Click to bookmark this page!

- Contact Me -
Include your email address

<< April 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


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


Friday, April 30, 2004
Nightline: Politicising the War Dead

It wasn't enough for the Left when the "mainstream" media made it a point to include the daily US soldier body count from Iraq in every news report in every medium. It wasn't enough when they unapologetically added the number of those killed in accidents in Iraq -- which, frankly, could have happened almost anywhere -- to those killed in combat, just to inflate the American body count further. It wasn't enough for the Left that, for the last half of 2003, the media talking heads almost gleefully announced a second daily Iraq soldier body count, with the tagline, "since President Bush declared major combat over on May first." Support for the liberation of Iraq from dictator Saddam Hussein remained strong, despite the best efforts of the Left to instill an anti-war attitude into every viewer.

Dissatisfied at the refusal of the unwashed masses to go along with their determination to undermine support for the President and the war in Iraq, the Left began attacking him for not attending the funerals of dead soldiers, despite the fact that such events have been rare occurences in our history. President Johnson, who presided over the Vietnam War around which the Left has based their opposition to all things military since, only attended two military funerals despite the fact that 58,169 service members died. Bill Clinton, beloved of the Left, did not attend any funerals for the military except for the sailors killed in the al-Qaeda attack on the USS Stark. Not even the 18 Army Rangers who died in Mogadishu in 1993 merited a Presidential funeral attendance.

When that didn't drum up the anti-war sentiment the Left wanted, they began attempting to politicise the military itself. Falling back on standard Democrat class warfare tactics, the anti-war Left, led by Charlie Rangel (D-NY), began -- isn't irony incredible? -- actually calling for a draft, claiming that an all-volunteer military was "unfair" to minorities and the poor. As tragic as it was, the recent death of Army Ranger Pat Tillman in Afghanistan quickly squashed the Left's claim that people only enter the military due to economic hardship or other disadvantage. Tillman, a rising football star, turned down a $3.6 million contract with the Arizona Cardinals out of sheer patriotism after 9/11, becoming an Army Ranger instead.

Back to the dead, then. The Left has been attacking President Bush for not allowing photos of soldiers' coffins to be taken, implying that he was attempting to hide something. What he might be hiding, no one can say, since the death toll (as I pointed out earlier) has been announced several dozen times daily since the first day of combat in Iraq. The problem with that particular line of attack is that the Pentagon's rule against photographing the coffins of war dead has been in place since 1991, and was not invented by President Bush to keep anything "secret." The Left runs on sheer emotionalism, however, and many believed viewers would "feel" more objectionable towards the war if they could only see some coffins, since merely announcing numbers wasn't causing anti-war sentiment to rise. Finally, the Left got what it wanted -- a photographer broke the long-standing rule and shot several pictures of flag-draped caskets. Unfortunately for the Left, the remains were being treated with all the honor and respect they deserve, instead of being stacked like cordwood or cargo. "I let the parents know their children weren't thrown around like a piece of cargo, that they instead were treated with the utmost respect and dignity," said the woman who was fired for taking the pictures. Guess the Left just can't catch a break. The "coffin photo controversy" was quickly (pardon the pun) buried.

Ted Koppel must be growing impatient with the persistent "failure" of mainstream America to feel the anti-war sentiment the Leftist elites want them to. How can they undermine support for President Bush in the fall election if most Americans stubbornly refuse to personally blame him for each and every American death in Iraq? Well, Ted's got what he thinks is the answer. Tonight's "Nightline" will be almost exclusively devoted to reading the names of every American man and woman killed in Iraq, while pictures of the dead are shown and wistful music, no doubt, tugs at the heartstrings. "Just look at these people. Look at their names. And look at their ages. Consider what they've done for you. Honor them," says Koppel by way of defense, claiming that this is not a political statement. If you believe that, then give me your name. I've got some Florida swamplan... uh, prime real estate to sell you.

If it's simply an honor roll of America's war dead, as Koppel and other Leftists claim, then where are the names of those who have died in Afghanistan?

Posted at Friday, April 30, 2004 by CavalierX

Jamie from Alabama
April 30, 2004   11:32 AM PDT
 
And what about the men/women who died in Mogadishou, in Kosovo, the bombing of the U.S. Cole, etc? And what about those Americans killed in Kosovo just last week by a Palestinian U.N. worker?

Besides the usual politicizing just to get vieweres, I think that there is a concerted effort my the media to turn this into another Vietnam. Add this to the showing of the Iraqi prisoners who were abused by American soldiers, the daily mention of number of troops killed in the fighting, etc. The mainstream media will not rest until they undermine all support for our troops. It is shameful and disgusting.

