They need to start shit canning some of these staffers...
Protest letters, like those over Israel, were rare in past administrations. White House veterans can barely contain their disdain over how times have changed.
Protest culture is shattering the last remaining barriers in official Washington, exposing a generation gap between how young staffers and their older bosses view the responsibilities of a Washington operative.
Since the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks on Israel, President Joe Biden’s consistent support of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s response has prompted a series of anonymous letters from staffers within the White House, the State Department and the Biden campaign — letters that have left politicos of a certain age shaking their heads.
The notion that junior staffers in such coveted jobs would dare cross the principal — even anonymously — would have been inconceivable not long ago, they say.
“There’s this whole, ‘You’re not the boss of me’ attitude now. ‘I might work for you but I have my own views,’” said longtime Democratic strategist James Carville, who worked for former President Bill Clinton as a top campaign strategist. “If you said you didn’t like some of President Clinton’s policies, the idea that you would go public with that would be insane. Just wouldn’t do that. It wouldn’t even cross your mind.”
In years past, it would be exceedingly rare for officials inside a White House to attempt to influence their own boss by going public with an internal disagreement over principle within his administration — at least without quitting first.
Leaks to the press from administration officials have been a hallmark of political reporting for generations. And during the George W. Bush years, top White House aides occasionally went public to air their disagreements. But that was only after leaving their jobs first.
“The bargain a staffer strikes has always been this: You get to influence the decisions of the most powerful government in the history of the world,” said Paul Begala, who worked alongside Carville in the Clinton White House. “In exchange for that influence, you agree to back the final decision even if it goes against your advice. If confronted with a decision that crosses one’s ethical, moral, social, political lines, the choice is clear: Shut up and support it, or resign.”
Things have changed more recently. In the Trump presidency, unauthorized leaks became a form of political currency, with anonymous officials writing op-eds, and wild bits of drama routinely finding their way into the news.
Inside the current White House, there’s a feeling that the culture has now irrevocably changed. Aides’ biggest frustration tends to be the outsized coverage of anonymous letters and criticism compared to on the record support for the president’s policies.
www.politico.com
Protest letters, like those over Israel, were rare in past administrations. White House veterans can barely contain their disdain over how times have changed.
Protest culture is shattering the last remaining barriers in official Washington, exposing a generation gap between how young staffers and their older bosses view the responsibilities of a Washington operative.
Since the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks on Israel, President Joe Biden’s consistent support of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s response has prompted a series of anonymous letters from staffers within the White House, the State Department and the Biden campaign — letters that have left politicos of a certain age shaking their heads.
The notion that junior staffers in such coveted jobs would dare cross the principal — even anonymously — would have been inconceivable not long ago, they say.
“There’s this whole, ‘You’re not the boss of me’ attitude now. ‘I might work for you but I have my own views,’” said longtime Democratic strategist James Carville, who worked for former President Bill Clinton as a top campaign strategist. “If you said you didn’t like some of President Clinton’s policies, the idea that you would go public with that would be insane. Just wouldn’t do that. It wouldn’t even cross your mind.”
In years past, it would be exceedingly rare for officials inside a White House to attempt to influence their own boss by going public with an internal disagreement over principle within his administration — at least without quitting first.
Leaks to the press from administration officials have been a hallmark of political reporting for generations. And during the George W. Bush years, top White House aides occasionally went public to air their disagreements. But that was only after leaving their jobs first.
“The bargain a staffer strikes has always been this: You get to influence the decisions of the most powerful government in the history of the world,” said Paul Begala, who worked alongside Carville in the Clinton White House. “In exchange for that influence, you agree to back the final decision even if it goes against your advice. If confronted with a decision that crosses one’s ethical, moral, social, political lines, the choice is clear: Shut up and support it, or resign.”
Things have changed more recently. In the Trump presidency, unauthorized leaks became a form of political currency, with anonymous officials writing op-eds, and wild bits of drama routinely finding their way into the news.
Inside the current White House, there’s a feeling that the culture has now irrevocably changed. Aides’ biggest frustration tends to be the outsized coverage of anonymous letters and criticism compared to on the record support for the president’s policies.
Bosses in the Biden admin are pressed over young staffers’ anonymous letters
Protest letters, like those over Israel, were rare in past administrations. White House veterans can barely contain their disdain over how times have changed.
www.politico.com
