"Our aim, to swat liars and leeches, hypocrites & humbugs, demagogs & dastards"
-- The Yellow Jacket
Moravian Falls, N.C., 1919
It's interesting to note that journalists from the White House press corps to The Billings Outpost are falling all over themselves about Cheney's hunting accident. Yet, there's not a word about another vice president, Al Gore, recently bad-mouthing America from Saudi Arabia during a time of war.While treason is ignored a hunting accident is blown totally out of proportion. Funny how news readership / viewership is plummeting in the the traditonal press.
1. The Outpost has not covered and has no plans to cover Cheney's hunting accident. Not our beat. My two-sentence blog entry is the entire extent to which we have been falling all over overselves.2. If you think the public would rather read about a former vice president making a speech in Saudi Arabia than about an incumbent vice president shooting a man in the face in Texas, then your news judgment is badly skewed.3. Criticizing the American government is treason? Then lock me up.
James-- Good point. I read some of Gore’s sorry spew. Maybe the State Department will revoke his passport while he is out of the country, and he will have to live forever with the Arabs he loves so much.The liberal media’s hysteria over the Cheney hunting accident is actually an expression of two leftwing mental problems: 1) Their deep-seated hatred of anyone who has been successful in life; and 2) their fear of all-things masculine, such as guns.If Cheney had been out in a rowboat and turned around and hit one of his passengers in the head with an oar and knocked him overboard and nearly drowned him, we would only hear leftwing mockery related to mental condition 1), above. But because a firearm was involved, we get elements of mental condition 2), above.
The right wing, as always, is falling all over itself trying to pretend there is a left wing conspiracy. 99 percent of the coverage I've seen is treating this thing as a Letterman-level joke. Humor is nonpartisan, except that right-wing nuts have no sense of humor.
Chris, You see "liberal media hysteria" on this story. An example, please?
A Lovely Bunch of Coconuts"
David:A few hysterical headlines should suffice.Cheney hunting victim suffers minor heart attackTexan shot by Cheney on hunt has heart attackCheney shooting victim suffers heart attackFellow Hunter Shot by Cheney Suffers Setback Hunter shot by Cheney suffers heart attack, remains at riskMan shot by Cheney has heart attackBirdshot Pellet Migrates to Heart of Man Shot by Cheney Cheney victim in intensive care after heart attackCheney shooting victim moved to the ICUVice Presidents don't shoot peopleNotice anything missing from the hysterical headlines above? Like the word “accidentally” maybe?Oh, and “Bob,” do these stories sound like “Letterman-level” jokes to you? What “coverage” have you been reading?
Chris,You ever try to fit "accidentally" into a headline? I don't care how conservative you are, it won't go.All I see there are a bunch of headlines that accurately describe what happened. If this is how you define "hysteria," then I would love to see you define "calm."
Your blog is infested with right wing hacks.
Dear James J., did you ever bad-mouth Clinton's policies while America was involved in a military action during his presidency? If you did, then by your own definition you are a traitor. But of course you are not.I have been highly critical of the foreign policy of both our current president and his predecessor, but I love my country. In fact, calling me a traitor to my face would be an extremely unhealthy thing to do.We have the right to dissent, even when we are at war. If we do not, then the utterance of words like "freedom" and "liberty" by our leaders is only so much bullshit.
Dear Chris,The obsession that was required to find and list those headlines is a clear example of hysteria.
David said: 2. If you think the public would rather read about a former vice president making a speech in Saudi Arabia than about an incumbent vice president shooting a man in the face in Texas, then your news judgment is badly skewed.Um, David, perhaps, like, maybe, BOTH of these events could be covered? Most newspapers (I'm excluding the Outpost on this) have room for more then one story! Al Gore told the audience at the Jiddah Economic Forum (mostly Arabs) that the U.S. had committed "terrible atrocities" against Arabs after the attacks of Sept 11, 2001. He stated that Arabs had been indiscriminately rounded up and detained in unforgivable conditions. He says there was "terrible abuses, and it's wrong.... "Do any of you moonbat apologists think that his words won't be used against the United States?What about John F'ing Kerry's words that American troops were "going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night terrorizing kids and children, you know women, breaking sort of the customs of the..."Parse that any way you want, but a description of the actions of U.S. troops that includes the word "terrorizing" in this war on terror is wrong, especially given that it was a prepared speech, and not merely words poorly chosen in an impromptou speech.Show me once where any of you home town journalists have been critical of any of these events and I may be inclined to be less critical.
