Warning: include(/home/annezook/public_html/sidebar.php) [function.include]: failed to open stream: Permission denied in /home/annezook/public_html/archives/002327.php on line 106

Warning: include() [function.include]: Failed opening '/home/annezook/public_html/sidebar.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php') in /home/annezook/public_html/archives/002327.php on line 106
October 21, 2005
A Little More News

Cheer up. This might make you feel a little better about the future of this country, so read the first eleven paragraphs, at least. We progress...slowly, but we do progress.

One does have to wonder precisely how the exact charges to be brought against Saddam Hussein were chosen. Did the Bush Administration, currently under fire for arresting and hiding potential "troublemakers," not to mention for torturing people arrested and never charged with any crime, approve it? Did the U.K., still reeling from the revelation that over-anxious police beat and killed an innocent bystander under the umbrella of "national security" see them?

There's a lot of blogworld fuss about (okay, a little fuss about) (okay, a teaspoonful of notice of) that whole suspending of the Bacon-Davis Act in Louisiana, but I think it's just reactionary. I approve of the move.

After all, we wouldn't want people whose lives have been mired in poverty and who have lost almost every one of their pitiful possessions actually making enough money while jobs are available to get back on their feet, would we? No...we'd rather add them to the dole lists and then thunder from the political pulpit about how lazy and worthless the poor are.

Besides. Think of the poor Halliburton stockholders. We don't want to cut into their obscene profits, do we?

Also? Don't get too wound up about the Op-Eds and Letters in your local rag until you know who wrote them.

One doesn't like to think of our military as being disorganized and incompetent. One doesn't like to think of any group of 100,000 heavily armed people as being scatter-brained and bungling. But we either have to accept that our military is like that, or start to seriously consider if there's a massive cover-up going on.

And, speaking of chaos and incompetence, not to mention fraud, for once, I do understand why senior Republican officials needed anonymity. Any behind-the-scenes story of how Bush's White House is going down for the third time and still arguing over what to call the surging vortex that will make it seem more like a jacuzzi would probably be career suicide for the person telling it.

But? Ken Mehlman? The party that, just weeks ago, was afraid to have David Dreir as their Majority Leader is thinking of bringing Mehlman in as Bush's White Knight? (Not that he hasn't already been putting his two cents' worth in, but that's his job, after all.)

I wonder if FOX's Shepard Smith will cover the story?

(While I'm Googling around, let's tie Mehlman, Bush, and framing all in together with an interesting bit of history.)

Cribbing talking points? Yesterday we had the "background noise" quote from Bush about ongoing criminal and fraud investigations around members of his staff and the Republican leadership. Today we get backroom noise" from Judith Miller's lawyer as a description of the circumstances surrounding Judith Miller's willingness to go to jail for a principle. I guess we're not supposed to consider whether she was really upholding a principle in the way most of us think of it. We're just supposed to assume that if she's a reporter and went to jail, she's a noble victim.

He also referred to the ongoing discussion as a, "sideshow." Me, I think it's the real show. I approve of the broadest possible protection of freedom of the press because when you start limiting freedoms and putting conditions on it, then it's not really freedom. But I also think exercises of such freedom should be open to public debate.

An Op-Ed worth considering. There are multiple faces to the truth. Much depends on what you want to see.

Gosh, with information like this going around, do you really wonder why the NYTimes is falling out of favor with people addicted to honest journalism? And yet, they did publish this.

Posted by AnneZook at 01:42 PM