text]
  • Infographic by Ben Fry; Data by Technorati There Are Upwards of 27 Million Blogs in the World. to Discover How They Relate to On
    There are upwards of 27 million blogs in the world. To discover how they relate to one another, we’ve taken the most-linked-to 50 and mapped their connections. Each arrow represents a hypertext link that was made sometime in the past 90 days. Think of those links as votes in an endless global popularity poll. Many blogs vote for each other: “blogrolling.” Some top-50 sites don’t have any links from the others shown here, usually because they are big in Japan, China, or Europe—regions still new to the phenomenon. key tech politics gossip other gb2312 23. Fark gouy2k 13. Dooce huangmj 22. Kottke 24. Gawker 40. Xiaxue 2. Engadget 4. Daily Kos 6. Gizmodo 12. SamZHU para Blogs 41. Joystiq 44. nosz50j 3. PostSecret 29. Wonkette 39. Eschaton 1. Boing Boing 7. InstaPundit 17. Lifehacker 25. chattie555 com/msn-sa 14. Beppe Grillo 18. locker2man 27. spaces.msn. 34. A List Apart 37. Power Line 16. Herramientas 43. AMERICAblog 20. Think Progress 35. manabekawori 49. The Superficial 9. Crooks and Liars11. Michelle Malkin 28. lwhanz198153030. shiraishi31. The seesaa Space Craft 50. Andrew Sullivan 19. Open Palm! silicn 33. spaces.msn.com/ 45. Joel46. on spaces.msn.com/Software 5. The Huffington Post 8. Thought Mechanics 15. theme.blogfa.com 21. Official Google Blog 38. Weebl’s Stuff News 47. princesscecicastle 32. Talking Points Memo 48. Google Blogoscoped 42. Little Green Footballs 26. spaces.msn. c o m/ 36. spaces.msn.com/atiger 10. spaces.msn.com/klcintw 1. Boing Boing A herald from the 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Frontpage Magazine.Com :: the Academy's Glass Ceiling by David French
    FrontPage magazine.com :: The Academy's Glass Ceiling by David French http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=18711 Tuesday, July 12, 2005 View Make Comment Printable Article Email Article Comments Font 6pt 6 The Academy's Glass Ceiling By David French FrontPageMagazine.com | July 12, 2005 Readers of FrontPage are by now well aware that our universities Second Year are among the most ideologically uniform institutions in modern Academic Freedom Achievement American life. In the past year, a series of studies have confirmed Report more > the long-held and widespread perception that American faculties are dominated by one side of the political spectrum. Let’s look at the statistical evidence. A recent study by Stanley Murdering Women For Rothman, S. Robert Lichter, and Neil Nevitte found that 72 “Honor” percent of professors teaching at American universities are liberal The Radical Lies of Aids (by their own description) and 15 percent are conservative. At elite universities, the ratio was 87 percent to 13 percent. Rothman, Lichter, and Nevitte also found that “religiously observant Christians are disadvantaged in their placement in the Humberto Fontova institutional hierarchy, after taking their professional achievements into account.” In a separate study, Daniel Klein and Paul Sperry Charlotta Stern found that on average faculty in six major humanities disciplines voted Democratic by a ratio of 15 to 1. David Horowitz Why does this disparity exist? The academic establishment offers PowerLine Blog different explanations, including a (now famous) statement from PolySigh The Anti-Chomsky Robert Brandon, Chair of Duke University’s philosophy Blog department: “We try to hire the best, smartest people available .