Rich,The Associated Press did move a story on Gore's speech. I don't know how many papers used it.John Kerry's remarks also were covered.
(David said) You ever try to fit "accidentally" into a headline?Seems to fit OK in a short sentence. Totally lame!***(Jim Larson said) The obsession that was required to find and list those headlines is a clear example of hysteria. It only took ten seconds. It’s called Google. Ever hear of it?***(5 said) Your blog is infested with right wing hacks. What’s in YOUR blog?***
David, I always enjoy reading your insights of the "behind the scenes" type of happenings in journalism, so maybe you can share your thoughts about the Washington press corps being in such a dither because they weren't notified about the shooting accident until the next day. I think the whiny questions they peppered (shotgun-style, if you will) at Scott McClellan, the President's press secretary, were rather funny in that it points out just how high and mighty they feel they are. It seems they have forgotten how to find stories on their own. They need it spoon-fed to them. No matter that a police report was filed and that the local press had the story. No, no. The national press was bent of shape that they weren't told - there must be a cover-up going on here.
David,Hardly a "left-wing obsession" about this incident. Even Marlin Fitzwater, press secretary for both Reagan and Bush 1, is chiding the current administration for their bungling of this.http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001996613
OK, David, you didn't personally "fall all over yourself" about this story, but a vast majority of the media has.It's not a matter of covering the Cheney story or the Gore story, they're both worthy of exposure.My news judgment is skewed? Let's see, a former vice president visits a nation that continues to support terrorism, gives a speech bashing American policy, skews the truth about that policy, and this isn't newsworthy?If the American media covered the Gore story with the intensity of the Cheney story we would be hearing questions such as: "Mr. Gore, who paid for your visit to Saudia Arabia and how much were you paid?" "Mr. Gore, your critics conclude that many of your statements such as, 'Arabs were indiscriminately rounded up in America, often on minor charges and held in deplorable conditions. . .' simply aren't true." "Mr. Gore, the US Constitution defines one aspect of treason as 'giving aid and comfort to the enemy.' How do you defend the fact that during a time of war you gave a speech negating American policy in a country that sponsors terrorism?" Believe me, I'm not an apologist for the Republicans. In fact, I view Bush/Cheney as having long ago abandoned conservative policies, leaving America in a much more vulnerable positon on many levels.Apparently, another thing that has been recently abandoned is a sense of traditonal journalistic standards.
Anonymous 7:37,I'm no authority on this, but I read some of the transcripts and watched some of the exchange that went on with McClellan, so I think I have a notion what's going on.I don't blame the reporters for being angry. Look at it this way: You cover a beat for years, you work with the official's staff, you develop sources. You think you're doing your job, but you can't work every second. So the vice president goes hunting in Texas and you take the weekend off, counting on the White House staff to let you know if anything newsworthy should happen, such as, for example, the vice president shoots somebody.Instead, you get stiffed, and you're pissed off. What makes it look bad is that in the old days this would have been between the press corps and the press secretary. Reporters would have given him hell, he would made a few lame excuses, and that would have been the end of it. Now, of course, it all goes on TV, which makes it look like the reporters are grandstanding.But really, they're just doing their job, busting McClellan's chops for not doing his job. And the fact that this pattern has been so consistent throughout this administration just adds fuel to the fire.
