• Home
  • Blogs
  • Public Eye
Public Eye
October 31, 2005 1:55 PM

Roberts Apologizes, Calls Choice Of Words "Unfortunate"

Posted by Vaughn Ververs
A question posed to White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan at this morning’s “gaggle” by CBS White House correspondent John Roberts has attracted quite a bit of chatter on the Internet. Of course, the topic of the day is the Supreme Court nomination of Samuel Alito, and the question from Roberts, was, “Scott, you said that – or the President said, repeatedly, that Harriet Miers was the best person for the job. So does that mean Alito is sloppy seconds, or what?”

Public Eye asked Roberts about the incident and reaction and here’s what he said:
“At the morning White House gaggle, I used an unfortunate choice of words in a question to Scott McClellan. Please be assured that there was no pejorative intent to my question. I was merely attempting to reconcile past statements about Harriet Miers with the President's new nominee for the Supreme Court.

The early morning White House gaggle is an informal, free-wheeling and often irreverent forum, which is not broadcast and generally not publicly available.

Obviously, my tone this morning was a little too casual.

As we all experience from time to time, it was one of those 'oops' moments which we wish we could rewind and re-record.

I apologize to anyone who took offense to my poor choice of words. I can assure you I meant none."
UPDATE: Roberts also apologized to McClellan at the more formal, on-camera press briefing this afternoon. Following a back-and-forth between McClellan and NBC correspondent David Gregory, in which the press secretary mentioned there was no need to be rude, it was Roberts' turn to ask a question. He said:
"Scott, on the subject of rude, my apologies for my unfortunate choice of words this morning to you."
Tags:
Roberts ,
Alito
Topics:
CBS News Issues
Share:
Digg
Yahoo! Buzz
Mixx

