Click to bookmark this page!

- Contact Me -
Include your email address

<< March 2004 >>
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
 01 02 03 04 05 06
07 08 09 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31


Just in case you weren't sure...
If you want to be updated on this weblog Enter your email here:

Please sign the Ted Kennedy Resignation Petition!


rss feed

Shameless Self-Promotion

Buy this book (not just because it contains two of my op-eds):
Americans on Politics, Policy, and Pop Culture:
The 101 Best Opinion Editorials From OpEds.com


An Interview With the G-Man:
My first (hopefully not last) experience in live radio, being interviewed by G. Gordon Liddy!



Perspective
Joe Mariani

Number of people freed from totalitarian dictatorships by precision use of American military force under George W. Bush:
50 million in just two years

Number of people freed from totalitarian dictatorships by anti-American Bush-bashing terrorist-appeasing whining elitists:
Zero. Ever.
...

The problem seems to me to be the definition of "free speech". Liberals define it as anything they want to say or do that opposes America. I say "speech" ends where "action" begins. Once you pick up a gun for the enemy, throw a rock at a cop during a "peace" march, send money to a terrorist organisation, or travel to Baghdad to block an American JDAM with your ass, you have crossed the line from free speech to costly action.
...

Saying the War on Terror is all about al-Qaeda is like saying we should have fought the Japanese Naval Air Force after Pearl Harbor. Not the Japanese Navy, not the Japanese Army, not the Empire of Japan -- just the Naval Air Force.
...

Complaining about the "waste" when human embryos are destroyed instead of being used in medical experiments is a lot like going to a funeral and complaining about the waste of perfectly good meat.
...

Blaming CO2 for climate change is like blaming smoke for the fire. CO2 is largely a following, not a leading, indicator of a rise in temperature.
...

Cavalier's First Theorem:
Every time, Liberals will fight to protect the guilty and kill the innocent, while Conservatives will fight to protect the innocent and punish the guilty.

Cavalier's Second Theorem:
Liberals are just Socialists who want to be loved... then again, Socialists are just Communists who lack the courage of their convictions.

Cavalier's Third Theorem:
Any strongly moral, hawkish or pro-American statement by a Liberal will inevitably be followed by a "but."

Top News Headlines

Iraq Blogs

The Messopotamian
Iraq at a Glance
Iraq the Model
Hammorabi
Iraq & Iraqis
Nabil's Blog
Road of a Nation
The Sun of Iraq
Healing Iraq

Iraqi Bloggers Central

The Truth About Iraq
Liberating Iraq
Pictures from Iraq
The Iraqi Holocaust: a collection
Iraq's Mass Graves

Mudville Gazette:
News the media can't use

The Other Iraq:
The Iraq you never hear about in the MSM

Michael Yon - Online Magazine
Dispatches not filed from the Baghdad Hilton hot tub


United States Central Command


Humor

Infamous Monsters of Filmland

Day by Day: Chris Muir's witty comic strip with a political bent

The Ultimate War Simulation: Why does this scenario seem so familiar?

What Kind of Liberal Are You?
Save me the trouble of figuring out what kind of idiot you are

Blame Bush
Because Bush is to blame... for everything

Sacred Cow Burgers
Web Archive

Satirical Political Beliefs Test

Communists for Kerry

Cooper's Protester Guide

Fellowship 9/11: Sauron never attacked Rohan, Saruman did! Yet a small group of elitists convinced Middle-earth to divert resources from the real war to attack Mordor for personal gain.


Analysis

When Democrats Attack
Did prominent Democrats switch positions on Iraq just to attack President Bush for political gain? (See the updated list.)

Was Iraqi Freedom Justified?
An honest, step-by-step analysis of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq that Congress voted into law shows that it was.

Saddam's Philanthropy of Terror
Details of solid ties to organised international terrorism

How The Left Betrayed Iraq
by Naseer Flayih Hasan

Did We Botch The Occupation?
No, not of Iraq: of Germany. Read the media's take on how we "lost the peace" in 1946 and compare.

Debunking 8 Anti-War Myths About the Conflict in Iraq

Pictures from Hate Bush/Hate America/Hate Capitalism/Hate Israel/general wacko rallies
- by Zombie

Jihad Watch


2004 Election Links

Looosers: Sorry, Everybody!
Winners: You're Welcome, Everybody!


