109655247970345651

OK, That’s Just…. Wrong

Sometimes I swear they must have restarted the “Candid Camera” show because I witness events simply too ludicrous to be a non-staged event. You think someone yakking it up on a cell phone while driving is too much? Have I got one for you.

As I am drying my hands off on my way out of the men’s room at the office building where I work, a man comes in the door having a rather loud yet cheerful conversation on his cell phone. While never pausing once, the man enters one of the stalls, closes the door, and makes preparation to do his business in there. By which I mean the business that requires a man to actually sit down on the sit down toilet. And, from the immediate sounds that emanated from the stall, got right to work.

Yes, I mean those sounds.

And the guy maintains his running conversation on the bloody cell phone the whole time!

As I said. That’s just wrong. On soooooooooo many levels. Open note to anyone who makes phone calls to me: I do not want to be on the other end of the phone when that happens. Please. I’m begging you…

109647749454163865

An open letter to WTOP News, Washington DC.

Greetings,

After the disgraceful behavior by CBS News over the past month, I feel it necessary to suggest that WTOP explore the possibility of getting out of the CBS News Network and aligning with someone else. Dan Rather’s “Memogate” was bad enough. For a group alleging to be news journalists, Mr. Rather has proven himself not worthy of trust with regard to reporting the facts. The use of obviously forged documents – and the continued defense of them to this day – would never be permitted by professionals who sought to simply report the facts.

Last night’s CBS News spectacle, however, is the last straw. Richard Schlesinger’s use of thoroughly debunked internet e-mails and an interview with a hugely biased individual to spread the latest Democratic Party charges is beneath your profession. His story purports to expose a danger of the draft returning should President Bush be re-elected. The e-mails he cites are hoaxes and have been proven so. The woman he interviews as the centerpiece of the story is reported as a Republican and portrayed as largely apolitical. Ms. Cocco is, however, a chapter president of an advocacy group called People Against the Draft. This fact is not relayed to the viewers. Nor is the group’s leadership noted in the story as being critics of the current administration. Finally, and this is inexcusable, Schlesinger goes on to make a big point of the fact that there are 2 bills in Congress trying to revive the draft while conveniently failing to mention that both of them have been submitted by Democrats. (Senate bill S.89 by Senator Fritz Hollings (D-SC), and House bill H.R. 163 by Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY). ) He simply mentions them without such context allowing the obvious implication that it’s the Bush Administration that wants them to pass.

I’ve been a loyal listener to WTOP for years. Your station is the only one I listen to on my morning commute and I check your web site several times a day to stay informed. I have never had an issue with how your reporters do their jobs and you are all to be commended for your professionalism. People are, however, known by the company they keep. CBS has shown in drastic detail they can no longer be rightfully titled a “news organization”. They are, instead, a media outlet for their special interests. I don’t want to see WTOP associated with that kind of reputation and I hope you don’t either.

Please, folks, consider leaving a dismally biased outfit behind and get on board with people who are still news reporters.

Regards,

109628708971241246

Take all the notes you like…

My message to the Euros who are coming to “monitor” the election here in the United States is simple: take as many notes as you like and feel free to observe. You are not part of our democratic process, however, and you will not interfere in the elections in the smallest way or I will take every action available to me to see that you and yours get permanently booted out of this country back to where you came from.

There were definitely voting irregularities in Y2K and Florida was ground zero of the problem. A horribly designed ballot, a bad set of processes to see to it that the people on the ineligible voter list were actually people that belonged there, and the disenfranchisement of hundreds of absentee ballots cast by American servicemen and women stationed overseas combined to make what should be straightforward into a nightmare. The legal maneuvering, miscalls by the media, and a profound lack of understanding by a large chunk of our populace as to how a president is elected only makes things worse. But whose idea was it that we Americans are so clueless that we need Europeans – who have no standing in the elections but clearly defined desires as to the outcome – to pat our little heads and make sure everything comes out “OK”? (I’m thinking Michael Moore, personally, considering his previous remarks on the subject of American intelligence.) And how am I to trust these people over my own fellow citizens when they’ve been nearly screaming at the tops of their lungs who they’d prefer to see win the elections? Should not the people we invite as monitors be people who are neutral in this regard? If we can’t find any such people, then I’m for trusting in my own nation’s processes and citizens over anyone else.

