Tuesday, 01 January 2008
ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF WHY YOU SHOULDN'T BELIEVE POLITICAL POLLS
I think it was W.C. Fields who said "why would anyone agree with a critic,
they don't even agree with each other".
With that in mind, I would like to show you the following Associated Press
item which I picked up from www.breitbart.com. It is about
political polls. Please read it through and see if it reminds you of
the W.C. Fields quote too:
THE RACE: The
presidential race for Democrats, Republicans in Iowa.
THE NUMBERS - DEMOCRATS (CNN-Opinion Research
Hillary Rodham Clinton, 33 percent
Barack Obama, 31
John Edwards, 22
THE NUMBERS - REPUBLICANS
Mitt Romney, 31
Mike Huckabee, 28 percent
Fred Thompson, 13
John McCain, 10
Rudy Giuliani, 8
Ron Paul, 8 percent
The poll shows a two-way race developing for the
Democratic nomination in Iowa, with Clinton and Obama in a dead-heat and support
for Edwards dropping. Previous polls in late December showed a tight three-way
race between the three candidates. This poll suggests Democratic voters in Iowa
see Clinton as the candidate who can win the general election and is most
experienced while they say Obama is the most likable and most honest candidate.
For Iowa's GOP race, Romney and Huckabee remain virtually tied; McCain, Thompson
and Giuliani still trail far behind.
The CNN-Opinion Research Corp. poll was conducted
Dec. 26-30. It included telephone interviews with 373 Republicans likely to vote
in the Iowa caucuses, with a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 5
percentage points; and 482 likely Democratic voters, with a margin of sampling
error of plus or minus 4.5 points.
THE RACE: The presidential race for Democrats,
Republicans in Iowa.
THE NUMBERSDEMOCRATS: (The Des Moines Register)
Barack Obama, 32 percent
Hillary Rodham Clinton, 25 percent
John Edwards, 24 percent
Bill Richardson, 6 percent
Mike Huckabee, 32 percent
Mitt Romney, 26 percent
John McCain, 13 percent
Fred Thompson, 9 percent
Ron Paul, 9 percent
Rudy Giuliani, 5 percent
An influx of first-time caucus-goers, including
political independents, helped Obama inch further ahead of Clinton. His support
increased from 28 percent in a Des Moines Register poll in November, while
Clinton's remained flat, at 25 percent. Edwards' performance was about the same
as in last month's survey. Obama's lead also is the largest of any of the
Democratic candidates in Register polling this year.
Among Republicans, the survey shows McCain
overtaking Giuliani to move into third place, up from his fifth in the November
survey. Giuliani, who has not campaigned as hard in Iowa as some of his rivals,
has fallen to sixth place. McCain is enjoying a resurgence of sorts in his
campaign, and is looking for a strong finish in Iowa to help him in next-up New
Hampshire, where he also has gained support.
The telephone poll for The Des Moines Register of
800 likely Democratic caucus-goers and 800 likely Republican caucus participants
was conducted Dec. 27-30. The survey has a margin of sampling error of plus or
minus 3.5 percentage points.
COMPLETE RESULTS: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?categoryiowapoll07.
Now, someone please explain again why I would take political polls seriously.
ROBERT COX ON KEITH OLBERMANN
Robert Cox is a veteran blogger who has a web site, www.olbermannwatch.com which takes Keith
Olbermann apart daily. It does so by deconstructing each of his shows
and criticizing their content and veracity.
Mr. Cox pretty obviously hates Olbermann's guts and is not at all shy about showing it. In that regard I think he
carries things way further than he should. Unfortunately, instead of just being insightful and
accurate Bob comes across as nasty and vindictive (part of
what he accuses Olbermann of being).
That said, however, it should also be pointed out that Olbermann gives Cox a
seemingly endless string of opportunities to do so. He is certainly the
most offensive cable talk show host I have ever seen. I consider him a
nightly disgrace for MSNBC and someone the network should be ashamed of.
As a matter of personal disclosure, I did a satirical piece for Bob Cox in
late 2006. It ridiculed Olbermann in what I thought was a
humorous way (I still do). Cox asked me some silly questions
about Keith Olbmerann which also attacked him, and I responded with
some silly answers which attacked him too.