More From Public Eye

Add a Comment See all 81 Comments
by drmartin13 November 2, 2005 2:05 AM EST
So the debate in our country has devolved to a discussion of the term \"sloppy seconds?\" Sad. The radical right has picked a non-starter here. The term in question has entered the lexicon, without (despite what the right-wing talk radio hosts maintain) any sexual connotation. Nor is it misogynist. I could cite any number of similar phrases. Actually, it fits perfectly in the context of the question; i.e., an \"undesirable second choice.\" Maybe not the best wording for the White House, but considering the lying, cheating (various types), and criminal activity that has transpired there over the last 45 years (under both political parties) it\'s a nit. No apology required. And, BTW, the right-wingers don\'t have Roberts \"by the short hairs!\" [Another commonly-used phrase with an obscure sexual meaning which has crept into common use...].
Reply to this comment
by jongarfunkel November 2, 2005 1:18 AM EST
Well after Howard Dean accused the administration of playing \"hide the salami\" with Harriet Miers, maybe people in Washington just can\'t separate sex in their mind from scandal?
Reply to this comment
by soldiersmom November 2, 2005 12:15 AM EST
I\'m sure that I\'m a little late in sending this, but I do want to say how disgusted I am at the use of John Roberts\' use of the term \"sloppy seconds\" in reference to Samuel Alito. When I first heard of the reference yesterday, I did not know what the term meant...I figured it had to do with leftover mashed potatoes - maybe with some leftover hamburger crumbled into mushroom soup poured over the potatoes. But, no, it doesn\'t mean that at all. So, will CBS allow John Roberts to continue to cover the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court of the United States after he has compared Alito to a woman who engages in &&*%&-like behavior? No doubt it will. No wonder CBS\' credibility diminishes more and more every day.
Reply to this comment
by November 1, 2005 9:30 PM EST
While I\'m no fan of the Bush Administration by any means, I certainly find Mr Roberts\'s innuendo to be unprofessional and suggest that CBS remove him from his post immediately. His comment was sexist and vile. I find it difficult to fathom what purpose there could have possibly been in it. If the previous nominee had been male, I doubt that Mr Roberts would have resorted to such language. For decades I have been an admirer of CBS News but these days I find it less and less a useful information source.
Reply to this comment
by exkiro November 1, 2005 4:28 PM EST
I have spent 41 years in television broadcast and if the viewers don\'t make this an issue and A CAREER ENDER they can no longer think for themselves.
Reply to this comment
by visitor111 November 1, 2005 3:33 PM EST
Sloppy seconds? I think Mr. Roberts was being kind. I\'d be surprised if Alito was team Bush\'s fourth or fifth try. Remember, the list of women and minorities the prez chose Miers from contained a number of names who asked to be withdrawn because of the caustic nature of the process. After listening to Scott talk out of the side of his neck for the last couple years, I can\'t imagine couresy or repect being the first thing on any reporters mind in a conversation with the white house spinners.
Reply to this comment
by whynaut November 1, 2005 3:15 PM EST
Real news does not have an opinion. As John Roberts has once again demonstrated CBS News not only comes with an opinion but usually an attitude as well.
Reply to this comment
by whynaut November 1, 2005 3:10 PM EST
As I read these posts I wonder why the left is so filled with hatred? Why is kwAwk so loathsome toward Rush the intertainer? Rush like me is just an imperfect \"sinner\", and Rush knows this. Perhaps kwAwk is a saint in his own mind, frustrated that the rest of us sinners do not recognize and accept his sainthood.
Reply to this comment
by weserneye November 1, 2005 1:50 PM EST
John Roberts\' comment was nothing compared to the obscenities used by VP Cheney, F*** Yourself, and nothing compared to the obscene lost of lives in Iraq. G. W. Bush\'s tolerance of lawbreakers in his administration, a la Karl Rove, is obscene. Sloppy second is sloppy second and that is all that George W. Bush seems to be capable of. Fact is, Alito is ANOTHER sloppy second. Yes, the rabid defense of all Bush\'s men certainly sounds like a White House Damage Control Corp. Like it or not, all presidents and politicians have this corp if they can afford it. westerneye
Reply to this comment
by theright November 1, 2005 12:56 PM EST
John Roberts\' apology was phoney as a 2 dollar bill. He is not sorry. His hatred for the Bush administration is extreme and he has no business covering the White House for CBS. CBS should get someone who is more objective. Reasign John or fire him.
Reply to this comment
by maajm November 1, 2005 11:19 AM EST
CBS correspondent John Roberts is another in a long list of reasons why I do not watch CBS news anymore. I am sincerely offended by his vulgar comments yesterday. In condoning his actions by allowing him to continue in his , CBS serves to enlighten me further that, not only are they not serving the higher purposes that journalism calls them to, but that they are now revealed to be sexist and crude as well. The media, in becoming the message, renders itself meaningless.
Reply to this comment
by elf1943 November 1, 2005 10:34 AM EST
speaking of \"sloppy seconds\" how is that Mapes forgeries investigation going?
Reply to this comment
by writerross November 1, 2005 7:58 AM EST
