Yearly Kos : Monday-morning Quarterbacking
The Kossacks themselves are all over the map as to what went right and what went wrong this past weekend. Mark Warner's massive party is a hot topic of conversation on the internet:
Think about it this way: if Gov. Warner has now established himself in the front of the pack, and grabbed onto a great big piece of the mindshare of the blogosphere, for only $70,000 (or whatever it cost), then GOOD FOR HIM - it shows he knows how to reach the audiences he needs to reach, when he needs to reach them. It's called "marketing." If there's anything the Democrats need it's marketing know-how, and if it means we get to eat free sushi, all the better.
Posted by: jesusland joe at June 12, 2006 01:29 PM (rUyw4)
2
Can't you just picture it:
Slow day, no JOOOs around, ...Why not burn something down? How bout we kidnap someone?
Hey, there are those assholes from Hammas.......
Posted by: B rad at June 12, 2006 01:55 PM (3OPZt)
3
Maybe if we just show a little more patience they'll kill each other off.
Posted by: Oyster at June 12, 2006 02:33 PM (ULAbo)
4
Does it strike anyone as strange that Muslims all over the world are so hellbent on killing each other like its their favorite pastime? WTF is wrong with these people?
Posted by: Jack's Smirking Revenge at June 12, 2006 02:40 PM (CtVG6)
8
>>>>I believe Fred Phelps ran for governor of Kansas as a democrat.
You'll here all about David Duke running as a Republican ad nauseaum, but not a peep about this lady being a Democrat.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at June 12, 2006 12:45 PM (8e/V4)
Posted by: Howie at June 12, 2006 01:06 PM (NdGSM)
10
As a christian myself, these legalistics types annoy me!
Does this lady and the church she is in not remember what Jesus said to the crowd that was about to stone the prostitute Mary Magadalene?
"Let he who is w/o sin cast the first stone."
By the way, someone needs to tell this lady that passing judgement on others is a sin, and so is activism...
12
Ummm...
Never wrestle with a pig.
You'll both get dirty, and the pig will like it.
Posted by: QC at June 12, 2006 02:15 PM (PX+vn)
13
Horrible interview. Two heffers screaming at each other...Could Banderas not have kept her cool and simply made the Phelpszombie look like subhuman scum in an audible, understandable way? All that gabbing and yacking sounded like Jerry Springer not Fox News.
Posted by: Jack's Smirking Revenge at June 12, 2006 02:43 PM (CtVG6)
14
Banderas is hot. She could yell at me all day, and I would never hear a thing. I would just answer, "Yes my Queen".
The sea hag would get a good slap, and told to STFU.
Posted by: Leatherneck at June 12, 2006 03:15 PM (D2g/j)
15
I can't stand Banderas, she's a female Geraldo. As a 'reporter', which is what she is supposed to be, she is not supposed to be part of the story. She is to present each side of the story.
Yes the woman she was interviewing was a crazy, dangerous, ugly, loon. But Banderas didn't have to stoop to the loon's level. Not professional!
Yes, she is married. heh
Posted by: Debbie at June 12, 2006 03:19 PM (rWxDT)
16
It's stupid to have any kind of an interview with that woman. Listen, she's shot her mouth off enough that at this point every soul in the country, but for the few parishoners at their God forsaken little "chrurch", would give her a wide berth on any sidewalk.
Actually I'm thinking maybe Zarqawi is in hell right now asking where his virgins are not knowing that Ms. Phelps (and Helen Thomas) is just running a little late.
Posted by: Oyster at June 12, 2006 04:51 PM (YudAC)
17
Thanks for the link. As a gay man I can handle whatever nonsense she and her ilk spew my way. Heck as someone who is also conservative, I may not agree with but respect the fact that some people have religious disagreement with my orientation. I'll be the first person to defend her free speech and religious liberty, but all of us (i.e. all Americans) have the same rights too. What she and her despicable bunch are doing by attacking servicemembers and 'protesting' the funerals of the fallen among them is so beyond the pale that I cannot put into words adequately enough what I think of it. She has the right to do so, within certain bounds, but we have just as much right to oppose her. God bless the Patriot Guard Riders! What Phelps-Roper and her inbred Klan are doing in my view is anti-Christian and un-American.
Posted by: John (AGJ) at June 12, 2006 05:04 PM (D5Sti)
18Fred Phelps is gay!
In all seriousness, I've wondered that myself at times. The stunts he and his bunch have pulled which are actually anti-thetical to the Gospel message he supposedly preaches, leads one to wonder if perhaps he is a deeply-disturbed closet-case or maybe was molested as a child and blames all gays for this. Whatever it is, the man is a loon.
Posted by: John (AGJ) at June 12, 2006 05:07 PM (D5Sti)
19
No, Banderas is hot. Any man who thinks she is not, is messed up in the head.
But wait, that was not compassionate of me. Please, go ahead and rape women, and children, drink boozs until you are in the hospital, do other drugs until you are in ICU, and please go ahead and keep buggering each other in the ass, there is no bloody right, and wrong. It is all OK. Remember, there is no such thing as sin.
Posted by: Leatherneck at June 12, 2006 05:41 PM (D2g/j)
20
You'd expect Leatherneck to ring in unable to resist speaking on the same side as the Phelpers.
Who cares if they are Republicans or Democrats? David Duke ran as a Democrat before he ran as a Republican. For fringe people like LaRouche, Phelps, Duke...it doesn't matter the name of the party. What matters is getting any media coverage at all. Lefties who use Phelps against conservatives are wrong, it's wrong in the reverse. Phelps is just batshit crazy, homophobic, and quite probably gay. He sure sees gayness everywhere.
Posted by: jd at June 12, 2006 05:48 PM (aqTJB)
21
Right, anyone who see buggering each other in the ass as wrong, is Homophobic, and anyone who thinks there is wrong, and right is like the Phelps. In jd's eyes.
Deal with that jd, and deal with the majority of Americans.
Posted by: Leatherneck at June 12, 2006 08:58 PM (D2g/j)
22
Leatherneck, I agree wholeheardedly with jd on this one. You're entitled to your opinion on this, but you're wrong in your approach. You sound just like "them".
Posted by: Oyster at June 13, 2006 04:43 AM (YudAC)
23
I don't think that everyone who is opposed to sodomy is homophobic. No one is forcing you to engage in sodomy, Leatherneck, unless you have camping buddies with control issues. I do think people who equate sodomy with drug abuse to the point of landing in the ICU have some issues with homophobia. Remember, sodomy in many state laws was oral and anal, hetero and homo. Look in your dictionary. Many churches used to teach the same. So are you saying you've never committed sodomy? You don't know what you're missing, man.
DUBAI (Reuters) - Al Qaeda in Iraq named a successor following the killing of the group's leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, according to an Internet statement on Monday.
"The shura council of al Qaeda in Iraq unanimously agreed on Sheikh Abu Hamza al-Muhajir, to be a successor to Sheikh Abu Musab al-Zarqawi," said a statement signed by al Qaeda and posted on a Web site frequently used by Islamist militants.
Most experts had speculated that Abu Ayyub al-Masri would be the one to take over for Zarqawi. Could this be the reason they were wrong?
Posted by: Andrew at June 12, 2006 05:53 PM (I+dcA)
6
That Jordan report on Abu Ayyub al-Masri's death is intriguing. One wonders why we haven't heard more of this. It would be fantastic if his #2 were taken out in the same strike. I look forward to learning of the identities of the other terrorists killed in the attack.
TIME reflects on the al-Masri character based on an interview with an AQ member in Iraq...
http://tinyurl.com/fhj95
The Time reporter, who met with the enemy, is likely a conduit of AQ spin, since I doubt they are going to reveal who is in charge so soon after losing Zarqawi.
Nonetheless, the Time report suggests that al-Masri doesn't exist but, based on the meaning behind Al-Muhajer, which means foreigner, that "Abu Hamza al-Muhajer" is probably a non-Iraqi Arab. The report also says that "Sheikh Abdel-Rahman" (Spiritual Adviser of Al-Zarqawi who was supposedly killed in the same attack) and "Abu Abdul Rahman al Iraqi" are different men. The report mentions another local terrorist, "Abu Abdullah Rasheed al Bagdadi," as being head of the Shura Council.