In my opinion, Olbermann deserved to get the business
-- if for no other reason because his nightly bombing run is not skewered
by mainstream media for what it is. Someone should nail olbermann for being the
one-sided obnoxious farbissoner puss he is, so I did.
As a matter of further disclosure, after doing the Olbermann material an
anti-Bill O'Reilly site asked me to do the same for them. I agreed.
I would do satirical material on just about anyone on either side of the
It didn't happen because they then indicated that they wanted it to be a more
serious hit job. While I'm not a big fan of O'Reilly, I don't put him in
the same low-end league as Olbermann or anywhere close. So I declined.
In any event, Mr. Cox has compiled a top 10 (or should I say
bottom 10) list of the lies Keith Olbermann pumped out during 2007. It must
have been very hard to cull this down to 10, but he did it. I thought you might like
to see them. So here they are:
Keith Olbermann's Top Ten
Lies of 2007
It's time for our annual list of the worst, most
egregious, most outrageous lies from the infamous, deplorable Keith Olbermann.
It's the toughest job of the year: narrowing the list down to just ten. There is
so much to choose from! Be that as it may, the staff of Olbermann has caucused
and the votes are cast. Here are Keith Olbermann's Top Ten Lies of
#10 - Keith Olbermann just can't help itself when
it comes to Fox News. It's Extreme Olby: Envy Edition as hardly a day goes by
without some attack on a news channel that is actually successful. The usual
tactic is to claim something on Fox was untrue or a lie, when it wasn't. Or another favorite: make a sweeping claim that you
know is untrue, because it appeals to your blue blog base. But the #10
winner uses a more blatant technique: just make up something about
Fox, broadcast it as if it were the truth,
and never correct the record.
#9 - Olbermahn's diseased loathing for anyone to
the right of Fidel Castro--like his hatred of Fox--regularly sends KO into fits
of fantasy, where facts and truth are dispensible annoyances. So he'll, say,
invent totally fictitious
statistics to slander the American
Enterprise Institute. Just as he will misstate a whole fistful of
facts when it suits his purposes. This
syndrome also explains the lunatic statement that comes in at #9 in the
countdown: "Mister" Bush is the first President ever to fire US attorneys.
#8 - When Monkeymann gets worked up about
something, the truth just isn't good enough. It's much more effective when Olby
himself can create a phony quote and use that to make his dishonest points. You
know, like when he spent an entire segment berating Rudy for something he never
said? In our #8 entry, note how Herr
Olbermann pulls that same trick: to "prove" a point he cites a Patrick
Fitzgerald statement that turns out to be, well, imaginary.
#7 - You know that since we are on the threshhold
of O'Reilly attack #400, there had to be some doozies in 2007. There are
too many Olbermann
Lies about Bill O'Reilly to detail without running out of
space. We've selected this and this as our representative examples for #7.
#6 - Republicans beware. Edward R Olbermann will
cover up for Hillary and spike stories that paint her in a bad light. But if you
have an (R) after your name the Hsu is on the other foot. Bathtub Boy will run
endless scandal stories, and if the blue blogs don't give him enough ammunition,
then he can cook up Another Olbermann Lie or two. Governor Gibbons (R) learned
how truthful Olby's reports are: not very. So it is that lie #6 in our countdown finds Mr Merkle
berating Mitt Romney for something that--all together now--Romney never said!
Yes, another phony, doctored
quote from Olbermoronn.
#5 - As quickly as Herr Olbermann will rush to
attack other broadcasters, he is oh-so-careful not to upset his corporate
masters at A-Mess-NBC. He'll broadcast flat-out fabrications, like claiming Rudy
Giuliani's Presidential campaign is being run by--get ready for this--Fox's Roger Ailes. He'll even lie about the contents of a competitor's
blog. But our #5 entry shows Keith "Man on Fan" Olbermann at
his most desperate. So eager was he to protect a possible NBC hire (Rosie
O'Donnell) he doctored her
words (sound familiar?) to claim she
never compared US troops to terrorists. Then he blamed "Fox Noise"--another lie
to protect his own sorry butt, since the people who accused Rosie of the
troops/terrorism comparison were Joe Scarborough, Chris Matthews, and Howard
Fineman--not on Fox, but on MSNBC!
