Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Jon Dubya
Published Letters: 95
Just to add to this, don't forget about various "9/11 widows." Even though they and anything related to 9/11 were considered "off-bounds" except for something for the Bush administration to crassly exploit in the propaganda wars, the minute some of them got off message and started demanding investigations into 9/11, they have to send their vicious attack dog Ann "RepubliCANT" Coulter on them. Take a good look, because that's unfortunately Jessic Lynch's future right there. Why, I'm sure Coulter and her ilk are just foaming at the mouth right now waiting for the chance to slander their former "heroes" (oh look, Elephantman already got a head start on the attacks, while pretending to "agree" with Glenn. Clever!)
And in regards to journalist, anonymous sources and "access", have any of you considered that maybe they they get off on NOT revealing anything to us (we're the plebians, remember?) For example in last month's Overpriced Catalogue...I mean Men's Vogue there was a feature on Brian Williams sanwiched between the 9,000 ads. (I can't find it online, unfortunately) It began with Mr. Williams joking around with the Pres, but since Bush is a moron he Says Something He Shouldn't, his handlers/thinkers swear Bri-guy to secrecy and he does with a big grin. This is all, of course told with beeming pride by Brian to highlight his mad Journalism skillz (see, the prez is his homeboy and he can keep his secrets. They tight like that, yo!) Likewise I wonder how many of those "anoymous" sources are also dishing about what's REALLY going on in the administration ("off the record", of course) with the confidence that it won't be reported because, hey, those journalist LIKE being in "the loop." It's what makes them special, that access to privillaged knowledge. These "secrets" then become like a velvet rope that only let the "important" people (beltway insiders) in.
I haven't read all the post here yet, but I already see that Elephantman is asking the same idiotic question a billion times. So though I'd normally never do this, I'll engage him and pretend his stupid litany has any relevance to Glenn's topic at hand. I'll do this by asking my own question: Why does NPR and PBS need to "balance" their supposed "liberal bias" in any case? You want right-wing distortion, you can always turn to FUX News.
Boy you late! Glenn has ALREADY done an "expose' on ABC. And even if he didn't, how would THAT mean that The Politico (THE place for EXCLUSIVE!!! hair gossip!) isn't a front for slanted right-wing talking points?
Let's look at this issue through the fun-house mirror of life (by which I mean Hollywood of course.) there are the J-Lo's who have "traditional" weddings with the heavily botoxed wedding planners and Wolfgang Puck cakes. And then there are the Nicky Hiltons and Britney Spears that have cheap Vegas weddings and "pimp" branded velour suits. Guess what these "happy marriages" have in common?
I'm just bringing this up to say that how much or little one spends on a wedding doesn't neccisarily predict matrimonial success (or lack thereof.)
There is also a homegrown version of this argument. It's when white people wonder why us Black folk are never "satistfied" and dare to complain about racist institutions holding them down. ("How can those ungrateful negros complain after all that we've given them?") I saw a similar argument on today's Inanity and Gnolmes...I mean Hannity and Colmes where the blowhead was getting his panties in a twist because a Mexican audience booed Miss USA in Donald Trump Presnts Feamle Exploitat...I mean Miss Universe. He was actually fuming that people might (gasp!) possibly disaprove of our representatives after all that WE do for them like "letting" them into our country. This of course is one of the reasons minorities complain and act "ungrateful" in the first place: the idea that rights and freedoms for us is some type of privilage that has to be granted by the mercies of a ruling class. Likewise "we" (our government) thinks the Iraqi citezens' sovergnity is a PRIVILAGE to be granted by our say so.
Fantastic post, Glenn (The good Glenn)! Thanks for showing all the potholes in the Conservative logic that has been going on since this scandal began. I'm particually saddened/amused by "Instapundit." I loved how he was trying to assert that Plame's covert status was merely Fitzgerald's opinion that was somehow "kept" from idiots like him (even though the only people who were claiming that Plame wasn't covert in the first place are simpletons like him.) And while I'm sure you probably already know this, Glenn, I am amazed to see from his bio that Glenn (the bad Glenn) is a LAW PROFESSOR. First of all, based on his "reaction" to the recent news, one would think he was so bratty immature 13 year old, so it's a surprised to see an "educated" adult making these type of bullshit assertions and non-apologies. Secondly, I'm blown away that a LAW PROFESSOR doesn't think it matters whether he gets facts right or not? Where does this man teach, Lionel Hutz' School of Law? His excuse isn't even original! (It's plagerized directly from Rush Limbaugh apologist who claim that Fatty McLimpdick can spout any kind of nonsense he wants because he's just an "entertainer." Like the tubby loudmouth lesbian they constantly attack.)
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