2008 Election

Peace Through Strength PAC


Duncan Hunter in 2008
official site



Click to join duncanhunterforpresident2008 at Yahoo! Groups

Useful Links

FamilyWishList
Share your wish list with friends and family

Virtual Tourist
Travel tips from real travelers

RemBot.com
Appointment calendar with email/wireless notification

PriceGrabber.com
Convenient comparison shopping


Reading Material

RightWingNews
The best right-wing news and commentary

GOP USA Commentary Corner

Men's News Daily
The New Media

OpinionEditorials.com
a project of Frontiers of Freedom

ChronWatch
SF Chronicle watchdog and conservative news

American Daily
Analysis with political and social commentary

The Conservative Voice
Conservative news and opinion

News By Us
...not news bias

IntellectualConservative.com
Conservative and Libertarian Intellectual Philosophy and Politics

CommonConservative.com
Practical conservatism for the common man

USASentinel
Analysis, Commentary and Opinion on the Real World

PhillyFuture.org
Philly news and blogs


Now Reading

The Fatal Conceit:
The Errors of Socialism
by F. A. Hayek



Articles Previously Published at
Useless-Knowledge.com

- When Good Liberals Go Bad - 05/29/03
- How Stupid Do Democrats Think You Are? - 05/31/03
- Who Are These 'Rich' Getting Tax Cuts, Anyway? - 06/02/03
- How Can We Miss The Clintons If They Won't Go Away? - 06/04/03
- Whining of Mass Distraction: How To Discredit A President - 06/05/03
- Liberal "Rules" for Arguing - 06/10/03
- Liberalism: Curable or Terminal? - 06/14/03
- Filibustering Judges: Hijacking Presidential Powers? - 06/17/03
- Is Hamas Exempt from the War on Terror? - 06/22/03
- How Malleable Is The Constitution? - 06/26/03
- Rejecting Our Biological and Cultural Heritage - 06/30/03
- I Need Liberal Assistance, Now! - 07/02/03
- Bring Them On - 07/03/03
- We Need You Arrogant Warmongering Americans...Again - 07/09/03
- Much Ado About Nothing, Again - 07/13/03
- Double Standard: Blindly Blame Bush - 07/18/03
- Was WWII Also Unjustified? - 07/20/03
- Clinton Backing Bush? Don't Bet On It! - 07/24/03
- How To Be A Hypocritical Liberal - 07/28/03
- The Clinton Legacy: In Answer to Mr. Stensrud - 07/30/03
-What Is 'Good News' To Liberals? - 08/02/03
- Bush's Big Blunder - 08/06/03
- The Meaning of Right - Why I Supported the Iraq War - 08/10/03
- More Liberal "Rules" for Arguing - 08/14/03
- You Can Have Cary Grant; I'll Take John Wayne! - 08/19/03
- Where Is The ACLU When It's Actually Needed? - 08/25/03
- Who's Afraid Of The Big Bad Ten Commandments? - 08/28/03
- From The Weasels: Thanks For Nothing - 08/30/03
- The Liberal Superfriends - 09/02/03
- Liberal Superfriends 2: The Sequel - 09/05/03
- Saddam and 9/11: Connect the Dots - 09/08/03
- Throwing Away the Southern Vote - 11/02/03
- Libya: The First Domino Falls - 12/20/03
- Is the UN Playing Games with American Politics? - 03/04/04


Blogs to Browse

Across the Pond
AlphaPatriot
Arts for Democracy
Betsy's Page
Bill Karl
Blonde Sagacity
Bull Moose Strikes Back
Common Sense & Wonder
Conservative Pleasure
Dangerous Logic
DowneastBlog
ElectionProjection
Everything I Know Is Wrong
Freedom of Thought
Sally Girl
Korla Pundit
LogiPundit.com
MarkLevinFan
Mark Nicodemo
Michelle Malkin
Moonbattery
My Arse From My Elbow
QandO Blog
RadioBS.net
Rebel Rouser
RightThinkingGirl
Sally Girl
Samantha Burns
Semi-Intelligent Thoughts
Sighed Effects
Sister Toldjah
Stark Truth
Take A Stand Against Liberals
The Resplendent Mango
The Right Society
The YNC
Tom's Common Sense
Tom DeLay
Tomfoolery of the Highest Order
Trying to Grok
TS Right Dominion
Violent Daydreams
Watcher of Weasels
Word Around the Net
WuzzaDem.com



Locations of visitors to this page


Saturday, March 06, 2004
Blatant Media Bias: Politicising 9/11 for Kerry

If this is how far the Democrats have sunk already, with eight months still to go before the election, 2004 is going to be a very dirty Presidential campaign year indeed.