#4 - More lies about Fox News. We could do a top
ten list every month the way Oralmann spews them. Whether it's a smear of
Chris Wallace, or a slander of Brit Hume, the one thing you can trust about Monkeymann's attacks is
that you cannot trust Monkeymann's attacks. That's what made this #4: Keith
Olbermann contructs an ostentatious salvo at Fox over a leak. And guess what?
Every single statement he made about Fox News was false. Untrue. An elaborate edifice of
#3 - When Oralmann gets a bee in his bonnet, there
is nothing that will stand in the way of OlbySpin. So he will pretend Richard
Armitage never existed and assert that Karl Rove was an "original leaker" of Valerie Plame. To attack GWB, he'll invent a
nonexistent checklist of rules for Presidential
pardons. But his blatant dishonesty about
waterboarding is our #3 lie. Olby's duplicity about Daniel Levin was so
shamelessly barefaced that even the fawning mainstream media called him on it, something that gave John Gibson no end of
#2 - Did you know that Keith Olbermann doesn't indulge in personal attacks? Why no, he's above all that. Sure, tell that to Liz Claman. In #2 of our countdown, observe how Fat Ass, to fuel yet
another error-ridden critique of GWB, is willing to smear two writers: ridicule
their professions, lie about their success... There can be no doubt that Keith
Olbermann is The Model of a
And finally, here it is, the #1 Keith Olbermann
lie of 2007. In fact it bids fair to be the greatest lie of his sorry
career: "I'm not politically
DIVERSITY AMONG PALESTINIAN ARABS
It is pretty clear that just about all Palestinian Arabs in Gaza and Judea
and Samaria (the west bank) speak out against the existence of Israel.
They favor a) replacing it with am Arab-ruled country called
Palestine and b) subjugating, tossing out or killing every Jew who lives
This is due, in no small part, to the fact that anyone who speaks out any
other way will be killed in the street, probably along with the rest of his/her
Do all Palestinian Arabs like the nonstop hatred and killing? Of course
not, they are human beings. But god help them if they say so in
the "Palestinian territories."
Then we have the Palestinian Arabs who live in Israel. They are in a
place where they have more latitude to speak out as they truly feel.
So what do they say about which government they prefer to live under?
Here, from Daniel Pipes writing for the Jerusalem Post, is an insightful look
at this issue:
Palestinians have a hidden history of appreciating
Israel that contrasts with their better-known narrative of vilification and
The former has been particularly evident of late,
especially since Israel's prime minister, Ehud Olmert, floated a trial balloon
in October about transferring some Arab-dominated areas of eastern Jerusalem to
the Palestinian Authority. As he rhetorically asked about Israeli actions in
1967, "Was it necessary to annex the Shuafat refugee camp, al-Sawahra, Walajeh,
and other villages, and then to state that these are part of Jerusalem? One can
ask, I admit, some legitimate questions about this."
In one swoop, this statement transformed
pro-Israel statements by Palestinians (for a sampling, see my 2005 article, "The
Hell of Israel Is Better than the Paradise of Arafat") from the mostly
theoretical into the active and political.
Indeed, Olmert's musings prompted some belligerent
responses. As the title of a Globe and Mail news item puts it, "Some
Palestinians prefer life in Israel: In East Jerusalem, residents say they would
fight a handover to Abbas regime." The article offers the example of Nabil
Gheit, who, with two stints in Israeli prisons and posters of "the martyr Saddam
Hussein" over the cash register in his store, would be expected to cheer the
prospect of parts of eastern Jerusalem coming under PA control.
Not so. As mukhtar of Ras Khamis, near Shuafat,
Gheit dreads the PA and says he and others would fight a handover. "If there was
a referendum here, no one would vote to join the Palestinian Authority...There
would be another intifada to defend ourselves from the PA."
Two polls released last week, from Keevoon
Research, Strategy Communications, survey representative samples of adult
Israeli Arabs on the issue of joining the PA, and they corroborate what Gheit
says. Asked, "Would you prefer to be a citizen of Israel or of a new Palestinian
state?" 62 percent want to remain Israeli citizens and 14 percent want to join a
future Palestinian state. Asked, "Do you support transferring the Triangle [an
Arab-dominated area in northern Israel] to the Palestinian Authority?" 78
percent oppose the idea and 18 percent support it.
