MAJOR UPDATE:
Also credited to Ace.
The suspect has been found and questioned by the Secret Service.
URGENT UPDATE:
Thanks for the Memory to Ace of Spades HQ:
The latest regarding this story from the Washington Times is that they still haven't caught him: He's completely disappeared!
U.S. law enforcement officials have been unable to locate an upstate New York man wanted for questioning regarding threats to President Bush.
Original Post, 21 September 2004:
Thanks for the Memory to Drudge.
City alert in threat to Bush
BY MICHELE McPHEE and LEO STANDORA
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITERS
Lawrence Ward
The Secret Service clamped down on midtown last night to protect President Bush from a possible assassin armed with a hunting rifle.
Lawrence Ward, 59, left his upstate New York home Wednesday with a .30-30 lever-action hunting rifle in the trunk of his car, telling a neighbor, "I'm not coming back."
Inside his house in Bainbridge was a picture of Bush with the words "Dead Man" spray-painted near it, law enforcement authorities said.
Bush was in town for a fund-raiser at the Sheraton New York before speaking today at the UN General Assembly.
The Secret Service deemed Ward, a software engineer, such a "credible threat" that a three-square-block chunk of midtown was cordoned off.
Secret Service agents and city cops patrolled the area looking for anything suspicious.
Ward's ex-wife, Judith Ward, 59, who lives in Connecticut, told the Secret Service she thinks her former husband "is very dangerous and capable of killing someone and/or committing suicide."
She said Ward "is obsessed with weapons, [Oklahoma City bomber] Timothy McVeigh and the book 'The Dead Zone' - a novel about the stalking and attempted assassination of a presidential candidate," according to a Secret Service document.
The document, reviewed by the Daily News, said Ward sent his ex-wife a CD that mentions killing both Bush and Democratic rival John Kerry.
He also was said to be "obsessed" with his 19-year-old daughter, Priscilla Jane.
Judith Ward told The News she divorced her husband four years ago after 18 years of marriage because "he was a wife-beater and other things I don't want to talk about."
Authorities said Ward has a criminal past dating to 1991, including an indecent sexual proposal charge.
The neighbor in Bainbridge, a community about 40miles northeast of Binghamton, told authorities that Ward "frequently spoke of 'fighting the system' and other anti-government topics."
The neighbor said Ward gave him his house keys and told him to help himself. He then drove off in a blue 1997 Toyota sedan with the New York license plate BRF-6546.
Two days later, the neighbor went into the house, found the photo of Bush and called police.
Please pray for the safety of the President, the Secret Service agents, any innocent bystanders, and even this man. He's obviously mentally disturbed, and the ideal outcome would be that he spends a long, long time in a secure facility.
Tuesday, September 21, 2004
No Moore, No Less
I received the following email, and thought it was a great idea!
PUBLISHER SPONSORING "DVD BUY-BACK" PROGRAM TO KEEP AMERICAN HOMES SAFE FROM MICHAEL MOORE'S DANGEROUS PROPAGANDA
Similar to Gun Buy-Backs, World Ahead Publishing Exchanges "Fahrenheit 9/11" for Copies of THANK YOU, PRESIDENT BUSH
LOS ANGELES, September 17, 2004 - In an effort to ensure the safety of American homes, World Ahead Publishing, publisher of THANK YOU, PRESIDENT BUSH, announces its Fahrenheit 9/11 DVD Buy-Back program for U.S. purchasers of Michael Moore's documentary. In urban areas, city leaders periodically sponsor gun "buy-back" programs to help reduce gun violence. Similarly, the Fahrenheit 9/11 DVD Buy-Back program is designed to protect Americans from harm, especially young children who might accidentally slip this dangerous propaganda into the living room DVD player.
Beginning October 5th, the day Moore's documentary goes on sale, World Ahead Publishing will offer citizens the opportunity to exchange their copies of Fahrenheit 9/11 for THANK YOU PRESIDENT BUSH: REFLECTIONS ON THE WAR ON TERROR, DEFENSE OF THE FAMILY, AND THE REVIVAL OF THE ECONOMY, with no questions asked.
Unlike Moore's film, which deceptively splices film footage to score its points, Thank You, President Bush discusses the facts. This book's all-star list of contributors includes Art Laffer, the father of supply-side economics; George Shultz, former Secretary of State; James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family; and Bill Bennett, former Secretary of Education. Vice President Dick Cheney also contributes a chapter on foreign policy, and the President's brother, Gov. Jeb Bush, pens a moving and personal introduction. All 29 writers are experts in their
topics, addressing such important issues as national security, the economy,
and social policy in straightforward language.
"Moore's work isn't a documentary. It's a dangerous weapon that shouldn't be left lying around the house," says Aman Verjee, co-editor of the anthology. "Send us Moore's lies and we'll give you the truth on President Bush's record and policies. We want to give people who unsuspectingly buy Moore's propaganda a chance to trade it in for a book that's positive and insightful," added Verjee. "This book sets the
record straight: George W. Bush deserves more than another term in office; he
deserves our gratitude."
For the mailing address and the terms and conditions of the buy-back program, go to www.worldaheadpublishing.com.
ABOUT WORLD AHEAD PUBLISHING
World Ahead Publishing is a privately-held, California-based corporation with a growing coterie of authors who advocate individual liberty and free markets. World Ahead believes that freedom is the inalienable right of all human beings but the spread of liberty is by no means a foregone conclusion-individual freedom and the institutions that make it possible, including capitalism itself, face risks from
reactionary and powerful interests. To that end, World Ahead Publishing seeks to publish thought-provoking nonfiction books exploring the significant economic, political, and security issues facing the nation and the world. Two other titles will debut in the second half of 2004, and seven new books are planned for 2005-2006.
For more information: www.worldaheadpublishing.com
When I read the gun buyback comparison, I couldn't help but think, DVDs don't deceive people, Michael Moore deceives people!
PUBLISHER SPONSORING "DVD BUY-BACK" PROGRAM TO KEEP AMERICAN HOMES SAFE FROM MICHAEL MOORE'S DANGEROUS PROPAGANDA
Similar to Gun Buy-Backs, World Ahead Publishing Exchanges "Fahrenheit 9/11" for Copies of THANK YOU, PRESIDENT BUSH
LOS ANGELES, September 17, 2004 - In an effort to ensure the safety of American homes, World Ahead Publishing, publisher of THANK YOU, PRESIDENT BUSH, announces its Fahrenheit 9/11 DVD Buy-Back program for U.S. purchasers of Michael Moore's documentary. In urban areas, city leaders periodically sponsor gun "buy-back" programs to help reduce gun violence. Similarly, the Fahrenheit 9/11 DVD Buy-Back program is designed to protect Americans from harm, especially young children who might accidentally slip this dangerous propaganda into the living room DVD player.