In answer to the vicious attacks constantly being levied at him by the Democrats, President Bush released a series of quiet, thoughtful tv commercials this week.  The ads were designed to remind the viewer that America has been faced with some serious hardships and challenges in the last few years, and that America -- led by President Bush -- has risen to meet them.  As part of a series of photographs that flash by in a montage, there is a brief shot of the American flag flying over the World Trade Center wreckage of 9/11, and an even briefer shot of one of the thousands of flag-draped stretchers that were carried out of the buildings' remains.  Since 9/11 was one of the challenges Bush helped the country survive, the defining moment of his Presidency and our generation, and arguably the greatest disaster this country has ever faced, it's entirely right and proper for him to allude to his leadership in its aftermath.  9/11 redefined this country, and redefined George W. Bush as well.  But the Liberals, as we know, see the worst terrorist attack in history as a hiccup, a fluke, a one-time thing rather than part of an ongoing campaign against us.  They refuse to see that it was an act of war, and that war against terrorists and their supporters was the only appropriate response.  While the rest of us were saying "Remember 9/11", they were -- and still are -- telling us, "remember 9/10".

The media (reduced to being the pets of the Liberals these days) immediately attacked the ads with everything they had, and in the sickest way imaginable.  Within hours of the ads' release, "news" stories began circulating such as "Victims' Families Press Bush to Pull 9/11 Ads" and "9/11 Victims' Kin Angered by Bush Ads" which ran quotes from people mostly identified only as relatives of 9/11 victims.  But the stories somehow neglected to identify nearly every person quoted as someone who has either contributed to John Kerry's campaign, works for John Kerry's campaign, or is a member of an organisation that's either "anti-war"... or just anti-Bush.

"It makes me sick," said Colleen Kelly, who lost her brother Bill Kelly Jr. in the attacks and leads a victims families group called Peaceful Tomorrows. "Would you ever go to someone's grave site and use that as an instrument of politics? That truly is what Ground Zero represents to me."

Ms. Kelly, it turns out, protested the liberation of Iraq in NYC alongside actress and activist Susan Sarandon.  Her group also visited Iraq before the war to stage a protest against the US.  The news story forgot to mention that.  But wait!  There's more!  This Peaceful Tomorrows group (which also opposed the war in Afghanistan), is "a project of the Tides Center" according to their own web site.  The Tides Center, in turn, is funded by the Vira Heinz Endowment and the Howard Heinz Endowment -- both chaired by Teresa Heinz Kerry.  Got all that? 

David Potorti, quoted as saying, "It's an insult to use the place where my brother died in an ad," is also a member of Peaceful Tomorrows.  So is Bob McIlvane, who said, "To argue that using footage of the wreckage of the towers to further someone's political career is 'tasteful' really needs to be rejected outright, and I condemn it."  Yet he is allowing the media to use his son's death to further the political career of John Kerry, whose wife's foundations contribute money to his organisation.  The media neglected to report any of this in their "outrage" stories.

Two members of the International Association of Fire Fighters Union are mentioned as being angry about the ads, Jeff Zack and Harold Schaitberger .  The IAFF gave their endorsement to Senator Kerry.  Schaitberger, in September 2003, gave the endorsement speech.  In fact, Harold Schaitberger is "co-chair of the Kerry for President campaign", according to the Firefighters for Kerry website.  The news media must have just forgotten to mention that.

Are you feeling sick yet?

Tom Ryan, who said, "As a firefighter who spent months at Ground Zero, it's deeply offensive to see the Bush campaign use these images to capitalize on the greatest American tragedy of our time," is an active campaigner for gay "marriage" as an officer of FireFLAG.  President Bush recently called for a Constitutional amendment to define marriage as between one man and one woman. Coincidence?  I wonder. I think I hear the scraping sound of an ax grinding.

Kristen Breitweiser, who also attacked President Bush for "using 9/11 as political propaganda," was not identified as the woman who decided "to wage a battle against the United States government" in the "ad" story.  However, that is the way she was introduced in an interview with Phil Donahue in 2002.  In both interviews, she attacked President Bush for not panicking a schoolroom full of children by personally overreacting while preparations were made for his departure.  That meme -- "how dare he react with such calm?" -- seems to be resurfacing again as a Democratic talking point. 

But that's what makes a President a leader, not rushing around in a hysterical panic.

Thanks to RightWingNews and little green footballs for some of the links.

Posted at Saturday, March 06, 2004 by CavalierX

Robert McClelland
March 6, 2004   02:07 PM PST
 
>Are you feeling sick yet?

Yes, you sicken me. Launching a smear campaign against the relatives of 9/11 victims just because they don't share your views is beneath contempt. Save your spin doctoring. This is just wrong.
Michael Cosyns
March 6, 2004   02:50 PM PST
 
What??? They are attacking <I>these</I> commercials????