    [Show full text]
  • Truth, Lies, and Fake News
    © 2020 Bedford/St. Martin’s. All rights reserved. Uncorrected proofs have been used in these sample pages. PROJECT 4 Truth, Lies, and Fake News Illustration Courtesy of New York Magazine he way news washes over us from our televisions, from social media, and from T newspapers and magazines, it is often difficult to distinguish between the truth, outright lies, half-truths, and exaggeration. It is easy to simply feel like sheep lin- ing up in orderly rows. Some claim that what we see on the evening news or read in newspapers is “fake news.” Others argue that the press is essential to democracy and can play a crucial role in exposing corruption and wrongdoing at all levels of society by revealing “the truth.” Meanwhile, the FBI and CIA have reported that the Russians used social media to spread deceptive stories during the 2016 election with the goal of changing the outcome, and the Trump administration denies this hap- pened. It’s becoming hard to know what the truth is. In this project you will explore the concepts of truth, lies, and fake news . and how to recognize the differences between them. 124 05_adamshub1e_24072_ch04_124-196_ptg01.indd 124 09/07/19 7:58 pm © 2020 Bedford/St. Martin’s. All rights reserved. Uncorrected proofs have been used in these sample pages. Getting Started: Discovering What You Know This project starts with two activities—Thinking about Key Terms and Applying Key Terms—that will help you get in touch with what you already know about these issues through thinking about and answering questions like “How do you define key terms, such as truth, lie, fact, and opinion?” and asking how you apply these key terms to a real-world situation.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Science 359 Spring 2016
    Political Science 359 Class meets on Mondays/3-5:30PM Liberalism and Conservatism Office Hours: Mondays/1-3PM Spring 2016 and by appt. Professor Alan Wolfe 24 Quincy Road, Room 102 For talk-radio hosts such as Rush Limbaugh, any of the major commentators on Fox News, Congressmen associated with the Freedom Caucus, and just about all the Republican candidates for president in 2016, nothing is worse, when it comes to politics, than a liberal – and no one is better for the future of the country than a conservative, the only question being which conservatives are the genuine thing. On the other side of the spectrum, some, but by no means all, liberals denounce the extreme right as dogmatic, sectarian, and dangerous, standing in the way of needed progress on new social issues and belligerent in foreign policy language. The Democratic message in 2016, no matter who is the nominee, will emphasize the dangers facing us if the Republicans win. Implicit in the arguments of all such discussions are a number of assumptions that may, on reflection, prove not as clear-cut as they at first seem: Are both liberalism and conservatism coherent bodies of ideas with suggestions for how to make the world better or are they best thought of dispositions whose content may change depending on time and place? Are they both American ideas or were they developed in Europe, where their meaning is quite different than one finds in this country? What differentiates a conservative from a reactionary or a liberal from a radical? Is it true that, as a character in the Italian novel The Leopard proclaims, that if we want things to stay the same, we will have to change? Are libertarians primarily conservatives or liberals? Should politicians tie themselves firmly to any set of ideas, whatever they are called, or keep his or her distance from them? This course has two purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • Bookazinebits April 9Th, 2020
    BookazineBits April 9th, 2020 On the cover of the NYT Book Review for 4/12/20 American Conservatism: Reclaiming an Intellectual Tradition by Andrew Bacevich (ISBN 9781598536560 $29.95) As American conservatism stands at a crossroads, Andrew Bacevich presents a groundbreaking collection of mainstream conservative writings since 1900, redefining a tradition whose ideas, debates, and defiance have profoundly shaped our national life. The ideas that animate mainstream American conservatism have long been misunderstood or belittled. Here, in a sweeping gathering of 45 essential conservative writers, editor Andrew Bacevich surveys the core currents of conservative thought in the United States since 1900: the importance of tradition, the value of familial and local ties, the mounting of resistance to an ever-expanding state, the opposition to collectivist utopias and other forms of tyranny abroad, and the necessity of free markets and economic growth to sustain individual liberties and prosperity. Bacevich reveals that American conservativism has hardly been a monolithic entity over the last 120 years. Instead, conservative thought has developed through fierce internal contention and debate about fundamental questions about who we are as a people and as a nation. On display here are impassioned arguments about bedrock beliefs: Andrew Sullivan’s influential conservative case for same-sex marriage before the prospect was widely taken seriously is joined by Antonin Scalia’s dissent in the Obergefell case before the Supreme Court, which made same-sex marriage the law of the land. Writings by isolationists stand side by side with neoconservative calls for foreign intervention; well- known names such as Charles Beard, Ronald Reagan, and William F.
