tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post115039502808845319..comments2024-03-19T07:09:28.479-05:00Comments on Althouse: "The gloomy present situation" in Iraq.Ann Althousehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01630636239933008807noreply@blogger.comBlogger46125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150785451105931752006-06-20T01:37:00.000-05:002006-06-20T01:37:00.000-05:00Ann Althouse: Most of them are just people who are...Ann Althouse: <I>Most of them are just people who are overeager to get ammunition to use against Bush and various Republicans, but a few of them actually want to see the U.S. defeated in the war.</I><BR/><BR/>It really saddens me that this goes on so much. I think there are people in both parties who act this way when the president is from the opposing party. I'm not a member of a political party and I always want my country and the world at large to be doing well and better, so I don't really relate. <BR/><BR/>With Iraq, there's so many people INVESTED in things turning out terribly that deep down some of them feel they don't wanna be wrong. It's still up in the air how Iraq will turn out, which I think makes this happen even more, but also makes it even more deplorable than some want it to be a failure. I don't dislike all of the Bush haters and some of them have been right about some things. I just dislike the ones who seem to be in bad faith, and they shouldn't act surprised when their bad faith is noticed.LoafingOafhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17398399168775034527noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150474272187667232006-06-16T11:11:00.000-05:002006-06-16T11:11:00.000-05:00"How are things going in Iraq?" "What can we do th..."How are things going in Iraq?" <BR/>"What can we do that will make things better, and not worse?"<BR/><BR/>These are the two big questions. I suspect that no thoughtful person has the answer to either of those questions. (That is the position we find ourselves in). We could set a timetable for withdrawal and it could result in a heartened insurgency, more terrorism, and the need for more intervention. Or we could "stay the course", and the opposition could continue to grow, the government could continue to flounder, and the U.S. military could be weakened and our budget destroyed. . Too often, both sides assume that one or the other event could be true. Why can't both be true?Mark Haaghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10664106985851562632noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150471165133938142006-06-16T10:19:00.000-05:002006-06-16T10:19:00.000-05:00Mike,It often is willfull, as you discovered. I w...Mike,<BR/>It often is willfull, as you discovered. I was a minor Democrat worker years ago, and when asked by a reporter how I felt about a certain election, I answered in one sentence. Next day, I found my one sentence, changed completely, with the addition of a whole paragraph! What in hell do they do to quotes from <I>important</I> people, I thought?<BR/><BR/>I recently emailed a reporter questioning a somewhat racist caption on one of the photographs accompanying her story. She wrote back saying her editors put that in, over her objections and tearful argument. The quote IMO was meant to appeal to readers of the Vietnamese paper they own, which is gaining readership, while the circulation of the regular Caucasian paper is dropping.<BR/><BR/>Coco, thanks for being gracious. I think the left blogs use this meme to avoid answering these rightful charges. The best defense is a good offense.PatCAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08920623662477828662noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150469108358392312006-06-16T09:45:00.000-05:002006-06-16T09:45:00.000-05:00The episode that that lifted the veil from my eyes...The episode that that lifted the veil from my eyes occurred in the fall of 2002. I watched Karl Rove give a talk at, I believe, the University of Utah. I watched it on C-Span. He took questions afterword. A young woman, with a No War! t-shirt walks up to the microphone and asks, respectfully, (I’m paraphrasing) “how do you, Karl Rove, suggest that we persuade our government to not go into Iraq. After all, we just had a protest of 200,000 people on the mall in D.C. and it didn’t seem to have an impact.” Rove, also respectfully, answers with the standard, “contact your elected representatives” and he finishes his answer with “but frankly, I’m more concerned with the 3,000 people who were killed on September 11 than the 200,000 protesters on the mall”. The next day, I’m reading a New York Times article on the event. The article has the woman asking “how can we persuade our government when it seems unconcerned about the 200,000 innocent Iraqis who will die in the invasion” and they had Rove responding “... but frankly, I’m more concerned with the 3,000 people who were killed on September 11 than the 200,000 innocent Iraqis who will die in the invasion”.<BR/><BR/>I’m convinced this was done willfully. I watched the entire event on C-Span. The reporter could not have mixed up two different questions because, not only did the original questioner not use the phrase "200,000 innocent Iraqis who will die in the invasion", but no one else did either. Nothing even close to that was said by anybody. The Times did print a correction a few days later (apparently, they got caught) but, of course, it was buried in the paper.