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Abu Musab al-Zarqawi lived for 52 minutes after a U.S. warplane bombed his hideout northeast of Baghdad, and he died of extensive internal injuries consistent with those caused by a bomb blast, the U.S. military said Monday.
One hopes that during those fifty-two minutes Zarqawi's Maker was giving him a perfect understanding of his actions, that Zarqawi realized he was experiencing a tiny portion of the suffering he so joyously handed out.
He added that no decision had been made on what to do with the remains of al-Zarqawi and his spiritual adviser, Sheik Abdul-Rahman, who also was killed instantly in WednesdayÂ’s airstrike.
1
They used to hang pirates in irons for all to see - not a bad idea, but I suppose to be practical about it and squeeze the utmost value of this animal's death, a video of hogs eating his body should be made and plastered all over the internet. "Porky and the Z Man" now showing in a Special Ops camp near you..........
Posted by: goesh at June 12, 2006 10:30 AM (1w6Ud)
2
Just toss his head on a spike and put it somewhere prominent, with an appropriate messege. Toss the rest out as pigfeed.
I'm not much for knee-jerk emotional reactions, but inspiring a little fear in your enemies never hurt anyone.
Posted by: MiB at June 12, 2006 10:35 AM (RwDCC)
3
1) Cut off his pen-is and stuff it up his @ss.
2) Sew strips of pigskin into his skin giving him a piebald appearance.
3) Hang him from a very tall tree/telephone pole/etc. with a constant feed via a web-cam on a website for the entire internet community to see.
4) Wait until there is *NOTHING* left.
Posted by: JeepThang at June 12, 2006 11:49 AM (0411H)
5
I do believe the Zark saw US soldiers and knew who nailed his ass. That is comforting to me, and I believe not so comforting for the jihadists in Iraq. Very nicely done!
Posted by: jesusland joe at June 12, 2006 12:13 PM (rUyw4)
6
Well, he is going to be buried. Time enough to dig him up and kill him again!
Posted by: Dan at June 12, 2006 12:20 PM (Z2OsI)
7
Sew their bodies in pigskins. That way they can't get their 72 virgins.
Posted by: RayRio at June 12, 2006 12:31 PM (1CTkD)
8
In Baghdad, in a stadium, burn the bastard in a pit, charge admission then take the ashes and dump it in the Euphrates.
For his 16 year old wife and their 18 month old child, allow family to take care of them. For the Prince of AlQaeda Iraq, feed him the fishies.
Posted by: whocares at June 12, 2006 01:12 PM (EFQfG)
9
Dump him like garbage on the outskirts of Bahgdad just like he did his victims.
Posted by: Howie at June 12, 2006 01:15 PM (NdGSM)
10
I have been rejoicing that Zarqawi lived long enough and suffered enough to realise the coalition were the ones that killed him. Where's allah now, you prick? has been the theme of the week for me.
Posted by: Jester at June 12, 2006 02:24 PM (TuAMG)
11
Bury him upside down, facing the west, wrapped in an Israeli flag, 3 weeks after his death. Include a dead pig, a dead hooker, an ounce of coke, a pound of weed, a handle of Jim Beam, and a large dildo up his ass. I think that should be enough to interfere with admission to the false afterlife.
Posted by: Jack's Smirking Revenge at June 12, 2006 02:51 PM (CtVG6)
12
The pig feed comment is most appropriate, and a well-developed tradition in Deadwood.
Posted by: Alan at June 12, 2006 03:54 PM (qCYc3)
13
I say bury him completely properly according to Islamic tradition, in a well publicized ceremony, thus maintaining the moral high ground, while at the same time allowing anyone less "friendly" an opportunity to show up after the fact and do as they will.
Posted by: j at June 12, 2006 05:33 PM (ssh6o)
14
Maybe we can buy tickets for the Phelps family to go picket Z's funeral. Let them get a taste of what kind of society their doctrine will breed.
Posted by: Oyster at June 13, 2006 05:45 AM (YudAC)
The New Band of Brothers
The Weekly Standard published a fantastic article by Michael Fumento on troops in Ramadi. He has now placed a copy on his own website, with the addition of links, photos and videos. You need to read it all to get the in-the-action flavor of the piece. Here are a few excerpts:
Ten days before I arrived, during the night of April 9, 1st Battalion suffered its worst casualties of the deployment in a mini-"Black Hawk Down" situation. An IED flipped a Humvee, killing the driver from D Company. An M-1 Abrams tank went to retrieve it. For good reason, Corregidor has a large complement of tanks and other armored vehicles. Unfortunately, another IED made a lucky strike on the tank, cutting the fuel line and setting it ablaze. The men inside scrambled to safety, but now things got really messy...
So the troops set up a perimeter and waited. As with the real downing of the Black Hawks in Somalia, the burning tank attracted bad guys from throughout the city. They kept pouring into the area to kill the infidels. But with their night-vision equipment and laser pointers, Americans own the night. The enemy came in droves and they died in droves. "The insurgents were so desperate to gain momentum against us that they were literally running into the streets to plant IEDs right in front of us or throwing them over walls," says Claburn. "It was purely amazing." By the time the rounds had stopped flying and the tank was recovered, 30 jihadists were confirmed dead. Disaster had been averted. But the price in blood was high. Two more soldiers from Headquarters Company had died when another IED ripped their Humvee apart. Later the engineers whose job it was to detect and remove IEDs came into Col. Clark's office, apologizing with tears in their eyes. "I told them you tried; you did your best; but you can't get all of them all the time," Clark said....
Right place at the right time indeed. I look where I had been standing exposed to the windows. About where my head had been there's a large pock mark in the opposite wall. The bullet might have drilled me had I remained there; I can't say. Then I see the window. There's a nice clean hole just where my upper right side was – where my body armor has absolutely no protection, much less the new side ceramic plates everybody in 1st Battalion wears. This puts me in a pensive mood. No Killionesque whoops. But there's little time to contemplate my mortality before the order comes to "exfil" for real and start trekking back to the pickup point at a good trot. All quiet on the OP Hotel front. Or so I think. But now it's going to get really bad.
It is the single best article I have read on the war. Go read it!
1
How would the MSM report this? "IEDs exploded and tore apart 2 Humvees in the town of Ramadi. Two more American soldiers died in the ensuing firefight and 30 Iraqis were killed in the confusion. An unidentified Iraqi said some were women and children. This brings the total American deaths in the war to 2 thousand (and whatever). The insurgency is growing! WE'RE LOSING, WE'RE LOSING, WE'RE LOSING!"
Am I exaggerating? Well, a little.
Posted by: Oyster at June 12, 2006 09:06 AM (ULAbo)
2
It seems that the Army is moving in on the city. They cordoned it off!:
http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=ramadi11&date=20060611&query=ramadi
Posted by: Dan at June 12, 2006 09:44 AM (Z2OsI)
3
We hare being to nice. 300 should ever time a American HumVee is attacked.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 12, 2006 10:06 AM (fDZgg)
4
Wow, this is some good stuff. Would that more Americans could read stories just like these, but the trash covering the war, with a few notable exceptions such as Fumento, are just not up to the task. That, in itself, speaks volumes about our media.
Posted by: jesusland joe at June 12, 2006 10:28 AM (rUyw4)
5
Thanks for the posting of my web-based version. I hope to insert more streaming video into it tonight. As to the "cordoning off" of Ramadi, it's true that for some reason no more embeds are being allowed into the city. Something appears to be up. That said, it would take a massive amount of troops to try a repeat of Fallujah. 1,500 isn't enough. It could be a major "search-and-destroy," but it won't be a "grab-and-hold."
Posted by: Michael Fumento at June 12, 2006 10:55 AM (aOJuO)
6
Thank you, Michael, for great wartime reporting along the lines of Ernie Pyle and other great reporters who followed our troops into WWII. It's a damn shame that so few are actually reporting from the front. Nonetheless, that doesn't take anything away from people like you and Yon and a few others. A job well done, Michael Fumento!
