Daniel Schorr
Farwell to one of the great two-fisted broadcast journalists
Daniel Schorr
Dick Polman, Inquirer National Political Columnist
If only Daniel Schorr had remained healthy a little longer, he would've been afforded the opportunity to weigh in on the WikiLeaks/Afghanistan story. And he surely would've relished doing so. To borrow a baseball term, that story was right in his wheelhouse.
Schorr, who died Friday after 93 years on earth and 60 years in journalism, was one of the last links to the pre-Internet golden age of two-fisted broadcasting, which is why he rates a special mention here. During his long career, particularly at CBS News and at National Public Radio, he crafted a well-earned reputation as a combative reporter and analyst who bucked governmental authority in the service of the truth. He ferreted out the real story, often aided by leakers on the inside. He shared his findings with the public, and, most admirably of all, he couldn't have cared less who got ticked off.
Schorr would've instinctively understood the purpose of the Afghanistan document dump, that the leaked battlefield reports (as vetted by three top newspapers) are intended to enlighten the public about a war that's going worse than officially portrayed. He would've noted that messengers often pay a price for disseminating unwelcome messages; after all, he was thrown out of Moscow during the '50s when the Soviets grew displeased with his CBS reporting, and he was essentially eased out of CBS in the mid-70s when the network grew displeased with his attempts to air a secret congressional report on CIA illegalities. (Threatened with jail time and a $100,000 fine for contempt of Congress, he ultimately gave the leaked document to the Village Voice, which published it. Congress backed down on its threat. The republic didn't fall.)
Schorr was the 17th name on President Richard Nixon's official "enemies list." One incident during that era best illustrates his relationship with authority (or, more precisely, the reverse):
One summer night in 1971, Nixon gave a speech to the Knights of Columbus and promised that he would give federal money to private parochial schools. The next day, anchorman Walter Cronkite asked Schorr to do a piece on the issue for The CBS Evening News. Schorr interviewed various administration officials and parochial school lobbyists, and learned that Nixon's promise was a con, that he was merely pandering to Catholic voters with an eye on his '72 re-election, that he couldn't have funded the schools even if he wanted to because the U.S. Supreme Court had put the kibosh on those kinds of funds.
Schorr duly aired his report. Three days later, the FBI, acting at the administration's specific request, opened an investigation into Schorr's background. The FBI sent agents around the country to quiz 25 of Schorr's friends, family, and colleagues. The ostensible reason to check out rumors that Schorr's wife may have had some "Marxist" associations in her past.
The FBI probe didn't stay secret; ultimately, it was disclosed in The Washington Post. Then came the fun part. The Nixon people decided that, in order to spare themselves embarrassment, they needed to concoct some fake spin about why they had been investigating Schorr. So they publicly claimed that they'd screened his background with the intention of offering him a job, bringing him onto the Nixon team - as assistant to the chairman of the Environmental Quality Council.
It later turned out that Nixon himself had crafted this lie - and apparently he came to believe it. In 1991, Schorr attended a Nixon speech; as he recalled in an interview two months ago, he approached the former president when the speech was over and said, "Mr. Nixon, I'm not sure you remember me. My name is Daniel Schorr." To which Nixon replied, "Sure, Dan Schorr. Damn near hired you once."
Just 17 days ago, Schorr was still on the air at NPR, in what would be his final stint - offering historical context on U.S.-Russian spy swaps, opining on the sensitive but necessary Obama-Netanyahu alliance ("they are condemned to be good friends"), and envisioning a long legal battle over the Arizona immigration law. Host Scott Simon then said, "Dan, thanks very much."
Schorr replied, "Any time."
If only.
I only heard of Schorr for the first time just this morning (I am but a young man) when my U.S. history students and I decided to look up the enemies' list online just to see who was on it. In among Sidney Davidoff ("A first class S.O.B"), John Conyers ("Has known weakness for white females") and Paul Newman we found Schorr's name - and pretty soon after that, this amusing anecdote. Seems that when the enemies list first became public during the Watergate hearings, Schorr was actually handed a copy to read on the air sight unseen. He paused not a beat when he came to his own name, even though he later recollected that he "tried not to gulp." Wow, that takes stones.— Billy Ray Winthorpe- former, if you are going to have reporting there are going to be mistakes made, but Fox News didn't even air the clip until she was fired already. Breitbart is a blogger like you and me, but better paid:) It is just his opinion not something like a legitmate news organization. I don't understand why the administration always shoots first and asks questions later. Lack of experience is the only explanation that makes sense. They need a couple experienced hired guns to help the President out. Don't you think?— NEPhilly
- "Unemployment benefits do nothing to spur the economy and tax cuts do." When people get unemployment benefits, they spend them on goods and services. That puts people to work providing those goods and services. "If there is increased economic activity maybe you have enough tax receipts to pay for some of your ideas." The easy way to complicate that overly simplistic restatement of the Laffer Curve is to suggest that eliminating taxes completely REALLY ought to make those tax receipts explode. Since that idea would be absurd, we're left with the proposition that a balance must be observed between public and private expenditure. You and I just happen to have a different idea about where that balance ought to be.— Billy Ray Winthorpe
- NE, posting comments on Polman's blog doesn't make us bloggers. More like leeches, really...— yoda
