John "Sloppy Seconds" Roberts

John Roberts of CBS is trying really, really, really hard.

He keeps apologizing for comments he made yesterday morning when talking about Samuel Alito and Harriet Miers during a press gaggle with Scott McClellan.

Roberts said:

"So, Scott, you said that -- or the President said, repeatedly, that Harriet Miers was the best person for the job. So does that mean that Alito is sloppy seconds, or what?"

Due to the Internet attention his phrasing received, Roberts responded by issuing a statement to apologize for his "unfortunate" vulgarity.

Posted on the CBS news blog Public Eye:

“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 perjorative 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."

Apparently, those two retractions weren't enough. Also on Public Eye, Roberts posted yet another apology.

CBS News White House correspondent John Roberts asked Public Eye to post this in response to the many comments and discussion about his earlier apology.

After reading some of the posted comments in response to my apology, I remain deeply troubled and wanted to take a moment to try to clear this situation up.

I can assure you that in no way did I intend to use the phrase 'sloppy seconds' in either a sexual connotation or a pejorative way. Rather, I was thinking 'second choice' - or 'second best'. If Harriet Miers was the "best person for the job" - then - where did that leave Alito? It was a poor choice of words, for which I am deeply sorry.

Many posters seem to think that it is indicative of an 'agenda' or 'reveals my true thinking' about the White House. That is simply not the case. I goofed. And I freely admit it. The words had barely escaped my lips when I cringed and thought 'oops - that was a stupid thing to say'.

Again, the forum was informal and is never broadcast, so I my linguistic guard was down. I uttered a phrase that is used colloquially these days to describe a number of situations. At no time did the sexual connotation ever enter my mind, but I agree, it has no place at the White House.

I have offered my apologies to Scott McClellan, and he has graciously accepted. Scott and I have a good working relationship and he is confident that I meant nothing untoward.

And I offer a humble apology to anyone who took offense upon reading the text of my question. Journalists must be held to high standards, and in this case, I fell short.

You can be confident that it will not happen again.

With highest regards,

John Roberts Chief White House Correspondent CBS News

I don't why Roberts keeps apologizing for his comments. Enough already.

Do I believe that Roberts may have used the term without considering its sexual connotation?

Yes, I do.

Do I think his use of "sloppy seconds" revealed that he has an agenda?

Absolutely.

Let Roberts off the hook for his unprofessional, vulgar comment. I think it's plausible, though unlikely, that he really didn't think of the sexual connotation of "sloppy seconds" when he used the term.

That said, Roberts should not be let off the hook for his sharply focused anti-Bush administration agenda.

The public certainly didn't need his little gaffe to know that he's a lib to the core and a member of a media outlet that has been engaged in desperate schemes to derail the Bush presidency.

Roberts is biased. We knew that.

He can be vulgar. I didn't know that; but I don't care.

Personally, I think the blatant anti-Bush agenda of CBS personnel, revealed in the substance of the goofy question that Roberts posed yesterday morning and reiterated at the afternoon briefing, is far more troubling than the term "sloppy seconds." The real issue is the bias engrained in the CBS newsroom, not a correspondent's use of a crude term.

Obviously, CBS does not want the reputation of John Roberts tarnished. The network is engaged in a frantic damage control effort. This is probably because they know that the elderly Bob Schieffer can't hold down the CBS Evening News anchor chair much longer.

CBS doesn't want "sloppy seconds" corroding the integrity of John Roberts.