Right Wing Nut House

In honor of Armed Forces Day, I thought it would be appropriate to hear from someone who is directly affected - in a true-to-life-and-death way - by the anti-military bias so prevalent in the MSM.

Dadmanly bills his blog as “Just one man’s point of view, from the heart of Mesopotamia.” The uncommon common man just happens to be one of the more eloquent and passionate members of our military I’ve read to date.

Following the Newsweek imbroglio, Dadmanly had some thoughts that go straight to the heart and soul of the issue of consequences. Consequences for the troops. Consequences for the American people. Consequences for our image abroad:

You are creating greater risk for me personally. You are creating incredible hostility in Muslim countries due to incessant negative reporting out of context and ignoring orders of magnitude of good news in doing so. Yet, in your jaded imaginations, you believe every misconception you spin is ever more confirmation of what you always knew about the U.S. Military. These unrelenting Vietnam analogies are like press versions of drug addled flashbacks.

You create added danger for my soldiers. You feed into enemy (yes, enemy) propaganda efforts in yielding unlimited access to pre-staged voices with calculated intent. You are entirely ignorant of the countries you claim to cover, and you know as little about the U.S. Military, its culture, climate, training, procedures, and ways of operation. You diminish and demean our service.

You cause greater concern, fear and worry for our friends and family. You expand pinpoints of data into grossly distorted exaggerations of fact, and paint broad brush strokes of violence without any context or comparison to relative levels elsewhere. You have no sense of proportion or equivalence. You have no regard for collateral damage, and yet see imagined carnage with every surgical strike, precision bomb, or targeted raid. You can speak of cities destroyed with the destruction of a single building.

Lack of “context” is something that seems to me to be the biggest sin of the MSM. In fact, this is why the charge of bias rings so true. Dadmanly points out that every major accusation of abuse came not from the press, but from the military itself.

We are proud of our Military, our Country, and how, for over 200 years, the U.S. has tried to improve both ourselves and the world around us, usually for little thanks and much scorn and insult. We police ourselves. Every scandal you report, from My Lai to Iran Contra to Abu Ghraib, has been first reported to authorities by military personnel. And that has resulted in prosecutions and punishment. And what do you stress in your reporting? The sins, crimes, and misdemeanors and rarely if ever remark on the ability and willingness for us to identify and correct malfeasance in our ranks.

Never, never claim to support the soldiers, you don’t, you never will in any meaningful way until you can see your prejudices for what they are, work to eliminate them, and for once try to view the world with an open and not a closed mind. You need to rethink how you consider the idea of a just war after 9/11. You need to acknowledge that you don’t know the modern U.S. Military or the men and women who serve.

As an example, yesterday’s New York Times carried a 5000 word screed on the deaths of two Afghans at Bagram Air Force base back in 2002. It isn’t until the 20th paragraph that we find out that after completing its investigation, the army feels that charges should be brought against 27 individuals:

Even though military investigators learned soon after Mr. Dilawar’s death that he had been abused by at least two interrogators, the Army’s criminal inquiry moved slowly. Meanwhile, many of the Bagram interrogators, led by the same operations officer, Capt. Carolyn A. Wood, were redeployed to Iraq and in July 2003 took charge of interrogations at the Abu Ghraib prison. According to a high-level Army inquiry last year, Captain Wood applied techniques there that were “remarkably similar” to those used at Bagram.

Last October, the Army’s Criminal Investigation Command concluded that there was probable cause to charge 27 officers and enlisted personnel with criminal offenses in the Dilawar case ranging from dereliction of duty to maiming and involuntary manslaughter. Fifteen of the same soldiers were also cited for probable criminal responsibility in the Habibullah case.

So the New York Times is pissed that the army 1) took so long and 2) didn’t keep the press updated throughout the investigation. By burying information that, if placed upfront, would have put the entire incident in a different context, the Times writers proved themselves to be either lousy journalists or horribly biased.

Which do you believe it is?

Go read the whole rant by this dedicated soldier. On Armed Forces Day, it’s the least you can do.

There will be light posting this weekend for a variety of reasons:

1. Cubs-White Sox. Need I say more?
2. I’m working on two different articles for publication.
3. Yardwork beckons…and beckons. I may blow it off for another weekend - but risk sleeping alone.
4. Got the first three discs of Sci-Fi Channel’s mini-series “Taken.” Sue and I missed it when it was on last year so we plan on watching it tonight and tomorrow.