Beginning October 5th, the day Moore's documentary goes on sale, World Ahead Publishing will offer citizens the opportunity to exchange their copies of Fahrenheit 9/11 for THANK YOU PRESIDENT BUSH: REFLECTIONS ON THE WAR ON TERROR, DEFENSE OF THE FAMILY, AND THE REVIVAL OF THE ECONOMY, with no questions asked.
Unlike Moore's film, which deceptively splices film footage to score its points, Thank You, President Bush discusses the facts. This book's all-star list of contributors includes Art Laffer, the father of supply-side economics; George Shultz, former Secretary of State; James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family; and Bill Bennett, former Secretary of Education. Vice President Dick Cheney also contributes a chapter on foreign policy, and the President's brother, Gov. Jeb Bush, pens a moving and personal introduction. All 29 writers are experts in their
topics, addressing such important issues as national security, the economy,
and social policy in straightforward language.
"Moore's work isn't a documentary. It's a dangerous weapon that shouldn't be left lying around the house," says Aman Verjee, co-editor of the anthology. "Send us Moore's lies and we'll give you the truth on President Bush's record and policies. We want to give people who unsuspectingly buy Moore's propaganda a chance to trade it in for a book that's positive and insightful," added Verjee. "This book sets the
record straight: George W. Bush deserves more than another term in office; he
deserves our gratitude."
For the mailing address and the terms and conditions of the buy-back program, go to www.worldaheadpublishing.com.
ABOUT WORLD AHEAD PUBLISHING
World Ahead Publishing is a privately-held, California-based corporation with a growing coterie of authors who advocate individual liberty and free markets. World Ahead believes that freedom is the inalienable right of all human beings but the spread of liberty is by no means a foregone conclusion-individual freedom and the institutions that make it possible, including capitalism itself, face risks from
reactionary and powerful interests. To that end, World Ahead Publishing seeks to publish thought-provoking nonfiction books exploring the significant economic, political, and security issues facing the nation and the world. Two other titles will debut in the second half of 2004, and seven new books are planned for 2005-2006.
For more information: www.worldaheadpublishing.com
When I read the gun buyback comparison, I couldn't help but think, DVDs don't deceive people, Michael Moore deceives people!
Monday, September 20, 2004
CBS: As Impartial as a Russian Olympic Judge
Thanks for the Memory to Luciane Via Ace of Spades HQ.
Kerry Aid Contacted Burkett on CBS' Advice
Associated Press
NEW YORK - At the behest of CBS, an adviser to John Kerry said he talked to a central figure in the controversy over President Bush's National Guard service shortly before disputed documents were released.
Do tell.
Joe Lockhart denied any connection between the presidential campaign and the papers. (Uh huh. The way things have been going in this case, buddy, you might understand if we view this claim... skeptically.)Lockhart, the second Kerry ally to confirm contact with retired Texas National Guard officer Bill Burkett, said he made the call at the suggestion of CBS producer Mary Mapes.
It's a good thing the media is so unbiased, or we might think Mapes was trying to help Kerry.
"He had some advice on how to deal with the Vietnam issue and the Swift boat" allegations, Lockhart said Monday, referring to GOP-fueled accusations that Kerry exaggerated his Vietnam War record. "He said these guys play tough and we have to put the Vietnam experience into context and have Kerry talk about it more."
You're sure he didn't saying anything about "fighting fire with fire, even if you have to start the fire yourself?
Lockhart said he thanked Burkett for his advice after a three to four minute call.
Lockhart said he does not recall talking to Burkett about Bush's Guard records. "It's baseless to say the Kerry campaign had anything to do with this," he said.
Then why are we talking to you? The fact that you called him, on CBS' advice, right in the middle of the whole mess, you don't consider that a bit... suspicious?
CBS News apologized Monday for a "mistake in judgment" in its story questioning Bush's Guard service, claiming it was misled by the source of documents that several experts have dismissed as fakes.
Burkett admitted this weekend to CBS that he lied about obtaining the documents from another former National Guard member, the network said. CBS hasn't been able to conclusively tell how he got them, or even whether they're fakes or not.
Kerry ally Max Cleland, a former Georgia senator, also said he had a brief conversation last month with Burkett, who told him he had information about Bush to counter charges against Kerry's Vietnam War service. Cleland said he gave Burkett's name and phone number to the campaign's research department.
But... but... I thought it was "...baseless to say the Kerry campaign had anything to do with this"! What is this your telling us?
Kerry spokesman David Ginsberg said nobody in the campaign's research department followed up on Burkett's offer of information.
Again, we're a bit skeptical, given how many times we've been lied to in this whole mess.
Lockhart said Mapes asked him the weekend before the story broke to call Burkett. "She basically said there's a guy who is being helpful on the story who wants to talk to you," Lockhart said, adding that it was common knowledge that CBS was working on a story raising questions about Bush's Guard service. Mapes told him there were some records "that might move the story forward. She didn't tell me what they said."
That's the part of this story that galls me to no end. Forget the direct link to a Kerry campaign worker. It's possible, but not likely, that he acted independently, and that they really ARE telling the truth (for once) when they claim a lack of collusion.
But the fact that Mapes, the CBS Producer of the story, called a member of the campaign staff of one of the two candidates, with information she thought would help him defeat the other candidate, nails the lid in the coffin of any claims to impartiality on the part of CBS.
I repeat,
This nails the lid in the coffin of any claims to impartiality on the part of CBS.
Oh, THAT media bias.
UPDATE:
Thanks for the Memory to reader Mark at Ace.
Apparently, even Mapes' own FATHER recognizes her as a DNC Shill.
Ouch.
UPDATE 2:
Thanks for the Memory to Random Birkel via Ace of Spades.
Apparently Joe Lockhart isn't the only member Kerry camp talking about contact with Burkett. In an interview on MSNBC's Hardball (the most poorly named program on TV), Tony Coelho claims that the DNC saw the Burkett documents, but suspected they were fakes.
Which raises a couple of questions in my mind: If you knew they were fakes, why didn't you say so when this story first broke? Hoping that little tidbit wouldn't come out? Hmmmm? And if you knew Burnett was passing fake documents, why didn't you warn Kerry's staff not to take his advice on ANYTHING?????!!!!!
In trying to exhonorate themselves, the DNC just sinks deeper into this. A little bit of advice: When you're up to your neck in quicksand, STOP STRUGGLING!