Posted by: jesusland joe at June 12, 2006 12:18 PM (rUyw4)
7
Here's another great piece on the war, by the well known liberal John Derbyshire, at the commie National Review. Some conservatives are capable of admitting error. The whole piece is worth reading:
We are not controlling events in Iraq. Events in Iraq are controlling us. We are the puppet; the street gangs of Baghdad and Basra are the puppet-masters, aided and abetted by an unsavory assortment of confidence men, bazaar traders, scheming clerics, ethnic front men, and Iranian agents. With all our wealth and power and idealism, we have submitted to become the plaything of a rabble, and a Middle Eastern rabble at that. Instead of rubbling, we have ourselves been rabbled. The lazy-minded evangelico-romanticism of George W. Bush, the bureaucratic will to power of Donald Rumsfeld, the avuncular condescension of Dick Cheney, and the reflexive military deference of Colin Powell combined to get us into a situation we never wanted to be in, a situation no self-respecting nation ought to be in, a situation we don’t know how to get out of. It’s not inconceivable that, with a run of sheer good luck, we might yet escape without too much egg on our faces, but it’s not likely. The place we are at is surely not a place anyone in 2003 wanted us to be at—not even Vic Davis Hanson.
Since the Iraq war was obviously a gross blunder, is it time for those of us who cheered on the war to offer some kind of apology? Here we are—we, the United States—in our fourth year of occupying that sinkhole, and it looks pretty much like the third year, or the second. Will the eighth year of our occupation, or our twelfth, look any better? I know people who will say yes, but I no longer know any who will say it with real conviction. It’s a tough thing, to admit you were wrong. It’s way tough if you’re a big-name pundit with a reputation to preserve. For those of us down at the bottom of the pundit pecking order, the stakes aren’t so high. I, at any rate, am willing to eat some crow and say: I wish I had never given any support to this fool war.
Posted by: jd at June 12, 2006 05:32 PM (aqTJB)
8
jd, WTF prompted you to insert this piece of bull into this thread? It's totally off topic. Let's talk about our soldiers. Crap, is there nothing sacred to you? Insert that garbage into another thread that covers our entry into the war. There are only about 10 million of those at any given time on the internet. Crap!
Posted by: jesusland joe at June 12, 2006 07:56 PM (rUyw4)
9
So jd, since someone may not agree with you, it means they're incapable of admitting error? And Derbyshire's "opinion" had no place in this thread as JJ stated. Unless he's reporting from Iraq on actual events, it has no place here and continues to be "opinion".
As many people here have openly and readily admitted that many errors have been made, you don't consider them honest unless they join your ranks in wanting to throw the baby out with the bath water. Allow me to predict your response, as you've reiterated it so many times: "The majority of Americans are now against the war." So what? You're part of that majority. I'm happy you have friends. Good day.
Posted by: Oyster at June 13, 2006 06:10 AM (YudAC)
10
I think if you look at comments here, many people have posted stuff that is not directly related. I certainly didn't intend to denigrate our troops. The troops succeeded; the president has failed. We needed a leadership equal to the valor and sacrifice of our fighting men and women. Unfortunately, Bush, Cheney, and Rummy aren't fit to be mentioned in the same sentence as our fighting heroes in Iraq and Afghanistan. Their incompetence, bluster, and meretricious partisanship in the war on terror has made a mockery of their oaths of office.
New Nukes for Ontario
The environmentalists and the not-in-my-back-yard liberals will surely protest this news. I'd suggest that the citizens of Ontario have left themselves with few options. Alternative energy sources won't come close to providing the anticipated 12,000+ megawatts of continuous capacity needed to meet demand over the next 20 years. It's either nuke plants or turn off the lights.
The provincial government will announce tomorrow that Ontario is embracing more nuclear power plants, sources told the Toronto Star.
Premier Dalton McGuinty has privately spoken of his government's plans to confidants for days, insiders say.
In an off-the-record speech on Saturday night in Ottawa to the secretive Bilderberg group, McGuinty discussed the pros and cons of more nuclear plants.
While he did not divulge the government's plans to that audience of 160 business and political leaders, the premier privately admitted the public will officially learn of the plans tomorrow when his government announces its long-awaited response to the Ontario Power Authority's report on the province's energy supply mix.
The Sierra Club and Greenpeace have already weighed in with their disapproval. Nevertheless, it appears that $40 billion worth of new and refurbished nuclear generating capacity is now on the table as the primary focus of the Ontario Power Authority's next 20 years.
3
Tell the antinuke granola munchers to go ride the bicycles clear across the atlantic ocean and stop boing so dumb
Posted by: sandpiper at June 12, 2006 01:41 PM (kexrr)
4
greyrooster you make as much sense as Prez Bush without a teleprompt. sure its cleaner, as long as you have some place to put the waste.
you'd be surprised to see how many non-granola intellegent people are against the idea. at the end of the day I like my room colder and my air cleaner. too bad i can't have both
Posted by: hillbilly-bob at June 12, 2006 03:32 PM (fANv+)
Haditha, The Gatekeepers and The Groundshift
Cross-posted at Mein Blogovault
Much (not all) of what is contained in this post has been stated or articulated elsewhere in the blogosphere, so please forgive and indulge me for the sake of reflection on this important issue.
In its apparent zeal and fervor, the mainstream press may have shot itself in both legs with the outlandish and one-sided Haditha coverage over the past few weeks. It is certainly now evident that there have been glaring and troubling inconsistencies from the “eyewitnesses” to these alleged incidents. It is also evident that the “sources” for the TIME story were presented in a catastrophically misleading way. These corrections, backtracks, misleading statements, scrubbings, retractions and inaccuracies are now (thanks to the fact-checkers residing in the new media – the readers) surfacing on a daily basis. The mainstream press, it figures, can merely outrun the new media with their nightly news megaphone and printing presses; assuming quite correctly that irreparable damage to our image and our military has been done simply by printing allegations, misleading suggestions and hysterical “eyewitness accounts” from nameless, faceless sources who are turning out to be not-so-nameless, faceless or agenda-less.
There have also been rumblings in the blogosphere about the potential for this story to become a bigger referendum and embarrassment for the “old media” then the Dan Rather Memogate scandal. There has undoubtedly been a recent emerging of hasty and sloppy media coverage when it comes to certain incidents both tangentially and directly involving our war on worldwide Islamic terrorism (especially when it comes to the conduct and effectiveness of our military), but no proportional cynicism or distrust of the “sources” from which stories like Haditha emerge. Herein lies the root of the problem – the enemy gets the benefit of the doubt, and the military (by proxy, the US) gets smeared.
A few recent examples of this emerging pattern are in order. Newsweek published a completely bogus story of our troops in Gitmo flushing Korans down the toilet; the facts revealed that precisely the opposite was occurring on a daily basis. We often hear about how the military is broken and strained, and yet, we have stories indicating that the Army and other armed forces are meeting their recruiting goals. We have hyperventilating coverage of “alleged massacres” that come from hard-line Sunni insurgents bent on driving the US out of Iraq so that they can resume what they do best – slaughtering innocents. We have the incident at Ishaqi – released (intentionally released at the time this supposed story was breaking) to enhance the “pile-on” effect. Unfortunately for the anti-war left, that “massacre” turned out to be nothing of the sort, complete with acquittals. This is a partial and incomplete list, but there is an undeniable pattern of incompetence and gun-jumping now established.
Just what is it, then, that causes or allows for this hysterical and shoddy press coverage of the war? For one thing, it could be that the general political leanings of many in the media business fall on the left-of-center side of the aisle, and that these media have already “dug in” (starting after 2000) against the actions of the Bush Administration regardless of facts and reality. It could also be that the formative experiences (1960’s drug-addled hysteria, unmediated leftism and Viet Nam) of many of these media progenitors (think Pinchy, Bill Keller, Mary Mapes, Dan Rather, Eason Jordan, etc.) are disproportionately influencing their perspectives on modern events. It could very well be that the left’s go-to 40 year old narrative of “US bad, Military = baby killers, Vote Democrat or else" is deteriorating at a rapid rate. This rapid erosion of mainstream television and print media power and influence is causing the retaliatory emergence of tabloid-like sensationalism and “gotcha” journalism, sort of like how a fish desperately flails for dissolved oxygen on dry land. This is perhaps a predictable response from those who feel that their “integrity” and their “professionalism” is being challenged unfairly. As this current Haditha story is indicating, those criticisms are perfectly valid and are evidently getting under the skin of certain publications known by their “credibility.”