I’m not ready to say that we, as Americans, have done what we can do to correct the problems ourselves. Our media has been long and loud in telling us the problems. Are they saying no one has tried to fix them? What are the possible fixes? Have any been tried? Here in Virginia we had no such difficulties and, frankly, fixing Florida’s problems are outside of our zone of control. Are the folks wanting to invite in Europeans to guarantee our democracy suggesting federalizing the elections process completely?

So sure, Monitors, come on in. Pull up a chair and scribble some notes down. Write up your commentary to be published the morning of the 3rd as to who won and whether that’s a good thing for the European Union. But keep your mouths shut during the election. Say nothing that might influence anyone in any way whatsoever. If that’s too much to ask, then don’t bother to come.

109607675774342240

No Surprise: Michael Moore was in on the CBS forgeries

As noted over at LGF, seems that liberal propagandist Michael Moore knew about the CBS fake memos and their intention to run the story the day before it aired. From his own blog:

Space Here

Later today (Wed.), the Boston Globe, the A.P. and Dan Rather all present new and damning information about how George W. Bush got moved to the front of the line to get in the Texas Air National Guard, and how he then went AWOL. I am putting every ounce of trust I have in my fellow Americans that a majority of them get this, get the injustice of it all, and get the sad, sick twisted irony of how it relates very, very much to our precious Election 2004.

Space Here

Fascinating. He knew about the story and, it is very strongly implied he knew the details of what CBS was going to say. We know full well the extent to which the Kerry Campaign and the Democratic National Committee are in bed with Moore. Seems CBS was in bed with him too. Mr. Moore’s penchant for doing whatever’s necessary to further the DNC’s causes and to smear the President are equally well-known. I wonder how far we’d have to stretch to think that Moore might have access to a PC with MS Word on it? It’s no stretch at all to believe he’s honorless and cheating enough to put up whatever forgeries he might have to do to make such a story come to life.

Oh, I’m just thinking out loud. Really.

109595109490001478

One more into the breach

Greyhawk has left to go to war. Between him and Sgt. Hook, I find myself so surprised that these men I’ve never met can stir such pride and concern in me. To you both, gentlemen:

Be sharp your eyes,
Be true your aim,
Be strong your arms,
Be steadfast your faith.

May your strikes be bold, swift, sure, and devastating. May you and your mates show the innocents you go to free and those you leave behind yet under your aegis the best that is American and show those who would do us all harm the worst.

And may you be victorious and return home in safety soon. Our thoughts and prayers go with you…

Update: – Sean, that goes for you, too. Stay safe.

109577876204551524

This is the enemy

They’re past justifying. Their actions are inhuman and their “reasons” are just excuses to kill as many Americans and their allies as they can. Al-Qaeda aligned terrorists in Iraq have killed another hostage, sawing his head off with a knife while the man screamed for mercy. This man, who had no ability to effect any change they claim is all they’re after, was simply butchered. The event was taped, not only for their perverse enjoyment of seeing it aired throughout the Islamic world but also to be shown to their new recruits as an example to follow. Their ridiculous excuse for a demand this time was to secure the release of all Muslim women held by the Coalition.

Funny how they’re so concerned about the welfare of their women now. Seems they only care about them when they’re not being held under the Sharia’s heel and being hung for speaking out of turn. Further reports say:

Space Here

The speaker then threatened to kill at least one more hostage in 24 hours unless all Muslim women are released from U.S. custody in Iraq. The group still claims to be holding American Jack Hensley (search) and Briton Kenneth Bigley (search), construction contractors abducted along with Armstrong from their Baghdad home last week. The U.S. military says the only two women in its custody in Iraq are two female security prisoners: Dr. Rihab Rashid Taha (search), a scientist who became known as “Dr. Germ” for helping Iraq make weapons out of anthrax, and Huda Salih Mahdi Ammash (search), a biotech researcher known as “Mrs. Anthrax.” The speaker, whose voice resembled al-Zarqawi’s, said Tawhid and Jihad was taking revenge for women Iraqi prisoners and called President Bush “a dog.”

Space Here

Go take a browse with Google and find the file. (I’ll try to put a link up here as soon as I’m able.) See the face and actions of the enemy and get used to calling them that. There’s this oh-so-modern-and-PC revulsion in using the term “enemy” but that’s what they are. The immediate, knee-jerk reaction is that anything bad said about the enemy is merely propaganda. Well, this time it’s their propaganda, folks. They don’t want to live peacefully alongside us. They want us all coverted to their form of Islam or dead. Frankly, I suspect that even if we did all convert, it’d never be enough because we’re not Arab.