IGNORING THE don't-knows/refused, the ratios of
respondents are nearly identical preferring to stay within Israel - 82 percent
and 81 percent, respectively. Gheit exaggerates that "no one" wants to live in
the PA, but not by much. Thousands of Palestinian residents in Jerusalem who,
fearful of the PA, have applied for Israeli citizenship since Olmert's statement
further corroborate his point.
Why such affection for the state that Palestinians
famously revile in the media, in scholarship, classrooms, mosques, and
international bodies, that they terrorize on a daily basis? Best to let them
explain their motivations in direct quotations.
Financial considerations: "I don't want to have
any part in the PA. I want the health insurance, the schools, all the things we
get by living here," says Ranya Mohammed. "I'll go and live in Israel before
I'll stay here and live under the PA, even if it means taking an Israeli
passport. I have seen their suffering in the PA. We have a lot of privileges I'm
not ready to give up."
Law and order: Gazans, note Israeli-Arab
journalists Faiz Abbas and Muhammad Awwad, now "miss the Israelis, since Israel
is more merciful than [the Palestinian gunmen] who do not even know why they are
fighting and killing one another. It's like organized crime."
Raising children: "I want to live in peace and to
raise my children in an orderly school," says Jamil Sanduqa. "I don't want to
raise my child on throwing stones, or on Hamas."
A more predictable future: "I want to keep living
here with my wife and child without having to worry about our future. That's why
I want Israeli citizenship. I don't know what the future holds," says Samar
Others raise concerns about corruption, human
rights, and even self-esteem ("When the Jews talk about swapping me, it's as
though they are denying my right to be a person").
These earnest views do not repudiate the vicious
anti-Zionism that reigns in the Middle East, but they reveal that four-fifths of
those Palestinians who know Israel at first-hand understand the attractions of a
decent life in a decent country, a fact with important and positive
What does this mean? It means that when human beings are given a choice
of living like the human beings they are, or as murderous, hate-filled
automatons, they usually prefer living like human beings.
The saddest most frustrating factor is that Arabs in
Gaza and Judea/Samaria are no different than those who live in Israel.
If they happened to live in Israel it is a near-sure bet they would
feel the same way Israeli Arabs do.
So what is causing the difference? Why is it that the same people who
are so accepting of Israeli governance think so differently when they are
ruled by fatah, hamas and whoever has the most guns and mortars nearby?
Well, maybe if they had a chance - a real chance - to speak out we'd find out that
many of them don't think so differently at all.
Will they ever get that chance? Sorry, my crystal ball broke this
morning and I can't say. But I can hope.
MICHELLE'S NOTABLE QUOTABLES OF 2007: PART I
Michelle Malkin has put together what she considers the "notable quotables",
of 2007. They range from intelligent to dumb, friendly to scary and
proprietous to obscene. Some of them express opinions I agree with and
some that I do not.
The list is way too long for one post - mine or hers. So Ms Malkin has
separated them into two parts - the first half of the year and the second.
Also, instead of just posting the quotes (which she has done with some), Malkin
provides links which take you to the quotes along with additional material about
Here is the first half of her list. The second is coming up later
Malkins year-in-review: Notable quotables, Pt
A Yale professor named Dont tase me, bro as the
most memorable phrase of 2007 last
week. Heres the first of my
two-part list of obvious and not-so-obvious notable quotables, words, headlines,
and phrases of the year. Part I covers January through June. Part II will cover
July through December.
Obscene amenities. - WaPo troop-basher William Arkin.
Amenities International. - Sout al-Kuffars video smackdown of Arkin.
Ive lost my son but he became a part of
history. - Deb Dunham, mother of
fallen Marine Cpl. Jason Dunham, recipient of
the Medal of Honor.
The way ahead will be neither quick nor
easy. - Gen. David Petraeus on
the surge, testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee.
What Democrat Rep. Joe Baca called Rep. Loretta Sanchez, who quit the
Congressional Hispanic Caucus in protest.
- To make a thorough ass of oneself in public, coined by blogger Tim Blair.
This is both my first post to the Edwards blog and my
announcement that Im joining the presidential campaign for John Edwards for
2008. Ill be taking over the job of Blogmaster (mistress?) over the course of
the month of February. The main two questions this brings up are: Why me? And
why John Edwards? - Amanda
Marcottes first official post as chief John Edwards blogger
Godbag. Jeebus. - Favored religious-bashing slurs of Marcotte.