Whatever the collective and aggregate socio-psychological reasons that elicit such childish and knee-jerk reactions from members of the press on all matters military, it is almost irrelevant. For the most part, I’m willing to bet that the majority of members of the old media know that the ground is shifting as it did when they assumed power in the 1970’s. There is an entire world of information literally at the fingertips of anyone willing to look for it, and this is a terrifying prospect to media organs whose primary function is to act as what David Manning White termed the “gatekeepers” of information. Being the gatekeeper of information bestows upon said gatekeeper an inordinate amount of influence of power – for whatever reason you choose, you get to decide who talks about what, how much of it they can talk about, when they can talk about it , in what context, etc. These gatekeepers (reporters and editors, sometimes management and ownership) don’t necessarily tell the audience what to think (although this is debatable in many circumstances when linguistic biases within media writing are exposed), but the gatekeeper is essential in telling the audience what to think about. A recent Pew Institute reportsuggested that the Internet is now the most adhered-to source of information and news – surpassing long-time stalwarts like print and television.
To those who have built virtual empires on the commercial viability of television news and printed news, this is a potentially terrifying prospect. In response, the old media fires back with the only weapons in its arsenal that it knows how to use – their legacy influence over an unsuspecting audience and their ubiquitous “coverage” that permeates nearly every home and workplace in the country. It is during this loosely-coordinated counter-attack that the new media asserts its importance and relevance. For your convenience, I have assembled a representative roundup of counter-MSM Haditha coverage. Hopefully, this provides and continues to validate how the new media performs the editorial functions that those “gatekeepers” in the old media are either don’t perform or perform over-zealously at the expense of the entire story being laid out.
1
Great post. Remember the Greyrooster said it was all bullshit from the start. Same with the Duke Lacrosse team. Too many Tawana Brawley going around. WHY? Because the stupid childlike liberals wish to believe anything bad.
Liberals and leftards are sich shits who have been disturbing this great nation for far too long. They offer nothing on the good side of the ledger. Only lies, distortions because of their own self loathing. Pitiful little friendless shits.
Outlaw Islam.
Outlaw Leftards.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 12, 2006 07:17 AM (KM2nY)
2
I cancelled my local newspaper (a bullhorn for the AP) and no longer rely on the 3 networks for TV news. My information gathering comes, almost exclusively, from the internet. I find myself much more informed about world events than most in my circle of friends.
The old media is like the last mammouth, struggling through the snow in a vain attempt to find a mate.
Posted by: MCPO Airdale at June 12, 2006 07:53 AM (3nKvy)
3
So what is the opposite of troops flushing the Koran down the toilet?? - your words. Can't imagine the koran flushing troops down the toilet, more's the pity.
Posted by: kevin aylward at June 12, 2006 08:15 AM (e97lE)
4
Observe how Liberals will hang on by their nails to dream that Haditha must true, instead of hoping that maybe, just maybe it could be false. You see, when you want things to be true, you insist to your dying breath that it is true, and when you want it to be false, you dont. Libs won't give our boys even the slightest benefit of the doubt because they WANT to believe they're cold-blooded murderers.
But don't you fucking DARE question their patriotism, or call into their """"support"""" of the troops. Just remember, their "dissent" is """"patriotic."""""
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at June 12, 2006 08:19 AM (8e/V4)
5
"So what is the opposite of troops flushing the Koran down the toilet?? - your words. Can't imagine the koran flushing troops down the toilet, more's the pity"
Umm...How about the DETAINEES flushing, tearing and urinating on their own Korans that I and my fellow Americans paid for? Are you really that dense?
Posted by: Good Lt at June 12, 2006 08:21 AM (yT+NK)
6
Well, well, the Zarq bites the dust, Time Magazine stoops to a new low(how low can they go, you ask), the antique media shills for Islamists, and the Democrats do their best to undermine the troops. What looked like a complete disaster for the Republicans just a few weeks ago has now backfired.
I figured the Democraps were a shoo-in to take at least the House, but now Murtha and Kos, along with Polosi and a few others seem ready to hand the Republicans the House again. They just can't figure out that most Americans have more respect for the military than they have for politicians.
Now the only hope the Dems have to win elections is fraud. And be prepared for plenty of that, as most Dems who were convicted of fraud got away with a slap on the wrist. Look for millions of illegal aliens to vote, along with thousands of criminals and the dead. Should be interesting watching how it plays out.
Posted by: jesusland joe at June 12, 2006 08:36 AM (rUyw4)
7
The good guys planted Murtha there. Ha. Ha.
Didn't you know Cidny Sheehan really works for the GOP.
Ha! Winning is so easy when dealing with leftards.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 12, 2006 10:11 AM (fDZgg)
8
The Democraps next hero with be Willie Jefferson from the Chocolate city. He didn't do it. Ha, Ha. Here be comes the black caucus, the naacp, willie nagin, leftards, Al sharpton, The REV. (cheats on his wife Jackson) (aka buys the ho a house with contributions),those on welfare and the normal democrat group. He be insent. Youse white folks all lying trin to put de black man down.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 12, 2006 10:17 AM (fDZgg)
9
Excellent piece, Good Lieutenant. Now I'm off to read the links.
Posted by: Oyster at June 12, 2006 11:01 AM (ULAbo)
10
Thanks for the support, fellow Siths! More to come!
Posted by: Good Lt at June 12, 2006 11:12 AM (jWYAe)
11
Greyhawk had an excellent point in the Mudville Gazette link. Jonathan Karl did nothing more than to try to portray the original press release, as it stands, as an unwillingness by the military to correct the record. (incidentally, the military's correction won't be one square inch on the inside, bottom right corner of page 18 of a sixty page publication) But the investigation isn't over yet so exactly what does the media suppose they correct it with? The answer is: They don't care. They've already painted the picture with their perception by simply asking the question.
The military, unlike the media, is gathering facts on this issue - all of them - before correcting, recounting what happened and rendering a verdict. The media has already rendered their verdict.
Posted by: Oyster at June 12, 2006 12:02 PM (ULAbo)
Rot in Hell, Zarqawi
The Z-man was a beheader, murderer of innocents, and a pedophile:
The Jordanian security official told TIME that the bombing killed Abdul-Rahman and Mr. X, in addition to al-Zarqawi's 16-year-old wife.
Since his baby was 18 months old, that means he impregnated his wife when she was 13 or 14 years old. That is one more reason to hope he is burning in hell.
Posted by: actus at June 12, 2006 06:39 AM (nnhSu)
3
By now the Z man has found out that there is indeed one true God, but his name isn't Allah, and that, instead of being a martyr, he will be sent to eternal hell. Where he awaits his judgement, it's already worse for him than anything he ever did to anyone on earth. And by now he had also found out that,
THERE AIN'T NO VIRGINS THERE SUCKER.
Wake up, islam, before it's too late for the rest of you.
Posted by: n.a. palm at June 12, 2006 06:40 AM (2ePu9)
4
That's how they do things there. You can't judge or condemn. Only condemn how we do things here.
Posted by: AbbaGav at June 12, 2006 07:05 AM (5XR09)
5
What kind of hatefull little shit would the brat have grow up to be?
Posted by: greyrooster at June 12, 2006 07:19 AM (KM2nY)
Posted by: Jester at June 12, 2006 02:25 PM (TuAMG)
7
He is down there with HITLER,STALIN,MOA,KHOMENI,ATTILA,GINGAS KHAN,and a few of his followers complaning HEY YOU LIED TO US YOU SAID WE WERE GOING TO PARIDISE
Posted by: sandpiper at June 12, 2006 09:19 PM (FpZEl)
Filipina Celeb - Natasha Asbury
Natasha is a half-Filipina/half-American substitute schoolteacher and fashion model. And, based on my in-depth investigation, she is not a terrorist. More here.
How to Identify a Terrorist...
For your safety and the safety of others, it is important to be able to quickly identify potential terrorist threats that you may encounter in your daily life.
This person, for example, may or may not be a terrorist:
Hamas Shows Incompetence, Ends Ceasefire
Friday, 7 (or 8, depending on the source) Palestinian civilians were killed in an explosion on a Gaza beach. Hamas claims that Israeli artillery shells killed them and used the deaths as an excuse to end the fragile ceasefire with Israel.