I’ll have something up this afternoon around 4:00 pm with the same tomorrow.

For all of you who may have discovered this site in the last few days, may I suggest browsing the archives? I’m particularly proud of the “History” archives. And for some good laughs at the left’s expense there’s Marvin Moonbat, my fictional next door neighbor and the general “Moonbat” category.

Thanks for stopping by…Y’all come back.

About a half an hour ago, my sitemeter registered the 50,000 visitor since February 12 which is when I officially got off Blogspot and opened the New and Improved Rightwing Nuthouse. To everyone who visits on a regular basis, I’d like to say a great big “Thank You” and hope you continue to visit the House for news, opinion, and a few laughs.

And to all who wrote such supportive comments and sent nice emails about my defense of my brother I’d like to also say thank you. For those who weren’t so supportive and sent nasty, insulting emails…

Get stuffed.

If timing is everything in politics, somebody should give Canadian Tory Leader Stephen Harper a stopwatch.

Five weeks ago, the Tories were riding high as revelation after revelation from the Gomery inquiry into the Liberal Party’s electoral slush fund drove the approval numbers of Prime Minister Paul Martin’s ruling party lower than the attendance figures at an old Montreal Expos game. At that point, Harper was in the catbird seat as far as calling for a no-confidence vote in Martin’s increasingly shaky government.

But then Mr. Harper gambled. He decided to wait a while to see if even more damaging revelations would come out of the Gomery hearings. His theory was sound. Wait for the momentum caused by the ugly political scandal to build up to the point that the conservatives, who needed plenty of help in order to bring down the government, could rely on other minority parties to vote their way in any no confidence vote.

The gamble failed:

After his defeat on a vote designed to force a spring election, Conservative Leader Stephen Harper finds himself today with a chunk of his political capital spent, a temperamental image with the Canadian public, and some members of his party sniping at him for what they believe was the frittering away of the massive advantage given to him by the sponsorship scandal.

“He lost sight of the big picture,” one senior Tory said.

“You get so consumed by what’s going on in Parliament, sometimes you forget what it looks like from the outside.”

Harper didn’t help his cause when he got a sudden and severe case of foot in mouth disease:

The first questions about the Harper strategy began to surface after Prime Minister Paul Martin pledged in a speech to the nation to hold an election within 30 days of the report of Mr. Justice John Gomery. In his televised response, Mr. Harper kicked off what was to become a pattern of personal irritation, calling the Prime Minister a sad spectacle.

Later, he told the Commons that Mr. Martin’s career was going down the toilet, and, in perhaps the most controversial remark of all, accused the Prime Minister of waiting for two cancer-stricken MPs to get sicker so they could not make the budget vote.

MMMM…Harper is a conservative but he’d fit in right smartly with our Democratic party, I think.

So while Harper and the conservatives were skewering the liberals in Parliament and the media, the canny Martin was doing a little gambling himself - and with much better results. First, he locked up the New Democrats (NDP) with, what I would call (but Canadian readers have told me otherwise) a shameless budget bribe to increase spending by $9 billion.

Then, he took advantage of a political faux pas by Harper:

Then, in an effort to demonstrate that the Liberals had lost the moral authority to govern, Mr. Harper and his colleagues shut down the House of Commons, a move that one consultant said actually took the heat off the Liberals, who were being battered daily by testimony at the Gomery inquiry.

“Rule one in politics is that when your opponent is in the process of destroying himself, you don’t get in the way,” said Rick Anderson, who was an adviser to Preston Manning, former leader of the Reform Party. The rushed attempt to force an election interrupted what was a growing consensus that the Liberals needed to go.

This is the kind of advice our Republican Senate leaders should listen to. Instead, the Republicans are playing the Democrats game and what’s worse, on their playing field.

Finally, Harper experienced the biggest shocker of all; a high profile MP Belinda Stronach defected to the Liberal Party - in return for a Cabinet post:

Tories and other observers call the loss of former leadership foe Belinda Stronach to the Liberals the ultimate mistake. But Mr. Harper was also blamed for taking the heat off the Liberals by bringing controversy on himself.

Game, set, match, Martin.

The vote was close; 152 to 152, the tie being broken in favor of Martin by the Speaker. But a miss is as good as a mile. And Martin, who has promised elections next fall following the report by Judge Gomery on the scandal, has plenty of time to repair the party’s battered image.

