I think the Times should just go ahead and begin calling themselves the American version of al-jazeera.
They'll print, in detail, of the failures. Fine. I've got no problem with telling it all, the good, the bad and the ugly.
They ignore, in deafening silence, the victories. Typical.
I'm sure most of us remember not too long ago the story of the young trooper whose life was saved by his body armor, caught on video by the shooter.
I don't seem to recall either seeing the video, reading the story, or reading the letter that the soldier wrote describing the incident, and how the armor saved his life.
I guess it's easier to find fault than give credit to anything that happens during this administration's time in office.
I also don't remember seeing the Times criticize President Clinton for not supplying armor to the Rangers killed in Somalia, even though they were begging for it.
The New York Times sucks.
13 August 2005
Police Seek Suspect in Bizarre Internet Sex Case
What would you do if you found a naked 25-year-old man under your 13-year-old daughter's bed?
According to the incident report, the victim's father called Lawrence police, but only after conducting his own "interrogation" of the suspect.Yeah, me too.
"Yeah, he pulled him out, and had a 'chat' with him. That's what he told us," said Robert Bowser, Lawrence Police Department.
11 August 2005
AOL's love fest with Ms. Sheehan
Ok, DC got me thinking about the war and its multiple fronts. I decided to stop being quiet and sent a little love note to AOL. I'll be interested to see what sort of response I receive. Thanks DC, I think my congressfolks are going to get a similar letter soon. The war rages on....
To whom it may concern:
I am deeply troubled by the choice that AOL News has made in giving Ms. Cindy Sheehan any airtime whatsoever. She is strongly featured in the article "A mother's protest", and there is little or no opportunity for the full story to be told. You have a brief quote from Drudge, but you make no space available for the story from her hometown paper which was published shortly after her visit with the President last year. That story completely contradicts her statements today. You also do not include the letter written today from the rest of her family, urging her to end her protest, and giving their continued support to the President and the troops.
This particular story troubles me because I'm becoming more and more aware that the war is not only being fought overseas. It is also being fought here in this country and in my opinion, stories focusing on people like Ms. Sheehan are undermining the war effort. Period. I have also noticed that as of late, there has been little to no stories making the front pages of your news that talk about the successes and victories of our troops overseas, but there are plenty of stories focusing on the deaths of our troops. Why is that? I urge you to visit Michael Yon's blog to read current dispatches from the front. His work is unbiased, and it is excellent. And it also tells the complete story of the unit he is with - the good, the bad, and the ugly, and not just the company line that you are currently repeating from the bulk of the mainstream media. Reading the majority of the stories that you CHOOSE to publish, one can not help but think the troops are losing the war and I know that is simply not the truth.
So, here's my offer to you. I've been a subscriber for years to AOL. If I don't see any changes in the way in which you present your stories, particularly those that focus on the ongoing war, then I'm jumping ship and will go to another ISP. I simply refuse to spend any of my money with an organization that is as biased as yours appears to be in its presentation of the war.
I realize that my 20 something dollars a month likely means nothing to you, but it means something to me, and that's all that matters.
To whom it may concern:
I am deeply troubled by the choice that AOL News has made in giving Ms. Cindy Sheehan any airtime whatsoever. She is strongly featured in the article "A mother's protest", and there is little or no opportunity for the full story to be told. You have a brief quote from Drudge, but you make no space available for the story from her hometown paper which was published shortly after her visit with the President last year. That story completely contradicts her statements today. You also do not include the letter written today from the rest of her family, urging her to end her protest, and giving their continued support to the President and the troops.
This particular story troubles me because I'm becoming more and more aware that the war is not only being fought overseas. It is also being fought here in this country and in my opinion, stories focusing on people like Ms. Sheehan are undermining the war effort. Period. I have also noticed that as of late, there has been little to no stories making the front pages of your news that talk about the successes and victories of our troops overseas, but there are plenty of stories focusing on the deaths of our troops. Why is that? I urge you to visit Michael Yon's blog to read current dispatches from the front. His work is unbiased, and it is excellent. And it also tells the complete story of the unit he is with - the good, the bad, and the ugly, and not just the company line that you are currently repeating from the bulk of the mainstream media. Reading the majority of the stories that you CHOOSE to publish, one can not help but think the troops are losing the war and I know that is simply not the truth.
So, here's my offer to you. I've been a subscriber for years to AOL. If I don't see any changes in the way in which you present your stories, particularly those that focus on the ongoing war, then I'm jumping ship and will go to another ISP. I simply refuse to spend any of my money with an organization that is as biased as yours appears to be in its presentation of the war.