By the way, Specter didn't waste any time showing his true colors, did he? I just read this over on NewsMax:
After winning by only 16,000 votes out of more than 1 million cast, an embarrassment for an incumbent, Specter scrambled to emphasize his differences with Bush.

He bragged of his support for fetal stem-cell research and his opposition to school choice, tax relief and the administration's minimum-wage plan.

"I intend to retain my independent voice. The people of Pennsylvania have not elected me to be a rubber stamp," Specter said.

"I don't give anybody a blank check, including the president of the United States."

Now, does anyone still want to argue that he isn't a RINO?
Jamie from Alabama
April 30, 2004   11:51 AM PDT
 
Did you see the story in the Washington Times about "Baltimore-based Sinclair Broadcasting is pre-empting the live program on its ABC affiliates, citing ethical conflicts "

Its a great article... here is the link:
http://tinyurl.com/ypnhj

By the way, not only will this be on regular TV, theyalso plan to broadcast it on the network's Jumbotron screen over Times Square. I suppose they will say that is something they normally do, right?
Jamie from Alabama
April 30, 2004   12:16 PM PDT
 
Sorry to keep bothering, but Drudge just reported that "U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) issued the following letter today to Mr. David Smith, President and CEO of Sinclair Broadcast Group, in response to the preemption of this evening's Nightline program:

I write to strongly protest your decision to instruct Sinclair's ABC affiliates to preempt this evening's Nightline program. I find deeply offensive Sinclair's objection to Nightline's intention to broadcast the names and photographs of Americans who gave their lives in service to our country in Iraq.

The man is unbelievable.
me again, sorry
April 30, 2004   03:27 PM PDT
 
Sinclair Broadcasting issued a statement in regard to reaction to their decision to not air Niteline. They also replied to Senator McCain.... It is the letter to the Senator that I really, really like.

http://www.sbgi.net/

I'm glad someone is standing up to the mainstream media and calling attention to what they are doing.
JM
April 30, 2004   09:27 PM PDT
 
I have to say, that David Smith guy -- the head of Sinclair -- REALLY impressed me with his response to RINO McCain.
Jamie from Alabama
April 30, 2004   09:30 PM PDT
 
I was very impressed as well. He was on Bill O's show tonight and he impressed me some more. Its about time someone stood up and spoke out against the media ploys like what ABC is doing tonight and what CBS did when they showed those awful pictures. That's all anyone is talking about on the Iraqi websites. It had exactly the affect that they wanted - to inflame the Iraqis against the coalition troops.
Jamie from Alabama
April 30, 2004   09:32 PM PDT
 
And NOW I just read a report about some pictures of British soldiers abusing Iraqi prisoners! The anti-war crowd is on a roll and gathering steam as we speak. They could care less about the repercussions of what they are doing.
StarkTruth
May 1, 2004   07:48 AM PDT
 
Actually that is wrong, they do care about the repercussions of what they are doing. They are hoping to get Bush out of the White House. Their greatest accomplishment in life was causing the military defeat in Vietnam. Don't forget, they hate American. Now, they don't hate all things American, but they hate capitalism. They hate that Bush doesn't want to be a part of the Global community with the pathetic UN. They hate that they have lost control over the House, Senate and Whitehouse. It is not that they don't realize what they are doing, it is that the know exactly what they are doing. Make no mistake, vitriol is like a cancer and it blinds people from right and wrong.
WK
May 1, 2004   02:06 PM PDT
 
I agree 100% with the valid criticism of Koppel not reading the Afghanistan war dead.

I heard Koppel on radio yesterday with concern that dropping of his broadcast by Sinclair was the first time this has happened to Nightline in its 24 years.

If so, that reflects very unfavorably on Koppel. He is sliding in his later years, showing controversial stories that can be contrued as demoralizing our troops and implying support for the anti-war position. The man is beginning to remind me of Andy Rooney, who has graduated to the looney bin with the Iraq war and anti-Bush rhetoric he spouts out any more. What is with these media lefties? They have a right to show programming they think will appeal to lefties, I have a right to not watch their propaganda.

BTW, count me as one of those that has the fullest respect and honor for our fighting forces. They get the benefit of the doubt from me in all cases in controversial stories. Can our elite media say the same thing? If they are say yes, they are full of bs.

