Helen is just another hate-America journalist who doesn't understand concepts like national defense. When a decision needs to be made to believe or trust either America or some terrorist group, liberals ALWAYS side with the enemy. Look at Haditha. Republicans side with those defending our country and the Dems side with the enemy. Look at the General Petraeus attack. Republicans believe the man leading our defenders overseas and the Dems attack him. When liberals come out and say we can't question their patriotism, I say "why not"? When Dems say they care about our soldiers I laugh out loud.

Woohoo!! Way to go Dana!! She's already a thousand times better than McClellan ever was. I hope we get to see a lot more exchanges like this!

Spoken like a true, ill-informed liberal. Puke. Liberals will never understand why this country is the greatest in the world because they're too busy condemning it. Perhaps they should move to Venezuela since they worship at the altar of dictators. Of course, liberal "journalists" may not like the jail cell Hugo would throw them in if they express an opinion contrary to his own.

Helen Thomas is a disgrace and the White House press corps is disgraced by its toleration of her.

When the opinion page moved to the front page of the news, all reporters became papparazzi. That includes Helen Thomas. When they start policing their own and start reporting the news again instead of creating it, then they will gain back credibility. Like any other right, the first amendment carries with it responsibility. Somehow that responsibility has been relegated to an ends justifies the means relativism that supercedes all moral and respect boundaries and dismantles or distances any connections to the media's actions. Celebrities are fair game even to their deaths, politicial stories can be justified as fact without substantiation and people can go to jail for grand jury investigations of non-crimes. This has what the stewardship of the first amendment has evolved to.

Perino is awesome, and Thomas -- Lebanese by birth -- has hated this country long before the Bush Administration.

Sorry, folks, but I'm not a 31 percenter. If I had a choice between Helen Thomas or the usual sycophancy displayed by most of the media, I'd go with Helen any day. Your beloved Bush doesn't deserve all the delicacy that you folks seem to be demanding for him. Furthermore, I find it very revealing, that the attacks on Helen from the 31 percenters tend to focus obsessively on her appearance, calling her a troll, and ugly beast, etc. My my, but that certainly adds to civilized discourse.

Helen is way too old and lost her mind. She no longer knows or cares who the enemy is and should move to Iran with the rest of the I hate America crowd. Nice job Dana!

This line from above gets me:

Perhaps they should move to Venezuela since they worship at the altar of dictators.

There seems to be plenty of worship goin' on right here in America to a man who, by virtue of "our country is at war," is pretty much a dictator himself.

We are not at war folks - we are occupying another country. There really is a difference.

The extreme partisanship bothers me. It's not about the republicans. It's not about the democrats. Reasonable people not affiliated with either party think that this country's current leadership's actions abroad will have serious negative consequences on par with the original British self-serving, heavy-handed manipulations of the middle east during the early 20th century. Helen Thomas has every right to question this administration. Their mismanagement and lack of planning has created this situation.

I am a Canadian who would like to offer some observations. I think we could all do better than the intolerance shown here for (i) a simple, fair, and good question and (ii) each other.

Helen should be able to ask her questions and have them answered directly and openly. Dana ducks, preaches the talking points, and responds mostly by giving Helen flak. "Helen, I find it really unfortunate that you use your front-row position bestowed upon you by your colleagues to make such statements. It is an honor and a privilege to be in the briefing room, and to suggest that we as the United States are killing innocent people is just absurd and very offensive." So, is she saying then that if you want to have the privilege of asking her questions, don't keep asking those she (and implicitly also Helen's colleagues who put her there) does not like?

Some commentators suggest that Helen's questions are effectively liberal and anti-American-troops and anti-American-security. There is some irony in the Venezuela comments about Liberals and effectively Helen - because to me, the response to Helen from Dana and the comments on Venezuela from others all sound like something Hugo Chavez might say - if you don't behave or if you don't like our views, then just get out.

Either Dana knows how many deaths there have been and does not want to say or she does (more likely) and does not want to visit the subject? Is an innocent American life worth more than someone else's innocent life? Will not saying or not admitting the number of deaths (not to mention the many more injured) somehow reduce their tragic numbers? Or make them invisible so no one else can see the collective human price tag? Dana's aggressive push not to answer leaves it open for the worst interpretation.