I realize that my 20 something dollars a month likely means nothing to you, but it means something to me, and that's all that matters.
More on Cindy Sheehan
Doing a little more digging on Ms. Sheehan, it becomes more and more pathetic.
From the Huffington Blog, featuring Ms. Sheehan herself:
"It’s ironic, given the attacks leveled at me recently, how some in the media are so quick to scrutinize -- and distort -- the words and actions of a grieving mother but not the words and actions of the president of the United States."
Ok, I'll call bullshit. What attacks exactly? People have used your own words and your own statements to further explain your position. It just so happens that everything you say makes you look like a total idiot. Pointing out the truth, using your own words, now constitutes an attack.
"When my son was killed, I had to face the fact that I was somehow also responsible for what happened."
I wonder - are the people that pointed their weapons at your son and killed him responsible in any way? Or are they somehow let off the hook?
"As for people like O’Reilly and Hannity and Michelle Malkin and Rush Limbaugh and all the others who are attacking me and parroting the administration line that we must complete the mission there -- they don’t have one thing at stake."
I listened to Hannity this week since this story broke, and I have yet to hear him attack you. I read Michelle's blog tonight, and have yet to see her attack you. What they are doing is pointing out your own inconsistencies. What they are doing is pointing out the lunatics that you have chosen to associate with. I've also noticed that you've done nothing to refute your earlier statements, nor have you refuted the statement that was published by your family today condemning your actions.
The more I read and learn about you, the more that I am disgusted by your attempts to use your son's death to attempt to push your own liberal viewpoints, because that's all you're doing. And it's embarrassing.
From the Huffington Blog, featuring Ms. Sheehan herself:
"It’s ironic, given the attacks leveled at me recently, how some in the media are so quick to scrutinize -- and distort -- the words and actions of a grieving mother but not the words and actions of the president of the United States."
Ok, I'll call bullshit. What attacks exactly? People have used your own words and your own statements to further explain your position. It just so happens that everything you say makes you look like a total idiot. Pointing out the truth, using your own words, now constitutes an attack.
"When my son was killed, I had to face the fact that I was somehow also responsible for what happened."
I wonder - are the people that pointed their weapons at your son and killed him responsible in any way? Or are they somehow let off the hook?
"As for people like O’Reilly and Hannity and Michelle Malkin and Rush Limbaugh and all the others who are attacking me and parroting the administration line that we must complete the mission there -- they don’t have one thing at stake."
I listened to Hannity this week since this story broke, and I have yet to hear him attack you. I read Michelle's blog tonight, and have yet to see her attack you. What they are doing is pointing out your own inconsistencies. What they are doing is pointing out the lunatics that you have chosen to associate with. I've also noticed that you've done nothing to refute your earlier statements, nor have you refuted the statement that was published by your family today condemning your actions.
The more I read and learn about you, the more that I am disgusted by your attempts to use your son's death to attempt to push your own liberal viewpoints, because that's all you're doing. And it's embarrassing.
Israeli hawks circle Iran's N-plants
My eyes would surely not shed a tear if Israel took out Iran's nuclear capability. What sane person could blame em?
Good ole Cindy Sheehan
I've been fairly quiet on this rabid woman as I think that she's had a right, given to her through the loss of her son, to vent her displeasure.
It's gone way beyond that. Any sympathy I had for her over the weekend for her loss has disappeared, and rather quickly at that.
Never mind the fact that she's changed her tune. (check out Michele Malkin's site for excellent up to date information) Shortly after her meeting with the President after her son's death, she referred to the meeting as uplifting and meaningful. Today, she says Bush didn't take it seriously and was joking and laughing as if it was not a somber occasion.
Never mind the fact that her family would like her to shut her pie hole:
(from Drudge)
"In response to questions regarding the Cindy Sheehan/Crawford Texas issue: Sheehan Family Statement:
The Sheehan Family lost our beloved Casey in the Iraq War and we have been silently, respectfully grieving. We do not agree with the political motivations and publicity tactics of Cindy Sheehan. She now appears to be promoting her own personal agenda and notoriety at the the expense of her son's good name and reputation. The rest of the Sheehan Family supports the troops, our country, and our President, silently, with prayer and respect.
Sincerely,
Casey Sheehan's grandparents, aunts, uncles and numerous cousins."
I'll go ahead and say it - this woman is an idiot, in fact, in the bad old days, she would have been called a useful idiot. But she's still an idiot and needs to shut her pie hole. It's now falling into the category of giving aid and comfort to the enemy and when you take a look at the scumbags she's now associating with, I'm thinking that's not far from the truth.