Get real, David. The White House is under no obligation to call reporters. Are you kidding? That’s why the White House has a press briefing every day.“Hi David! It’s McClellan here. Just thought I’d give you a ring and bring you up to date on what’s happen. You weren’t busy, were you?”And, uh, David, it’s not “the vice president shoots somebody.” It’s “the vice president ACCIDENTALLY shoots somebody.” Or was the word too big to fit?
Yeah. Reminds me of all those biased World War II headlines. "U.S. Drops A-Bomb on Japan." Should have read: "U.S. Purposely Drops A-Bomb on Japan."
Good point about the headlines Rich. I stand chastised.
Bob (Ed Kemmick):You're really PC stupid. The headline would have been "U.S. Drops A-Bomb on Japs."
Jim Larson,It was actually Chris that provided the chastising, and he did a very good job of it.
Today, the news is about the news.A leftwing TV news channel (CNN) is crying over Vice President Cheney giving an exclusive interview to a rightwing TV news channel (Fox).Those devious White House capitalists! They deliberately let the leftwing media hype this attempted murder and cover-up for days, then they give the exclusive interview to the rightwing media? Who do they think they’re fooling? Why, that’s as good as writing a check to Fox News Channel for a gazillion dollars!There ought to be law. The media that creates a huge story out of nothing, should be the media that profits from it. What the White House has done is thievery, plain and simple.But this is not over. The leftwing news media will not be cheated. They are now demanding that the vice president hold a (free) press conference and face their hard-hitting questions. That’s pretty scary for a shotgun killer hiding from the law. No doubt, if he holds the press conference, he’ll trip up and get caught in a lie, which will be another huge story!So what if a press conference is like getting the crumbs from the Fox media mega-banquet? The leftwing media have proven time and again that they can derive nourishment from nothing of substance.
Chris, I dont recall Gore ever holding hands with a Saudi Prince.....And this leftwing media shit, whatever....Hey David, your blog has become a haven for a bunch of fucking right wing slobbering nutjobs....
My CNN criticism of the week: Why publish the Abu Ghraib photos, but not the Mohammed Cartoons?
Don't you just love how the "right-wing slobbering nut-jobs" are always able to present their viewpoints cogently and without profanity?
5,Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you. BOO!
Chris,Saying that the White House press staff is under no obligation to call reporters is like saying that the person working the window at McDonald's is under no obligation to take your order. It's technically true, but it is that person's job.As taxpayers we shell out good money to handle White House press relations. And we're getting cheated.What makes you so certain that this is a left-wing story? Do you seriously mean that it wouldn't be news if Cheney had been a Democrat?And finally, who exactly at CNN is crying? I have heard no tears there.
Sorry Rich,I'll try to keep you two straight.Crisp has been working me too hard. Did you see the Mohammed Cartoon in the Outpost today? It was home grown.
Here's an interesting angle that some enterprising local reporter might explore: What's former Senator Al Simpson's (author of Right in the Old Gazoo, and close friend of the Vice President, take on Cheney's relationship with the press? Al's a nice guy and might even speak to you if you're polite.