Well, that’s not going to be an issue. I don’t want to convert. Since, if you feel the same, that immediately makes us worth only killing to them, they are the enemy. Let’s get into the mindset, into the fight, and do what’s necessary to remove the threat.

109568994448137982

CBS to Announce the Obvious

CBS is said to be preparing to announce, possibly today, that they were mislead as regards the authenticity of the memos used in the 60 Minutes II report aired 2 weeks ago. Hoodathunk?! To anyone reading the blogs these days, this is not news. To anyone with a set of eyes and even a teensy bit of objectivity on the matter, this announcement is one of the largest “No Duh!” moments of the year. Seeing the horrific damage these guys have done to the reputation of CBS news, it’s not coming as a surprise that they’re coming clean – at least this far – as regards the memos being fake.

However, that’s not going to be enough. When I accuse someone of doing something underhanded and it turns out I can’t back up the claim, common courtesy demands I apologize. It’s gonna suck if I feel that the person is really, really guilty of what I’m accusing him of, but it’s something ethics and honor require of me. They require I apologize for the accusation and that I then keep my mouth shut on the matter until I do have something to back it up. I’ve mentioned before that an apology doesn’t go like, “I’m sorry, but here’s all the reasons I’m justified for accusing this jerk of (insert regurgitation of my accusations again).” CBS should explain how this happened with special detail to what parts of their process either didn’t cover the situation in question or how/who simply failed to follow those procedures. They should then apologize to the President for the allegations and admit that they relied on faulty information for the accusation. End of apology. End of story. Go to commercial.

Having Dan Rather and Andrew Heyward resign as a way of trying to set things right for the hundreds of CBS News employees who have had eyes blackened over this through no fault of their own would also be good form. Those 2 should offer apologies of their own on their way out the door.

I’m not holding my breath, of course. But with honorable parties, this is what should happen.

109568991324074968

CBS to Announce the Obvious

CBS is said to be preparing to announce, possibly today, that they were mislead as regards the authenticity of the memos used in the 60 Minutes II report aired 2 weeks ago. Hoodathunk?! To anyone reading the blogs these days, this is not news. To anyone with a set of eyes and even a teensy bit of objectivity on the matter, this announcement is one of the largest “No Duh!” moments of the year. Seeing the horrific damage these guys have done to the reputation of CBS news, it’s not coming as a surprise that they’re coming clean – at least this far – as regards the memos being fake.

However, that’s not going to be enough. When I accuse someone of doing something underhanded and it turns out I can’t back up the claim, common courtesy demands I apologize. It’s gonna suck if I feel that the person is really, really guilty of what I’m accusing him of, but it’s something ethics and honor require of me. They require I apologize for the accusation and that I then keep my mouth shut on the matter until I do have something to back it up. I’ve mentioned before that an apology doesn’t go like, “I’m sorry, but here’s all the reasons I’m justified for accusing this jerk of (insert regurgitation of my accusations again).” CBS should explain how this happened with special detail to what parts of their process either didn’t cover the situation in question or how/who simply failed to follow those procedures. They should then apologize to the President for the allegations and admit that they relied on faulty information for the accusation. End of apology. End of story. Go to commercial.

Having Dan Rather and Andrew Heyward resign as a way of trying to set things right for the hundreds of CBS News employees who have had eyes blackened over this through no fault of their own would also be good form. Those 2 should offer apologies of their own on their way out the door.

I’m not holding my breath, of course. But with honorable parties, this is what should happen.

109534050415261692

Fake but Accurate

This seems to be the new mantra of those who want desperately to believe the CBS forgeries were real. Since the documents themselves have been proven to be absolute forgeries, they’re now alleging the content of those memos are what’s real and important.

Hello? The memos were fakes. They can’t be used as proof that the content was anything, accurate or otherwise. The 30-year-old recollections of an octogenarian who has clear bias against President Bush can hardly be pointed to as conclusive proof, either. As CNN reports:

Space Here

CBS News reported that the documents it first broadcast last week on “60 Minutes II” appear to be forgeries to the woman who would have typed the original memos in 1972 and 1973. But Marian Carr Knox, a former Texas Air National Guard secretary, said she did type similar documents for her boss, Lt. Col. Jerry Killian. “I know that I didn’t type them. However, the information in those is correct,” Knox told CBS anchor Dan Rather.