<I>"Are you feeling sick yet?"</I>

No. Just disgusted.

Robbo I don't get you man. From your postings over at the Iraqis I understand that you are not even against the war on terror since you seemed to deplore the shifting of troops from Afghanistan to Iraq. So it seems to be more a rgument over strategy. You even approved of some aspects of GWB's domestic policy. If anything you are hard to put a label on.

These commercials are anything but aggressive. Guys attacking the Prez over them are sick. Cav just pointed out a few important things the media conveniently forgot to mention, and I'm grateful for that.
JM
March 6, 2004   08:37 PM PST
 
Robert, can you point out where I attacked the relatives of 9/11 victims? Not, of course, that they get a free pass for the rest of their lives, but I'm upset that the media did not accurately portray them in order to paint a certain picture. The same way that when Rudy Giuliani's open support of the President's ads is mentioned, they invariably say "Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who is campaigning for Bush's re-election, says..."
American Joe
March 7, 2004   12:08 PM PST
 
Here is the situation as I see it:

1. The major media are almost unanimous in their hatred for George W. Bush. They have kept up an unrelenting torrent of attacks for months and that torrent shows no signs of slacking off. In fact, it probably will get worse.

2. Any attempts that are made to get Bush's message out will be drowned out. The 9/11 ad is a case in point. The "news" is not the message, but rather the attacks on the ad.

3. Because of McCain-Feingold, the voters will see and hear almost nothing but the major media reports for the last 60 days before the election.

My conclusion: Bush is toast. He could heal the sick, raise the dead, and walk on water, and all the voters will hear about is that somebody was offended. It's all over folks - get ready for President Kerry.
Jamie G
March 8, 2004   09:16 AM PST
 
I don't think that it will be such a cake-walk for Kerry. You've got to give more credit to the average American voter. (I know, the media thinks that the average American is an idiot and believes just about anything they are told by Dan Rather, Katie Couric, NBC, CBS, etc.) But, guess what, it isn't trued.

Its funny, Kerry and all the other Democrats have been bashing Bush (and the Admin) for months now, yet the media doesn't characterize this as "negative campaigning". Which it is. The B.S. story about Bush's Nat Guard service; the B.S. about those 16 words and Bush's "lying"; are just a couple of examples.

Yet, all the media can talk about is how Bush will "soon begin airing 'negative' ads"; ads which will emphasize how Kerry has flip-flopped on most of the major issues facing this country. But you see, all that will be emphasized is the truth! So, its only negative when you consider it from the viewpoint of the Kerry campaign. I think that the media (and the Kerry campaign) are attempting to scare the Bush campaign into not running any ads exposing Kerry for what he is.

There are many months still to go in this and people are already tired of the stuff that is going on.....
Jamie G
March 8, 2004   09:34 AM PST
 
BTW - to me, the fact that Pres Bush did NOT panic and run around like an idiot when told about the WTC attacks confirmed that he is a leader. And that is why I will vote for him to remain in office. (And that is probably one of the reasons that the leaders of some of the most oppresive regimes in the world are hoping that G.W. won't win re-election).

Can you imagine what any of the Democrats would have done? (I guess they would have consulted with Kofi Annan, called an emergency session of the U.N Security Council ..... called Jaques Chirac or Gerhardt Shroeder, perhaps? I thank God every day that George W. Bush was in office when those attacks occured, and NOT Al Gore (or Clinton).
Name
March 8, 2004   12:09 PM PST
 
Bush will *not* be allowed to get his message out to the voters. The underlying theme of this election is driving home the fact that this country is controlled by the "permanent" Democratic establishment and the big media.
Jamie
March 8, 2004   01:27 PM PST
 
The "big media" is losing viewers every day. And don't dismiss alternative news outlets (like Fox News) from getting the message out, not to mention the Internet as a valid source for current news/ideas/opinions for a lot of people. Kerry's wife was quick to dismiss the media late last year when she said "Until EVERYONE has access to a computer and knows how to access the Internet, it will still be an adjunct political grassroots organizing tool”. But then again, most mega-rich folks like her don't have much respect for the abilities of commoners, do they? Hasn't anyone ever told her that one doesn't have to personally OWN a computer to be able to access the Internet?

BTW - go to the Wall Street Journal Online and read a couple of the articles posted there from family members of 9/11 victims. There was a really interesting one posted last week and another one today. Not all family members are opposed to what the Bush campaign has done.
 

Leave a Comment:

Name


Homepage (optional)


Comments




Previous Entry Home Next Entry