Here’s the Captain on Harper’s future as leader of the conservatives:

Harper made some odd decisions in this fight, and all played against him. Telling people that this vote was an all-or-nothing one-shot deal was his biggest mistake. In light of the corruption already exposed in Ottawa, Harper should have instead made clear that he will not stop until the Liberals were kicked out. He made the decision to drop his challenge to the earlier motions which should have qualified as no-confidence votes for no return whatsoever, a decision which legitimized yesterday’s vote. Harper also failed to come to terms with Canadian ambivalence about his own political image; since he was in effect running for PM, he needed to make his case more publicly for that position. A slew of polls resulted in some contradictory numbers but showed a trend swinging back to the Liberals, driven mostly by a distrust of his leadership, and that needed immediate addressing.

Lastly, though, Harper may have been undone by his own basic honesty. During this entire episode, Harper made clear what he wanted to do and was aboveboard in his efforts to topple the Liberals. Harper clearly underestimated Martin and overestimated the man’s ethics. Harper appeared unprepared for the garage sale that Martin kicked off, buying the NDP with a budget package and Stronach with a second-tier ministerial position. Anyone who paid attention to the Gomery Inquiry should have known better, but even I was pretty amazed at how baldly Martin and his cohorts sold out Canada just to squeeze past the no-confidence vote.

Harper seems like a decent sort. Not flamboyant but certainly earnest and hardworking. As the Captain pointed out, he didn’t try to arrive at the no confidence vote using subterfuge or misdirection. He was straight and upfront about it.

Whether those are the qualities the Tory party wants in a leader as they go into elections this fall remains to be seen.

Keep on the sunnyside
Always on the sunnyside
Keep on the sunnyside of life.
It will help us every day
It will brighten all our way
If we keep on the sunnyside of life.

(Words and Music By Al Carter and Gary Garett)

The fact that Americans are always looking on the sunny side of life has evidently stunned pollsters and members of the MSM. How can this be, they must be asking themselves? After all, we do our best day after day to be so gloomy we could make a hyena weep. Not so, says a poll taken by the New Jersey Medical School in Newark and conducted by McLaughlin and Associates:

The American spirit is alive and well: A landmark study released yesterday from a New Jersey medical school finds that the majority of us are overwhelmingly optimistic about the future, even if catastrophe looms on the horizon.

A sampling: 82 percent of Americans ages 18 to 24 feel optimistic about their futures; 82 percent of those ages 25 to 44 do so as well; and 75 percent of those ages 45 to 64 and 64 percent of those 65 or older agree. Only 15 percent to 22 percent of the respondents say they have grown more pessimistic over the past five years.

And the press still wonders what people saw in Ronald Reagan?

What makes this study even more remarkable is the realistic view of the world and world events that people have which is conspicuously pragmatic as to what might happen:

Not all respondents were wearing rose-colored lenses, however: Between two-thirds and three-quarters of those in all the age groups fear the United States will suffer a biological or nuclear attack in the next 20 years.

Thirty percent to 40 percent feel the country can solve all or most of its problems, yet it doesn’t deter the hopeful feelings. Across the board, 75 percent still insist they are optimistic about their futures, despite the global threats.

It’s been a hallmark of the American race for more than 200 years to look to the future and dream. We dream of a better life for our children, a better world for them to inherit. But why is this? In the face of some truly scary scenarios and despite the relentless negativity of the media, Americans still see a hopeful future. Is there something that might…just might be exceptional about this?

I know it terribly unfashionable and downright un-PC of me to even mention out loud the words “American Exceptionalism” but the fact is even if the politically correct left doesn’t believe in the concept the American people obviously do. Simply put, there is no other country on the planet - not in tired old Europe or the go-go economic miracle countries of Asia - where this spirit of optimism and hope is so imprinted on people’s psyches and taken as an article of semi-religious faith that it manifests itself in concrete, measurable economic and social accomplishments.

When people are looking to the future, they work harder, are measurably healthier, and by and large happier than people who are fearful of what’s to come. Nobel Prize winning economist Julian Simon spoke of this on several occasions.

Not to mention that optimists are generally easier to be around and get along with as anyone can attest.

Ultimately, it just goes to show that politicians (and pundits) should never underestimate the wisdom of the American people. And the best politicians are always the ones who appeal to “The better angels of our nature” as Lincoln said rather than the darkness that always seems to be gathering just over the horizon.