I think those that point to Helen's heritage should first look to themselves - all American roots, save native Americans, are elsewhere. And, the country of one's origin is not necessarily a measure of one's make up and motives. Going in that direction is a low and personal shot at Helen and suggests that it is fair game to attack others that way too. This fuels intolerance and a weakening of the social fabric. I think it might also be read as innuendo to Helen's motives being from the (middle east) side of the enemy.

I think America's leadership should try to move past the whole Lib Dem dichotomization of your good country. I think that is barking up the wrong tree - and it tends to bury the forest in the trees. I suggest you return to more open and respectful discussion so you can offer the "free and democratic" (not necessarily Democratic) American leadership and vision the world needs - based on the highest ideals you are famous for and underpinned by an objective foundation.

Please, apply that leadership, within the full context of your history, wisdom and intelligence to help define Global as well as your own American issues and to execute profound solutions that are in the broader collective interest. I think that, after all, is in America's best interest too.

All,

As an Independent Voter and a person who understands the military my simple point in this discussion is that Press Secretaries are simply parrots who stand out front with less than in-depth information of what is going on. Face it if they knew all the facts they would essentially stand before the press and lie. Hence, they are spoon fed on what to say and the pass on questions is a way of depicting they do not have the knowledge required to answer a question. Scott (Former Press Secr) is a guy who has a conscience after the fact. I personally wonder how the press secret. to include the present one can actually sleep at night being put in positions where half-truths or misrepresentations are the norm. I also note that Republican minded people miss the point and simply tow-the-rope to the common detriment of most of man-kind. Democrats are not sure of what path to take. None should make personal digs at people over a disagreement. Republicans need to stop making matters personal. Look within yourself and open your eyes and get away from lining up on party line no matter the cost. You could be easily described as a non-passionate group/class.

Well Buddy, you're sadly delusional if you think you're going to get anything remotely newsworthy from Helen Thomas. And you can find anything you want to be revealing, but it most likely just reveals that Helen has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

Helen Thomas is a disgrace. I am glad that Dana Perino had the guts to rip her to shreds. Should have been done long ago.

Buddy, when Helen runs her mouth in the fashion she did--and always does--she is not simply attacking President Bush--she is attacking ALL of America, and she's trying to indict our troops, as well. Forget President Bush, if you will, but it's not sycophancy that makes most Americans want the office of the Presidency, our military and commanders, and our entire country itself, treated with greater respect and decency.

People defended Saddam, too...

the hate George Bush syndrome really shows up in the press corp..doesn't it? And we are expected to take these people seriously? NO WAY!

Helen Thomas is an Arab as well as far left wing.

Whover said the white house reporters are sycompahnts isn't listening carefully. Ninety percent of them are anti-Bush.

Thomas so rude that she shouldn't be called on at all.

Lee Tabin

Spoken like a true 22 percenter, Buddy.

I wonder if hapless Helen cried over the countless thousands of innocent people Saddam slaughtered over the years. Probably not. She is a disgrace.

Way to go Dana.
Dana is also easy on the eyes
unlike HT.

Helen asking Perino these questions is democracy, Helen is doing the job that the press is supposed to do, something that Congress and the flagwavers are afraid to do.

Helen Thomas is just like every liberal, they talk about civil discourse while bashing the very country that allows them such "Civil Discourse". Of course we all notice that when a scum dog like Clinton gets in the White House, everything magically disappears, like poverty, lack of jobs, homelessness, child hunger, etc.
With Liberals , civil discourse basically means agree with me or you are a 31 percenter. President Bush has done an admirable job on most things in a very tough time, liberals would just talk about them and bash anyone who took the lead. That's all liberals are...talk, they don't acomplish anything.

The real story should be Helen Thomas long deserved removal from briefing room access. What a national disgrace!

Helen T. manners remind me of my mom without her meds.

I suggest Dana use simpler direct words when talking to Helen. "Helen, men and women die as the evil ones fight justice. Everyone of our soldiers are innocent and the terrorist are guilty.

Helen Thomas should be embarrassed by he condescending and cynical comments.

Dana Perino is terrific!

Helen Thomas represents what is the very worse of our citizenry. The door swings both ways Ms. Thomass so don't let it hit you in the backside as you move to a Middle Eastern country and surround yourself with freedom of speech!Maybe you can name your dog Muhamad and see what happens.