- billy, if unemployment benefits stimulated the economy we would be over-stimulated by now:) You of course also have to cut govt. spending as well as cut taxes to not explode the deficit, but raising taxes into a stumbling economy is not the way to get it going again. Of course there is diminishing returns if you cut taxes to 0, but in my view private companies spend money much more efficiently than the govt. does in creating jobs. As we have seen with the stimulus plan, the govt. just can't spend it efficiently enough to really so any good.— NEPhilly
- yoda, I understand:)— NEPhilly
- yoda, nothing else to add but a little nitpicking:)— NEPhilly
- oh, I see another comment my apologies:)— NEPhilly
- "In my view private companies spend money much more efficiently than the govt. does in creating jobs." Well, I won't argue with you that private companies spend money very efficiently, but sometimes that efficiency doesn't translate very well into American jobs - when it involves investment in labor-replacing technology or emerging low-wage economies abroad. What's more, you still need the government to do the stuff that's not going to pay off within the preferred time horizon of the average private investor, but that is going to be necessary for long term economic health. To leave the handling of the economy entirely up to private investment decisions - or for that matter, entirely up to government planning (a la the late, not-so-great Soviet Union) - is unworkable.— Billy Ray Winthorpe
- NE, why do the studies from Harvard, the CBO, and the Fed show that unemployment benefits have stimulated the economy? Why do various studies over the last 100 years show that tax cuts harm the economy?— HandNik
- billy, we need private companies to start hiring again in order to bring 9.5% unemployment down to the usual 5/6%. The govt. just can't hire enough people or spend enough $$$ fast enough to make a dent. Obviously the govt. has its place as regulator, keeper of the peace & promoting the common good (roads, etc.) but their involvement in the economy to a larger extent usually causes more harm than good (ie Fannie/Freddie:). hand, why then has every economic expansion over the last 50 years been preceeded by tax cuts from JFK, to Reagan, to Clinton, to GWB? I am going to look up some of the UI benefit studies and get back to you, but I believe you are wrong in this case.— NEPhilly
- NE - If tax cuts were so stimulative, why are we in such an economic funk? And have been since(depending on who you listen to)2005, 2007 - right smack in the middle of those Bush tax cuts that you and all the other Fixed news, neocon buffons keep spouting about? If they were so job creating stimulative, where are the jobs from those years that they stimulated? PLEASE, the cuts are still in place. Why then aren't jobs being created? I know, I know, those poor business people are so unsure what taxes they will have to pay. Pleaaaase, do you really think we are all stupid enoough to but the shill that a business person won't expand their business if there is money to be made because they are concerned about the taxes they might pay? Why then are the centers of industry and commerce and service in this country located in some of the highest tax districts in the country such as NYC, California, Mass. Dallas, Houston, etc? Oh, that's right, becuase that is where everyone else is - or some lame answer like that. Wasn't it not so long ago that that great defender of life, truth and the American way Tricky Dick Cheney was waxing prophetic about how "deficits don't matter" as the bushies were running up deficits with two unfunded wars and tax cuts for the rich and unpaid election year medicare benefits for the elderly? And now you and they purport to be the guardians of fiscal sanity? When every economist worth their salt is saying the economy needs more stimulus not less (for reasons way above you and your like mental capacity to comprehend). You are probably a very nice person - why do you continue to sound so dumb?— jti
- FormerGoper... Trying to respond to your blog but the censor must be a liberal with rabbit ears because he has canned my anti-liberal responses to you.— Phil Checchia
- NEPhilly : the net job growth over GWB's entire tenure was 1.1M jobs. that's it. not even enough to keep up with population growth. yes, tax cuts are generally stimulative. but don't act like they're a panacea. many other things affect the economy. And yes, they must be accompanied by spending cuts if you are worried about the deficit.— still_independent
- jti, I happen to agree with you philosophically, but don't bash my buddy NEPhilly. He's a very nice guy, and he's not dumb. Name calling is an ugly business, and doesn't accomplish anything at all but bad feelings. HandNik, do you think you could find links to some of those studies? I'd like to take a quick gander.— NigeltheMastiff
Cited by the Columbia Journalism Review as one of the nation's top political reporters, and lauded by the ABC News political website as "one of the finest political journalists of his generation," Dick Polman is a national political columnist at the Philadelphia Inquirer. He is on the full-time faculty at the University of Pennsylvania, as "writer in residence." Dick has been a frequent guest on C-Span, MSNBC, CNN, NPR and the BBC. He covered the 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004 presidential campaigns.
ARCHIVES
All commentaries posted before April 18, 2008, can be accessed at www.dickpolman.blogspot.com.
- American Spectator
- David Limbaugh
- Free Republic
- Glenn Reynolds
- Hugh Hewitt
- Human Events
- John Hawkins
- Matt Lewis
- Michelle Malkin
- National Review
- Opinion Journal
- Power Line
- Red State
- The Brody File
- The Daily Caller
- Town Hall
- Weekly Standard
- Center for American Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- Daily Kos
- David Corn
- Huffington Post
- Media Matters
- Mojoblog (Mother Jones)
- Open Left
- Political Animal
- Salon's War Room
- Talking Points Memo
- Tapped
- The Democratic Strategist
- The Grey Matter
- Unclaimed Territory
- Andrew Sullivan
- Attytood
- Chi Tribune's The Swamp
- CJR's Campaign Desk
- CNN's Political Ticker
- CQ Politics
- FactCheck.org
- Gail Collins
- Howard Kurtz
- Mickey Kaus
- NBC's First Read
- Obit
- Political Wire
- Politico
- Politics Daily
- Pollster.com
- Real Clear Politics
- The Atlantic Wire
- The Fix
- The Moderate Voice
- The Plank
- USA Today On Politics
- Wonkette