Space Here

(Emphasis mine.) I’ve read Mrs. Knox’s comments from a number of sources and I don’t recall anyone reporting her as saying she had typed “similar” documents before. (Unless that means she had typed other memos, in general, for Killian. If that’s what everyone thinks that statement means, please sound off and let me know I’m just being jumpy about the topic.) Regardless, the thrust of this new round of reporting is that even though CBS attempted to foist forgeries off onto the public in an attempt to influence the course of a presidential election it’s OK. After all, the information in them was correct, so it’s no big deal to fabricate documentation dealing with the issue.

Well, that’s not OK, not by a longshot. They tried to sneak one past the public, and they weren’t very sneaky about doing it, either. They counted on Americans being the “dumbest people on the planet”, as one of America’s most caustic critics put it. Turns out we aren’t. We caught it. The right thing to do would have been to admit it, come clean, and tell the whole story about how these docs got put onto a prestigious news program. Who gave them to CBS and what was his motive in doing so. If they’d like to pursue the dead-horse issue of President Bush’s service record, fine. But this attempted fraud on the basis of our democracy is a huge story and should be followed with equal vigor.

109533739951832066

The Missing Component in the AWOL Story

The CBS meltdown over the past week has gotten me thinking quite a bit about the concept of proof. It’s an axiom that fake/forged documents do not constitute proof of anything they allege. (They prove nothing except that someone wanted to make a point badly enough that they’d cheat to do it.) CBS’s assertions to the contrary, simply thinking that something is “accurate” is also not proof. Faith is a fine thing but it’s not going to persuade someone who doesn’t already hold your beliefs. With the LA Times making baldly unsupported claims that President Bush’s being AWOL is true to the point where it “doesn’t take new documents to establish that Bush shirked even his National Guard duties” one has to ask: where’s the proof? The immediate follow-on to that should be: what would constitute proof?

You see, the media, the left-wing 527′s, and the Kerry Campaign all rely on the “I didn’t see him so he must not have been there” proof. Specifically, that’s called “eyewitness testimony”. Let’s look at that for a moment. Imagine you and 5 of your buddies all get into a 10-person elevator and ride from the lobby of the building (where, specifically, isn’t important) up to the 10th floor and get off. Later, someone tells you I am claiming I was in the elevator with all of you and asks you if that’s true. You and your friends can answer “no” with confidence because you didn’t see me in there. Can the person who has asked you accept that as proof?

Sure. That’s because it’s reasonable to accept the premise that 6 people in an elevator of that size can reliably see everywhere in that elevator that a person of my size might be. They didn’t see me. Ergo, I wasn’t there. That’s proof. Now apply the same conditions to an area the size of the Mall in Washington, DC. That person has now asked you about my claim that I was on the Mall at the same time you and your 5 buds were. Now, you can make the claim that I wasn’t there because none of you saw me, but this time that’s not sufficient. It’s not reasonable to accept that the 6 of you could keep every spot where a single person might be under surveillance at the same time. The fact that you didn’t see me is insufficient to prove I wasn’t there. So if your goal was to prove I wasn’t there, how would you do it? The only way to pull that off is to prove I was somewhere else. In that argument, we assume the truth of the premise that I couldn’t be in 2 places at the same time. Therefore, if I can be proven to have been somewhere other than the Mall at the time I claim I was at the Mall, then you have proven I wasn’t there.

So if President Bush was supposed to be AWOL from the Guard, where was he?

The base he was stationed at was huge. There were supposed to be something like 900 people there at the time. Last year I was in an office that had 100 people in it and there were people I didn’t see for days. And that was in 1 building. 900 people on a sprawling base with several buildings – oh, and that was 30 years ago – and we’re supposed to accept that a handful of people who didn’t see him constitutes proof he wasn’t there? Nope. Sorry. Thanks for playing.

Show me that he was supposed to be on base on xx (insert month here), 1972 and yet he was over here slacking off at the time and that would be proof. So far, nothing. Accusations that he wasn’t there because no one saw him, that’s all. That’s fine for the faithful, but it’s just not persuasive.