Christofascist. - Favored slur of Edwards second blogger, Melissa McEwan
Important action alert. - Coined by nutroots leader Chris Bower of MyDD to rally
supporters of John Edwards nutty bloggers.
He felt that what we were doing was just and
right. - Charles Cummings,
father of fallen hero Army PFC Branden Cummings, who died in an IED attack in
Chickengreens! - Blogger Tigerhawks nickname for Al Gore and his eco-sanctimonious
elites who Conserve as I say, not as I do.
Dr Evil escapes againdamn.
Better luck next
If at first you dont succeed
You cant kill pure evil. Like an
exorcism, you have to drive a stake through it.
- Huffington Post commenters reacting to the
suicide bomb attack on Bagram Air Force base during VP Cheneys
KICK MY ASS. - Sign worn by performance artist Mark McGowan, who crawled around the
streets of New York in a George Bush mask looking for unhinged moonbats to plant
their shoes on his backside for therapeutic purposes.
Whats wrong with sucking up to everybody?
- John McCain on the campaign
trail in Seattle.
Chocolate Jesus. - Cowardly artists attempt to offend people of faith.
I am John Doe. - Our response to the lying, flying, suing imams.
I have cancelled all speaking engagements. I am afraid to
leave my yard. I will never feel the same. I will never be the same.
- Techblogger Kathy Sierra gives
in to online threats.
I made the Vote Different ad. - The producer of the famous viral anti-Hillary Big Sister
ad steps forward.
He would do it all over again, and he loved being an
American. - Kristia Cavere,
sister of fallen hero Jonathan Cadavero, an Army medic killed on patrol in
Aww dont feel noways tired. Ive come too faarrr from
where I started frum. . . . Aww could have listened all day luung.
- Hillary Clinton in Selma,
No attack occurred. - the North Carolina Attorney Generals conclusion
regarding the Duke lacross players.
This is why Im hot
Catch me on the block
Another bitch another drop
16 bars, 24 pop
44 songs, nigga gimme
what you got
- from my post on Don Imus vs. the Billboard Hot Rap Tracks
Theres only one whore on this split-screen, and its you,
Mr. Shabazz. - My response to
hatemonger Malik Shabazzs attack on me as a political prostitute.
You know, when I walk into the Oval Office in January of
2009, Im afraid Im gonna lift up the rug and Im goin to see so much stuff
uh-nder thar . . . You know, what is it about us always havin to clean up after
people? . . . But this is not just going to be pickin up socks off the floor.
This is going to be cleanin up the government. - Hillary Clinton preaching at Al Sharptons
We should not surrender in the face of barbarism
- Joe Lieberman to Harry
As coverage of the Virginia Tech shooting continues to
unfold, AAJA urges all media to avoid using racial identifiers unless there is a
compelling or germane reason. -
Asian American Journalists Association grievance-mongers complaining about
coverage of VTech killer Cho Seung-Hui.
Verizon decided this week to end its support and
sponsorship of Akon. - Verizon
official Jim Gerace.
Im not serving you. - restaurant owner Jeff Ruby to O.J. Simpson
I dont feel like a hero, to be honest with you. I feel
like I did the right thing. But the real heroes are our men and women overseas,
and the people in our law enforcement who handled this
situation. - Brian Morgenstern,
the John Doe whistleblower who tipped of the feds to the Fort Dix Six jihadi
- John McCain cursing out John Cornyn over
12 million undocumented
Americans. - Harry Reids
description of the illegal alien population of the US.
Loud people. - Lindsay Grahams disdainful description of grass-roots opponents of
Talk radio is running America. We have to deal with that
problem. - The odious Trent
Clay pigeon. - Harry Reids last-ditch shamnesty ploy.
Bush Estrangement Syndrome. - Kathryn Lopezs term of un-endearment for the White
House after the shamnesty debacle.
I sincerely apologize to anyone I may have inadvertently
offended. The bag was a purchase I made as a tourist in China and I did not
realize the potentially hurtful nature of the slogan printed on
it. - Cameron Diaz apologizing
for carrying her Mao bag in Peru.