Also see:

Daily Pundit
Questions and Observations

The totals are in from this week’s Watchers Council vote and once again, yours truly managed to come out on top. Also once again, the Watcher himself had to exercise his powers as Chairman and cast the tie breaking vote. This time, it was between my post “Please Don’t Run, Newt’ and an article I voted for from The Glittering Eye entitled “Intellectual Property and the Trade Deficit.”

The Eye’s article was an eye opener (sorry ’bout that, but it fit too nicely!). Did you know that 90% of application software in China is pirated? It’s unbelievable the amount of money this country is losing not just in software, but in other intellectual property like music and movies. It’s so bad that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has estimated U.S. companies lose more than $200 billion in China each year because of sales of counterfeited and pirated goods:

Yes, $200 BILLION. Our trade deficit with China in 2004 was $162 billion or, said another way, if China were playing fairly and honestly all other things being equal we’d be running a $48 billion dollar surplus with China. And nobody (except for the Chinese) would be talking about revaluing currencies or Americans consuming too much.

I don’t see any real likelihood of this situation righting itself, the Chinese are unlikely to take anything but show measures to correct things, and I don’t believe that any outside agency (like the WTO) will actually do anything to correct the situation.

And the scary and depressing thing of it is; nothing can be done.

Read the whole thing. It’s, as I said. a real eye opener.

In the non-Council categoy, Varifrank won with an excellent essay “I Got Your Desecration Right Here Pal.” A sampling:

Hello, my name is Fabrizio Quattrocchi. I was captured by Muslim holy warriors and tortured before cameras, just for their sport. In the end, they set aside of any respect for international law common, human decency or even the restraint of their own religious doctrine and beheaded me. I shouldn’t have expected any special treatment as this is a common act that they perform even among their own people. However, you won’t see the video of my beheading because I died like a man rather than the sniveling coward they wanted me to be.

I just want you all to know that I find all Muslims who decry to horrors of “George Bush and abu-ghraib” and now this desecration of the Koran to be a bit, shall we say “shallow” in light of the fact that the same “abu-ghraib” that you decry under Bush was a charnel house under Saddam, and yet you said nothing since it was a fellow Muslim doing the killing Oh, and I tell you, the International Red Cross coming out for concern over “civilian deaths in iraq” now that Saddam is gone is rich, real rich. Where was all the concern when the Kurds were being gassed? Where was all the concern for the marsh arabs then, eh? Where’s all the indignity when the supposedly holy kingdom of Saudi Arabia works so hard at killing and subjugating so many of the worlds Muslims. See any Christians in Arabia? No, Golly why is that? Oh that’s right, because it’s a death sentence

I think he’s upset. We all should be.

Second place in the non-Council category went to Austin Bay for his thoughtful article on the fallout from the Newsweek scandal, calling it the press’ “Abu Ghraib,” and a great round-up of reaction from the world media:

But why might this be the press’ Abu Ghraib? Here’s the connection: globe-girdling technology has once again amplified foolish behavior, lack of professionalism, and disregard for consequences into a tragedy. Consider Abu Ghraib, without the fevered hyperbole of The Nation or The Guardian. The behavior of US troops at the prison was inexcuseable –frat rat hazing, trailer trash porn, street punk threat taken up ten quanta to felony prisoner abuse. But dump the hyperbole and call Abu Ghraib what it was: rank felony abuse, not deadly torture. The global dissemination of Lynndie England’s dog leash photos, etc., (and magnification of the abuse by anti-American critics) made Abu Ghraib the political and historical scar it is. The US soldiers committed a crime, but information technology made the crime an international fiasco.

If you’d like to participate in the Watcher’s Council Vote, go here and follow instructions.

You may have heard that Howard Dean will be appearing this Sunday with the maestro himself, Tim Russert on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” Since I’m pretty lazy on Sunday and don’t feel like interrupting my “Nicktoons” viewing for anything, I thought I’d pay a visit to my good friend and inventor Professor Hawkinshank.

Now the Professor has a marvelous invention he calls a “TV Time Portal” that allows the viewer to see future TV shows. Isn’t that something? For instance, I already know who wins “American Idol.” And I’ve already seen Michael Moore’s next three movies. Surprise! They’re clunkers. Now, the Professor made me swear that I wouldn’t reveal anything more than 4 days into the future…something to do with anti-gravitons doing a deadly dance with proto-energy. Evidently this wouldn’t do too much damage to the space-time continuum. I’m sure you’d have no problems. Everyone can get used to eating upside down.