An Israel Defense Forces intelligence officer has confirmed that the explosion that killed eight Palestinians on Friday, was caused by a stockpile of Hamas explosives.
"Shortly after we stopped defensive firing at Hamas rocket launch pads which were deployed behind Palestinian human shields, members of Hamas scrambled to fire more rockets at our positions," said Col. M. "We have eyes on every meter of Gaza, from the sky, from the ground and from the sea. One of their rocket tripods collapsed inadvertently setting off an explosion of a stockpile of Qassam rockets. The Palestinians killed their own children. And this was not the first time."
Hamas terrorists fired rockets and mortar bombs from a crowded Gaza beach at southern Israel. Some of the rockets fell near the Israel city of Ashkelon. Some 17 rockets were fired between Saturday and Sunday morning. A man at a school in the Israel town of Sderot was wounded, Israel officials said.
Israel Maj.-Gen. Yoav Galant said today that the Israel Defense Forces has additional evidence that it wasn't Israel artillery that hit the beach in Gaza. Galant, who commands Israel's southern command, said Israel stopped firing 15 minutes before the explosion. It's all on secure videotape from both sides of the conflict. Israel Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said he was sorry about the deaths, which included three children.
Hamas knows what happened, they know their own incompetent terrorists killed their own people. And they still use the incident as an excuse to end the ceasefire. Why? Hamas is in a nasty fight with Fatah over control of the PA government, and the best way to maintain support is to find an external enemy to bring the faithful back into the fold. Wag the dog, if you will.
1
They do it because it works. Once having accused Israel, and having the papers pick it up (and Israel of course, in a knee jerk reaction to the death of any innocent, offers remorse over the loss of life...) they get the best of all worlds. Israel is either guilty (even if it was an accident) or the papers are too fearful of making the same mistake twice (well, they always make this same mistake, just not twice in succession) so the papers, if they care to pretend to be unbiased at all, take a "neutral" stance, repeating the accusation against Israel and then adding something along the lines of "but Israel says..."
SO, Israel retains her guilt, while the Palestinaisn are the victims...
I'm not holding my breath waiting for the world to wake up.
Posted by: Rachel Ann at June 12, 2006 05:06 AM (OGPU0)
2
How long did it take to make that bull shit up?
Time for you two to wake up
Posted by: david at June 12, 2006 08:26 AM (SL48Z)
Posted by: black Death at June 12, 2006 01:35 PM (/B3gx)
4
They are not Palestinians. That is a big fat lie that keeps being written. They are mostly from Jordan, and Egypt. They came to the area to work for Jewish people who were turning the land into something more than dry dirt.
These are the same people who went to war with Israel five times, and lost each time. They are about to go to war again, and this time we helped them get enough area to call it a state.
It is a terrorist state, and they worship Allah. If anyone thinks Allah is the same god the Jews pray to, please search Allah, or moon god. You will get the same result.
ROPMA
Posted by: Leatherneck at June 12, 2006 01:55 PM (D2g/j)
Yearly Kos Report : From the fingers of babes...
Did you know that if you mix equal parts home video camera and personal computer hardware, you can make virtual napalm?
Oh, yes. One can produce all sorts of explosive propaganda using simple household items--if one is so inclined.
For those interested in the Yearly Kos show, you're probably aware that Hot Air has been ALL OVER it from the get-go. Blogging on the Kossacks' Saturday night red-meat-o-rama, Hot Air's AllahPundit had this to say about the Kossacks' amateur video work:
more...
Posted by: Kos_Irhabi at
12:54 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 318 words, total size 2 kb.
Read the whole article. It's kinda funny. It painstakingly outlines the egregious hand-wringing going on about this non-event.
It's simple. We are in a war. Club Gitmo is a POW camp. A POW camp is where Prisoners Of War are held. All the ridiculous carping about people being held without trial is just that. Ridiculous.
It should also be noted that many detainees released from Gitmo have cheerfully returned to their chosen avocation of trying to kill as many Americans as possible.
If you really want to read a howler, check out this editorial from a month ago in the Yemen Observer. You know Yemen, that country that sets the standards for humane incarceration in the world. That's like Tony Soprano lecturing Jack Bauer that he should stop killing people.
1
Turn all terrorists over to the Japanese. I hear they would bayonet them to death. What's good enough for a GI. Is surely good enough for a terrorists fighting in someone elses country.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 12, 2006 10:33 AM (fDZgg)
2
Correct me if I am wrong but they don't even qualify as POWs because they do not fight under a visible symbol like a uniform and they do not obey the rules of war that are spelled out in the Geneva Convention which spells out the rights of POWs. They are militants (not civilian criminals) who didn't attempt to qualify for POW protection when they were on the battlefield. The reason they "fall through the cracks" of the legal system is that no one ever thought that being an terrorist who targets civilians was something worth protecting. We should keep it that way.
Posted by: Chuck the Lucky at June 12, 2006 07:02 PM (scKzN)
3
Is anyone going to introduce the new posters, or are they supposed to be unknown?
Posted by: davec at June 11, 2006 08:32 PM (CcXvt)
4
Scroll down, Dave, Catholicgauze and Chris both introduced themselves.
The All Seeing Eye, well, after what he just went through, probably doesn't need a formal intro.
Yearly Kos : A Revolution in the Making?
This was it. The netroots, coming together. The Kossacks, mad as hell and not gonna take it anymore. A brave new political world being born. The left-wing blogosphere, planning their real-world revolution. You could feel the energy, even as far away as LGF and Malkin.
Just out of curiosity, I decided to pop in and have a look. Knowing that this was touted as the making of a brave new political world, and considering I was in the neighborhood, I figured I might as well check it out.
I suppose I was expecting something similar to DailyKos.com, except audible, and with chicken sandwiches, perhaps accompanied with a whiff of incense... more...
2
Very interesting. I really don't get this "re-framing" of arguments. Especially when so many of them are unclear as to exactly what they want. Take abortion for example. Many people don't accept it as moral, but are cautiously supportive if restrictions are applied. So is "re-framing" it supposed to coerce more people into not only being tolerant, but to accepting it as moral? Has government school indoctrination not been as successful as they hoped?
Posted by: Oyster at June 11, 2006 06:30 PM (YudAC)
3One of the panelists politely explained that it'd probably be counterproductive to beat up the conservative co-worker with a baseball bat. He explained that reacting angrily and/or violently only plays to stereotypes about the left.
Not to mention, she'd find that there are more conservatives at her office than Leftwing moonbats-- and many of them are actually armed.
Yes, there are THOUSANDS of us conservatives out here. It's not just the eeeeeevil corporations they have to defeat.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at June 11, 2006 06:33 PM (8e/V4)
4
>>>>they're starting to be taken seriously by the Democrat Party establishment.
Which means the Democrat party is going to be pulled further to the Left, and away from the mainstream. The only way for the Democrats to win will be for the GOP to muck things up so bad that it's own base won't turn up at the polls.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at June 11, 2006 06:36 PM (8e/V4)
5
What is interesting is that there is no possiblity of a conservative equivalent, because the conservative side of the voting spectrum is not permitted to join in the process, which is top down, distributed talking points, and staying "on message." The idea that voters might contribute to the "message" or that voters might have (gasp) diverse opinions is anathema to the right.
Unable to play the same game, conservatives have nothing left to do except whine that it's not an important game to play and that the Kossacks' vast array of opinion on every political subject is somehow evidence that they aren't thinking for themselves.
Perhaps a conservative can explain why, in a free marketplace of ideas, DKos is five or six times more popular than the most popular conservative blog, and the left blogosphere in general is about five times as popular as the right. No one is paying people to visit DKos or Eschaton or AmericaBlog, and it is no more difficult to go there than it is to any other site. What is it about a free discussion with few limits that makes the liberal blogs so much more successful than conservative blogs?
Does anyone here really think that the power of the left blogosphere has already peaked and that it is all downhill from here? I do not. I believe that it is barely out of the starting blocks, and doing something for the first time ever might take a little time to sort out, but it is definitely not going away soon, and in a few years the impact will be more than just a joke to the right.