And by special commenter request
If the answer is build a fence Ive got two goats on my
place in Mississippi. There aint no fence big enough, high enough, strong
enough, that you can keep those goats in that fence.
Now people are at least as smart as goats, Lott
continued. Maybe not as agile. Build a fence. We should have a virtual fence.
Now one of the ways I keep those goats in the fence is I electrified them. Once
they got popped a couple of times they quit trying to jump it.
Im not proposing an electrified goat fence,
Lott added quickly, Im just trying, theres an analogy there.
- The odious Trent Lott striking out
HILLARY CLINTON'S IGNORANCE ABOUT PAKISTAN
"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a
fool than to open it and remove all doubt"
The above quote has been attributed to many people; Mark Twain, Abraham
Lincoln and Benjamin Franklin among them. But one thing whoever said it
first and everyone who said it afterwards has in common is that they have a
With this in mind, here is the latest foolish commentary from Hillary
Clinton, a woman who seems determined to singlehandedly elevate the art
form. It comes to us from the excellent web site www.powerlineblog.com:
Ms. Hillary does
comments on Ms. Hillary's recent discussions of events in Pakistan with Wolf
Blitzer and George Stephanopoulos, addressing the question: "How credible is
Hillary Clinton on Pakistan?" Houlahan writes:
"If President Musharraf wishes to stand
for election," [Senator Clinton] told Blitzer, "then he should abide by the
same rules that every other candidate will have to follow."
My immediate reaction was: "Did I hear that
As a Pakistan analyst, I know for a fact that
Pervez Musharraf doesn't wish to stand for election any time soon.
The upcoming elections are for the next
parliament. Musharraf was just elected president of Pakistan, overwhelmingly,
by popularly elected electors on Oct. 6. He's just begun his five-year term as
the president of the country. Why would he ever want to run for one seat in
parliament? It wouldn't make sense.
However, I checked the transcript of the
interview later. That's exactly what she said.
My next reaction was: "Maybe she misspoke.
Candidates do a lot of interviews. Not every sentence comes out the way they
want it to."
After all, Sen. Clinton is a candidate who is
running claiming big-time foreign policy knowledge and experience that she
says her closest opponents in the Democratic Primary don't have.
Pakistan? A nuclear power? A front-line ally in
the war on terror? A country that's been in the news an awful lot in the past
few months? "C'mon," I told myself. "A candidate with all of those advisors
has got to know at least the basics about Pakistan's political
No such luck.
Sunday morning, ABC's This Week ran an interview
George Stephanopoulos had done with Sen. Clinton on Friday.
The interview produced this gem:
Referring to a possible delay in the elections,
Sen. Clinton said: "I think it will be very difficult to have a real election.
You know, Nawaz Sharif [leader of the PML-N, an opposition party] has said
he's not going to compete. The PPP is in disarray with Benazir's
assassination. He [President Pervez Musharraf] could be the only person on the
ballot. I don't think that's a real election."
And then it hit me:
Sen. Clinton really didn't know that the
upcoming elections were for individual seats in Pakistan's parliament. She
actually believed that Bhutto, Nawaz and Musharraf would be facing off as
individual candidates for leadership of the country in the upcoming
Sen. Clinton didn't know that Nawaz Sharif isn't
allowed to run for office in Pakistan because of a felony conviction. She
didn't know that President Musharraf won't be on the ballot because he's
already been elected.
Sen. Clinton, a candidate for the leadership of
the free world, apparently doesn't know the first thing about the country
referred to by some as "the most dangerous place on earth."
A transcript of Senator Clinton's interview with
Blitzer is posted here; a video of
Senator Clinton's interview with Stephanopoulos interview is posted here. If any of the major
Republican presidential candidates had spoken in this manner about the scheduled
elections in Pakistan, surely an issue would be made of it.
And with this latest ignorance from Ms. Clinton comes my standard
lament: Where are media on this? How can they so blatantly protect
Senator Clinton and pretend they are objective?
Haven't the same media mercilessly attacked and ridiculed President Bush for
his painful lack of communications skills? Wouldn't it seem reasonable to
expect that the same media would offer us a word or two about Hillary Clinton's
combination of abject ignorance and willingness to thrust her chin out and state
that ignorance as fact?