But I was curious to see how the Reverend Dean would deal with the relentless Mr. Russert. So the Professor allowed me to view and take notes on this very interesting and revealing interview:

Russert: Welcome to Meet the Press Dr. Dean.

Dean: Please call me Governor. I’m not really a Doctor. My wife’s the Doctor. I mean, one of the reasons I ran for Governor was because I couldn’t hack it as a physician. I wanted to be a vet, did you know that Tim?

Russert: No Governor I didn’t. Now let’s…

Dean: Really, I did. I wanted to be a vet. Love animals. Love dogs.

Russert: Right. Now Governor, let’s talk about the Democratic Party. Where do you see the party heading in the near future?

Dean: Are you kidding? We’re going down faster than a $5 whore on Saturday night. I have no idea how to turn this damn thing around nor do I have a clue about what I’m doing. But I’m good on the internet! I’m great at raising those small donations - you know, the really small ones.

Russert: Yes, you’re a legend in your own mind. Now, Governor, the FEC report recently released shows that Republicans raised approximately twice the amount of money that you and the Democrats did. Why is this?

Dean: Simple. They cheat. Republicans always cheat. Just because your political party comes up with good ideas with attractive candidates to sell those ideas doesn’t mean your any better than us. It’s cheating. It’s what Republicans do. Besides, I raised more “small money” than the Republicans did. When it comes to raising between $5.00 and $10.00 donations, no one can touch me. I’m the champ.

Russert: Yes…Let me ask you this. A few months ago you said Republicans are evil. Do you want to retract that statement?

Dean: I said what I said and I’ll stand by it to the death…unless it offends blacks, feminists, gays, union people or old folks. And yes, Republicans are evil. They’ve hijacked religion, I tell you. They’re trying to make it seem like Democrats hate religion. That’s not so. I’ve made it a point to include at least 3 references to God in every speech I make. If that doesn’t convince people we Democrats are religious, I don’t know what will. We’re going to talk about “God” and “values” and maybe even throw in a few “Jesus” in those states where the guys have the shotguns and confederate flags on their pick up trucks. When it comes to religion, nobody is going to be holier than me.

Russert: Right…Governor, Senator Harry Reid, the Senator Minority Leader and one of the leaders of your party recently called the President a “loser.” Would you like to take this opportunity to denounce that kind of negative attack?

Dean: Denounce it? Hell, I told him to say it! Winning two wars and two elections and getting just about everything you want from Congress doesn’t make you a winner, ya know. There are other standards a President should be measured against.

Russert: For instance?

Dean: For instance….

Russert: Yes? You were saying?

Dean:

Russert:

Dean:

Russert: I see. Well Doctor, one more question. Who will be the nominee of the Democratic Party for President in 2008?

Dean: Now Tim, you know it’s much too early to speculate about that but I will say this. We’re going to campaign in every state in the nation. Not only are we going to New Hampshire, we’re going to South Carolina and Oklahoma and Arizona and North Dakota and New Mexico, and we’re going to California and Texas and New York. And we’re going to South Dakota and Oregon and Washington and Michigan. And then we’re going to Washington, D.C., to take back the White House.

YAAAAAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!

Russert: Thank you Doctor…er Governor Dean.

Here’s a bunch of good stuff I found shadowing the “Shadow Media” - nomenclature I got via Ace of Spades who thinks along with the folks at The Corner that “Blogosphere” is too unwieldy. I always thought of Captain Nemo and the Nautilus using a blogosphere to traverse the uncharted depths…But then, if asked, I would have not named them “blogs” in the first place. How about “Webbies?” Or “O-Jo’s” for online journals?

Sheesh. Hugh Hewitt will never link to me again…

John Little at Blogs of War links to a very funny video made by British soldiers in Iraq that’s so popular it’s crashing the Ministry of Defense Computers!

A group of soldiers who jokingly filmed a version of the video for the hit song (Is This The Way To) Amarillo? were coping yesterday with sudden stardom. And rather than being punished for acting like pop stars instead of privates from the Royal Dragoon Guards serving in Iraq, the Ministry of Defence has promised that none of them will be disciplined.

