Althouse: The Daily News was hilariously paraphrasing.

December 28, 2006

The Daily News was hilariously paraphrasing.

I can't believe people think Ford actually said "Drop Dead" to New York City.

70 comments:

Anonymous said...: Not everyone has your finely honed bullshit detector.; 12/28/06, 9:41 AM
bearbee said...: I would like to read what he said and the context in which it was said.
The man had spine. I understand he veto, time and again, pork ladened spending bills. It's a pity todays White House is not of similar resolve.

Interestingly Oct 29 was the date of the great 1929 stock market crash; 12/28/06, 9:42 AM
AlphaLiberal said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 12/28/06, 9:56 AM
AlphaLiberal said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 12/28/06, 10:14 AM
Anonymous said...: Great. Now claiming that John Kerry was misquoted, by himself, will appear magically in every thread about every topic, no matter how mundane or far removed from it it might be.

I find it amusing...sorta... how many people have decided that they are THE ANSWER to Ann Althouse, by mewling in her comment strings. Then you get fifty column inches of short bus economics and fresh air class geopolitics, with "sad" appended at the end. Great.

At least Walter Sobchak yelling about prior restraint and body counts in a coffee shop is mildly amusing. It's just kind of lame, here.; 12/28/06, 10:24 AM
AlphaLiberal said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 12/28/06, 10:28 AM
AlphaLiberal said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 12/28/06, 10:32 AM
Anonymous said...: It's hard to stamp your little foot and whine when it's nailed to the floor and you're running around in a circle.; 12/28/06, 10:44 AM
AlphaLiberal said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 12/28/06, 10:50 AM
bearbee said...: Too Many Jims thanks for the link. Excellent speech.

Here is a link to Time Magazine article published June 6, 1975 How New York City Lurched to the Brink; 12/28/06, 10:51 AM
Anonymous said...: Re: EXIF data

The EXIF data must only be accurate if you set the calendar and clock on your camera. I never do this, and I just checked the EXIF data on several of my own photos. The dates and times are all wrong.; 12/28/06, 11:03 AM
Anonymous said...: That's very funny. Think of how appalled a person would be who really thought he said it!; 12/28/06, 11:07 AM
Anonymous said...: Alpha, you're going off half cocked.

The Vivicam 8400 came out in 2006. If this camera is like the two other brands I have, the clock and date likely default to 01/01/[year it came out] when you change the batteries. The guy had probably last changed his batteries nine days before taking the pic.; 12/28/06, 11:11 AM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: To deranged thread hijackers:

Sock puppetry is unbecoming.

Think of patronizing a blog, like this one, as being a guest in some one's home. As a guest, you do not have a right dictate how the homeowner decorates her home or be obnoxious to the other guests. The home owner does have a right to tell you to leave (or at least delete posts that are out of line).

Back to Ford and the Daily News. It is telling that these types of misquotes and distortions are not able to be foisted on the public with the ease that they were in the 70's. Before the Internet there was little public discourse about current news events. You had to write a letter to the editor and hope that it might be published and if it was it was long after the event. Now, fact checking and refuting lies are almost instantaneous. So is the spreading of the same lies and distortions. Win some.... lose some.

Having lived through the 60's and 70's, I now wonder how many things that were printed in the major papoers or reported on the Big 3 nightly news shows were just plain false? How often were we fed a hook line and sinker without even questioning it?; 12/28/06, 11:18 AM
KCFleming said...: William F. Buckley saw the crash of NY City coming way back when he ran for mayor in 1965. His book about the city's problems, and the politics surrounding it, are a fascinating read (The Unmaking of a Mayor).; 12/28/06, 11:21 AM
KCFleming said...: Well, fascinating for dorks.
Otherwise, not really.; 12/28/06, 11:28 AM
Anonymous said...: I'm not "attacking" anybody, I'm mocking you. It's entirely different.

You think you're living in Life During Wartime, but it's really Pee Wee's Playhouse in there.

I don't "censor" my children, for instance. I tell them to "shush," the adults are talking. They are different things.

-New York is interesting.
-The Daily News headline, which I read contemporaneously, was magnificent fun.
-Gerald Ford was an interesting person.
-New York has made a remarkable transformation since its descent into oblivion. That's interesting.
-The difference between tabloid papers and broadsheets is interesting.

