Live Q&As

  Unreported? Let's see, it's in my column today. I was interviewed about it this morning on CNN. I saw Fox News doing a segment. The blogosphere is ablaze over it. Some outlets may have been slow because the story broke over the weekend, but it hasn't exactly been unreported.

  I don't see where she's getting a break. And when you say "just covering the reaction," that means we are a) covering what she said; b) reporting on why people thought it was outrageous (I quoted Ari Fleischer and Lanny Davis); and c) reporting her apology. That's the way journalism works.

  Helen Thomas is in full control of her faculties, she is a longtime critic of Israel, and she knew she was looking into a camera when she made those remarks.  She is, of course, 89 years old, and perhaps failed to filter her remarks, but that hardly lets off her off the hook for what she said.

  That's a question for Hearst Newspapers, which for now has expressed its deep regret over Helen Thomas' remarks but has made no comment about her future employment.

  This is not a question of free speech. Helen Thomas is entitled to say whatever she wants, regardless of how repugnant others may find it. But she has no automatic right to a newspaper column or a seat in the White House briefing room. If her comments are considered reprehensible, she may lose those things. She can keep speaking out on her own, but no media organization is required to give her a platform.

  I didn't say that Meacham recognizes he made a mistake, I said that some at Newsweek believe he took the magazine down the wrong path. But whether he was wrong or right - and I've frequently noted Newsweek's move to the left - the magazine's problems are much bigger than that and bigger than Meacham. Newsweek has lost more than $40 million since 2007.  Time has also moved toward analysis and opinion, but has done it in a more successful way, and with the backing of the much larger Time Warner.

  Her longevity is now over. Helen Thomas just announced that she is retiring.

  First, why does he owe the world an explanation? He's no longer a public official.  Plus, since he's not exactly holding news conferences these days, I don't believe any reporter has had a chance to question Gore, on this or anything else, since the couple's announcement.

 Not even close.

 Yup, you missed it.

  I don't think it's a close call. This or that journalist may not be left-leaning, but look at the columnists: Jonathan Alter, Jake Weisberg. The only conservative columnist is George Will. The way the magazine has covered Obama is a case study in leaning left. The cover story bashing Rush Limbaugh. There are many fine and fair-minded journalists at Newsweek, but even Meacham doesn't argue very hard when I tell him the magazine has moved left.

 Precisely. We are so accustomed in journalism to thinking there must be a bimbo eruption or soul mate somewhere. Sometimes people in marriages really do just drift apart, whether they are ordinary folks or a former vice president/Nobel laureate and his wife.

  Fox's top White House correspondent is Major Garrett, and even the Obama team regards him as fair.

 It's up to the White House Correspondents Association, which provides the credentials. The president and his press secretary can choose not to take questions from someone whose views they strongly disapprove of, but they don't have the right to exclude that person, nor should they.

  It's everywhere. I was working on it over the weekend, talking to Helen, Ari Fleischer and Lanny Davis.

  First, reporters aren't stenographers. And second, after decades as a reporter, Helen Thomas became a columnist a decade ago, meaning she was paid for her opinions. But while she has clearly been anti-Israel, she has never before publicly expressed the view that the Jews should abandon Israel.

  I don't know how closely the Bethesda high school examined her career. But I must say, having seen Helen Thomas ask antagnostic questions about Israel and the Middle East for years, I've never heard her say anything remotely close to her "go back where they came from" remarks.

 She was absolutely not set up. The rabbi didn't even ask her a sharply worded question, just asked for her views on Israel. We certainly have many views of Israel and Israeli policies in this country, as the recent uproar over the combat on the Turkish flotilla made clear. Again, Helen Thomas has a right to her views, but not necessarily a right to a newspaper column, which, in this face of this firestorm, she has now given up.

  I think we need to be careful about not equating strong criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism. Sometimes it is motivated by anti-Semitism, but even many American Jews disagree with some Israeli government policies--on settlements, treatment of Palestinians, the flotilla raid, etc. But to say that Israel's Jews should go back to Germany (and Poland and America) is way, way outside the mainstream.

 My heart has not been aflutter over this. I still haven't recovered from the iPad hype.

  It may have contributed. I spoke to Helen Thomas on Friday night. She said she was sorry for what she said, but it was a narrow apology that didn't address the substance of her remarks. She didn't want to stay on the phone. I got the impression that she just wanted to say something that would make the whole thing go away.

 I'm sorry, she was not the only journalist was was "tough" on Bush, and her questions often presumed that the administration did not care about the deaths of Iraqi civilians. She was against the war and made it clear. And this is not just "some comment about Israel"; she didn't just criticize the way Israel deals with Gaza or treats the Palestinians; she said the Jews had no right to be there and should abandon the country.

  She is -- or was -- an opinion writer, but no one's offering that as an "excuse." What she said was so offensive that it almost doesn't matter what her job description was. And no, you won't be reading her column again now that she's in effect been forced to retire.

  It's mostly pundits who are indicting the president for insufficient anger, and I would agree that he can seem awfully calm, even passive, in the face of a national calamity such as the oil spill. Connecting with the public is part of a president's job. But it's also true that the commentators are dealing with theater criticism because no one, including them, knows what to do about this spill. The White House has been greatly frustrated by the coverage of Obama's role in the BP debacle.

  It's not an assumption. Israel was created as a sovereign country in 1948 in the wake of the Holocaust. That doesn't make Israel "right" in everything it does in terms of dealing with its Arab population and its neighbors, but there is an international consensus that it has a right to exist.

  Helen Thomas is indeed the daughter of Lebanese immigrants, and she is indeed entitled to her views. But saying the Jews should just "go home" goes well beyond the "Arab perspective"; such countries as Egypt have accepted Israel's right to exist, even if Hamas and Hezbollah have not.

  I share that feeling. She had an amazing career, beginning when women simply didn't have jobs like covering the White House, unless it was to write soft features on the first lady. But she may have stayed far too long, and it is sad to see her professionally self-destruct like this on the eve of her 90th birthday.

  Thanks for the chat, folks.