The MoD has offered the video to Comic Relief, which could use it to raise thousands of pounds for charity. The shakily filmed video ended up bringing one of Britain’s most sensitive computer systems to its knees, crashing the MoD’s e-mail system

La Shawn Barber has found “Some Holy Books are More Holy than Others.”

Physical objects are not to revered or worshiped, and they hold no “sacred” power. Islam obviously teaches something entirely different. I think it’s ridiculous for the United States to cater to prisoners of war in this way, no matter what their religion. But I don’t run anything except this blog.

Yes…and you do that quite well, thank you.

Kender informs us that Mae Magouirk has passed away. She was the 80 year old woman whose daughter thought she’d be happier “with Jesus” despite the fact that she had no brain damage and her condition was treatable:

Some people on the left are probably feeling a bit smug about this story today, much like they felt when Terri finally died.

Those same people are probably wringing their hands that people on the other side of the globe are dying in places that our military is stationed and wondering what they can do to stop the Big Bad Evil Bush War Machine.

Yup.

The Captain has been blogging the Canadian political crisis since its inception. It looks like things are about ready to come to a head:

Canada feels Ms. Parrish’s pain, waiting as they are for a resolution to the political crisis facing them in an almost-stalemated Parliament. The only prediction anyone can make now is that more potential vote-skewing developments will almost certainly occur between now and the vote.

God I almost wish we had a Parliament. Well, not really. But in the last two weeks they’ve had the Prime Minister buying votes with the budget, bribing a Tory to leave the party by giving her a cabinet post, more revelations of electoral shennanigans, etc.

I bet Canadian bloggers haven’t been suffering from writers block recently.

The Commissar has a special school for the Intelligent Design folks…They let kids decide what’s true. Example:

Chemistry - “Alchemy 666″ - Using the latest principles of Theodoric of York, the students will explore the wonders of transsubtantiation. Woot! They are going to have a special lab on converting lead into gold

Read it all…it’s a stitch.

Somebody get Beth at My Vast Rightwing Conspiracy an airsick bag. She’s found an Eason Jordan clone:

The more I look at this, I see that Ms. Foley is an avowed leftist with an axe to grind. For her it’s apparently all about the Pentagon being the bad guys (duh) who aren’t doing anything to protect journalists. She’s been wrapped up in efforts demanding investigations by the Pentagon for quite some time, so this latest thing isn’t surprising. She’s quite careful to not (publicly) accuse the military of targeting journalists outright, but she very CLEARLY implies it.

Giacomo of Joust the Facts links to an article by Charles Fried, former U.S. Solicitor General under President Reagan who makes a reasoned, powerful argument to bust the filibuster. Giacomo sums up:

The politics was decided, at this moment in time at least, in the 2004 election where Republicans not only kept but extended majorities in the House and Senate and President Bush was re-elected to a second term. Yes, it was close, but name the last Democratic president who got a larger percentage of the total vote. (Hint: you’ve got to go back 40 years.)

Majority rule. It’s a simple democratic concept. You would think elected public officials would understand it.

Giacomo is the optimistic sort, isn’t he…especially when it comes to Senate Democrats.

Van Helsing serves up his specialty - Moonbat Guacamole. He’s blogging the LA Mayorl contest won by Antonio Villaraigosa - a full blown Hispanic moonbat of the first order who believes in Reconquista; returning California and much of the Southwest to Mexico:

Villaraigosa is former Chairman of the UCLA chapter of MEChA, a racist and seditious group devoted to the “Reconquista” of the Southwestern United States. The Reconquista is going well for the Mexicans, as anyone aware of our government’s outrageous refusal to defend the border will probably agree.

In closely related news, a 66-year-old woman suffered “inner cranial trauma” when she was assaulted for daring to protest the anti-American Danzas Indigenas monument in Baldwin Park, California, which features inscriptions in support of the notion that California should be ruled by Mexicans.

What’s the Spainish word for “nutcase?”

Don’t forget TJ’s excellent News - Interesting - Funny (NIF) for the best links to both the new and old media on the web.

And finally, Ferdinand T. Cat has the question of the ages for this weekend’s titanic match-up between the forces of good and evil here in Chicago. It’s my Go-Go White Sox versus the evil, corporate toady’s from the North Side. And while diplomatic, Ferdinand better stay away from my Ebony who adores the White Sox and whose 25 pounds of ferocious fatness would take out Ferdy in a heartbeat.

South Side cats rule!

