Archive for July 26, 2010

Hey the New York Times…

Posted: July 26, 2010 by datechguy in media, opinion/news, tea parties
Tags: , , ,

issues this correction:

The Political Times column last Sunday, about a generational divide over racial attitudes, erroneously linked one example of a racially charged statement to the Tea Party movement. While Tea Party supporters have been connected to a number of such statements, there is no evidence that epithets reportedly directed in March at Representative John Lewis, Democrat of Georgia, outside the Capitol, came from Tea Party members. emphasis mine

Of course as Powerline notes in their post:

Someday the Times may go all the way and admit that the epithets “reportedly” directed at Lewis (reported by Lewis himself, that is) never occurred. In the meantime, the paper is careful to assure its readers that Tea Party members have made “a number of” racially charged statements, all of which are unspecified.

Well they did use the word reportedly so I guess that’s a start.

Ready for the great swash of media condemnation of the NYT by the media that beat its breast over Andrew Breitbart in 3…2…1 Never.

Memeorandum thread here.

Update: American power has a screen shot and Smitty has some fun:

So, perhaps somebody with an iPod and some speakers was standing inside the building, listening to gangsta rap, and the Congressmen heard it as they came out. Then the whole incident could be downgraded from ‘victimized by racial epithets’ to ‘experiencing art’. Look at me being a Helpy Helperperson!

That works for me.

Update 2: Memo to some bloggers: Aspiring to the the NYT of the right is a bad idea.

Joe Raises a great point about Pakistan

Posted: July 26, 2010 by datechguy in Afghanistan war, opinion/news, war
Tags: , , , , ,

In a phone call to Morning Joe, Joe Scarborough makes a critical point on Pakistan; that of course they are our enemy and have been from the start.

Does anyone remember the speech that Musharraf made at the start of the Afghan war besides me? As I recall (and correct me if I’m wrong) In that speech he compared his actions in corporation with the Bush administration to Mohammad’s treaty with the Jews and stressed he was doing what he was about to do for the survival of his country.

Basically at a time when practically the entire country was looking for blood Bush laid down the law and Musharraf caved, but at the same time we breathed a sigh of relief as we wanted no part of a war with a Nuclear Pakistan if it could be avoided.

As soon as they (Pakistan) determined that we were not going to hit them, they quickly resumed their role as quiet friends of Islamic terror in general and the Taliban in particular.

Since there is absolutely of us challenging Pakistan in a way they would find credible (particularly with this administration) this will continue with impunity until and unless there is a cost to those in power greater than the domestic risk of supporting us.

Update: Hate to admit it but Zbigniew Brzezinski is absolutely right, I’m being simplistic on Pakistan, there are multiple sides within the government and it is very complicated. We do have to be very careful here.

Oliver Stone projects…

Posted: July 26, 2010 by datechguy in opinion/news
Tags: , , , , ,

Stacy is spot on concerning Oliver Stone to wit:

In the “context,” that is, of hating America. And Oliver Stone’s hatred of American is probably the best explanation for why a formerly successful feature director, an Academy Award winner, is reduced to directing crackpot “documentaries” for cable TV. Who wants to watch movies based on the theme that America is the unique embodiment of evil in the world?

There’s something frightening, really, when you realize how many people bought into the conspiratorial worldview of Stone’s JFK and then ponder the pathological destination to which this worldview has led Stone. And does anybody doubt that Stone has a handy scapegoat for his career problems? Blame the Jews!

When I look at the Newsbusters clip there is actually at least one point of Oliver Stone’s rant is worth considering.

Hitler did have a lot more support both within and outside of Germany that people care to remember, but I suspect Stone would like to forget that this includes the far left which just fawned over Adolph once he made is pact with the USSR and did a 180 as soon as he invaded the Soviet Union. As the saying went in France: “If everyone who claimed to be resistance were resistance, there would have been nobody left to collaborate.” It’s important to not forget that a lot of people bought what he was selling. This is is generally true for any purveyor of evil, they all have their acolytes that help make them possible.

The ultimate irony of this? This is exactly the role the Stone and people like him serve for Chavez (who he excuses) Iran (who he minimizes) and served for Saddam (Bush was worse).

Stone only valid point in his rant turns out to be a case of projection but he doesn’t see it. How could he? He is blinded to reality by the power of the “Jewish Cabel”.

Remind you of anyone?

Memeorandum thread here.

Update: The Volokh Conspiracy lays it out in case I was too vague:

Gibson was an easy target for Hollywood liberals and leftists. A right-winger and a religious Catholic, Gibson was the perfect manifestation of Hollywood liberals’ stereotypes of anti-Semites.

Stone, by contrast, is a Buddhist leftist of partial Jewish descent, the kind of person the Hollywood left usually thinks of as “one of the good guys.” Stone even was clever enough to follow his anti-Semitic remark about Jewish domination of the media, noted in the context of Hitler and the Holocaust, with some pablum about the Jewish lobby, Israel, and American foreign policy. This had nothing to do with the topic at hand, but Stone’s apologists will inevitably claim that his remarks were aimed at the “Israel lobby,” and not Jews per se.

Let’s see if stone gets the same play as Gibson, likely not, no baby mama in play here.

Gee in the middle of a War a group chooses to release…

Posted: July 26, 2010 by datechguy in internet/free speech, war
Tags: , , , , ,

…a bunch of classified documents in the hopes of derailing the effort.

So on Morning Joe we have a panel of people all against the war commenting on it. (In fairness the entire regular panel is against the war anyway so they would have to have a guest on to defend it.) Is there outrage, is there anger and this kind of leak? Nah.

They are less excited about it then you would expect, they say it is info we mostly already know, no big surprises. Harold Ford makes the correct observation that war is generally not clean and easy and the administration needs to explain that to the public. Barnicle points out that “this is Bush info” is not going to fly.

Will anyone be prosecuted for this? Unlikely. That would depress the administration’s base that is already depressed going into a midterm. They may or may not care about Afghanistan but they sure care if it is lost on their watch.

You can be sure about one thing, you will see none of the media outrage that you did over the Palme Affair.

Bottom line, this is dishonorable act by people who don’t understand the meaning of the word and care less for the well being of the troops and the country than they do about their agenda. They should be prosecuted to the fullest extent that the law allows. This will take place sometime after the Beatles reunite by using Voodoo to revive zombified remains of George and John.

Memeorandum thread here

Update: Stacy links, thanks

Older Entries
Newer Entries