Defending Desiree Rogers

IN CHARGE Desirée Rogers, preparing for an event in the East Room, is known as a perfectionist. The White House is standing firm behind their Social Secretary Desiree Rogers, refusing repeated demands that she testify before Congress about her alleged mismanagement of the state dinner in which celeb-seeking socialites Michaela and Tareq Salahi crashed the event, allegedly with hopes of landing on a TV show.

Yesterday’s NYTimes updates the story without offering any new insights but giving a more circumspect overview of the Rogers problem than our earlier post on Robin Givhan’s acerbic rundown of key events. (I suspect that Robin has burned a few bridges for her Thursday post.)

Meanwhile Lynn Sweet writes a sympathetic post toda for Politics Daily In Defense of Desiree Rogers, reminding us of the line left in his 1993 suicide note left by Clinton couple friend Vince Foster: “ruining people is considered sport.”

The Christian Science Monitor and several other media picked up a line worth a good laugh. 

Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D) of California told the “Today” show that Congress had a right to such information. The she delivered the zinger about Desiree Rogers’s earlier dismissal of the ‘gatekeeper’ who used to monitor the guest list with the secret service at WH events:

“Even Wal-Mart has a greeter,” Representative Sanchez said.

Meanwhile reporter April Ryan with American Urban Radio adamantly pursued the Desiree Rogers ‘problem’ with White House Press Secretary, creating an exchange that so far hasn’t gotten Gibbs in trouble but should. Personally I found April Ryan out of line in her persistent questioning, when Climategate is unfolding and we’re sending 30,000 more tropps to Afghanistan.

But the Gibbs response in which he likened April Ryan’s behavior to his six-year-old child’s was rather a stunner in the pompous guy department. There’s no doubt in my mind that Gibbs would have used the same metaphor if the reporter had been a guy.

I repeat my point from the other night, this WH group gets a C in the effectiveness of their communications. Of all the metaphors you shouldn’t use in talking to a professional woman, don’t tell her that she’s behaving like a petulant child — even when she’s aggravating the heck out of you fairly or not.

Gibbs Compares WH Reporter To His Child

Meanwhile, poor Michelle. We’re all so focused on Desiree Rogers that I have no idea what the White House Christmas decorations look like. Let’s run over to Mrs. O where POTUS and FLOTUS lit the national Christmas tree last night.

Images by Tim Sloan and Alex Wong / Getty ImagesMore reading: In Defense of Desiree Rogers Politics Daily

Obama social secretary let 1st priority slip Chicago Sun-Times

Anne’s Writing on Desiree Rogers

Today: Feb. 26, 2010

Desiree Rogers | As They Say on ‘Washington Week’, Bye Bye

Limelight Lover Desiree Rogers Finds Herself in the Hot Seat

Meet Desiree Rogers, Descendant of Creole Voodoo Priestess Marie Laveau Glapion, Now CEO of Global Megabrand Obama 

Valerie Jarrett and Desiree Rogers |  “Laissez les bon temps rouler”

Update on Sun, December 6, 2009 by Anne

Maureen Dowd has written a very clever column today The Lady and the Tiger, about the foibles of Desiree Rogers and Tiger Woods. When Dowd revs up her pen, she let’s it rip in word-style beyond compare. On the subject of Desiree Rogers:

The smart thing would have been for Desiree to sail up to Congress, wearing designer sackcloth and pearls of remorse, apologize for the oversight at her first state dinner and promise it wouldn’t happen again.

It just made her look weaker that she couldn’t simply accept some blame publicly for what happened at a dinner she was in charge of, and draw the heat away from the First Family she serves. She’s no G. Gordon Liddy.

Congress being Congress, they would have lapped it up and let her off the hook. Instead, she let the Secret Service director, Mark Sullivan, go up alone and take the rap.

On the subject of her other black swan, Tiger Woods — you gotta read the story: The Lady and the Tiger NYTimes

Comments

[BJ]

I am wondering why your appraisal of Desiree Rogers is so scathing. Even though she was the person in charge of the guest list, let's talk about the fact that it is the job of the Secret Service to protect the President and other important officials. Let's talk about those idiots who were blinded by Michaele Salahi's golden mane and let in a woman who could have killed the President.

It is unfair that a woman who is successful as well as glamorous should apologize of not being ashamed of this fact. How dare you criticize her for letting her light shine. It seems as if you have more in common with the American women you criticize. You proclaim to be for women and their right to present themselves in an intelligent manner but this article smells of Girlie Haterade. How duplicitous.

[Anne]

I'm letting this comment stand, but your words must be canned. Or you are trying to stir up trouble where there is none. Perhaps you are attributing the quoted comments to me, when they belong to someone else. I quote many people by name.

In any case, you use big words but they make no sense personally, as they are written about me. It's a common problem in American political culture. We're all politically correct reactionaries. I actually take Desiree's side several times and have written that she is an enormously successful woman, defending her when under attack for the 'branding' references.I love Desiree Rogers, so your comments make absolutely no sense.