<$BlogRSDURL$>

A blog of music reviews, movie reviews, politics that try to be but fail to be wingless, and assorted stuff. T'anks for reading. RSVP: regularsnipehunter@juno.com.

Tuesday, February 08, 2005

Proof! that as of 2/8/2005, the paperless society ain't nowhere near here!

Nope, don't trust all the hard copy you print or Xerox each day. The concept of a paperless, open information society isn't going to be fulfilled anytime soon. Not when media employees - including the bored newswriting folk - can be fired for keeping a blog on their own time. Wow. How many more trees did we believe we were saving by using discs and drives? I tell you, more trees will die so people can start publishing antagonistic pamphlets and broadsheets again just to avoid this fate.

What would Sven Birketts say about this? Hey...I'm asking you, gentle reader! Me, I have no idea.

Friday, February 04, 2005

my quip follows the word NONETHELESS near post's end.

The Iraq elections last week were yet another sign, but it seems to me that the hug between the Iraqi woman and the mother of a dead Marine shows that the 'music and flowers' response Tariq Aziz mocked in a 2003 New Yorker article is continuing to crack through to sunlight.

Yet scenarios such as the one Chris Matthews followed up with must well up in the back of many a journalist's mind to the point of bursting his occiput. This exchange between Matthews and guest Ron Reagan started off as surprisingly reasonable :

After Ron Reagan said that he is uncomfortable with people who have undergone tragedy being used as political props -- unless they got something out of it emotionally, Matthews proposed:
"But isn't it the true story of this gift? If you think about it in a non-political sense, and you think about these service people, we met a lot of them out at Camp Pendleton last week, these young Marines, these guys...making a commitment to join a unit, to operate as a unit, to operate without questioning authority, to think in terms of mission and job and training and the environment they're in, and they give this, their life, for a cause. Shouldn't that be displayed?"
Reagan acceded: "Yes, that's, there's nothing wrong with that, I mean, you did a whole show out there at Pendleton, which certainly displayed their courage and the honor that they have. Again, I'm just uncomfortable with, you know, using people in such obvious pain as a political prop. But again, if they got something out of it, that's the most important thing to me. If they felt satisfied."


So far, that seems reasonable enough to me. Neither of these guys are Bush or war supporters, and if they have anything decent to say about either subject it's a splash of gravy. So I'm neither surprised by, not really irritated by, this next exchange:


"Matthews then suggested: "Do you think President Bush used this to push his numbers on Social Security reform, just to get his general appeal up a bit, a couple of points?"
Reagan: "Well, I don't want to speculate on what was in President Bush's mind."
Matthews: "How about his handlers? Do you think the PR guys-"
Reagan: "Well, yes, sure."
Matthews: "-around the White House did this to promote the President's agenda?"


Reminds of me of the more desperate attacks of the Clinton years: even if it's just a straight pencil line shaped like a stick, beat the president with it 'til he proves it isn't a stick. Then hit him even harder.

MSM kudo to Newsweek Managing Editor, Jon Meacham, for this statement:
"I think the idea that that moment was about Social Security poll numbers is absurd."

NONETHELESS: the Democrats will not find even one Iraqi citizen (non-insurgent)who'll say "thank you for trying to stop our liberation". What ingratitude, eh?

Wednesday, February 02, 2005

The Snipe Hunter...
...gets posted on www.hughhewitt.com re: the matter of Eason Jordan.
Thank you, sir.

If Eason Jordan will just present some evidence...
...then this is the most vicious crime ever committed against the First Amendment , over and above Exodus 20:13 and 16. All it takes is some verifiable proof - documents, witnesses - and I'll say Bush et al needs to go - to prison, if possible. Seriously - this would be crime worthy of the Medicis. Presenting proof - how hard can it be?

BUT BUT BUT...having proof is different. And Jordan The Anti-war, Anti-Bush Executive isn't the beacon to guide any of the blinkered through the fog of war, you know. In fact, he's been a part of the fog himself, as the news executive who admitted in April 2003 that he had his own reporters sit on several years worth of stories about the Tigress of the Euphrates's cruelties to protect CNN staffers targeted by the Hussein administration and keep CNN's Baghdad bureau open. A hostage situation, simply put. Well, if Jordan can't present proof that U.S. soldiers are deliberately targeting journalists, he's in major violation of Exodus 20 : 16, in addition to slander laws. A violation that are particularly steaming and pungent, tending to pile up faster than Jordan's betters can shovel it away.

All this talk of 'fear of speaking out'. No one in this country is scared of Bush anyway, since baloney of this magnitude gets a chance to undercut the more delicately phrased, legally-cleared processes of insinuation charged against CBS, the Times of NYC and London, etc.

The most innocent construction I can think of for Jordan's charge is that he's previewing a novel - he's going into the alternative history genre. Put Jordan's proposed novel beside Nicholson Baker's Checkpoint (at least you know Baker's a novelist). You can see the endcaps for an entire rack at Border's Books: "History As It Should Have Had The Good Grace To Have Been Made". Or "Wish-Fulfillment With A Will To Dignity."

Don't mean to slander a whole legitimate literary genre. But Bush Bashery is an industry, just as Clinton and Reagan Bashery were, as I wrote in my last 2004 post after the election. How tight are its' standards?

Addendum: some errors corrected since posting to www.hughhewitt.com.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?