UPDATE 3:
Again via Ace of Spades.
This Article from USA Today is the most damning yet. It implies that Burkett agreed to give CBS the documents only on condition that they arrange a meeting between him and the Kerry camp!
Dan Rather should quit now. Hey, at least he'll have a job as a press aid to Kerry.
Kerry Aid Contacted Burkett on CBS' Advice
Associated Press
NEW YORK - At the behest of CBS, an adviser to John Kerry said he talked to a central figure in the controversy over President Bush's National Guard service shortly before disputed documents were released.
Do tell.
Joe Lockhart denied any connection between the presidential campaign and the papers. (Uh huh. The way things have been going in this case, buddy, you might understand if we view this claim... skeptically.)Lockhart, the second Kerry ally to confirm contact with retired Texas National Guard officer Bill Burkett, said he made the call at the suggestion of CBS producer Mary Mapes.
It's a good thing the media is so unbiased, or we might think Mapes was trying to help Kerry.
"He had some advice on how to deal with the Vietnam issue and the Swift boat" allegations, Lockhart said Monday, referring to GOP-fueled accusations that Kerry exaggerated his Vietnam War record. "He said these guys play tough and we have to put the Vietnam experience into context and have Kerry talk about it more."
You're sure he didn't saying anything about "fighting fire with fire, even if you have to start the fire yourself?
Lockhart said he thanked Burkett for his advice after a three to four minute call.
Lockhart said he does not recall talking to Burkett about Bush's Guard records. "It's baseless to say the Kerry campaign had anything to do with this," he said.
Then why are we talking to you? The fact that you called him, on CBS' advice, right in the middle of the whole mess, you don't consider that a bit... suspicious?
CBS News apologized Monday for a "mistake in judgment" in its story questioning Bush's Guard service, claiming it was misled by the source of documents that several experts have dismissed as fakes.
Burkett admitted this weekend to CBS that he lied about obtaining the documents from another former National Guard member, the network said. CBS hasn't been able to conclusively tell how he got them, or even whether they're fakes or not.
Kerry ally Max Cleland, a former Georgia senator, also said he had a brief conversation last month with Burkett, who told him he had information about Bush to counter charges against Kerry's Vietnam War service. Cleland said he gave Burkett's name and phone number to the campaign's research department.
But... but... I thought it was "...baseless to say the Kerry campaign had anything to do with this"! What is this your telling us?
Kerry spokesman David Ginsberg said nobody in the campaign's research department followed up on Burkett's offer of information.
Again, we're a bit skeptical, given how many times we've been lied to in this whole mess.
Lockhart said Mapes asked him the weekend before the story broke to call Burkett. "She basically said there's a guy who is being helpful on the story who wants to talk to you," Lockhart said, adding that it was common knowledge that CBS was working on a story raising questions about Bush's Guard service. Mapes told him there were some records "that might move the story forward. She didn't tell me what they said."
That's the part of this story that galls me to no end. Forget the direct link to a Kerry campaign worker. It's possible, but not likely, that he acted independently, and that they really ARE telling the truth (for once) when they claim a lack of collusion.
But the fact that Mapes, the CBS Producer of the story, called a member of the campaign staff of one of the two candidates, with information she thought would help him defeat the other candidate, nails the lid in the coffin of any claims to impartiality on the part of CBS.
I repeat,
This nails the lid in the coffin of any claims to impartiality on the part of CBS.
Oh, THAT media bias.
UPDATE:
Thanks for the Memory to reader Mark at Ace.
Apparently, even Mapes' own FATHER recognizes her as a DNC Shill.
Ouch.
UPDATE 2:
Thanks for the Memory to Random Birkel via Ace of Spades.
Apparently Joe Lockhart isn't the only member Kerry camp talking about contact with Burkett. In an interview on MSNBC's Hardball (the most poorly named program on TV), Tony Coelho claims that the DNC saw the Burkett documents, but suspected they were fakes.
Which raises a couple of questions in my mind: If you knew they were fakes, why didn't you say so when this story first broke? Hoping that little tidbit wouldn't come out? Hmmmm? And if you knew Burnett was passing fake documents, why didn't you warn Kerry's staff not to take his advice on ANYTHING?????!!!!!
In trying to exhonorate themselves, the DNC just sinks deeper into this. A little bit of advice: When you're up to your neck in quicksand, STOP STRUGGLING!
UPDATE 3:
Again via Ace of Spades.
This Article from USA Today is the most damning yet. It implies that Burkett agreed to give CBS the documents only on condition that they arrange a meeting between him and the Kerry camp!
Dan Rather should quit now. Hey, at least he'll have a job as a press aid to Kerry.
Rather Ironic
Thanks for the Memory to Little Green Footballs via Ace of Spades HQ.
This is a picture an LGF reader took of a CBS News van in NYC:
The small sign under the CBS News sign reads, "The only bush I trust is my own."
Ha ha ha. How clever. Oh, THAT Liberal Media Bias.
Ironically enough, the only CBS News I trust is... ummm....
This is a picture an LGF reader took of a CBS News van in NYC:
The small sign under the CBS News sign reads, "The only bush I trust is my own."
Ha ha ha. How clever. Oh, THAT Liberal Media Bias.
Ironically enough, the only CBS News I trust is... ummm....
U of O College Republicans Cry "Fowl!" at DeFazio Staffer's Behavior
Thanks for the Memory to to Jim Peterson, local GOP leader, who forwarded this press release from the UofO College Republicans to me:
Media Advisory
September 18,2004
Contact: Matt Lawrence
Chicken Ruffles DeFazio’s Feathers
Albany, OR – Apparently, some people can’t take a joke.
Last month, the Oregon College Republicans began a campaign of sorts against Democratic Congressman Peter DeFazio. Upset over DeFazio’s lack of willingness to debate his opponent, Republican challenger Jim Feldkamp, the CRs began using a chicken suit to try and goad the reluctant Democrat into accepting more debates.
To date, the only debates accepted by DeFazio are scheduled for October 20 – five days after ballots are dropped.
“We felt that Mr. DeFazio was deliberately pushing the debate back as far as he could,” College Republicans Co-Chair Matt Lawrence said. “He claimed his Congressional schedule made it too difficult, but we know that they adjourn in early October.”
Thursday, DeFazio made some appearances in Albany. One of the first was a radio interview at KGAL’s downtown studio.
Unfortunately for DeFazio, The Chicken decided to stop in and watch the interview as it was in progress. The Chicken even had signs with questions written on them that DeFazio had previously refused to answer.
Once the interview was over, DeFazio and his staffers literally manhandled the chicken, threatening him and his family, and displaying the type of conduct not normally expected of statesmen and Congressional staffers.
