Monday, May 31, 2004

and before I forget here's a report on Gen. Zinni's appearance on 60 minutes last week -- yet another closet Democrat partisan hired on by Bush... how does this keep happening? O'Neil, Clarke, DiTullio... the list goes on and on <sarcasm> 2:09:38 PM

The so-called liberal media (SCLM) at work I would find it amusing that people read the findings of the Pew report on the media and assume that because self-dexcribed liberals outnumber self-described conservatives that the press is "liberal." (BTW both liberals and conservatives are widely outstripped by self-described moderates, which account for a clear majority in the biz, and in some instances nearly two-thirds). Who holds the levers of power? If you were to poll medieval society I think you could find that the vast majority were in favor of some terribly liberal beliefs -- income redistribution, lay participation in clerical administration -- but that didn't make such societies "liberal" because the powerbrokers and decision-makers were "conservative." AThe same goes for the press (or any other industry for that matter) it doesn't matter if the poor plebes stuck at the bottom of the pyramid are "liberal" if the folks deciding what stories run or what angles get pushed are the conservatives, now does it? And what did the survey show, but that the most conservative elements are -- yup, the decisionmakers and the celebrity journalists. Ta-da the rightwing has managed to cherry pick the best positions within journalism as an industry: who says throwing money at a problem (in terms of think tanks, talk radio, and of course Fox) doesn't work--never mind an unceasing thirty plus years of working the refs? Here's a great expose of that egomaniacal flack for Junior and his war of choice: Judith (insert favored expletive here) Miller... while we're at it here's another well deserved slam. Andrea Mitchell -- wife of Greenspan, NBC celebrity reporter, and charter member of the SCLM Adam Nagourney -- who's sole purpose in life appears to be casting doubt on Kerry's campaign strategy -- not any particular strategy, just whatever one Kerry is pursuing (or described as pursuing) at any given moment. Kelli Arena at CNN -- who thinks that a vote for Kerry is a vote for the bin Laden, because her sources in the Bush Administration told her so... And here's a softball: Sean Hannity equating MoveOn.org to the Ku Klux Klan truly, what is wrong with the wiring in these folk's brains? UPDATE: the NY Times ombudsman tackles the "mea culpa" that was posted on A10. The mea culpa was more like a "nemo culpa," but the ombudsman's take is definitely worth a look. 2:03:49 PM

The man who should be prez "George W. Bush promised us a foreign policy with humility. Instead, he has brought us humiliation in the eyes of the world. "He promised to "restore honor and integrity to the White House." Instead, he has brought deep dishonor to our country and built a durable reputation as the most dishonest President since Richard Nixon. "Honor? He decided not to honor the Geneva Convention. Just as he would not honor the United Nations, international treaties, the opinions of our allies, the role of Congress and the courts, or what Jefferson described as "a decent respect for the opinion of mankind." He did not honor the advice, experience and judgment of our military leaders in designing his invasion of Iraq. And now he will not honor our fallen dead by attending any funerals or even by permitting photos of their flag-draped coffins. "How did we get from September 12th , 2001, when a leading French newspaper ran a giant headline with the words "We Are All Americans Now" and when we had the good will and empathy of all the world -- to the horror that we all felt in witnessing the pictures of torture in Abu Ghraib. "To begin with, from its earliest days in power, this administration sought to radically destroy the foreign policy consensus that had guided America since the end of World War II. The long successful strategy of containment was abandoned in favor of the new strategy of "preemption." And what they meant by preemption was not the inherent right of any nation to act preemptively against an imminent threat to its national security, but rather an exotic new approach that asserted a unique and unilateral U.S. right to ignore international law wherever it wished to do so and take military action against any nation, even in circumstances where there was no imminent threat. All that is required, in the view of Bush's team is the mere assertion of a possible, future threat - and the assertion need be made by only one person, the President.... " Go read the entire critique 9:39:25 AM