David:Come on, you’re playing with smart guys here. And I don’t think they’re going to let you off the hook until you stop trying to outsmart them with disingenuous word games, professorial demands for footnotes, and Kerry-style nuanced arguments.I will respond to your latest post, but this is the last time I am going to bother.“Technically true” is, well, true. (Personally, I would not dispute a statement that is “technically true” or even just plain true. But I guess you have your reasons.) The White House is under no obligation to call a press briefing just because some leftwing journalists are so gleefully hysterical they’re wetting their pants. When the White House thinks it has something important to announce, it calls a press briefing; otherwise, it’s show up at 10 or 11 AM and we’ll take your questions, biased and dumb as they may be. The Cheney hunting accident did not represent a national security crisis or even a minor emergency. Contrary to what you say, the White House is actually saving tax dollars by not trotting out Scott McClellan whenever the leftwing media goes into one of its weekly convulsions or whenever Helen Thomas discovers something interesting in “Pravda.” I never said the Cheney hunting accident was not “news.” Everything is “news” to someone. What I have been saying, directly or indirectly, in all my comments is that the news spin has been extremely left-handed. (If you need me to define “spin,” I give up.) Assuming that Al Gore’s handlers would allow him to go hunting with a loaded gun, or, say, a court found Howard Dean mentally competent to possess firearms again, do I think if either of them had accidentally shot someone it would be “news”? Yes, of course, David. Would I expect the headlines and the stories to boldly proclaim the incident to have been a most unfortunate and perhaps unavoidable accident? Yes. Would the story be gone in 24 to 48 hours. Definitely.As for “who exactly at CNN is crying,” I refer you to the excerpts, below, taken from the San Francisco Chronicle. (As for you not having “heard” any tears at CNN, I would suggest you consult with a television repairman. I’d be curious to “see” what he has to “say.”)***Critics slam Cheney's interview choiceFor days, the White House news corps has pounded the Bush administration, demanding to learn more about Vice President Dick Cheney's accidental shooting of a hunting companion Saturday. Cheney finally addressed the incident Wednesday, but the forum in which he chose to do so -- in an exclusive interview with Fox News host Brit Hume -- quickly became another source of contention. But some Democrats and competing broadcasters charged that Cheney chose to speak only with Fox News because of a perception that the cable channel is sympathetic to the Republican administration.They called for the vice president to hold a news conference with the rest of the media.On CNN, commentator Jack Cafferty called the interview "a little bit like Bonnie interviewing Clyde. ... I mean, running over there to the Fox network -- talk about seeking a safe haven." http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/02/16/MNGS3H9J3N1.DTL
Check out this: John Gambling Warning for you libs, it's a right wing site, but listen anyway, listening once won't hurt you. I'm sending you here because this broke over 3 days ago, and yesterday a small story finally made it to the antique media. The White House Press Corps was so muggered up with the Cheney story they missed a big one right under their noses. I'm not calling this left wing bias, but THIS IS NEWS I WANT TO KNOW ABOUT!
Even the ultra-liberal Bozeman Chronicle is starting to see through the Cheney hysteria. The editors over there are comparing the story to “black helicopter” sightings:http://bozemandailychronicle.com/articles/2006/02/17/opinions/01cheneyedit.txtLast night the AP ran another “Nedra Pickler” story about the Cheney hunting accident . The story read like a close-out or summary story and gave the impression that the AP was getting ready to drop coverage and move on to The Next Huge White House Conspiracy.The AP, apparently trying to bolster the credibility of the story, included a satellite photograph of the ranch were the “shooting” took place. Yes, this is true. The AP hired some company to produce an image of the ranch. Then, working from the sheriff’s report describing the accident, the company estimated the GPS coordinates for the spot where the “shooting” took place. A small yellow dot was then superimposed on the image to mark the place where the "victim" was shot-gunned.Oh, yes, this was a big attempted cover-up! But the AP has satellite photos to prove the ranch really does exist and the crime scene has been tentatively located. The AP has not found the charred remains of a body yet or any black helicopters, but no doubt they are “researching” it.: “AP reporter Nedra Pickler is known as being a stickler for detail in her presidential-campaign coverage. Too bad she gets so many things wrong.” American Prospect, 01/20/04.
I wish I knew who the hell all of you rightwingnutjobs are yelling at....Its all well and good that the story has rolled around....
5: I can understand why this is hard for you to follow.
Anybody read this shit for insight? Pretty damn pathetic I'd say. But the question I have is WHY little jimmy j. is NOT in Iraq killin' Ayrabs instead of uses his mouth to satisfy all the talking heads! He's pretty good at that though! A real little monica man!
The Bozeman Chronicle is ultraliberal? I thought they were capitalists over there.
"I will respond to your latest post, but this is the last time I am going to bother."We'll miss you.
Like the City of Bozeman, the Chronicle is controlled by the Marxist losers up at MSU. All the capitalists are out in the county living in huge houses and having a great laugh.
MSU controls the Chronicle? Stranger and stranger.
Post a Comment