<BR/><BR/>Independent of what one thinks of the war, how bad is that? What kind of person thinks it’s ok to just make up such a vile quote for publication in the New York Times (answer: “a journalist”)?<BR/><BR/>I don't give these people the benefit of the doubt. They aren't useful idiots. They are on the other side.Mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14103916899734135507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150467905249997362006-06-16T09:25:00.000-05:002006-06-16T09:25:00.000-05:00For those that don't read Cox and Forkum they had ...For those that don't read <A HREF="http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/000865.html" REL="nofollow">Cox and Forkum they had a cartoon</A> a couple of days ago that put the media bias in America in the proper perspective.alhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13231164751097426353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150464837969491742006-06-16T08:33:00.000-05:002006-06-16T08:33:00.000-05:00Knoxgirl: Whenever subjects like this come up, I c...Knoxgirl: Whenever subjects like this come up, I can't help thinking of Justice Potter Stewart's comments about pornography in 1964: <I>"I know it when I see it . . . "</I><BR/><BR/>Yet, some never do and never will.Randyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03071928294799081845noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150462505700748852006-06-16T07:55:00.000-05:002006-06-16T07:55:00.000-05:00To dick, pogo, jennifer, patca, drill sgt, and oth...To dick, pogo, jennifer, patca, drill sgt, and others who replied to coco: <BR/>The innacuracy of the media coverage of the war is a very hard thing to explain, because you're trying to convince people who truly hear <I>no good news</I> that progress is happening. It's very easy to only hear the bad news, as we all know!!<BR/><BR/>It's like trying to convince someone that there's, I don't know, another person living in their house they've never noticed... why should they believe it!? They never <I>see</I> it... it seems absurd on its face.knoxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13231876226573540476noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150461880939773312006-06-16T07:44:00.000-05:002006-06-16T07:44:00.000-05:00coco:plenty of people have answered your questions...coco:<BR/><BR/>plenty of people have answered your questions and provided excellent examples of press bias,useful idiocy, or laziness. I would add this quote from the Baron WSJ article Ann refers to in a post up top:<BR/><BR/><I>America's newsrooms are populated largely by liberals who regard the Vietnam and Watergate stories as the great achievements of their profession. The peak of their ambition is to achieve the fame and wealth of great reporters like David Halberstam and Bob Woodward.</I><BR/><BR/>A lot of people who go to school in journalism aren't going to do the hard, and often tedious work it takes to cover a story in a straightforward, thorough, just-the-facts manner. They go to "change the world"!!! Instead of realizing that the job of a journalist is to sit quietly on the sidelines and report on the changers....knoxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13231876226573540476noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150461464100994792006-06-16T07:37:00.000-05:002006-06-16T07:37:00.000-05:00Momxxo never taught little quxxo to lose gracefull...Momxxo never taught little quxxo to lose gracefully.knoxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13231876226573540476noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150433890272121792006-06-15T23:58:00.000-05:002006-06-15T23:58:00.000-05:00It's late where you are, you psychotic bastard. G...It's late where you are, you psychotic bastard. Go to sleep.Legacy Userhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12643996886903710573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150432201897172172006-06-15T23:30:00.000-05:002006-06-15T23:30:00.000-05:00knoxgirl said... quxxo got schooled!Yes, I got ...<I>knoxgirl said...<BR/><BR/> quxxo got schooled!<BR/></I><BR/><BR/>Yes, I got schooled! I got schooled by SlipperyCheese a few days ago to, when Karl walked.<BR/><BR/>When quxxo gets schooled, what does quxxo do? Acknowledges it. <BR/><BR/>When NoxieGirl and the other Ann functionaries get schooled what do they do? "Ban quxxo! Ban quxxo!"<BR/><BR/>And when Ann gets schooled, rather than acknowledge it, what does she do?<BR/><BR/><I>This post has been deleted by the blog administrator</I>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150431241484412392006-06-15T23:14:00.000-05:002006-06-15T23:14:00.000-05:00I think it's important to make clear that the "use...I think it's important to make clear that the "useful" part of "useful idiots" in this discussion is from the point of view of the terrorists (i.e. the enemy).Mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14103916899734135507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150426761651688532006-06-15T21:59:00.000-05:002006-06-15T21:59:00.000-05:00"do you mean that if a terrorist group sets off a ..."do you mean that if a terrorist group sets off a series of car bombs in the middle of a populated and guarded area and 10 people are killed that only a "useful idiot" would report that this event actually ocurred?"