Posted by: Repack Rider at June 11, 2006 08:04 PM (uHrmF)
6
Repack Rider:
The left blogosphere is five times as popular as the right? Where do you get that idea? There are FAR more right-leaning blogs than left ones. The blogosphere was created by the right, because the left already controlled all of the MSM and academia.
DKos is more popular by a factor of 5x of any conservative blog? Do you have figures on that? I disagree that the left blogosphere is barely out of the starting blocks; they may not have peaked, but they aren't going much higher. What passes for discourse on DKos and DU is nothing but vitriolic hate, and mainstream America and the center will never respond to that. Just view the red county/blue county chart of the last two elections to see where most of America lies. The fact that Moulitsas is what, 0-20, on endorsing candidates shows that the vast importance you place on lefty blogs is highly over-rated. And
Air America, flagship network of the left, has ratings that can barely be measured. The only reason DKos has a high hit count is because it is one of very few lefty blogs and is being kowtowed by the Democrat party. And considering how out of the mainstream most of the opinions there are (such as Moulitsas' "screw them" comment) ... see ya' in 2008. It'll be interesting.
Posted by: rokbassist at June 11, 2006 08:43 PM (hmks6)
7
vitriolic hate ?? are those damn Quakers on the rampage again ?
Posted by: john ryan at June 11, 2006 08:52 PM (TcoRJ)
8
Perhaps a conservative can explain why, in a free marketplace of ideas, DKos is five or six times more popular than the most popular conservative blog,
Good for DKos.
Perhaps a liberal can explain in a free election system, liberal candidates are overwhelmingly likely to lose....and lose badly. And why Democrats no longer look forward to success at the ballot box, but "moral victories" by means of losing but not as badly as before.
Good for the kossacks....they participate in a bulletin board discussion in large numbers. Folks on the right are busy working during the day and actually winning elections. Given the choice, I'll take electoral success over internet discussion largesse.
But that's just me.
Get someone to win an election running on the themes that the kossacks love - gay marriage, socialized health care, tax hikes (all reformatted as "equal rights, single payer and rolling back", of course....it's the narrative that counts, I'm told) and it won't be taken as quite the joke that it is, now. Or, win an election in general. Zero for twenty is quite a record to behold.
9
"What is interesting is that there is no possiblity of a conservative equivalent, because the conservative side of the voting spectrum is not permitted to join in the process, which is top down, distributed talking points, and staying "on message." The idea that voters might contribute to the "message" or that voters might have (gasp) diverse opinions is anathema to the right."
Speaking of distributed talking points, holy cow. I don't suppose you've ever heard of the Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute, National Review, the Weekly Standard, CPAC, GOPAC, the Young America's Foundation, or TownHall.com just to name some of the biggest places where ideas and policies have been debated and refined for years. Heck, you can see the process happen on nearly a daily basis on NRO's blog, The Corner. What you do not see is a legion of people marching to the beat of the same drum and eschewing differing ideas.
It's funny that you mention the Kossack's vast array of opinions, insifar as they have one opinion about every subject and God help you should you differ from the doctrine. Ask Joe Lieberman about how having an opinion that differs from the Kossacks.
How to explain the popularity of lefty blogs? I could come up with quite a few ideas, but none, I believe, that would convince you. You have the Kos playbook in your head and you're running it nearly perfectly.
Posted by: Jimmie at June 11, 2006 08:54 PM (4mZXF)
10The quietness of the Kossacks was the first surprise of Yearly Kos. The second surprise was the degree of attention paid to 'mainstream' issues like the budget deficit, the trade deficit, economic growth and domestic energy policy.
It's only a surprise if you judge the lefty blogs by their rhetoric, as opposed to their policy preferences. Most of the leading liberal bloggers -- Kos, Duncan Black, Josh Marshall, Digby -- are fierce rhetoreticians, but the policies they prefer put them on the "mainstream" or "moderate" end of the spectrum: they like balanced budgets, a health-care system similar to other capitalistic countries, and they were in favor of some military interventions but not Iraq II. A Mark Warner or, for that matter, an Al Gore (who is not a lefty by any means) fits the Kossack profile much better than a Cynthia McKinney or even a Barbara Boxer. (A similar example in the column-writing world is Paul Krugman, a moderate, pro-globalization economist who got a reputation as a shrieking lefty mostly for his tone, not his policy prescriptions.) Like the pro-gun, pro-Desert-Storm Howard Dean, they're what might be called "angry moderates."
Also, I'm never really sure what the "0 for 20" thing is supposed to prove. For one thing, it's not even true (the "netroots" contributed to some Dem special election wins in Congress in 2004). For another thing, the whole point of backing longshots is that you usually lose. And the final point is that these groups are more or less where conservative groups were in the mid-'60s, when Democrats controlled everything -- and conservatives didn't get One of Their Own into power until 1980. I don't know if the netroots types have the patience to wait that long, but if you want to build a movement you have to be in it for the long haul.
Posted by: M.A. at June 11, 2006 09:34 PM (sJV6q)
11Also, I'm never really sure what the "0 for 20" thing is supposed to prove.
That the Lost Kos Kids are losers? Moulitsa's endorsement is the kiss of death. I go to DailyKos every time they lose an election. It's fascinating to see the "reality-based community" backslap each other on their "moral victories". lol! Yes, the Nutroots is truly a force to content with.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at June 11, 2006 10:29 PM (8e/V4)
12That the Lost Kos Kids are losers? Moulitsa's endorsement is the kiss of death.
Again, the only way to be sure of that would be to compare it to the record of a new conservative advocacy group, say in 1966 or something like that. They didn't do so great either when they started out. The test of the "netroots" as a movement is whether they can move things in their direction eventually, the way the conservative groups did -- but "eventually" doesn't mean "less than four years after the start of the movement from scratch."
Also, you have to qualify the statement with two points: a) The Kossacks did, in fact, help two Democrats win special elections for Congress in 2004 (though that sure as heck didn't presage a Democratic victory in November), and b) Kos mostly endorses candidates who are considered longshots, and longshots usually lose. Again, conservative groups know that this is important even if you usually lose, because eventually you do win one and even when you lose, you help move things in your direction. (E.g. by sponsoring the primary challenge to Arlen Specter, conservative groups "lost," but helped put pressure on Specter to toe the party line. A similar thing could happen with the Lieberman challenge).
I go to DailyKos every time they lose an election. It's fascinating to see the "reality-based community" backslap each other on their "moral victories". lol!
You're seeing what you want to see. Kos's own posts for the last year or so have been pretty realistic about the Democrats' chances (he frequently throws cold water on the idea that they can take back Congres) and about chewing the Democrats out for specific losses.
Again, the correct comparison of the liberal "netroots" is to the conservative movement in its mid-'60s infancy, after Goldwater's loss prompted conservatives to organize and take back the country at the grassroots level. The interesting thing will be that eventually people will be elected who sort of "grew up" politically with the liberal blogs, just as the '80s brought to power Republicans who had "grown up" with the new conserva-roots. Though I'm not sure who the netroots Reagan will turn out to be 15 years from now (maybe Brian Schweitzer).
Posted by: M.A. at June 11, 2006 11:22 PM (sJV6q)
13
I prefer to call a spade a spade. First off, the new election campaign contributon law was fought for fiercely and backed by George Soros and some other big money types. He knew at the time that the 527 loophole would be a reasult.I am not certain he leans toward socialism or communism, but Jane Fonda is number three [3] on the list of supporters and backers. Hillaey and a fellow who figured in the Clinton administration [for the life of me I can't remember his name right now] with Soros' backing started the Shadow Party and the "7" sisters. They also started their own 527's along with many others of the top socialist leaning money contributors and pretty much have the Democratic party by the short hairs.
Back in the late 90's there was a "progressive" meeting in Chicago that discussed a long term goal of a candidate in the White House in 2008. It was on the DSA website along with the names of the members of the progressive Caucus members and officers. A reporter wrote a story about the relationship of the DSA and the Progressive Caucus. The whole issue was quietly put down. DSA redesigned their web site and stopped showing the progressive caucus as an affiliate. The Progressive Caucus then started its own web at a .gov site.