“DeFazio and his staffers totally snapped,” Lawrence said. “I think it’s safe to say we really ruffled their feathers.”
The Chicken has subsequently reported receiving several prank phone calls at his house. He has been severely traumatized by the whole experience, and is currently seeking therapy as a result.
“I don’t know why Mr. DeFazio and his staffers would threaten me and my family. My little chicks have never done anything to hurt him or anybody else,” The Chicken said. “Cluck, cluck, cluck.”
Now, obviously, there is a bit of tongue-in-cheek humor at the end of the article, but some of it makes some serious allegations. So I called Matt for further details. Here's what I found out:
The incident occurred at an ountdoor event held by KGAL NewsTalk Radio 1580 AM in Albany, outside their studios. The interview is with KGAL host Jim Willhight, and is set to air today at 1:00 PM PDT. The public was welcome, and encouraged to come and ask questions of the congressman. So the CR's sent the Chicken and a few other members to the event. Matt said that DeFazio exited the event looking upset, so I'm looking forward to hearing it.
While they were entering the area where the interview was being held, and again when the left, the CR's were confronted by an individual who seemed quite displeased with his presence, and wanted to know what questions they had to ask (Matt's words were that this individual "got in the face" of one of the CR's). This individual then informed the CR that he would find out who he was, who his family was, and where he lived. He then left with DeFazio, leading the CR's to believe he was a DeFazio staffer. The CR in question has since received several "prank" calls, all of which have been recorded.
According to Matt, no mention of this incident has been made by KGAL or any of the local and state news sources they've sent it to. I doubt it will. Unfortunately, unless they got it on tape or video, it's the CR's word against DeFazio's. But while I'm hesitant to make a "post hoc" leap regarding any connection between the incident and the prank calls (at least not unless I have a chance to hear them), I wouldn't be surprised if there is a link.
More info as available.
Media Advisory
September 18,2004
Contact: Matt Lawrence
Chicken Ruffles DeFazio’s Feathers
Albany, OR – Apparently, some people can’t take a joke.
Last month, the Oregon College Republicans began a campaign of sorts against Democratic Congressman Peter DeFazio. Upset over DeFazio’s lack of willingness to debate his opponent, Republican challenger Jim Feldkamp, the CRs began using a chicken suit to try and goad the reluctant Democrat into accepting more debates.
To date, the only debates accepted by DeFazio are scheduled for October 20 – five days after ballots are dropped.
“We felt that Mr. DeFazio was deliberately pushing the debate back as far as he could,” College Republicans Co-Chair Matt Lawrence said. “He claimed his Congressional schedule made it too difficult, but we know that they adjourn in early October.”
Thursday, DeFazio made some appearances in Albany. One of the first was a radio interview at KGAL’s downtown studio.
Unfortunately for DeFazio, The Chicken decided to stop in and watch the interview as it was in progress. The Chicken even had signs with questions written on them that DeFazio had previously refused to answer.
Once the interview was over, DeFazio and his staffers literally manhandled the chicken, threatening him and his family, and displaying the type of conduct not normally expected of statesmen and Congressional staffers.
“DeFazio and his staffers totally snapped,” Lawrence said. “I think it’s safe to say we really ruffled their feathers.”
The Chicken has subsequently reported receiving several prank phone calls at his house. He has been severely traumatized by the whole experience, and is currently seeking therapy as a result.
“I don’t know why Mr. DeFazio and his staffers would threaten me and my family. My little chicks have never done anything to hurt him or anybody else,” The Chicken said. “Cluck, cluck, cluck.”
Now, obviously, there is a bit of tongue-in-cheek humor at the end of the article, but some of it makes some serious allegations. So I called Matt for further details. Here's what I found out:
The incident occurred at an ountdoor event held by KGAL NewsTalk Radio 1580 AM in Albany, outside their studios. The interview is with KGAL host Jim Willhight, and is set to air today at 1:00 PM PDT. The public was welcome, and encouraged to come and ask questions of the congressman. So the CR's sent the Chicken and a few other members to the event. Matt said that DeFazio exited the event looking upset, so I'm looking forward to hearing it.
While they were entering the area where the interview was being held, and again when the left, the CR's were confronted by an individual who seemed quite displeased with his presence, and wanted to know what questions they had to ask (Matt's words were that this individual "got in the face" of one of the CR's). This individual then informed the CR that he would find out who he was, who his family was, and where he lived. He then left with DeFazio, leading the CR's to believe he was a DeFazio staffer. The CR in question has since received several "prank" calls, all of which have been recorded.
According to Matt, no mention of this incident has been made by KGAL or any of the local and state news sources they've sent it to. I doubt it will. Unfortunately, unless they got it on tape or video, it's the CR's word against DeFazio's. But while I'm hesitant to make a "post hoc" leap regarding any connection between the incident and the prank calls (at least not unless I have a chance to hear them), I wouldn't be surprised if there is a link.
More info as available.
Thursday, September 16, 2004
Another Example of Jackbooted Right Wing Thugs and Their Freedom Loving Leftist Victims
Only, Y'know, Not:
Three-year-old Sophia Parlock cries while seated on the shoulders of her father, Phil Parlock, after having their Bush-Cheney sign torn up by Kerry-Edwards supporters on Thursday, Sept. 16, 2004, at the Tri-State Airport in Huntington, W.Va. Democratic vice presidential candidate John Edwards (news - web sites) made a brief stop at the airport as he concluded his two-day bus tour to locations in West Virginia and Ohio. (AP Photo/Randy Snyder)
Thanks for the Memory to Curtis at a_sdf.
Update:
As Aaron at Free Will points out, the jerk on their right, the one who seems to be holding remnants of the sign, is wearing a Union shirt -- apparently the IUPAT, the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades. I think it reflects well on their trade, don't you?
UPDATE 1:
Thanks for the Memory to reader Kat in Missouri over at the Rottie.
IUPAT Issues Apology.
Does this mean your thug will be turning himself in to the authorities?
As I've discussed before, this isn't the first time the left has acted like this. I doubt it will be the last.
UPDATE 2:
Amazing how quickly I was proven right.
Thanks for the Memory to Mr. Minority.
UPDATE 3:
Emily at It Comes in Pints? has a different conservative reaction to this, as do several readers over at the Rottie. And upon further reflection, I have to concede their point. The gentleman whose sign was torn up is a known conservative agitator, and this is the third presidential election in a row in which he's been involved in an incident like this. And it WAS irresponsible of him to take his 3-year old into the middle of a hostile crowd. And the Union thug is an aberration. Most people, even rabid supporters of one cause or the other, would not intentionally cause a child harm or trauma.