It's gone way beyond that. Any sympathy I had for her over the weekend for her loss has disappeared, and rather quickly at that.
Never mind the fact that she's changed her tune. (check out Michele Malkin's site for excellent up to date information) Shortly after her meeting with the President after her son's death, she referred to the meeting as uplifting and meaningful. Today, she says Bush didn't take it seriously and was joking and laughing as if it was not a somber occasion.
Never mind the fact that her family would like her to shut her pie hole:
(from Drudge)
"In response to questions regarding the Cindy Sheehan/Crawford Texas issue: Sheehan Family Statement:
The Sheehan Family lost our beloved Casey in the Iraq War and we have been silently, respectfully grieving. We do not agree with the political motivations and publicity tactics of Cindy Sheehan. She now appears to be promoting her own personal agenda and notoriety at the the expense of her son's good name and reputation. The rest of the Sheehan Family supports the troops, our country, and our President, silently, with prayer and respect.
Sincerely,
Casey Sheehan's grandparents, aunts, uncles and numerous cousins."
I'll go ahead and say it - this woman is an idiot, in fact, in the bad old days, she would have been called a useful idiot. But she's still an idiot and needs to shut her pie hole. It's now falling into the category of giving aid and comfort to the enemy and when you take a look at the scumbags she's now associating with, I'm thinking that's not far from the truth.
N.Y. Wants Trans Fats Off Restaurant Menus
You say you don't believe that government can get too big, too intrusive? Sure, it's a voluntary effort now, but how long before it becomes policy?
What business does any government, much less a city government, have in dictating how food is cooked. Granted, if they're cooking in rat poison, that's one thing. But we're talking about margarines and frying oils here.
Obviously, New Yorkers are so stupid, they need their government to intervene on their behalf.
Nanny government. Want some?
What business does any government, much less a city government, have in dictating how food is cooked. Granted, if they're cooking in rat poison, that's one thing. But we're talking about margarines and frying oils here.
Obviously, New Yorkers are so stupid, they need their government to intervene on their behalf.
Nanny government. Want some?
Man dies after 50 hours of computer games
Ahh, another mark in the "Win" column for the ol' gene pool. What a goofball - sheesh.
09 August 2005
Still waiting
For someone in the MSM to jump on the Air America fiasco. I'm sure, as Michelle Malkin has pointed out, that we won't hear a peep until the day Air America goes completely under, and then it'll just be a RIP report.
Officials Monitored Hijackers Before 9/11 Attacks
You know, the libs are constantly saying that the chickens are now coming home to roost, that we are only reaping what was sown by previous administrations in our current war against the terror mongers.
Well, I hate to agree with them, but they are right. We are reaping what was sown by Bill Clinton, in every respect. Every time Bill tucked tail and ran from the terrorists, they gained strength. Now we come to find out that during Bill Clinton's time in the White House, several of the 9/11 terrorists were identified by the military and the military attempted to get the FBI to roll them up. But, thanks to "the wall" erected by Jamie Gorelick, the information could not be acted upon, and after all - the terrorists had green cards and we wouldn't want to invade their civil liberties.
"Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said the Sept. 11 commission (search) looked into the matter during its investigation into government missteps leading to the attacks and chose not to include it in the final report."
I'm sure the fact that Jamie "the wall" was on the 9/11 commission had nothing to do with it.
Well, I hate to agree with them, but they are right. We are reaping what was sown by Bill Clinton, in every respect. Every time Bill tucked tail and ran from the terrorists, they gained strength. Now we come to find out that during Bill Clinton's time in the White House, several of the 9/11 terrorists were identified by the military and the military attempted to get the FBI to roll them up. But, thanks to "the wall" erected by Jamie Gorelick, the information could not be acted upon, and after all - the terrorists had green cards and we wouldn't want to invade their civil liberties.
"Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said the Sept. 11 commission (search) looked into the matter during its investigation into government missteps leading to the attacks and chose not to include it in the final report."
I'm sure the fact that Jamie "the wall" was on the 9/11 commission had nothing to do with it.
Brittney Spears IS fat!
No comment required. I wonder if the Tattler will get the same number of hits from this report? :0
Michael Yon : Online Magazine
Wow. Found this link through DC and it's awesome. I've just spend the past 2 hours reading through Michael's blog and it's stunning.
You are forced to ask yourself why a freelancer on the front lines in Iraq posts dispatches that are quite different than what you hear from the MSM.
You are forced to ask yourself why a freelancer on the front lines in Iraq posts dispatches that are quite different than what you hear from the MSM.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)