    [Show full text]
  • European Media Representations of US Foreign Policy Making
    Loughborough University Institutional Repository Framing the neocons : European media representations of US foreign policy making This item was submitted to Loughborough University's Institutional Repository by the/an author. Additional Information: • A Doctoral Thesis. Submitted in partial fullment of the requirements for the award of Doctor of Philosophy of Loughborough University. Metadata Record: https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/2134/12167 Publisher: c George Tzogopoulos Please cite the published version. This item was submitted to Loughborough University as a PhD thesis by the author and is made available in the Institutional Repository (https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/) under the following Creative Commons Licence conditions. For the full text of this licence, please go to: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ ~~~-~-------~-,---~---",--,------.--------.--.--.--- ....-- ... ~ ....., ~l r. ., ~ ~ ~ f ;~:~: ''-' "'.' ,. --,.~'.J ,] -: ~.. 1 .: .. : ;~ ~ ~ :.; ~"..(~,;;~:;:-;, ~;~ -~.- ~. ,:.:--' ~.-:r:'- -. .....:t·.. _;,;::..... _-.. ~',· .... '~~:J;·-.-'t'.u=-"- :'. ,-". -',";:V." -"" .:_'~ ,l.:.:.. _~.~~...... '~~.-•.:..J;I! ...........~ l J.~,VV j r!~~i\10. - k - - ~ ,I t ~ ~ ~."7'1.~_~~_\W.. .._.. i ....~ r __ ~.."'"-"_~I IDat3 I !':r-,.:; ,'v·_- ••. "-'.-.:..:~.~..v..... - •.".,,'l._:.: __~-,:.-:.: ... -;-' .,._y~·.~.'"-r.:', ..-._~·>;....:.T .• "-,-~;:::,~;.:: ... ~..:.;.:~...I.~~Cl<C-~~ 'Framing the Neocons: European Media Representations of US Foreign Policy-Making' by George Tzogopoulos A Doctoral Thesis Submitted in partial
    [Show full text]
  • Enterprise Report Restoring Liberty, Opportunity, and Enterprise in America
    Issue No. 1, Winter 2020 Enterprise Report Restoring Liberty, Opportunity, and Enterprise in America A New Year and New Opportunities By AEI President Robert Doar A new year offers the opportunity to set priorities. Our highest priorities at AEI come from our institutional commitment to freedom: We believe in free people, free markets, and limited government. We promote the rule of law, economic opportunity for all, and institutions of civil society that make our freedom possible. And we stand for a strong American role in the world. These priorities guide how we want our scholarship to move the public debate; they relate to our philosophical predisposition. And they are well-known. Lately, I have been thinking about two other priorities that are less discussed but vitally important to the Institute and our scholars’ work. These two priorities are not so much about where we want our country to be headed but rather how we want to do our research—the intellectual environment AEI must foster so that our scholars can do their best and most effective work. That intellectual environment must be grounded in two simple values: independence of thought and the competition of ideas. So long as they remain consistent with our overarching philosophy and maintain high standards of quality, our scholars engage in their work free of control from anyone, including management. Within their areas of expertise, our scholars study, write, and say what they want to study, write, and say. We recruit great thinkers and writers with established records, and we give them the freedom to apply their skills however they see fit.
    [Show full text]
  • Press Galleries* Rules Governing Press
    PRESS GALLERIES * SENATE PRESS GALLERY The Capitol, Room S–316, phone 224–0241 Director.—S. Joseph Keenan Deputy Director.—Joan McKinney Senior Media Coordinators: Amy H. Gross Kristyn K. Socknat Media Coordinators: James D. Saris Wendy A. Oscarson-Kirchner Elizabeth B. Crowley HOUSE PRESS GALLERY The Capitol, Room H–315, phone 225–3945 Superintendent.—Jerry L. Gallegos Deputy Superintendent.—Justin J. Supon Assistant Superintendents: Ric Anderson Laura Reed Drew Cannon Molly Cain STANDING COMMITTEE OF CORRESPONDENTS Thomas Burr, The Salt Lake Tribune, Chair Joseph Morton, Omaha World-Herald, Secretary Jim Rowley, Bloomberg News Laurie Kellman, Associated Press Brian Friel, Bloomberg News RULES GOVERNING PRESS GALLERIES 1. Administration of the press galleries shall be vested in a Standing Committee of Cor- respondents elected by accredited members of the galleries. The Committee shall consist of five persons elected to serve for terms of two years. Provided, however, that at the election in January 1951, the three candidates receiving the highest number of votes shall serve for two years and the remaining two for one year. Thereafter, three members shall be elected in odd-numbered years and two in even-numbered years. Elections shall be held in January. The Committee shall elect its own chairman and secretary. Vacancies on the Committee shall be filled by special election to be called by the Standing Committee. 2. Persons desiring admission to the press galleries of Congress shall make application in accordance with Rule VI of the House of Representatives, subject to the direction and control of the Speaker and Rule 33 of the Senate, which rules shall be interpreted and administered by the Standing Committee of Correspondents, subject to the review and an approval by the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration.
    [Show full text]