But just because he's not the norm does not mean he's necessarily the only one of his kind out there. Just look at the incidents I catalog in this post from August, or this post from Michelle Malkin today (some overlap occurs), or the link above in update 2. These "isolated incidents" start to snowball after a while.
I guess what irks me most of all is the hypocrisy of the Left, the blatant, unabashed willingness to accuse the Right of the very things they themselves do. Look at all these incidents. I've had one of my own -- admittedly not violent, but it was definitely the action of someone willing to take unethical action in order to deprive me of my freedom of expression -- and yet the daily rhetoric from the Left is about conservative being Nazis, about the threat to personal freedoms, especially freedom of expression. They do this without any sense of self-irony whatsoever, without shame, without batting an eye.
"The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."
Three-year-old Sophia Parlock cries while seated on the shoulders of her father, Phil Parlock, after having their Bush-Cheney sign torn up by Kerry-Edwards supporters on Thursday, Sept. 16, 2004, at the Tri-State Airport in Huntington, W.Va. Democratic vice presidential candidate John Edwards (news - web sites) made a brief stop at the airport as he concluded his two-day bus tour to locations in West Virginia and Ohio. (AP Photo/Randy Snyder)
Thanks for the Memory to Curtis at a_sdf.
Update:
As Aaron at Free Will points out, the jerk on their right, the one who seems to be holding remnants of the sign, is wearing a Union shirt -- apparently the IUPAT, the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades. I think it reflects well on their trade, don't you?
UPDATE 1:
Thanks for the Memory to reader Kat in Missouri over at the Rottie.
IUPAT Issues Apology.
Does this mean your thug will be turning himself in to the authorities?
As I've discussed before, this isn't the first time the left has acted like this. I doubt it will be the last.
UPDATE 2:
Amazing how quickly I was proven right.
Thanks for the Memory to Mr. Minority.
UPDATE 3:
Emily at It Comes in Pints? has a different conservative reaction to this, as do several readers over at the Rottie. And upon further reflection, I have to concede their point. The gentleman whose sign was torn up is a known conservative agitator, and this is the third presidential election in a row in which he's been involved in an incident like this. And it WAS irresponsible of him to take his 3-year old into the middle of a hostile crowd. And the Union thug is an aberration. Most people, even rabid supporters of one cause or the other, would not intentionally cause a child harm or trauma.
But just because he's not the norm does not mean he's necessarily the only one of his kind out there. Just look at the incidents I catalog in this post from August, or this post from Michelle Malkin today (some overlap occurs), or the link above in update 2. These "isolated incidents" start to snowball after a while.
I guess what irks me most of all is the hypocrisy of the Left, the blatant, unabashed willingness to accuse the Right of the very things they themselves do. Look at all these incidents. I've had one of my own -- admittedly not violent, but it was definitely the action of someone willing to take unethical action in order to deprive me of my freedom of expression -- and yet the daily rhetoric from the Left is about conservative being Nazis, about the threat to personal freedoms, especially freedom of expression. They do this without any sense of self-irony whatsoever, without shame, without batting an eye.
"The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."
Another Purple Heart
This Time for Shooting Himself in the Foot.
Thanks for the Memory to Tim Blair via Free Will.
John Kerry talked to Pro-Kerry pundit Don Imus today, and even Imus wasn't impressed:
"I was just back in my office banging my head on the jukebox," Mr. Imus said. "This is my candidate, and ... I don't know what he's talking about."
And the best quote, as pointed out by both my sources, was this exchange:
KERRY: I mean, what you ought to be doing and what everybody in America ought to be doing today is not asking me; they ought to be asking the president, What is your plan? What's your plan, Mr. President, to stop these kids from being killed? What's your plan, Mr. President, to get the other countries in there? What's your plan to have 90 percent of the casualties and 90 percent of the cost being carried by America?
IMUS: We're asking you because you want to be president.
Finally a Democrat who gets what we Republicans have been saying all along.
Thanks for the Memory to Tim Blair via Free Will.
John Kerry talked to Pro-Kerry pundit Don Imus today, and even Imus wasn't impressed:
"I was just back in my office banging my head on the jukebox," Mr. Imus said. "This is my candidate, and ... I don't know what he's talking about."
And the best quote, as pointed out by both my sources, was this exchange:
KERRY: I mean, what you ought to be doing and what everybody in America ought to be doing today is not asking me; they ought to be asking the president, What is your plan? What's your plan, Mr. President, to stop these kids from being killed? What's your plan, Mr. President, to get the other countries in there? What's your plan to have 90 percent of the casualties and 90 percent of the cost being carried by America?
IMUS: We're asking you because you want to be president.
Finally a Democrat who gets what we Republicans have been saying all along.
Welcome to Wittenburg
Thanks for the Memory to It Comes in Pints?
The Memogate controversy has garnered attention in Belfast -- and they are paying attention to the fact that it was bloggers who made it happen.
I highly recommend reading the essay. I found the Catholic Church/Printing Press analogy appropriate, but I would go one step further: Blogs have been the MSM's printing press for some time.
This was our 95 Theses.
The Memogate controversy has garnered attention in Belfast -- and they are paying attention to the fact that it was bloggers who made it happen.
I highly recommend reading the essay. I found the Catholic Church/Printing Press analogy appropriate, but I would go one step further: Blogs have been the MSM's printing press for some time.
This was our 95 Theses.
Signs of the Apocalypse
Thanks for the Memory to Sheila via It Comes in Pints?
Apparently plans are in the works to film a new movie version of F Scott Fitzgeralds The Great Gatsby. That's cool, I'm all for a renewed interests in the classics.
Now the bad news.
They're casting Paris Hilton and Lance Bass as Daisy Buchanan and Jay Gatsby.
Really.
I may just have to take a wood burning kit to my occipital lobe.
Apparently plans are in the works to film a new movie version of F Scott Fitzgeralds The Great Gatsby. That's cool, I'm all for a renewed interests in the classics.
Now the bad news.
They're casting Paris Hilton and Lance Bass as Daisy Buchanan and Jay Gatsby.
Really.
I may just have to take a wood burning kit to my occipital lobe.
Shut Yo Mouth
A Shout Out for the Memory to Macktastic Rusty Wicked of Yo! MyPetJawa!
Rusty has suggested that we form a Blog Pimp Alliance. The first step is getting a Fly Pimpafied Name.
Well, considering the way we've made Dan Rather our B*&$#, it does seem appropo. So from now on, you may call me Ghetto Fabulous B. Slick
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to get down with my bad self.