If Republicans are 31%'ers then Democrats are 12%'ers; the last number I saw on Congressional leadship approval ratings. Thomas has plenty to discredit her without resorting to physical or personal attacks.

I have watched, for many years, what Ms. Thomas does and does NOT do in these forums. Her appearance, her ancestry, her personal value judgments matter not a whit to me. What does matter to me is that she is surpassingly partisan and that prevents her from being the professional that she seems to believe that she is. She can ask hard questions now - and even silly questions - but the fact that she did not ask hard questions of the Clinton camp reveals a stunning lack of professionalism on her part. She is transparent and lives in a self-imposed world of personal privilege that does not exist in reality.

Helen is way past her pull date. She doesn't ask questions; she does make mini hate speeches. She is an embarrassment and should have been put out to pasture a long time ago.

Well said, Buddy.
We are a military family. Saying publicly that you do not agree with the policies of the current government is what democracy is all about. When that criticism is turned into rhetoric that sounds anything like "Those who disgree with the government hate America" those accusers are taking a step towards supporting fascism.

For those of us who think GWB's policies are a miserable failure, we don't hate America. We hate incompetence. That you DON'T hate incompetence says something about you, not about us.

Sorry, folks, but I'm not a useful idiot of the democrats. If I had a choice for a journalist between Helen Thomas or anyone randomly selected from the next city bus, I'd go with random selection any day. Your beloved clinton doesn't deserve all the delicacy that your democrat media shill typists and opinion writers seem to be more than willing to provide. Furthermore, I find it very revealing, that the attacks on America from the useful democrat idiots tend to focus obsessively on made up assertions rather than fact. My my, facts certainly lead to silence from the democrat shills.

Wow! Sounds like she's taken some tips from Tony! Go Dana!

What service does Helen Thomas provide as a journalist with her tripe? Hers is not civil discourse; it is vitriol, OBL-like propaganda spewed from a seat she clearly no longer deserves.

Why can't a journalist be more like a Republican?-(Henry Higgins, if he lived in America.)

Wait for the official word. Publish it without question. Defend it against any criticism. Smear the person that questions it. And, finally, forget that the offical answer was wrong and wait....for the official word. ad infinitum.

Clearly, it's the Republicans that don't have a clue what a fact is. Mr. Bush CHEATED in the second "election" and he was APPOINTED in the first. He did NOT win by a large margin the second "election". A half percentage with that gained from fearmongering and cheating is not a large margin by any stretch of the imagination.

Mr. Bush is Commander in Chief of the MILITARY ONLY. That is fact, not opinion. A so-called election doesn't mean that he IGNROES us after it. It means when the MAJORITY says to stop this war, that means to stop this war. THAT is not open for debate. It's obvious how Nazi Germany happened because what is going on and being allowed by Republicans and Bush worshippers is exactly what happened then.

When our troops get tortured in Iran after Bush attacks it for no reason, then you have no business opening your mouths.

It's clear that who moderates this is only allowing pro-Bush tripe since that is all I have seen here. This alone proves exactly what I'm saying here.

Republicans whine and complain about one single incident by Clinton, but these same people don't have a problem with it when Bush rapes the Consitution on a daily basis and commits crimes against humanity. You have sold your souls for him. That's your choice, but don't you dare question the rest of us because we refuse to. The Republican Party is a party of hypocrites and liars. You slam Clinton for everything under the sun, but literally make excuses for Bush getting away with murder. You're the same who claims to be "pro-life", but don't have a problem with it when bombs wipe out entire families in one pop. You don't care that REPUBLICAN politicians are getting caught for sex offenses. Clinton's affair was none of your business, but real crimes are and you turn your backs on those.

I hope you people can live with your decisions. I surely couldn't.

The only hate mongers are Bush worshipping Republicans. You claim we don't support troops for not worshipping Bush for not believing his lies, then you're dumber than you sound. If Bush loves our soldiers so much, he wouldn't have gotten us into this illegal war and gotten them killed for no reason. For the ones who survive, why don't you ask Mr. Bush why he is refusing them medical care. If that's how it is to support the troops, then I'd hate to see what abusing them was.

Want to look into the face of evil? Start looking in the mirror before you accuse us.

Oh my God! Helen sounds just like Edith Massey from the old John Waters movies. "Oh, Mr. Egg Man, I love you!"

