jaketapper

Yes I do but I also think it's more complicated than just liberal bias. I think there are a lot of hard-working reporters in NYC and DC who have never fired a gun, or never worked a 9-5 manual labor job, or lived in the middle of the country, or worried about their next paycheck, or have anyone in their family who serves in the military and I think that creates a cultural bias. But I also think there are a lot of reporters who work to counter that and understand the limitations of their own realities. But yes, I do think there is bias. Reluctant to name names though because I try to be collegial.

No, but it is always very well groomed and closely shorn.

He is a role model for many reasons, but here's a poem:

for anyone with a beard, he should be revered. -- e.e. tapper

they've been a treasure trove for journalists and have let Americans know more about what the US government is doing purportedly in the name of our security. I wish I'd broken them instead of that dastardly Glenn Greenwald!!! ;)

I can certainly understand why those in the national security apparatus, charged with keeping us safe and desiring every possible tool that can be dreamed up, would not be so enamored.

The White House press briefings are quite often useless. The spokespeople are there to not make news. I get a lot more reporting done away from cameras, at least when it comes to the White House. I have never had the desire to jump up to the podium, and I will leave the second part of your sentence dangling there enticingly.

1) Be more careful -- I confused two women's names in an early Washington City Paper article that haunts me to this day. Not because it was in itself so serious, but because it was sloppy and my editor yelled at me quite a bit. As he should have. 2) The universe is smaller than you think -- and everyone reads everything.
3) Persistence persistence persistence persistence persistence persistence persistence 4) Stop smoking That was advice for my younger self.