Rusty has suggested that we form a Blog Pimp Alliance. The first step is getting a Fly Pimpafied Name.
Well, considering the way we've made Dan Rather our B*&$#, it does seem appropo. So from now on, you may call me Ghetto Fabulous B. Slick
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to get down with my bad self.
Greenpeace: Next on the Agenda, converting the Rainbow Warrior Into a Whaler
Thanks for the Memory to Common Sense & Wonder
via It Comes in Pints?
Greenpeace is facing criminal charges for violation of Alaskan state environmental laws.
I think the article speaks for itself. Any further comment would spoil its perfection.
via It Comes in Pints?
Greenpeace is facing criminal charges for violation of Alaskan state environmental laws.
I think the article speaks for itself. Any further comment would spoil its perfection.
Unanswered Questions
I watched the 60 Minutes II interview with Killian's secretary last night, and was amazed at how quickly Dan Rather managed to glaze over the fact that the memos are not authentic. He's still living in the past, thinking he can just slickly move past that, and not get called on it. Hasn't learned much from the last week.
He goes on to argue that regardless of the authenticity of the documents, there are bigger questions that remain unanswered. I agree -- more on that in a moment.
He then claimed that in all the furor over the documents themselves, that his critics and the White House have failed to address the other evidence, or the issues that they raise.
Sorry, Mr. Rather, you're wrong. These allegations have been made for the past 5 years. They've been addressed again and again and again. The more recent allegations, and all of the arguments made in your story, have been equally addressed in the last week by numerous blogs. I am not going to go to the trouble of repeating their efforts, but I'd recommend you start with Ace of Spades or Rathergate (I thought you'd like that one).
But let's consider some other questions this story raised, Mr. Rather.
Why were you and are you still insistent on the authenticity of documents that were so easily debunked so quickly?
If they are forgeries, why are you protecting a source you now know to be unreliable? What are you hiding?
Why have you not interviewed the son and widow of Killian, both of whom deny the veracity of the memos' contents? And why did you ignore Killian's son's advice to talk to several other TANG sources who could provide contrary views?
Why have you failed to address the fact that your main witness, Burkett, is a hardline Democrat with an axe to grindwhose own child says this is politically motivated? Correction -- that's Barnes. Burkett has enough baggage, no need for me to go pulling a CBS. Thanks to reader Merc for the correction.
There ARE plenty of unanswered questions, Mr. Rather, but I believe it is YOU who needs to answer them. Otherwise you continue to look like nothing more than a strident mouthpiece for the Democratic Party.
He goes on to argue that regardless of the authenticity of the documents, there are bigger questions that remain unanswered. I agree -- more on that in a moment.
He then claimed that in all the furor over the documents themselves, that his critics and the White House have failed to address the other evidence, or the issues that they raise.
Sorry, Mr. Rather, you're wrong. These allegations have been made for the past 5 years. They've been addressed again and again and again. The more recent allegations, and all of the arguments made in your story, have been equally addressed in the last week by numerous blogs. I am not going to go to the trouble of repeating their efforts, but I'd recommend you start with Ace of Spades or Rathergate (I thought you'd like that one).
But let's consider some other questions this story raised, Mr. Rather.
Why were you and are you still insistent on the authenticity of documents that were so easily debunked so quickly?
If they are forgeries, why are you protecting a source you now know to be unreliable? What are you hiding?
Why have you not interviewed the son and widow of Killian, both of whom deny the veracity of the memos' contents? And why did you ignore Killian's son's advice to talk to several other TANG sources who could provide contrary views?
Why have you failed to address the fact that your main witness, Burkett, is a hardline Democrat with an axe to grind
There ARE plenty of unanswered questions, Mr. Rather, but I believe it is YOU who needs to answer them. Otherwise you continue to look like nothing more than a strident mouthpiece for the Democratic Party.
The Empress Has No Clothes
Thanks for the Memory to PoliPundit via Ace of Spades HQ.
This seems appropriate, considering she's named after Marie Anoinette's mother. Teesa Heinz Kerry, visiting relief efforts for hurricane victims, said, "Clothing is wonderful, but let them go naked for a while, at least the kids,"
I will repeat that, because, to borrow from Lewis Black, it bears repeating:
"Clothing is wonderful, but let them go naked for a while, at least the kids"
Wow.
According to the AP article, she was concerned the effort was too focused on sending clothes instead of essentials like water and electric generators.
Well, yes, Teraysuh, if that's all any of the relief centers were packing, I'd be concerned too. Of course, I'd ask first how the food and water situation was being handled, and I'd find a more sensitive way to express this concern. You know, one that was a little less reminiscent of "Let zem eat cake."
Furthermore, you might be surprised to learn that clothing is still quite essential, not just "wonderful." Protection from the elements and all that.
Imagine the outrage from Democrats if a Republican said something like that. Look at the way they excoriate the President for his malapropisms. Imagine if it had not been Teresa, but Laura Bush. Except I just can't imagine our First Lady making such an insensitive quip.
Keep talking, Dahling. You're helping our cause.
This seems appropriate, considering she's named after Marie Anoinette's mother. Teesa Heinz Kerry, visiting relief efforts for hurricane victims, said, "Clothing is wonderful, but let them go naked for a while, at least the kids,"
I will repeat that, because, to borrow from Lewis Black, it bears repeating:
"Clothing is wonderful, but let them go naked for a while, at least the kids"
Wow.
According to the AP article, she was concerned the effort was too focused on sending clothes instead of essentials like water and electric generators.
Well, yes, Teraysuh, if that's all any of the relief centers were packing, I'd be concerned too. Of course, I'd ask first how the food and water situation was being handled, and I'd find a more sensitive way to express this concern. You know, one that was a little less reminiscent of "Let zem eat cake."
Furthermore, you might be surprised to learn that clothing is still quite essential, not just "wonderful." Protection from the elements and all that.
Imagine the outrage from Democrats if a Republican said something like that. Look at the way they excoriate the President for his malapropisms. Imagine if it had not been Teresa, but Laura Bush. Except I just can't imagine our First Lady making such an insensitive quip.
Keep talking, Dahling. You're helping our cause.
Wednesday, September 15, 2004
Taking Care of Our Own
One misperception that many have of a conservative like myself is that because I oppose huge government-sponsored social programs, I am somehow in opposition to charity. On the contrary, I believe very strongly in giving to worthy causes -- assisting the poor, disaster relief, the arts and sciences, education. What I take issue with is the propriety and ability of the government ot administer such giving properly. I feer the added overhead of government bureaucracy, and prefer to have more say in where my charitable giving goes. But I definitely give when I can, and encourage others to do the same.