Your imaginary paranoid offtopic drivel is not interesting.; 12/28/06, 11:31 AM
Glenn Howes said...: I was a bit curious as to how prevalent bad date settings are in cameras. So I went to Flickr's search by camera feature, searched for the Vivicam 8400and got a bunch of pictures like this nice green mountains of Wales photo with the improbable date of January 20.

I'd also note that many of the photos are shown as taken in 2005, which is odd if the camera was released in 2006.; 12/28/06, 11:45 AM
bearbee said...: The photo was taken on January 9, 2006 with a Vivicam 8400.

According to Kerry's website he did visit Iraq but on January 18 and 19, 2006. On January 10, 2006 he was in London. No mention of January 9 meetings.; 12/28/06, 11:50 AM
Glenn Howes said...: And here's one of those famous March 12th jack-o-lanterns.

BTW, all my digital cameras have batteries which are charged externally, so I assume they have some means to keep their clock time for at least a few hours without power. Perhaps by the slow discharge of a capacitor?; 12/28/06, 11:53 AM
AlphaLiberal said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 12/28/06, 11:56 AM
bearbee said...: An observation of the photo. Would Christmas decorations be on display on January 9th?; 12/28/06, 12:02 PM
Anonymous said...: politely asking

Heh. I bet.; 12/28/06, 12:03 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 12/28/06, 12:12 PM
X said...: GG?; 12/28/06, 12:13 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 12/28/06, 12:18 PM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: when Ann Althouse deletes threads politely asking reasonable questions for her justification for the war in Iraq instead of answering the questions, then she invites disgruntled participants to bring up the issues elsewhere.

Alpha: at the risk of violating what I am going to say next, I assume that your posts were deleted because they were completely irrelevant to the thread that you were responding to.

I don't know that to be the case. But having observed in THIS thread your persistent desire to hijack the thread to talk about what YOU want to discuss (i.e. "Iraq bad" ad nauseum)instead of the topic, I think that is most likely to be the case.

There is no implied invitation to continue to beat dead horses in threads that have nothing to do with the topic. Like other lefist trolls, you seem to want to make it all about you. Narcissism is a mental disease. You should get that checked out.; 12/28/06, 12:22 PM
Anonymous said...: Why would they take Portugal's flag down? They fought with them, so I'd imagine that they'd leave the flag up.

Is your contention now that the picture was taken around Christmas 2004 with a camera that came out in 2006?; 12/28/06, 12:24 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 12/28/06, 12:29 PM
Anonymous said...: We don't know how many people set their camera's dates or not, I suspect most people do, you suspect they don't. We don't know anything about it including the make of camera it was made with. Exif data can be edited as easily as a photo can be shopped. The Vivicam 8400 was also released as a Mustek, but when? And who knows what the mustek's exif says.

The point is we don't know anything about when or where this photo was taken. January? December? US Embassy? British Airbase?

We don't know the context. If it was at the US Embassy, how many chairs were overall empty in the hall? How many troopers were actually there? What time of day is it? When did Kerry arrive at the event? When did he sit down at the table?

We don't know anything about this photo but that doesn't stop the fine professor here from believing and repeating and amplifying any piece of random crap that she feels favors her positions without any regard to the source of that random crap.

That may be the sort of fine sourcing we've come to expect from tenured law bloggers but I would prefer she leaves it at pajamas media where it belongs.

Wake up sheeple.; 12/28/06, 12:31 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 12/28/06, 12:32 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 12/28/06, 12:35 PM
Anonymous said...: I don't know enough about the manufacturers to know who is rebranding what these days. My Quasar TV isn't a Quasar.

The pic exif info gets a bit more odd. If you visit the website of the guy that claims to have taken the picture, none of his pictures have any exif info associated with them, although perhaps the process of uploading them into blogger stripped them while sending them through email retained them.

In the other thread the prof talks about believing the eyewitness, but I don't think she knew then who the eyewitness actually was. She links to powerline who links to scott hennen who tells of an email a friend sent him. She never links to the actual eyewitness herself.

Even the eyewitness' report. He claims to have been called there. Do we know what pics he chose not to take, or not to send? Does he know why the dining hall was empty? Does he provide any of the context? On the other hand does his website already have loads of anti-Kerry and anti-Democrat nonsense on it?

