This page includes posts from
September 12-18, 2004 in the usual reverse
order. Each posting on the home page is perma-linked to these
Tonight’s late-breaking news at DelawareOnline included a startling report that might just reflect an unfortunate mixing together of the worlds of sport, broadcasting, and politics.
Now, let’s think about this.
Admittedly, this possible connection may seem a bit far-fetched. Even so, it makes at least as much sense as CBS continuing to insist that Dan Rather didn’t use forged documents.
Except, of course, for the fact that the Eagles fans were the victims of "sophisticated" counterfeits.
Note: Unlike CBS and its forgeries, I’m only kidding around about the Eagles and the Tiffany Network.
I flipped through the television channels last night, watching the various reactions to CBS’ audacious, Nixon/Clinton-like statement about its apparent knowing reliance on forged documents for a “news” story on 60 Minutes II.
When I reached Fox News, their cameras displayed Tony Snow in a standard head shot with a blue background.
Max Headroom came immediately to mind:
Spooky, isn’t it?
Fortunately, Tony doesn’t have Max’s stutter--very similar sense of humor, though, which is fine with me.
I’m in full agreement with Mrs. Presky.
He's typically witty, frequently blunt, and usually comes across as fair in his discussion of Washington politics.
Perhaps that's why I found his reported take on the Tiffany Network's current forged documents problem to be just a tad frustrating.
He spoke at a news conference in Iowa, and is reported to have said the following:
Well, geez, Bob, it's pretty simple.
If a source gives you incredibly bad forgeries and somehow successfully fools you into believing that they're real, you're under no ethical obligation to keep their names confidential once you discover that fact. It'll be painful to make the admission and burn the source, but there's a larger point here--no one should think they can escape the consequences of their fraudulent behavior, right?
And you agree with me about "no one," don't you, Bob?
I was actually amused by the other quote:
You're sure you're not going too far out on a limb with the "may be so" quote, Bob?
Let's just recall that at least since Bush ran for the Texas governorship, folks have been trying to find documents like these to use against him. Years later these blatant forgeries magically appear within two months of the general election for his second term as President, and we're supposed to assume it's just part of a disinterested search for the truth?
I expected better, Bob. Just be a mensch and admit the obvious. It won't hurt and might help.
Hat tip: Lucianne.com
It's always a bit startling to see one's daily stats jump four-fold.
Today the national Democratic Party sent me an email soliciting contributions.
I’m not surprised at being asked, what with being a registered Democrat and all.
What is a bit surprising is the fact that even at this late date in the campaign, the email never once mentions any substantive, policy-based reason to vote for the Kerry/Edwards ticket.
Instead, the entire message is an extended attack on President Bush and Vice-President Cheney (whom they attempt to diminish by referring to them as George and Dick, without mentioning their official titles).
It’s a mystery to me why the DNC chose to engage in this kind of choir-preaching. If they wanted to recruit Democrats to rely on this and similar emails to push for Senator Kerry’s election, why not give them some helpful material? From my experience, folks don’t mind being told why the other guy doesn’t deserve it, but what they really want to hear is why your guy merits their vote.
Trashing alone simply won’t do.
Here are some of the email passages, with a few comments inserted in the usual format I follow here:
Surely the media’s slander-by-forgery emphasis on the President’s National Guard years isn’t coming from Republicans feeding them the false documents. These attacks give every appearance of being an attempt to ignore the current reality--deciding what the next steps should be in the struggle against Islamofascism.
I’d give this approach more credence if I saw more evidence that John Kerry actually took a position during his Senate years and kept to it. That didn’t happen, apparently.
And as for Senator Kerry's biography, emphasizing four months’ experience in your twenties is all well and good, when you’re still in your twenties. It’s a bit much when you’ve had 30 years after that time to build up a record you could stress during your campaign for President.
When you don’t stress what you’ve done lately, I’m inclined to think you’re the one hoping we’ll forget about a "miserable record".
I assume that first clause relates to the WMD issue. Nonetheless, anyone who believed that the Administration gave WMD as the reason to go to war, at a level of policy-making below the defense against Islamofascism, is at best misguided or at worst guilty of willful denial of the facts.
As for the alleged peace plan failures, I’d be happy to hear the details, after I concluded that we’re at peace. I make no such assumptions at this point in the war.
I also think that the Democrats’ money-better-spent-on-domestic-priorities argument insults our intelligence.
Fighting terrorism doesn’t come cheap. It’s not as if there really was a peace dividend after the Cold War—the Islamofascists’ attack on America simply caused us to change the manner in which our defense dollars needed to be spent.
I fully expect both parties to suggest that the other side’s victory would make us less safe. It’s a fair argument in a political campaign, for which this Democratic solicitation makes no response other than sputtering, if not “macho posturing”. Remember Kennedy’s bogus missile-gap ploy in the 1960 campaign?
There’s more to the email, but the choir-preaching noted above is typical of the remaining passages.
If anyone would like to see the entire solicitation, I will gladly send it along. [You can also click here.]
And no, I won’t be sending any checks to the Democratic Party any time soon.
I usually applaud those who display the character trait of persistence. The ability to keep plugging away at one’s chosen task, despite the presence of significant distractions, is deeply admirable.
There are exceptions, however.
This simple truth may now be clear to a young man from Milford, Delaware, who was using a public access computer for some, ah, research:
According to the News-Journal, the youth was charged with engaging in a lewd act, and told to stay out of the library for the time being.
There’s a chance that the young man will learn from this embarrassing episode. With any luck, he’ll soon have a handle on how to behave in public arenas.
After all, being a jerk of any kind is just not the way to live.
Official small print disclaimer: This is, after all, a personal web site. Any opinions or comments I express here are my own, and don't necessarily reflect the official position of my work as a government attorney or any of my clients.
That fact may become obvious later on, but it needs to be said here anyway.
© Frederick H. Schranck 2002-2004