Well, now I have a chance to encourage my readers to give to help a fellow blogger. If you've followed any of the links in my entries or at the side of my blog, you'll know I'm a huge fan of Da Goddess. In fact, she's my "Blogmother" -- one of the bloggers who helped me get started when I decided to do this. She's a funny, smart, sweet lady in San Diego who really has some good things to say.
And now she's out of work. She's been that way for 3 weeks or so now, and finances are getting tight. I know her well enough to know she's trying, but the job market is tight in her area, and she hasn't had much luck yet. She's actively seeking. This isn't a case of someone who won't work, it's someone who tries hard but hasn't had much luck. I know the feeling -- I've been there, and may be again soon. Besides, she's a good person, and a damned good blogger.
So I'm asking you to go drop a buck in her tip jar -- pop by her blog, find the "Flag Fund", and hit the "Donate Now" button.
Thanks.
Well, now I have a chance to encourage my readers to give to help a fellow blogger. If you've followed any of the links in my entries or at the side of my blog, you'll know I'm a huge fan of Da Goddess. In fact, she's my "Blogmother" -- one of the bloggers who helped me get started when I decided to do this. She's a funny, smart, sweet lady in San Diego who really has some good things to say.
And now she's out of work. She's been that way for 3 weeks or so now, and finances are getting tight. I know her well enough to know she's trying, but the job market is tight in her area, and she hasn't had much luck yet. She's actively seeking. This isn't a case of someone who won't work, it's someone who tries hard but hasn't had much luck. I know the feeling -- I've been there, and may be again soon. Besides, she's a good person, and a damned good blogger.
So I'm asking you to go drop a buck in her tip jar -- pop by her blog, find the "Flag Fund", and hit the "Donate Now" button.
Thanks.
MY Turn to Question THEIR Timing
It's become a blogosphere cliche joke -- questioning the timing of something. It stems from the tendency of the Left and of the Kerry campaign to respond to any piece of good news or alert in the WoT coming from the White House by "Questioning the timing" of the news, as if the news was released merely to coincide with some even the Left was putting on, in order to steal attention from the Left. They couldn't refute the news itself, so instead, they'd "question it's timing". A new take on an old fallacy.
Now, they've found a new take on THAT new take, questioning the timing of the Freeper post that got the ball rolling on the whole Memogate affair. Unfortunately for the left, even their questioning of the time is in question. But apparently, the Left didn't get the memo, and Susan Esterich continued to bring it up (Thanks for the Memory to Ace of Spades.
Well, now it's MY turn to do some questioning of timing. No, I'm not trying to avoid issues by diverting. I think that the memos have been pretty effectively debunked, and any questions raised by them are only valid if their claims are true, which seems at best questionable, since they're made in forged documents.
No, my questioning of the timing has to do with a question that hasn't been answered yet: Who released these documents to CBS in the first place? I have my opinion, and the timing of the whole story only strengthens that opinion. Ironically enough, it has to do with ANOTHER bit of screeching by Susan Esterich that I commented on a while back. It pretty much summed up the Democrats' battlecry after the RNC -- The Republicans fight dirty, so now we will too. The gloves are coming off, and we're going to dig up as much dirt on Bush as we can.
Well, now a reader over at Backcountry Conservative (read the comment by Gary Maxwell) has expressed a concern that was bothering me last night: In all the hooplah about the veracity of the documents themselves, let's not forget how eerily soon after the RNC this story came out. I have a feeling that it was a Democratic operative who pushed these memos on CBS.
And as I've said before, regardless of the source, CBS' credibility has taken a huge hit. furthermore, the timing of the story so soon after the RNC and comments like those made by Esterich reveal an eagerness on the part of CBS to help the Democrats' cause. Oh, THAT liberal media.
Now, they've found a new take on THAT new take, questioning the timing of the Freeper post that got the ball rolling on the whole Memogate affair. Unfortunately for the left, even their questioning of the time is in question. But apparently, the Left didn't get the memo, and Susan Esterich continued to bring it up (Thanks for the Memory to Ace of Spades.
Well, now it's MY turn to do some questioning of timing. No, I'm not trying to avoid issues by diverting. I think that the memos have been pretty effectively debunked, and any questions raised by them are only valid if their claims are true, which seems at best questionable, since they're made in forged documents.
No, my questioning of the timing has to do with a question that hasn't been answered yet: Who released these documents to CBS in the first place? I have my opinion, and the timing of the whole story only strengthens that opinion. Ironically enough, it has to do with ANOTHER bit of screeching by Susan Esterich that I commented on a while back. It pretty much summed up the Democrats' battlecry after the RNC -- The Republicans fight dirty, so now we will too. The gloves are coming off, and we're going to dig up as much dirt on Bush as we can.
Well, now a reader over at Backcountry Conservative (read the comment by Gary Maxwell) has expressed a concern that was bothering me last night: In all the hooplah about the veracity of the documents themselves, let's not forget how eerily soon after the RNC this story came out. I have a feeling that it was a Democratic operative who pushed these memos on CBS.
And as I've said before, regardless of the source, CBS' credibility has taken a huge hit. furthermore, the timing of the story so soon after the RNC and comments like those made by Esterich reveal an eagerness on the part of CBS to help the Democrats' cause. Oh, THAT liberal media.
Statement Watch
CBS has said they'll issue a statement regarding MemoGate today. Backcountry Conservative promises to keep us posted.
Reaping the Benefits of Their Own Efforts
Thanks for the Memory to Da Goddess.
Da Goddess has a friend whose publisher is currently offering to ship any donated books to the USO to send to the troops overseas.
What a great idea. Take the fruit of one of our basic freedoms, that of expression, and send that fruit to the troops who are guarding those freedoms.
Besides, anything we can do to help our troops is worth the effort. So I will repeat the link: GO DONATE BOOKS TO THE USO FOR OUR TROOPS!
Da Goddess has a friend whose publisher is currently offering to ship any donated books to the USO to send to the troops overseas.
What a great idea. Take the fruit of one of our basic freedoms, that of expression, and send that fruit to the troops who are guarding those freedoms.
Besides, anything we can do to help our troops is worth the effort. So I will repeat the link: GO DONATE BOOKS TO THE USO FOR OUR TROOPS!
Vichy Redux
Thanks for the Memory to the Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler.
Apparently the French have been hearing it for their attempts to avoid terrorism by staying out of Iraq. A few of the recent comments from editorials:
"The abduction of the French journalists is a lesson for those who think they can be neutral in the war on terror, or for those who think that it is possible to arrive at a truce with international terror by means of spineless political positions towards terrorism.