This outrage over alleged prisoner mistreatment pisses me off. I fault those that did the mistreatment and they'll get their punishment I'm sure, but where is the damn outrage by Arabs and others to the taking of our hostages. There is no outrage that way because they are not our friends, period.

A key part of the terrorist strategy is using the western media to demoralize the American and western public, and damn they are effective at using the elite media in just that way. For one, I will not subject myself to the elite media networks and their bs editorializing any more. Thank goodness for the internet blogs.

Keep up the good work in here, keep getting the word out above the crap of the elite media.
Harry
May 3, 2004   06:52 AM PDT
 
If somebody dies serving their country it should at least deserve a mention among the important news items of the day like the Michael Jackson trial or which politician said what about another.But Michael,Kobe and others have pushed an awful lot of the casualties off the news bulletins altogether.This is just an attempt at redressing the balance.John McCain doesn't seem to think it's unpatriotic.

If people are dying every day for their country, isn't it right that it at least gets reported?If this was a war that people believed in,there would be no controversy.America can accept casualties in a war that they think needs to be fought.

And if news media reporting the news is politicising the dead,what is it when GWB shows bodies being carried from Ground Zero in a campaign advert?
Ken
May 3, 2004   09:11 AM PDT
 
Harry, did you even BOTHER to actually read the article before posting your comment? It sure doesn't seem so. Read it, then comment. That's how things are usually done.
Harry
May 3, 2004   10:38 AM PDT
 
Yes I read it.And even if we disregard what John McCain said and agree that Nightline was politicising the dead,why is it OK for GWB to do the same thing in a campaign ad?
Ken
May 3, 2004   12:05 PM PDT
 
For crying out loud, the two had nothing to do with each other. At least apples and oranges are both fruit. Bush did not "politicize" the dead; he reminded us of a terrible thing that happened and his response to it. The RIGHT response... which we would never get from Kerry. He has already stated that terrorism is a law enforcement matter. That kind of fuzzy thinking GAVE us 9/11 in the first place.
Harry
May 3, 2004   01:06 PM PDT
 
How is using images of the dead at Ground Zero in a political campaign advert not politicising the dead?
Ken
May 3, 2004   01:46 PM PDT
 
We were ATTACKED on 9/11, you ignoramus. (Man, they're right... the Left HAS forgotten.) Bush's response to a national emergency and a surprise attack SHOULD be the focus of a campaign ad. If the ad showed a picture of a flag-draped coffin and a voiceover said, "This is what Kerry will bring us," then THAT would be "politicizing" the dead. Of course, the Left already knows all this; they require those of us on the Right to spell everything out as if to little children so they can try to find a word or phrase to attack in the explanation.
Harry
May 3, 2004   02:34 PM PDT
 
Using dead Americans for political gain is something that can be attributed to both sides.You would presumably argue that the troops killed in Iraq are part of the same War on Terror as the 911 dead,so I can't see a difference.If it's wrong for Nightline to broadcast that show,it's wrong to use 911 images in a political advert designed to get a particular candidate elected.It's hard to think of a clearer definition of politicising the dead than using the 911 images.
Ken
May 3, 2004   02:44 PM PDT
 
"so I can't see a difference"
Well, there's your problem in a nutshell. "The dead" were not being used in that 1/10th of a second in a campaign commercial. Who was it? What was the message being sent? Where was the lie about intent? "The dead" WERE being used in an hour-long anti-Bush commercial thinly disguised as a news special "honoring" them.
Name
May 3, 2004   03:38 PM PDT
 
Check out Mark Steyn's take on Koppel's stunt:
"Costs don't exist in a vacuum, but relative to their benefits. For example, the cost of Ted Koppel to ABC is said to be $6 million per year. That sounds a lot when you consider that Skip, the busboy at Denny's, would be happy to do it for $28,000, but cost alone doesn't factor in the benefits of Ted's distinctive portentousness. "
http://www.suntimes.com/output/steyn/cst-edt-steyn02.html
Harry
May 3, 2004   03:42 PM PDT
 
So how LONG you show dead bodies for is what counts?I'm pleased to see you're finally admitting Bush politicised the 911 deaths.
Name
May 3, 2004   04:35 PM PDT
 
Oh, I'm sorry.. I didnt realize Harry here is just a common garden-variety troll. The best cure is to ignore him.
d_Brit
May 4, 2004   01:10 AM PDT
 
starktruth's comment is simply the "stark truth" about the liberal mind-set
 

Leave a Comment:

Name


Homepage (optional)


Comments




Previous Entry Home Next Entry