Suppose the person who made those comments was Rudy Giuliani. Do
you think for a moment, for a nanosecond, that media would look the other way
and bury it for him?
But listen to them squeal like stuck pigs if you call them biased.
THE NEW YORK TIMES' VIEW OF U.S. SOLDIERS
P.J. Gladnick of www.newsbusters.org
has written an excellent piece about yesterday's New York Times editorial, which
essentially calls our soldiers along with our elected
administration war criminals.
This needs no commentary from me. It speaks for itself.
See if you agree:
NYT Editorial Accuses American
Soldiers of War Crimes
In what looks like an editorial authored by one of the more extreme members of the Democratic Underground, the New
York Times ended the year with a rabid leftwing rant that among other things
accused American soldiers of war crimes on a large scale:
In the years since 9/11, we have seen American
soldiers abuse, sexually humiliate, torment and murder prisoners in
Afghanistan and Iraq. A few have been punished, but their leaders have never
been called to account. We have seen mercenaries gun down Iraqi civilians with
no fear of prosecution. We have seen the president, sworn to defend the
Constitution, turn his powers on his own citizens, authorizing the
intelligence agencies to spy on Americans, wiretapping phones and intercepting
international e-mail messages without a warrant.
If you think these assertions are
outrageous, the Times' editorialist was only getting warmed up:
There are too many moments these days when we
cannot recognize our country. Sunday was one of them, as we read the account
in The Times of how men in some of the most trusted posts in the nation
plotted to cover up the torture of prisoners by Central Intelligence Agency
interrogators by destroying videotapes of their sickening behavior. It was
impossible to see the founding principles of the greatest democracy in the
contempt these men and their bosses showed for the Constitution, the rule of
law and human decency.
No mention in the editorial about Nancy Pelosi and
other congressional Democrats being briefed on waterboarding way back in 2002.
The main point of this editorial was to attack the Bush administration and
Republicans with absolutely no anger directed against actual
We have read accounts of how the governments
top lawyers huddled in secret after the attacks in New York and Washington and
plotted ways to circumvent the Geneva Conventions and both American and
international law to hold anyone the president chose indefinitely without
charges or judicial review.
Those same lawyers then twisted other laws
beyond recognition to allow Mr. Bush to turn intelligence agents into
torturers, to force doctors to abdicate their professional oaths and
responsibilities to prepare prisoners for abuse, and then to monitor the
torment to make sure it didnt go just a bit too far and actually kill
The White House used the fear of terrorism and
the sense of national unity to ram laws through Congress that gave
law-enforcement agencies far more power than they truly needed to respond to
the threat and at the same time fulfilled the imperial fantasies of Vice
President Dick Cheney and others determined to use the tragedy of 9/11 to
arrogate as much power as they could.
So according to this New York Times editorial the
real problem isn't the terrorists themselves but the fear of terrorism that was
used to fulfill the "imperial fantasies" of Vice President Cheney and other EVIL
Republicans in their drive to acquire power. You can almost hear the violins
playing as the Times laments the fate of the poor little terrorists at the hand
of the Bush administration:
Hundreds of men, swept up on the battlefields of
Afghanistan and Iraq, were thrown into a prison in Guantnamo Bay, Cuba, so
that the White House could claim they were beyond the reach of American laws.
Prisoners are held there with no hope of real justice, only the chance to face
a kangaroo court where evidence and the names of their accusers are kept
secret, and where they are not permitted to talk about the abuse they have
suffered at the hands of American jailers.
The editorial concludes with a plea to in effect
elect a Democrat as president to correct all the horrible misdeeds committed,
according to the fantasies of this editorialist, by the Bush
These are not the only shocking abuses of
President Bushs two terms in office, made in the name of fighting terrorism.
There is much more so much that the next president will have a full agenda
simply discovering all the wrongs that have been done and then righting
We can only hope that this time, unlike 2004,
American voters will have the wisdom to grant the awesome powers of the
presidency to someone who has the integrity, principle and decency to use them
honorably. Then when we look in the mirror as a nation, we will see, once
again, the reflection of the United States of America.
Reading this warped editorial, one has to wonder
what the DU screen name of this author is over at the Democratic
You tell me. Who came out better in this editorial;
our troops or the people they are fighting?
The one positive here is educational in nature. You now know
exactly what the New York Times thinks of our military.