All of this friend of a friend of a friend crap spreading innuendo and rumors and lies. It's what we've come to expect from our right wing smear merchants and it's why more than half the population is pulling Democratic levers these days.; 12/28/06, 12:52 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 12/28/06, 12:57 PM
KCFleming said...: Ah, 'reality check' finally calls the great unwashed "sheeple". And Alpha-Sigma-Nu cries "liar liar liar" to disagreements. The unmistakeable marks of the anti-intellectual, far left style.

Man, just give it up. Kerry went to Iraq and no one wanted to be his friend. It's funny, now it's over. No conspiracy needed; he's a one-man hang-dog loser campaign.

Unless you want to post all those great pics of the throngs of GIs in Irak, thanking JFK for his halp, and cheering their great hero on to victory in 2008. Cause those would be great to see!; 12/28/06, 1:02 PM
reader_iam said...: FOLKS!

Regarding the John Kerry picture making the rounds: I can't comment on that particular one as to its authenticity (though I can second the date-holding issue with cameras, I'd bet $$$$ that most people DON'T reset them regularly, and there IS a problem with the camera-release issue.).

I can give you all this link to a Reuters photo, posted at Yahoo, with this blurb: "U.S. Senator John Kerry (R) joins U.S. troops for lunch at the Basrah Air Station in southern Iraq is this undated handout photograph released by the Ministry of Defence on December 16, 2006."

May I suggest you look at the picture and what Sen. Kerry is wearing? The disputed photo mentions breakfast. This picture to which I link is labeled as lunch (and the cups are different), but Kerry pretty much looks the same. Could be the same day. Or not. Just throwing it out there. (Note that he has company, which, of course, neither approves nor disproves the other photo.)

Personally, I think this whole thing is a silly, silly controversy. For all we know, the original e-mailer saw only one part of the elephant. Or had malign intent. Maybe there were people sitting with Kerry who had already left. Maybe he arrived late. Maybe people joined that table two seconds later. Maybe Kerry was being shunned. Maybe the whole damn thing doesn't amount to a hill of beans!!!!!

(I pick the last, by the way.)

You know, pictures may paint a thousand words, but which words, and what they mean, are largely open to interpretation.

Only sayin'... .; 12/28/06, 1:09 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 12/28/06, 1:12 PM
Anonymous said...: I did a Google image search for "christmas in iraq," and this picture came up. Looks like the same place. And Kerry was in Iraq around Christmas this year.

Obviously the photo could be misleadingly cropped, misrepresented, or what have you, but I think you guys are getting ahead of yourselves talking about "right wing smear merchants." The photo is humorous, there's currently no evidence that it's a fraud, so of course people are going to pass it around for a laugh.; 12/28/06, 1:12 PM
reader_iam said...: I can't believe that I actually considered for a couple of seconds e-mailing or calling the locale in question and simply asking what flags hang in the mess hall.

If I were seriously attempting to report or get to the bottom of this controversy for the benefit of the blogosphere, I can assure that is precisely what I would do, among other obvious things, rather than speculate.; 12/28/06, 1:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Looks like the same place.

Then again, maybe that's just the style of most government building interiors in Iraq, so feh. Oh well, this whole thing is silly. Reader is right. I can't believe that I wasted this much of my time over a picture I don't even care about.; 12/28/06, 1:18 PM
reader_iam said...: Freeman: Specifically, Kerry was in Iraq weekend before last. Reuters has a series of photos one can click through from the link I provided in a comment at 1:09.

Alphaliberal: Look at the pictures I linked to and that Freeman Hunt linked to. A more recent date is ALSO "plausible," to use your word.

Why don't YOU contact the places in questions and ask them about the flags?

It's what a reporter would do ... .; 12/28/06, 1:19 PM
Anonymous said...: Well of course the Federal government shouldn't bail out cities that can't manage their fiscal situations. I completely agree with that, even as a New Yorker.

Then again - I don't think cities like New York should be bailing out the Federal government, which can't manage its own fiscal situation. New Yorkers get less than 50 cents back on every dollar they pay in taxes. I think we are owed a major refund for bailing out the lazy, slacker, moochers in the rest of the country.; 12/28/06, 1:23 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 12/28/06, 1:24 PM
reader_iam said...: Sorry for the simulposting, Freeman.

I have to tip a hat to your instinct for thinking like a reporter and first looking at the basics--you might not appreciate my saying that, given what I gather is your opinion of at least some MSM reporters, but that's meant as a compliment, given my resume.; 12/28/06, 1:25 PM
KCFleming said...: He called soldiers losers before he didn't call them losers.