Is there a limit to the number of log in names one can use for this forum? It feels as if one lone voice represents that conservative faux outrage above. What\'s worse is that someone would bother to villify a CBS newsman for a lovely, direct, honest question while at the same time denying the abusive language and criminal behavior of the cabal in the White House. There -is- a stench of corruption in D.C and that horrific smell leads all the way to the doors of the Oval Office at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. I thought John Roberts made a brilliant comment. But the newsmen are NOT the news. Your president is. Worry about the nasty language that Bush and Company used to open the doors to Iraq. Those lies about the fake WMDs and the fake mushroom clouds. Now THAT\'S as dirty and gutteral as it gets. Ask the 2000 dead soldiers which words bother them more. Oh if only you could.
Reply to this comment
by west-tex November 1, 2005 5:20 AM EST
Who\'s surprised? One time C\"BS\" darling, now turned C\"BS\" ~traitor~ Bernard Goldberg set us all straight years ago. In his mostly MSM ignored, or at best MSM maligned, book, \"Bias\". As a long time C\"BS\" insider, Goldberg showed us in spades what a pit of GOP hating Leftist snakes, C\"BS\" has long proudly but quietly been. Obviously, the truth is, \"Bias\" isn\'t just a C\"BS\" issue. And obviously, Roberts isn\'t the only Democrat Party shill, playing a so called \"Journalist\", on TV. The \"Networks\" are all filled to the brim with propagandist Leftist. Russert ~was~ a Democrat Party operative. So ~was~ Stephanopoulos. And we all know about \"Spam Blather\"...
Reply to this comment
by alphaa10-2009 November 1, 2005 3:25 AM EST
Happy Halloween! Now, I am curious. On a week when a crime wave seems to have hit the Bush regime, some GOP-leaners act as though a few words from a reporter is the real crime. Consider this explanation-- the more Bush stumbles, the louder their Limbaugh Chorale becomes. They must cover their Chief in his abject nakedness, and believe noise will do it. They whine, screech, moan, froth and even post letters of complaint. All this is an adolescent tactic called distraction. Like some midnight invocation in a B movie, their torchlit crowd scene winds its way up to the manor of Sean McManus (\"Mr. McManus\", to them). However, it is clear some of these self-proclaimed patriots (who champion democratic freedoms around the world, but cannot stand anyone to disagree with them in America) would feel right at home on Krystalnacht. So please note: This will be a regular drill among them from now on-- coordinated by email links, telephone or donkey trail. When Bush is down, their noise will increase, so consider it a reliable barometer of their fears. And while more than a few say CBS \"hates\" them, look over their messages and see where the hatred really lies. The final laugh at these hyenas is they despoil every conservative ideal for which they claim to stand.
Reply to this comment
by tarfumes November 1, 2005 3:21 AM EST
\"Sloppy seconds\" are sacred? I guess maybe that\'s something you enjoy. All of you who are criticizing this need to put away your tinfoil hats and get off of your high @##@#$. Where was your outrage when ?*@% Cheney told a Congressman to \"Go f*ck himself\"? You are all hypocrites.
Reply to this comment
by cane61 November 1, 2005 2:56 AM EST
Jimmy \"the Greek\" got fired for his comments, Rush Limbaugh got tossed off ESPN for his comments, Michael Savage got tossed off MSNBC for his comments and Bill Bennett got roasted for his comment. CBS should fire John Roberts immediately for his comments. Right, and pigs can fly!
Reply to this comment
by hobbestomcat November 1, 2005 2:43 AM EST
CBS\' John Roberts is a \"funny\" guy. Using a sickeningly crude term to refer to Judge Alito. A fine Judge, from all I\'ve read. Don\'t agree with him and he\'s \"sloppy seconds.\" Right CBS? A fine \"news\" organization. HA! If he were a Republican Senator named Lott joking at a place not \"generally not publicly available\" guess what would happen to him? We don\'t have to guess, do we? Another of example of CBS\'hypocritical left-lean bias.
Reply to this comment
by whynaut November 1, 2005 2:38 AM EST
I suspect John meant to say \"pejorative\" rather than that word he used which apparently is not in the dictionary. It would be a good word to describe the relationship CBS News has with this White House. The CBS attitude toward this White House has in fact been pejorative since at least January 2000. Thinking Americans who have witnessed the CBS News performance know this and most of us disapprove. Real news does not have an opinion. CBS News not only comes with an opinion but usually an attitude as well. Pejorative according to Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary: having negative connotations; especially: tending to disparage or belittle
Reply to this comment
by kylemcaliste November 1, 2005 2:37 AM EST
John Roberts needs to contact a local Junior College to see if they have any Journalism 101 He says, \"in no way did I intend to use the phrase \'sloppy seconds\' in either a sexual connotation or a perjorative way.\" C \"BS.\" What other way is there to use this phrase? I have never heard it used any other way except in a sexual connotation. Roberts and his CBS folk are always quick to hold politicians to exactly what they say. Why not hold journalists to the same standards. Unless, you are like Roberts, and you have no standards. Roberts meant what he said, and thought that no one would care. Wrong, John. Go back to J-School you hack.
Reply to this comment
See all 81 Comments

About Public Eye

Description for Public Eye