"France thought that the terror in Iraq would not reach it because it opposed the war and tried to set itself apart from the American position. As a result, international terror treats [France] like every other [country]. International terror is democratic. It strikes everyone without asking whether the casualties are Muslim or Christian, or supporters or opponents of America. International terror does not differentiate among the civilians of Fallujah, Riyadh, San'aa, Algeria, New York, and Nairobi. There is no differentiation between American and French. The only aim of international terror is to kill."
Amen.
Or how about this:
"Here the 'neutral' countries err in understanding the new developments in the Arab arena by thinking they can remain neutral. This is because the terror groups' true aspiration is to kill the captives in the name of Allah. Neutrality remains something unacceptable today, because these are groups that want to enter Paradise with the greatest quantity of victims' blood, and who are not interested in political or financial negotiations…"
That's what we've been saying on the right for some time.
One last quote:
"Those who claim that there is a 'Crusader war of the West against Islam' are in fact themselves waging 'holy war' against the Western democracies and against democracy and civilization everywhere… France, which deluded itself that it would be spared from the depraved hands of the terrorists because it opposes the war of liberation in Iraq, today faces the truth: The war on terror must be international, and all democratic countries and the United Nations must fight terrorist countries such as Saddam's regime…"
There's plenty more, but you can go read this article to see more.
But be sitting down when you do. you see, all these quotes are from Arab newspapers.
Poor France. When even the Arab Street calls you a wussy in the WoT, you're really and truly a wussy.
Apparently the French have been hearing it for their attempts to avoid terrorism by staying out of Iraq. A few of the recent comments from editorials:
"The abduction of the French journalists is a lesson for those who think they can be neutral in the war on terror, or for those who think that it is possible to arrive at a truce with international terror by means of spineless political positions towards terrorism.
"France thought that the terror in Iraq would not reach it because it opposed the war and tried to set itself apart from the American position. As a result, international terror treats [France] like every other [country]. International terror is democratic. It strikes everyone without asking whether the casualties are Muslim or Christian, or supporters or opponents of America. International terror does not differentiate among the civilians of Fallujah, Riyadh, San'aa, Algeria, New York, and Nairobi. There is no differentiation between American and French. The only aim of international terror is to kill."
Amen.
Or how about this:
"Here the 'neutral' countries err in understanding the new developments in the Arab arena by thinking they can remain neutral. This is because the terror groups' true aspiration is to kill the captives in the name of Allah. Neutrality remains something unacceptable today, because these are groups that want to enter Paradise with the greatest quantity of victims' blood, and who are not interested in political or financial negotiations…"
That's what we've been saying on the right for some time.
One last quote:
"Those who claim that there is a 'Crusader war of the West against Islam' are in fact themselves waging 'holy war' against the Western democracies and against democracy and civilization everywhere… France, which deluded itself that it would be spared from the depraved hands of the terrorists because it opposes the war of liberation in Iraq, today faces the truth: The war on terror must be international, and all democratic countries and the United Nations must fight terrorist countries such as Saddam's regime…"
There's plenty more, but you can go read this article to see more.
But be sitting down when you do. you see, all these quotes are from Arab newspapers.
Poor France. When even the Arab Street calls you a wussy in the WoT, you're really and truly a wussy.
Tuesday, September 14, 2004
Worst Case Scenario
Thanks for the Memory to my best friend Brian F.
In the midst of all the controversy surrounding Memogate, one of the options being bandied about, especially on the left, is that the memos are plants by the right -- and of course, top of the suspect list is Karl "Kayzer Soze" Rove. The thought is that the documents were intentionally forged poorly so that CBS and the left would bite, use them to attack the president, then get caught in a political rope-a-dope when they were revealed as forgeries.
Let's address this theory for a moment. Let's ignore the fact that today's latest stories indicate it might have originated elsewhere (personally, I haven't seen enough evidence to trust the rumors regarding the specific source). Let's ignore the fact that once such a plot was uncovered, it would backfire and make the Bush campaign look as evil as the left claims it is, and that Karl Rove is an evil genius, not an idiot. Let's ignore the fact that in order to work, such a plot would rely on an incredible level of gullibility on the part of CBS (ok, let's not ignore that fact, let's just set it aside to pick up again in a moment). Let's play "What If?" What if this theory is true? What if they did originate somewhere in the smoky back rooms of the GOP?
So what?
If the intent was to discredit the media, and specifically CBS, it worked, regardless of who originated it. Yes, it would also completely derail the Bush campaign, who would be viewed as playing just way too dirty. But the one assumption we made above to even consider this option that HAS proven true is an incredible level of gullibility on the part of CBS. As poorly forged as these documents probably are, as much other information as is coming out today, it required an incredible level of willingness by CBS to believe the unbelievable simply because they wanted it to be true in order for this story to proceed. Whether the documents were forged by the left, the right, the Grey Aliens, or the ghost of Howard Hughes, CBS fell for them, and now they have to live with the consequences.
Or die by them.
In the midst of all the controversy surrounding Memogate, one of the options being bandied about, especially on the left, is that the memos are plants by the right -- and of course, top of the suspect list is Karl "Kayzer Soze" Rove. The thought is that the documents were intentionally forged poorly so that CBS and the left would bite, use them to attack the president, then get caught in a political rope-a-dope when they were revealed as forgeries.
Let's address this theory for a moment. Let's ignore the fact that today's latest stories indicate it might have originated elsewhere (personally, I haven't seen enough evidence to trust the rumors regarding the specific source). Let's ignore the fact that once such a plot was uncovered, it would backfire and make the Bush campaign look as evil as the left claims it is, and that Karl Rove is an evil genius, not an idiot. Let's ignore the fact that in order to work, such a plot would rely on an incredible level of gullibility on the part of CBS (ok, let's not ignore that fact, let's just set it aside to pick up again in a moment). Let's play "What If?" What if this theory is true? What if they did originate somewhere in the smoky back rooms of the GOP?
So what?
If the intent was to discredit the media, and specifically CBS, it worked, regardless of who originated it. Yes, it would also completely derail the Bush campaign, who would be viewed as playing just way too dirty. But the one assumption we made above to even consider this option that HAS proven true is an incredible level of gullibility on the part of CBS. As poorly forged as these documents probably are, as much other information as is coming out today, it required an incredible level of willingness by CBS to believe the unbelievable simply because they wanted it to be true in order for this story to proceed. Whether the documents were forged by the left, the right, the Grey Aliens, or the ghost of Howard Hughes, CBS fell for them, and now they have to live with the consequences.
Or die by them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)