People were sitting with him before they weren't sitting with him.

Man, this stuff just writes itself! Thank you, JFK!; 12/28/06, 1:27 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 12/28/06, 1:28 PM
Anonymous said...: And then Gerry Ford, as a member of the illuminati and the Bushco crime family, tried to drive NYC into bankruptcy to allow his teams of Portuguese ninja demolition experts to plant thermite bombs in the World Trade Center, misjudging the height of the toppling towers, thinking when they fell over, they'd crush Kerry on his yacht in Nantucket Sound, before he could even become Lieutenant Governor of Massachusetts and marry the assorted heiresses necessary to fight for the little guy.

Wake up sheeple!

Especially, you - a law professor!; 12/28/06, 1:30 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 12/28/06, 1:33 PM
Ann Althouse said...: What the hell? Alpha Liberal is the most unscrupulous commenter who has ever showed up here. He's hijacked the thread to talk about another post, and he's continued a subject I deliberately cut off. I warned him in another thread that if he commented on the old post in a new post I would proceed to delete all of his comments. He has now done that, therefore I am deleting all of his comments. Please do not talk to him as you will be wasting your time.; 12/28/06, 1:45 PM
bearbee said...: Why is the Portugal flag up in the coalition mess hall if they are not in the coalition?

I believe Portugal is a part of the NATO training mission in Iraq.; 12/28/06, 1:47 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 12/28/06, 1:50 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 12/28/06, 1:51 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: Ann said:
"I warned him in another thread that if he commented on the old post in a new post I would proceed to delete all of his comments."

Really? Where?

Just please answer the numeours quesitons over what you meant by "fighting back":
"How many Americans would have died in post-9/11 attacks if we had not chosen the path of fighting back?"

Show us those "scruples!"; 12/28/06, 1:56 PM
Ann Althouse said...: As for the thing about the camera, I'll put an update on the old post and say there is a question, but I'm not seeing any link to a place that deals with this issue well. I think it is a recent picture. I saw the other picture of Kerry at that table, and it looks pretty much the same, from another angle.

Any further discussion of this subject should be under that post, not this one. And Alpha Liberal did a post on Daily Kos that is absolutely despicable, that calls me a liar and shows what purports to be a link to me that is nothing more than a link to Blogger.com. That is unscrupulous and dishonest. What abysmal hypocrisy! Maybe I got something wrong, but a mistake -- if it is one -- is not a lie. If you are going to accuse me of lying, you owe a proper link so people can see what you are talking about. To fail to provide one is unethical.; 12/28/06, 2:00 PM
Palladian said...: New York is parasitic. Of course, lots of nice things are parasitic, like sandalwood trees and mistletoe.; 12/28/06, 2:00 PM
KCFleming said...: Re: "I think we are owed a major refund for bailing out the lazy, slacker, moochers in the rest of the country."

Well, much as I sit here amazed, I actually agree with DTL, for the very first time.
The federal government has been over-taxing NYC for decades, nearly equal to its self-overtax. But if the Bush tax cut rollback occurs as promised, don't count on any relief.; 12/28/06, 2:02 PM
Anonymous said...: Quoted from a report from one of the NYC tabloids just the other day (I forget which one, sorry no link)

"Scientests in Belize working on genetically modifying howler monkeys had a breakthrough in attempting to increase their intelligence, but the consequences were dire.

These monkeys were able to read and type in English, but their thought processes were still sub-human, and their desire to fling poo remained. Now instead of flinging their actual poo, they prefer instead to hit the comment threads at popular blogs and fling their 'virtual' poo there . . ."

That explains so much . . .

The Daily News (at least I think it was the Daily News) "WEB POO FILLED"; 12/28/06, 2:04 PM
Palladian said...: I meant resource parasitic, by the way, since we don't actually produce anything here anymore like we used to. Perhaps the parasitism of over taxation is more damaging.; 12/28/06, 2:06 PM
MDIJim said...: So guys, was Kerry in Cambodia on that Christmas Eve or was he not?

I was in NYC back then. People were afraid that all kinds of horrible things would happen if the City could not meet its obligations. For some reason, people also believed that NYC was too big and too important to be allowed to fail. The Daily News played to that, and they were not alone. This whole affair proves how the blogosphere has changed things for the better as far as public information is concerned.