<BR/><BR/>No, but a useful idiot might portray violent events in an area with concentrated enemy activity explicitly for the purpose of influencing the media as representative of an entire country. <BR/><BR/>My observation has been that reporters are extremely ignorant about things I have some expertise in (and I'll bet that's been your experience to), and I have to assume that ignorance extends to areas I don't know much about. They also tend to spout conventional wisdom without questioning it, and are easily manipulated by people with greater knowledge and an agenda, particularly when that agenda fits the reporter's worldview. <BR/><BR/>Here's a great, nonpolitical example I've seen. This article (http://www.seacoastonline.com/2005news/11202005/news/74066.htm) contains this statement:<BR/><BR/>"Part of the stability in air fare comes from nonunion regional airlines, like Southwest and Jet Blue, having competitive rates"<BR/><BR/>Similar statements have appeared in the Wall Street Journal and The Street.com. I can't speak for JetBlue, but over 80 percent of Southwest employees are in a union. I'm pretty sure SWA is the most heavily unionized air carrier in the US, if not the world. A reporter making this statement relied on conventional wisdom and failed to do any fact checking at all.<BR/><BR/>I've seen a number of surveys indicating that the vast majority of journalists have political views well to the left of center, and it's hardly surprising that their work generally reflects that worldview. Failure to question their own biases and misconceptions frequently does make them useful idiots.Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01695896117685218995noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150425735670255552006-06-15T21:42:00.000-05:002006-06-15T21:42:00.000-05:00Coco,Additional instances of useful idiocy would i...Coco,<BR/>Additional instances of useful idiocy would include the use of stringers in Iraq who seem to be in league with the terrorists, such as the stringer who "happened" to be on <A HREF="http://powerlineblog.com/archives/010128.php/" REL="nofollow">Haifa Street</A> at the exact time when terrorists pulled an Iraqi official out of his car and assassinated him. This stringer had many such coincidences and was subsequently arrested.<BR/><BR/>Also, the men of iraqthemodel.com commented on Bremer's wonderful farewell speech--on the same day that our newspapers reported that Bremer snuck out of Iraq in shame without saying a word. <BR/><BR/>They wrote too that the papers also recently published an erroneous translation of an Iraq minister's words to imply he was supporting Iran. You may want to start reading their blog.<BR/><BR/>Newsweek published the Koran flushing incident without an iota of proof.<BR/><BR/>And on and on. IMO these errors are too numerous to be honest errors. To me, it is a pattern which suggests an agenda, probably not one I would concur with.PatCAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08920623662477828662noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150423400835735722006-06-15T21:03:00.000-05:002006-06-15T21:03:00.000-05:00Jen,That's Iraqi stringers, some with questionable...Jen,<BR/><BR/>That's Iraqi stringers, some with questionable ties to the bad guys that seem to get them to terrorist events in time to shoot good film.<BR/><BR/>oh, and not worry about being shot as a tool of the Americans at the same time.<BR/><BR/><BR/>hard to straddle both circumstances without connectionsThe Drill SGThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16394309533144027391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150423035804873022006-06-15T20:57:00.000-05:002006-06-15T20:57:00.000-05:00dick - I just looked up stringers - I had no idea ...dick - I just looked up stringers - I had no idea the major news outlets operated that way. It explains a lot. Thanks!Jenniferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12824506338738265111noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150421459677255542006-06-15T20:30:00.000-05:002006-06-15T20:30:00.000-05:00Hee - see, this is why I have a little web crush o...Hee - see, this is why I have a little web crush on Palladian!Jenniferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12824506338738265111noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150420250946101492006-06-15T20:10:00.000-05:002006-06-15T20:10:00.000-05:00quxxo got schooled!quxxo got schooled!knoxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13231876226573540476noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150417373398427362006-06-15T19:22:00.000-05:002006-06-15T19:22:00.000-05:00Coco - I don't think anyone is suggesting the medi...Coco - I don't think anyone is suggesting the media not run accurate reports on terrorist attacks, etc. I think what people are suggesting is that the media also report on progress made by the US military, etc. While I sometimes wonder if the military is effective in getting positive information into the hands of reporters, I assume the media doesn't hear directly from Al Qaeda. So, it likely comes down to a preference for investigating and reporting the negative.<BR/><BR/>Its illuminating to note that soldiers (especially milbloggers) are quite frustrated with media coverage while Al Qaeda appears to be satisfied. On the other hand, soldiers (especially milbloggers) are positive about <I>actual</I> progress while Al Qaeda appears to be frustrated.Jenniferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12824506338738265111noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150415671762894722006-06-15T18:54:00.000-05:002006-06-15T18:54:00.000-05:00Re: "And so I ask the question - what is the media...Re: <I>"And so I ask the question - what is the media supposed to do when a terrorist act occurs? NOt report it?"