Live Q&As

 You know what? It's a textbook case in how even in the digital age, not everything is captured on YouTube. Several members of Congress say it happened (and a CNN producer heard a protestor yelling "faggot" at Barney Frank). I'm not prepared to say these lawmakers are lying because there's no video. Nor, by the way, do I think an entire movement should be tarred because of ugly behavior by a few.

  Leaving aside my own program, I can tell you they're not rehearsed at all. I've been on Meet the Press, Face the Nation and, a long time ago, Fox News Sunday. Guests are given a list of topics so they can prepare (and hopefully offer some knowledge), but that's it. No one wants to destroy the spontaneity of a real discussion. Roundtables may be predictable, depending on the guests, but they're not rehearsed.

  Uh, because he's one of the most famous golfers on the planet? Because he was living a lie and was turned into tabloid fodder? Because many of his corporate sponsors abandoned him? Because professional golf ratings plummeted by more than half while he was out, and his return to the Masters is a dramatic event?

  By the way, by staging yesterday's presser, Tiger invited the media to come and question him in Augusta. My own view is that if he had held such a press conference or done some interviews a couple of weeks after the Thanksgiving crash, instead of hiding behind publicists and carefully worded statements, the story never would have become as big as it did. He handled himself pretty well yesterday and let the thing go on for 35 minutes, until it was clear the journalists had run out of gas.

  I was not aware of that.

  Seems to me your own bias is showing here. Laurie Goodstein is an award-winning religion reporter who has covered the beat for 17 years, first for the WP and now for the NYT. As she said on the program, she has great admiration for the church. Her stories about the correspondence with the office of then-Cardinal Ratzinger have been carefully written, based on documents and interviews, and she has not been out there promoting herself. Mine was the first TV invitation she accepted after turning down Charlie Rose and a bunch of others. As for Sally Quinn, it's not accurate to portray her as a church-basher. She has been highly critical of the way the Vatican has handled these latest allegations--and by the way, so have plenty of Catholics.

  That's your call. You do see a lot of the same faces. I've seen unexpected guests at times--say, Barbara Walters booking Roger Ailes-but not often enough. As for the hosts, that is starting to change too, with Candy Crowley taking over at CNN and Christiane Amanpour, an unconventional choice to be sure, soon to take over at ABC.

 I don't know who reported that. The fact that there was no arrest, though, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

   The print edition of The Post is basically a local paper that covers Washington and its suburbs. That's the advertising base as well. It wouldn't make much economic sense to peddle it in Baltimore, where the Sun is strong, and we barely cover Baltimore (indeed, I thought we undercovered the recent trial and conviction of the mayor). We don't travel with the Ravens and I think have stopped traveling with the Orioles now that the Nationals are in town. But we do have a mighty fine Web site that can be accessed from Baltimore and beyond.

  I thought Howell Raines made an error by not addressing the newsroom/opinion divide, even to argue that it is quite porous at Fox. Surely he wouldn't want the NYT's news coverage, which he once ran, judged by the views of Maureen Dowd and Frank Rich and the editorial page, which he once ran as well.

  It's funny that you invoke Paris, since the McCain campaign famously made an ad calling Obama the biggest celebrity in the world and flashing a picture of Ms. Hilton.  With Pain having just signed a TLC deal for an Alaska documentary, having sold 2.2 million copies of Going Rogue, having her new perch at Fox News, she doesn't seem to be overexposed yet. Besides, much of her post-gubernatorial career seems based on narrowcasting, that is, appealing to folks who already like her. In that sense, using the metric of political campaigns--37 percent approval rating--doesn't mean much. If she's not running for office, that 37 percent can watch a lot of TV and buy a lot of books.

  He's become a media celebrity as well as a world-famous athlete. Besides, it was 2 pm eastern. There wasn't anything else going on to divert the cable networks (which undoubtedly reaped higher ratings as a result). I happened to be in New York and even the local cable channel NY1 was taking the Tiger presser live.

  Depends on the meaning of indefinite. Shuster could be brought back, or not. Television hosts and correspondents talk to other networks pretty routinely, especially when their contracts are coming up for renewal. Making a pilot for another network, though, is guaranteed to tick off the network where you already work.

  Find me a quote where someone on the left is saying that anyone associated with the Tea Party is racist. Even leaving aside the fact that it's a movement more than a tightly organized party, I don't know anyone who would agree with that statement. Does it have fringe elements whose words and actions can give other followers a bad name? Sure. So does every other party and movement.

  Believe me, Tiger has much bigger problems than little 'ol me. Although if he starts winning championships again, this story could finally fade. My main argument all along was that he should do what he did yesterday--come out of the bunker and talk to the press. It was like lancing a boil; it had to be done.

  In fairness to Howard Dean, there was one so-called scream--kind of an overexuberant line that got endlessly replayed--when he lost the Iowa caucuses in 2004. And while Sarah Palin's rhetoric can be provocative, she's not a screamer. I don't think we should fall into the trap of calling women screechy when they raise their voices to address large crowds.

  Washington Post says he "resigned under pressure." Washington Times says that "frustration with inaction by his boss, he resigned." An interesting difference. Seems to me McKay was forced out and difference sources are putting a different spin on it.

  You'd have to cite me a specific instance. I don't recall a time when The Post gave any credence to the death-panels claim, but obviously reported on the fact that many people came to believe the claim was true.

 I think it's fair to say that he wasn't acting on my advice. And what he does means a great deal to the sport of golf and the corporations that made him rich as a pitchman.

  He seemed sincere to me. Obviously he knew what he had to do, and he was well-coached in finessing certain questions (such as whether he was on Ambien the night of the crash). But as best as one can tell in these matters, he seemed like a guy who had been flying high, had crashed to earth, and was now trying to pick up the pieces of his life.

  I didn't mean to suggest it was impossible to find, just that it's not carried on most newsstands.

  Thanks for the free ad.

  I guess screechiness is in the ear of the beholder.

  What does "truly objective" mean? Jim Lehrer's NewsHour comes pretty close. But remember that personal life experiences affect not just how you write or discuss a story but which stories you choose to cover, which you designate as most important, and so on.  Also, if a journalist is so hog-tied by the principle of objectivity that he or she simply reports that one side says the sky is blue/the other says it's green, that doesn't help readers and viewers much.

  Well, you see the Post article (which includes the video) in the link we've included. But I don't see it as an either/or. It's great that bloggers, Web sites, Wiki and other alternative organizations are gathering and reporting news and adding to the national conversation. That doesn't mean there's no need for the mainstream media. It's not a zero-sum game.

  It was the Pope who used the phrase "petty gossip," when the allegations we're talking about are anything but petty, or gossip. And yes, I don't think blaiming the media works any better for the Vatican than it does for a long line of American politicians.

  I've seen the video and it looks like the congressman has been spat upon - you see him wiping something off his coat - but maybe some folks think it's not definitive. What is definitive is that it's ludicrous to suggest that all Tea Party adherents are racists.

  Thanks for the chat, folks.