During my NYC days I came to the conclusion that Noo Yawkers, for all their pretended cosmopolitanism, were the most parochial people on earth. The upper West Side contains thousands of people who have been all over the world but cannot find an address in Queens. Not for nothing was that famous New Yorker cover reproduced all over the world.; 12/28/06, 2:11 PM
Anonymous said...: But if the Bush tax cut rollback occurs as promised, don't count on any relief.

The Bush tax cuts did not help New York City. We already get hit by the Alternative Minimum Tax big time, so the tax cuts did not help us at all.

That's why I don't worry if the Democrats scale back those tax cuts. I'll still be paying AMT and won't see a difference.; 12/28/06, 3:21 PM
KCFleming said...: Re: "I'll still be paying AMT and won't see a difference."

But how much better NY could be, should your tax burden be less than that, both state and federal.
Ah, to dream....; 12/28/06, 4:26 PM
Anonymous said...: Hi downtownlad- The purpose behind those tax cuts was to stimulate economic activity. That happened. The New York state economy is yoked to the NYC economy, which is dependent upon the money and investment sector, dwarfing almost everything else.

I know you know about money. You must know that. I can't think of a state that got more of a benefit from the general investment tax cuts than NY. They're handing out gold bricks at Goldman Sachs because the rest of the country made money, and mailed it to NYC to invest.

Me, I'm in Boston, so all I got is beans.; 12/28/06, 6:02 PM
Steven said...: When I hear a New Yorker complain about the Federal tax burden, I ask him when's the last time he voted for someone other than the Conservative or Libertarian Party candidate for federal office. If his answer is any date after 1962, I ignore him, because it's clear he doesn't really care, he's just looking for a rhetorical stick.; 12/28/06, 6:15 PM
Ann Althouse said...: DTL is right. The AMT is a special tax for Blue Staters. I'm about to pay my $12,000 property tax bill. It's all deductible, except it isn't.; 12/28/06, 6:32 PM
Steven said...: Blue Staters (as a collective) got exactly what they asked for when they voted year after year for the party of class envy. If they want to get down from where their petard landed them, let them make an offer on ladder rental.

I mean, I'd help 'em down for free, but the party that they voted for has consistently told me I'm an evil, money-grubbing, heartless demon, and I'd hate to disappoint.; 12/28/06, 10:28 PM
hdhouse said...: Let's get back to Annie's penchant for censorship. She makes note of removing posts because they are not on "focus" or somesuch nonsense. Other times she removes them because she made a boo-boo and it was pointed out to her that she could get sued for monetization of images without authorization or compensation...those were all removed but they were on topic within a thread.

The question is: how are we to know if Annie is telling the truth?

Why doesn't she leave posts up for a day or two with the warning that these are going to be removed for "da da da" reasons so we can clearly see from what direction her censorship comes from.

OHHH and to the "only governments censor" idiot:

censorship is the act of censoring

censoring is: A person authorized to examine books, films, or other material and to remove or suppress what is considered morally, politically, or otherwise objectionable.

Are you saying that Annie isn't authorized or doesn't assume the role of an authorized person in removing or supressing on this blog? Then, pray tell, who else has the passwords to the toolbox for "removed by administrator".

Ohhh the lengths some of you go to justify what you do.; 12/29/06, 2:03 AM
bearbee said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 12/29/06, 7:17 AM
bearbee said...: They're handing out gold bricks at Goldman Sachs....

Here is a lick smacking excerpt from a 12/05 article on Wallstreet and GS bonus':

Last year, the New York State Comptroller’s office estimated the average bonus on Wall Street to be a clean $100,600 (or $15.9 billion split among 158,000 employees). Early estimates of the 2005 bonus pool reach as high as $19 billion.

And this is the last paragraph:

The Table Scraps
Just-out-of-college analysts make $70,000 and hope to match that in bonus. Associates, with M.B.A.’s, hope to match their $95,000 salaries with a bonus, too. Secretaries who make as much as $75,000 have their sights set on bonuses of roughly $15,000.

And I'm sure this year those bricks will be diamond encrusted.; 12/29/06, 7:31 AM
bearbee said...: I meant lip-smacking

Are others having trouble posting?; 12/29/06, 9:35 AM
Ann Althouse said...: Bearbee: Unfortunately, I need to moderate comments today.; 12/29/06, 9:41 AM