ANSWER [behind the war protest marches], UPJ, NOIN, MoveOn.org [listed in order of ize are all umbrella groups for numerous Socialists and Communists groups who are either pro North KoreaP, Fidel Castro and the Venceremos Brigade, Communist China and Maoists or old Soviet type movements controlled by communists activists. All fall under the umbrella and/or influence of the old SWP and the newer WWP.
MoveOn.org first realized the advantage of the internet and virtually exists through the internet. They have been very succesful in this venue. By the way Hillary and Al Gore are ideologically as alike as two peas in the same pod. Shje is anything but a moderate. But she adapts for votes. That ability may have hurt her tremendously with her far left cohorts who unlike Hillary, won't compromise principles for votes.
Personally, I think she is one smart politician who whole heartedly had my vote for years. Then after 9/11 when Fonda and others crawled out of the woodwork like cock roaches, I began to look beneath the surface in popitics!!
Some of the major players in the "progressive movement" were active in the 60's. They are now lawyers, writers, educators [God help us], are. and have gotten smarter since the 60's. They know progressive or leftist sounds better than Communist or Socialist. They simply changed what things were called. Found more palatable sounding terminology.They've bought themselves control of media sources.
Enough said!
Posted by: devildog6771 at June 12, 2006 01:35 AM (VT3Uv)
14
M.A. -
You say I was only surprised to hear mainstream issues discussed at Yearly Kos because I listen to the Kossacks' rhetoric instead of their true policy preferences.
Are you saying that the Kossacks only PRETEND to be leftists fighting for fringe policies (e.g., socialized medicine, expanded wealth redistribution, impeaching the President, abandoning the new Iraqi government), while they're REALLY interested in instituting popular, centrist policies (promoting strong economic growth, controlling government spending, addressing trade imbalances, etc.)?
If this is what you're saying, please explain how this could possibly be a winning political strategy.
If it isn't what you're saying, please clarify.
Posted by: The All-Seeing Eye at June 12, 2006 02:38 AM (zj9j9)
15
Some of the talk here sounds grand and so noble, but "they like balanced budgets, a health-care system similar to other capitalistic countries,..." ?
I think the the problem here lies with half truths. Let's complete some of those likes and wishes. When a "progressive" talks about balanced budgets how can one possibly disagree? But let them complete that thought with "they like balanced budgets by making sure the rich (which is a pretty widely interpreted term) pay, pay, pay." It's the equating of rich with greed, power grabbing, insensitivity and imperialism that they prattle on about on these blogs yet leave behind when they hold their netroots gatherings. What's also conveniently ignored is the massive power and wealth of their own benefactors and their willingness to be manipulated by the likes of Soros, Heinz, Turner and many others. All leftists. And they think we can't see the hypocrisy in that?
And as I said earlier about abortion: it's not enough to be tolerant of abortion. Contrary to what they say, oh no, it's not tolerance they want. They want you to embrace it.
They want a health care system similar to other capitalist countries? And how, praytell, will they avoid the pitfalls and that giant sucking sound they hear from the government run healthcare systems overseas? Where's the discussion on that? Are they taking the Hillary approach and telling others, "You're smart. You'll figure it out."? Or are they taking the John Kerry approach and saying "I would have done it too, but I would have done it better"?
I could go on for ages with this stuff, but you get my drift.
Posted by: Oyster at June 12, 2006 05:47 AM (YudAC)
16
I should add that calling a position "fringe" when it's actually mainstream happens all the time on both sides. For example, liberals tend to talk as if opposing gay marriage is a fringe, crazy far-right position. But most Americans (and probably most people in Western capitalist democracies) oppose gay marriage. So while liberals may think it's wrong to oppose gay marriage, it can't be called a fringe position, any more than opposing the Iraq war is a fringe position. We tend, on both sides, to think that "mainstream" = "agrees with me."
Posted by: M.A. at June 12, 2006 07:11 AM (sJV6q)
17If this is what you're saying, please explain how this could possibly be a winning political strategy.
If it isn't what you're saying, please clarify.
I don't know if it's a winning political strategy or not; a lot of the people who post on Kos -- particularly the reader diarists and commentators, who of course aren't controlled by the people who run the blog -- are basically mainstream Democratic types whose politics are closer to Al Gore than to any left-wing types. However, they feel very passionately that Bush is hurting America, so they tend to write angrily, passionately and with fervor. So they are inevitably typecast as the "angry left." I don't think any of them are angrier than, say, Michelle Malkin, but it's just inevitable that the MSM thinks liberals are "angry" but gives a free pass to righties; no use complaining about that.
Is it good strategy to sound angry and advertise your hatred of the President? No. But most of these people aren't strategists; they're just people who read blogs and post comments. The online people who are "strategists" tend to be much calmer (Josh Marshall, Ezra Klein, the MyDD guys).
Posted by: M.A. at June 12, 2006 07:18 AM (sJV6q)
18...but it's just inevitable that the MSM thinks liberals are "angry" but gives a free pass to righties; no use complaining about that.
One of the more hilarious delusions of the Left is that the MSM is against them. What a laugh. It does, however, show the depths that Leftists will go to "explain" their own failings - attacking the one establishment out there that is doing everything it can, including forgery, lies, and hyperbole, to support the Left yet the left blames them for their own bad reputation. You guys never cease to make me laugh. And that is probably not a good thing, for your sake. The first step in achieving some kind of parity would be to be taken seriously. You Lefties have a long way to go for that.
19"However, they feel very passionately that Bush is hurting America, so they tend to write angrily, passionately and with fervor. So they are inevitably typecast as the "angry left." I don't think any of them are angrier than, say, Michelle Malkin..."
Umm, I have yet to see Michelle Malkin write a post filled with ALL CAPS, tons of profanity, and vile wishes against her opponents, followed by lots of exclamation points!!!!! In other words, most of the DKos'ers look like immature kids throwing a tantrum. Want to have a debate? I'm all for it. But once the profanity and name calling starts, as it does in nearly every Kos diary, I'm done ...
Posted by: rokbassist at June 12, 2006 01:59 PM (RxWwc)
20
Frankly, typecasting them as the "angry left" is not any different nor is it any more egregious than typecasting the right as "fascists". All that talk can be ignored or it seems more often it's just countered with further insult. So they don't like being called names? Whatever. In the words of the inimitable Dr. Rusty Shackleford, "Boo-freaking-hoo." Tell them to re-frame THAT one.
Posted by: Oyster at June 12, 2006 02:56 PM (ULAbo)
21
I couldn't get a rise out of them either, All Seeing Eye, and I was actively trying to get something explosive going.
Posted by: Kender at June 13, 2006 01:16 PM (CEBqE)
Don't Mess with Soccer
Lately bad news has reached the world. Islamists in the mold of the Taliban took over Mogadishu and are posed to take over the rest of Somalia. Too show how bad these people are one needs to look no further than the banning of the World Cup.
more...
Posted by: Vinnie at June 11, 2006 01:51 PM (/qy9A)
3
Rusty is gone for a short time. Until then you have to live with the cabal of guest bloggers including the one and only Catholicgauze!
Posted by: Catholicgauze at June 11, 2006 02:12 PM (A7S/s)
4
These islamic morons are just pissed off that Somalia are crap at soccer and didn't qualify.
Posted by: Jester at June 11, 2006 02:44 PM (TuAMG)
5
When you say "in the mold of the Taliban" is that like in the mold of Saudi Arabia ?
Posted by: john ryan at June 11, 2006 04:00 PM (TcoRJ)
6
Saudi Arabia is quite dry, so it would be difficult for mold to thrive. When he said "in the mold of the Taliban", I bet he meant just that. Breathe, john ryan. You need the oxygen.
Posted by: fluffy at June 11, 2006 08:19 PM (UxguT)
7
No need to answer John Ryan. He's a friggin commie. Pitiful little shit.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 12, 2006 10:36 AM (fDZgg)
8
Actually no John Ryan, because Saudi Arabia is fielding a soccer team in the World Cup.
Posted by: Catholicgauze at June 12, 2006 10:56 AM (H/+N4)
Filipina Celeb - Angel Locsin
Meet Angel Locsin, star of fantasy TV shows and commercials in the Philippines. She currently plays Darna, a Wonder Woman clone. More here.
Posted by: Darth Vag at June 11, 2006 11:07 AM (+nlyI)
2
The photos come free with your unpaid subscription to The Jawa Report.