It is not only disgraceful that Helen would insinuate that the US military is intentionally killing civilians, there is absolutely no credible data to back that statement up and frankly, it is extremely dangerous to make a statement like that given our current political climate of misguided hatred, not to mention the fact that there is a war going on with US troops in harms way. Not only should she lose her front row seat, she should be barred from the room. If she doesn't apologize for that statement, she should lose her job, but I know that won't happen. Dana handled Helen's venom with a quick and accurate reply and she deserves a lot of credit for that. I'm so happy to see someone as bright as Dana on the staff.

Leigh? I mean ... Helen? That's quite a little speech there. It would be nice if any of your statements could be backed up with facts, you know. But good job! You've exemplified for us all what is wrong with the thought processes of the liberals (if that isn't an oxymoron).

LeighPerson - your funny.

Hey Leighperson, are you really that ignoant of our government? Once Mr. Bush was elected, He has NO responsibility to lead by polls. You can vote in someone that will do what you want, but as soon as they are in, they will LEAD, which is what they were elected for, not listen to people. Elections are the voice of the people. And considering that all the Supreme Court did in the first election was rule that Florida could not change its election rules AFTER the election, it really makes you look stupid to say he was appointed.

Jan, don't be so quick to judge Republicans for our supposed "non-hatred of Bush's incompetence," as you put it. Perhaps if your hero Bill Clinton had handled national defense a bit more competently on his watch, this would have thwarted the series of events that led to Iraq.

What a bunch of morons you all are.

Jan, correct me if I'm wrong, but I always thought White House press conferences were about the press asking questions, not making speeches. Helen Thomas should have been thrown out of there years ago because she thinks the only way she can remain relevant today is by making dumb speeches, not by asking probing questions. Making snotty accusations may be appropriate for some lowlifes in the press, but I do expect a lot more from the White House press corps. I'm beginning to wonder if the press people over there are going to keep her in her seat even after she dies. I think that's the only time she'll start asking some sensible questions.

Helen Thomas never asked Bill Clinton how many innocents were being killed in Basnia that I can recall?

Everyone needs to remember that GWB is not runnng in 08 and people will have there vote and we will see where the country is going and no administrtion will ever have a media biased based press corps again...I think we can all agree that this is GOOD NEWS

There is so much I could say to the postings of this issue. I would suggest you go back and take a look at the Canadian's. He's on the money. I would like to address Angela's posting and where she brings up Clinton and how he "handled national defense....." Well my dear, if the right wing republican christian nut cases hadn't been so determined to bring his presidency down to the tune of $60 million dollars worth of absolutely senseless investigations and then that worthless impeachment, perhaps he would have time to focus on things that mattered to the American people....

Where have you people been? Helen Thomas is a national treasure who I have watched for decades and yes, she holds all president's feet to the fire from Kennedy thru the current [president]. Its just that she finds this arrogant, stubborn, inept, hypocritical, [liar] a little more daunting to deal with.

Canadian Paul,

Your too long, unsolicited comment is surley not necessary. If you must criticize, stick to your own country. We Americans already endured your socialist Peter Jennings spoon feeding us his slanted views of the world for years.

LeighPerson, you say "one incident" by Clinton? Which "one incident" would you be referring to? There were so many "one incidents" that with out looking at the newly updated lists that you will have to supply us with which number you are referring to in order for us to directly answer you. The actual list is about 3 reams long so you see our dilima here we do need an exact number.

Other than that are you trying to break in to stand up comedy? I can only think that by your post. Is so don't give up your day job just yet. You might want to look in to getting a new writer to assist you. Yes President Bush is the Commander in Chief of the military. But for those of us not in the military he is the President of the United States. That dear is fact. Also he won both elections fair and square.

May you might want to read up on exactly how the voting system works. That might give you a heads up. As far as your idol Clinton he made his expades our business by bringing it in to OUR WH. That's something else you might want to brush up on and re-read your Clinton history primer. Primer that would be a grade school book. Then move on from there.

There are things I like and don't like about a lot of things. But keeping our country safe is a primary focus for President Bush. To prove that, think a minute are you walking around in black rag from head to toe? Are you still breathing? Have you been injured or killed in another attack on us? Just some thoughts. That will require thinking on your part. Helen Thomas like some one else here said is way past her due date.