Tom Wolfe, who chronicled Ken Kesey’s riotous, hallucenigenic trip across country in a painted school bus in The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test wrote in that American classic “It’s easy to have faith as long as it goes along with what you already know.”

I can’t think of a better explanation for the cognitive dissonance shown by the mainstream press since “Crapperquiddick” hit the fan this past weekend. Because make no mistake: The very same people in the press who took CBS to task last fall for their “fake but accurate” defense of the Bush TANG memos have elevated that apologia so that it’s now considered a legitimate way to report the news.

In editorial after editorial, the press has latched on to the idea that since abuse of prisoners happened in the past at Guantanamo and especially Abu Ghraib, the story of the flushing of a Koran down a toilet sounds true, seems true, and therefore, must be true. Never mind that the only people making these charges are former inmates, their families, and the lawyers representing them. And unless you believe, as the American left so feverishly imagines, that these same inmates were just innocent bystanders swept up in military dragnets and thrown into dungeons like Gitmo, one must be extremely concerned that a line somehow has been crossed.

It’s easy to have faith as long as it goes along with what you already know.

Forget for a moment that the press is more willing to believe the jihadist beheaders, Taliban thugs, and unreconstructed Baathists rather than their own government and military. Forget for a moment that these terrorists are not stupid, that like their bloodthirsty brothers in arms from 40 years ago, the Viet Cong, they know how to push the hot buttons of the American left and their allies in the press. What’s so very striking about this sea change in press standards is that it’s being used to justify the publication of a story that so far has resulted in 17 people losing their lives.

I say so far because as I’ve mentioned previously, I have little doubt that with enough digging, the press will find whatever it is their looking for. And when they do, the piously ignorant peasants who rioted in the streets of Pakistan and Afghanistan last week will pick up where they left off and more hell will break loose. To what end? The explanation given by the press is the eternal “people’s right to know.” A noble sentiment meaningless when placed in the context of covering a war where the United States is fighting for its survival. Terrorists are not just an inconvenience. They are a threat. And if the perfect storm of weapons of mass destruction and fanatical jihadists ever merge, there will be no place in America to hide from the cyclonic blast , least of all the newsrooms and boardrooms of MSM.

What then drives the press to go so far as change reportorial standards when it comes to confirming stories with the potential to harm American interests? Bias is the easy answer. Hugh Hewitt believes that arrogance and hubris - the corruption of power - has blinded reporters to what their real jobs are; to chronicle events in a fair and accurate manner.

Id take that a step farther and say that the press is lost, adrift on an undiscovered ocean where the old certainties and verities of just six months ago no longer apply. They can’t stand the new found scrutiny of the Shadow Media (HT: Ace). They try to cover their uncertainty with bravado and insolence, hoping like a teenaged boy being questioned by his parents why he came home at 2:00 AM to bluff their way through. It won’t work.

If the press thinks this “fake but accurate” paradigm will improve their credibility with the public they’re sadly mistaken. It just becomes that much easier for those of us in the Shadow Media to point out that the Emperor forgot something when he left the palace this morning.

Cross Posted at Blogger News Network

I’ve received several emails from people asking about my feelings regarding my brother riding Scott McClellen at the White House press briefing.

First of all, thank you for your emails and comments. Feedback like this is what separates blogs from the Mainstream Press. However, those expecting me to criticize or even critique what my brother does for ABC news will be disappointed.

I happen to know that, despite what you might think, my brother is a loyal American who loves this country as much as I do. Only good things can flow from that. His job is to ask questions of people in power. Only good things can flow from that. And if it upsets you about the way he does his job, don’t come to this site or email me. Go to the ABC website and talk to them. I am not responsible for how my brother performs his job.

I am responsible for the content of this site which will be unrelenting in its criticism of the MSM and its anti-Bush, anti-war bias - sentiments my brother mostly agreed with on Hugh Hewitt’s show earlier today. The only responsibility toward my brother that I have is the love and affection I feel toward him and his family and the tremendous pride I take in his professional accomplishments.

In a family of 10 children (9 of whom are more liberal than I am) you can imagine some of the dinner table discussions - especially when we were coming of age in the 1970’s. But whatever knock-down, drag-em-out fights that ensued we never lost our love and respect for each other. Blood is thicker than politics. Don’t believe me? Try coming here and dissing my brother…you’ll get an earful back.

Thanks to Hugh Hewitt for asking the tough questions that needed to be asked…and for the link!