</I><BR/><BR/>I would only ask that you contrast the reporting for this war with that during WW2. The difference is immediate and startling. Information, including bad news, was frequently suppressed.<BR/><BR/>The mainstream press now takes the "drive-by shooting" approach common to the local news. One is often left wondering if there <I>is</I> a US military response. Did we get any bad guys? Where are we? What are the goals? Are we reaching any of them?<BR/> <BR/>But forget about gathering that knowledge from the NYT today, something they were quite capable of doing in the 1940s. Only when one reads the military blogs does a coherent sense of strategy and progress seem evident.<BR/><BR/>I make that out to be useful idiocy, although on some days it appears to be outright complicity. The problem is larger than reporting on indiviual car bombs. It's ignoring which side you're on. And if the NYT can't find the stones to be on our side, it also must recognize that such a stance isn't a neutral one.<BR/><BR/>Do we not report it? <BR/>Did we report the true outcomes of D-Day or Guadalcanal when they happened? The answer to the first question is contained in the second.KCFleminghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00124201866124646626noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150410033206027562006-06-15T17:20:00.000-05:002006-06-15T17:20:00.000-05:00Coc:We musn't forget that, after Saddam was captur...Coc:<BR/>We musn't forget that, after Saddam was captured, CNN admitted to covering up the atrocities and lies Saddam had spread while President-for-life, merely to maintain "access". I think this clearly falls into fifth column behavior, of the "knows it, doesn't want it, but carrys on anyway out of self-interest" kind.<BR/><BR/>And via Instapundit today, WaPo's Richard Morin writres in <A HREF="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/14/AR2006061402025.html" REL="nofollow">What's Black and White and Red All Over?</A>:<BR/><I>"More ink equals more blood, claim two economists who say that newspaper coverage of terrorist incidents leads directly to more attacks.<BR/><BR/>Both the media and terrorists benefit from terrorist incidents," their study contends. Terrorists get free publicity for themselves and their cause. The media, meanwhile, make money "as reports of terror attacks increase newspaper sales and the number of television viewers."</I><BR/><BR/>Hence, useful idiots.KCFleminghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00124201866124646626noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150409935730430612006-06-15T17:18:00.000-05:002006-06-15T17:18:00.000-05:00Well then Marvin, I apologize, because my original...Well then Marvin, I apologize, because my original complaint was because I thought you had thrown quxxo into the list of Lurketto, Reasonater and Auntie M.<BR/><BR/>On the otherhand, your upset with Auntie M. is really an upset with Blogger. <BR/><BR/>If Blogger wants to let people change their screen names, why should you care. As you point out, it is trivially easy to detect that. And it is not the same at all as someone running a sock-puppet (though I have never seen you or Maxine Weiss in the same room at the same time).<BR/><BR/>I don't know why Lurketto is changing his screen name and I don't care. She is enjoying the freedom blogger gives us, so it is really unimportant.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150409397992173522006-06-15T17:09:00.001-05:002006-06-15T17:09:00.001-05:00Pogo: Thank you.Pogo: Thank you.Bissagehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04439910009646381418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150409387413403672006-06-15T17:09:00.000-05:002006-06-15T17:09:00.000-05:00Palladian: Ouch!Palladian: <I>Ou</I>ch!KCFleminghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00124201866124646626noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1150409234359899412006-06-15T17:07:00.000-05:002006-06-15T17:07:00.000-05:00"Plutonium-Q36, You are an idiot. Just try followi..."Plutonium-Q36, You are an idiot. Just try following the links and you'll see immediately that you are posting out of your butt."<BR/><BR/>You've proven yourself, by your conduct here, to be borderline mentally impaired so I'll spell it out for you: the blogger profile is unavailable, yes (cowards are a dime a dozen!) but there is still a unique id for the account, in this case 18591647. Hover over the link to "Reasonator's" unavailable profile page in <A HREF="http://althouse.blogspot.com/2006/05/at-veterans-museum.html#114893262524610845" REL="nofollow">this thread</A> and what do you see? Why it's a link to <A HREF="http://www.blogger.com/profile/18591647" REL="nofollow">Blogger profile page number 18591647</A>. Same for "Lurketto" in other threads. You, as much as anyone, should know you can change your screen name without changing your Blogger account. I know some people think that the various names used for account 18591647 are your various other personalities but I'm not sure you're clever enough for something like that, though I admit that there's plenty of circumstantial evidence to support the theory (like the fact that you love to quote Reasonator/Lurketto/etc on your pathetic stalker blog).<BR/><BR/>Anyway, I don't usually choose to acknowledge you, because you're a sociopathic vandal as well as being a crushing bore, but this was a great opportunity to mock you so I bent the rules a little.Palladianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01105490715666718993noreply@blogger.com