It's what I do: I harass Jihadis and post a daily Filipina celeb photo. Oh, and I post amazingly huge roundup posts at my own blog, which I won't bother bringing to this site because nobody reads the damned things.
Chris
Posted by: Chris At Home at June 11, 2006 01:41 PM (5ve1C)
Posted by: JeepThang at June 11, 2006 02:23 PM (yZQoS)
4
I am willing to make the ultimate sacrifice for my country. Yes, let her know I will sleep with her, but only for America since this week its Flag Day.
Posted by: Steve Sharon at June 11, 2006 02:45 PM (oyNV4)
5
Is the show in English or Tagalog. She is F-I-N-E fine!
6
In Tagalog. Actually I think she has a new series
called Majik, Darna is in the dustbin of history. She has also lost some weight and looks great in commericials.
Chris
Posted by: Chris At Home at June 11, 2006 11:56 PM (5ve1C)
Saving Soccer
Now, this will sound like blasphemy to my fellow NFL fans, but, having watched nearly five minutes of the World Cup soccer match between Sweden and Trinidad and Tobago...the world has a point. It makes much more sense to use the word "football" for "soccer" than it does to apply it to...American football. After all, the wimpiest NFL players are the ones who specialize in kicking the ball, and they are increasingly drawn from the ranks of soccer players - Europeans.
That said, soccer continues to prosper in America about as well as the metric system; that is to say, it has approximately the popularity of a fart in an elevator. What can be done? Must "futball" forever abandon the world's most profitable market and fanatical fan base?
No! A few simple changes should suffice to bring soccer up to at least the popularity of ice hockey.
more...
Posted by: Darth Vag at June 11, 2006 09:25 AM (+nlyI)
2
Paintgun? How about a riot gun with sandbag rounds. If you can take the hit, and make the goal you are the MAN. Paintballs would be the equivalent of flag football, which is the equivalent of soccer plus testosterone.
Posted by: Touchdown at June 11, 2006 09:33 AM (7N2cZ)
3
Bluto--as accurate as ever. Soccer is the fastest growing sport in America, and is one of the top two (if not #1) youth sports. With 14% of the population hispanic, and with a sizable new population of African, caribbean, and asian immigrants as well, combined with the youth numbers, soccer has a bright future. It is also one of the rare sports in which participation by women is almost as high as for men. Our women's national team is among the top in the world. Our men's team is ranked fifth.
Now, as for tv--although I played soccer for 6 years as a kid, I still prefer watching football. Soccer is more fun to play, but doesn't translate well to the little screen.
Go USA! We have a good host against the Czechs tomorrow.
Posted by: jd at June 11, 2006 09:55 AM (DQYHA)
4
No surprises here...
JD is for soccer, Osama is for Jihad and the Democrats are for the gang-rape of America.
Posted by: Darth Vag at June 11, 2006 09:59 AM (+nlyI)
5
Touchdown: how about if we put half-inch ball bearings in the paint balls?
6
You forgot the worst rule in soccer: the offsides rule. This rule basically prohibits every kind of play other than the fruitless scrums you always see at the top of the box. Get rid of the rule, you open up the game to that most American play: the long bomb.
Plus half-inch ball bearings of course.
Posted by: cobalt blue at June 11, 2006 11:47 AM (cJXpZ)
7
I'm here to defend soccer...and be mocked for doing so. I find most US sports boring, especially your drawn out football with constant time outs. I prepare for the imminent abuse.
Posted by: Jester at June 11, 2006 02:46 PM (TuAMG)
8
I kinda like soccer, especially womens'. Sweaty chicks with muscular legs and tight buns kinda turns me on.
Posted by: hondo at June 11, 2006 03:46 PM (MVgHp)
9
Shortening the field has been attempted. It was known as indoor soccer. It's another gimmick sport that field miserably.
To eliminate the offsides rule would do the opposite of what you would like to occur. If you allow cherry-picking in the goal mouth, then you'll have to drop your defense back as well. Result: no long bombs and it then becomes even more of a defensive game.
I still like watching football better but I agree that soccer is more fun to play. I might feel different if there were plenty of football leagues for anyone over the age of 13.
Posted by: slug at June 11, 2006 03:50 PM (soGSc)
10
Or the U.S. could field a competitive team. In addition, the MLS could possibly get some talent. Just a few suggestions.
11
Hmmm...Americans like high-scoring games, that's true. But, then again, 6 points are given for a touchdown and 3 for a field goal. So, if they made goals in soccer 6 points each, too, would that help?
Posted by: Venom at June 12, 2006 11:16 AM (dbxVM)
Trio of Great Articles
I posted it over at my old blog because I haven't figured out the blockquote feature on MovableType yet. Here is the summary:
"So...40% of the badass 2004 Class at Terrorism High are dead.
The friggin' Guardian says we are winning the War on Terror.
And there might be a simple explanation for Haditha.
Overall, a pretty great evening here in the deepest, darkest province."
And, finally, the first real report of the Marines' versions of Haditha. The stories told by the Iraqis can almost fit into the Marine version, if you leave out the civilians begging for their lives and being shot execution style, that is.
Wuterich's version contradicts that of the Iraqis, who described a massacre of men, women and children after a bomb killed a Marine. Haditha residents have said that innocent civilians were executed, that some begged for their lives before being shot and that children were killed indiscriminately.
Wuterich told his attorney in initial interviews over nearly 12 hours last week that the shootings were the unfortunate result of a methodical sweep for enemies in a firefight. Two attorneys for other Marines involved in the incident said Wuterich's account is consistent with those they had heard from their clients.
And Wuterich's account of how it happened:
A corporal with the unit leaned over to Wuterich and said he saw the shots coming from a specific house, and after a discussion with the platoon leader, they decided to clear the house, according to Wuterich's account.
...
A four-man team of Marines, including Wuterich, kicked in the door and found a series of empty rooms, noticing quickly that there was one room with a closed door and people rustling behind it, Puckett said. They then kicked in that door, tossed a fragmentation grenade into the room, and one Marine fired a series of "clearing rounds" through the dust and smoke, killing several people, Puckett said.
...
Although it was almost immediately apparent to the Marines that the people dead in the room were men, women and children -- most likely civilians -- they also noticed a back door ajar and believed that insurgents had slipped through to a house nearby, Puckett said. The Marines stealthily moved to the second house, kicking in the door, killing one man inside and then using a frag grenade and more gunfire to clear another room full of people, he said.
According to a source in the article, the Marines probably were following the Rules of Engagement if this account is true. Note that civilians in an open area were not harmed while chasing other suspects soon after the house-to-house hunt.
1
Oh no! It couldn't be. All our troops are murderers. The ragheads allways tell the truth. Only concervative Americans lie. Ragheads get compensation if one of theirs is killed my US Morces. WHY WOULD THEY LIE??????
Posted by: greyrooster at June 11, 2006 07:51 AM (2/7WJ)
2
Welcome Chris, If you have any questions or need help with M you may email Howie (that's me) I'll help out.
Posted by: Howie at June 11, 2006 08:28 AM (0bDdS)
3
I was amazed to see that Guardian article. An estimated 40% of up-and-coming terrorists have been killed worldwide. Why is the MSM just getting around to reporting this? It sounds like efforts to eradicate the scum have been having a profound effect for a while now. I'm hoping this will break the ice and we'll see more encouraging stories like this.
Posted by: Richard at June 11, 2006 09:26 AM (7KF8r)
4
Thanks, Howie. I dug through the MT site and found it: blockquotes use the blockquote tag...ouch.
Posted by: Chris At Home at June 11, 2006 09:46 AM (5ve1C)
5
I'm not buying SSG Wuterich's account at face value -I'll wait for more details and reserve judgement. SSG W was in charge of a 12 man Marine patrol recon .... I spent years doing exactly the same with Army Cav recon .... same configuation, same type of mission ... virtually identical in every way. Something doesn't add up - there is a wiff about this. I'll wait.
Oh - required hondo disclaimer ... fuck the lib/left!
Posted by: hondo at June 11, 2006 03:34 PM (MVgHp)
6
Army doing the same as the Marine Corps. Ha, Ha, Ha.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 12, 2006 10:38 AM (fDZgg)
