Golf and bias at Raleigh's News & Observer

(Note: The news story discussed below is unavailable to me at The Raleigh News & Observer's archives but can be accessed at another archive here.)

Liberal bias? There’s none of that in the news columns of Raleigh’s News & Observer, a McClatchy paper. At least that’s what its executive editor for news, Melanie Sill, says.

But then you find a front page N&O story, “On links, politicians get caught in a trap” (Aug. 22), that reads more like a Democratic National Committee talking points memo than a genuine news story.

The story begins:

What is it about golf that attracts political scandal?
<….>
"Golf is one of two activities that bring out the worst in politicians," Hollywood writer Peter Mehlman said. "The other is politics."

You’re then told Ohio’s Republican Gov. Bob Taft was found guilty of violating state ethics laws for failing to report golf outings

And you’re told in great detail about golf trips Republican Rep. Tom DeLay took which were paid for by lobbyists; and which the House Ethics Committee is investigating. The N&O included a picture of DeLay, the only one accompanying the story.

The N&O even tells you about a golf trip former Republican Vice President Dan Quayle took back in 1980. It was with a group of congressmen and lobbyists. The trip proved embarrassing to Quayle when it turned out one of the congressman was accompanied by an attractive lobbyist who had posed for Playboy.

Quayle was never accused of any impropriety on the trip but The N&O was able to tell readers that as Vice President, he got “into hot water for mangling the English language” and that his wife said he would “rather play golf than have sex.”

At this point, reader, you may be saying, “Wait! Three big name Republicans, and for one of them The N&O had to go back to a trip 25 years ago on which nobody claims Quayle did anything wrong. Geez.

What about Democrats? Former President Clinton? Didn’t he play a lot of golf with Washington power-broker Vernon Jordan; and didn’t Jordan try to get Monica Lewinsky a job after she left the White House; and didn’t he meet with Lewinsky and get her a lawyer? Jordan admitted all of that to a grand jury, didn’t he? And at the end of the Lewinsky scandal didn’t Clinton have to pay fines? And wasn’t he disbarred by the Supreme Court?

Did The N&O report any of that? Isn't what I'm saying true?”

Those are all good questions, reader. Here are the answers.

No, The N&O didn't report any of that. All it said about Clinton was that he's a "golf nut" who as President played often and took uncounted re-shots.

Yes, what you're saying is true.

From a transcript of The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer (March 3, 1998)

The two men also spend a great deal of time together outside the White House in golf games at courses around Washington and during summertime visits to Martha's Vineyard in Massachusetts. Jordan's name was associated with the Monica Lewinsky saga almost from the beginning. On January 22nd, just days after the story broke, Jordan publicly acknowledged that he had tried to help the former White House intern after she left government.

VERNON JORDAN: I did two things for Ms. Monica Lewinsky: I assisted her in trying to find employment in the private sector in New York City. Secondly, when she was served with the subpoena and, at her request, I recommended a very competent Washington lawyer, Mr. Frank Carter. I actually took her to Mr. Carter's office.

A federal judge later cited President Clinton for civil contempt for giving "intentionally false" testimony under oath regarding his relationship with Lewinsky and fined him $90,000.

The bar association in Clinton’s home state, Arkansas, investigated further; and then recommended to its state Supreme Court his disbarment?

The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed its bar association’s recommendation, and so informed the United States Supreme Court.

On October 1, 2001, without dissent and for the first time in the nation’s history, the U. S. Supreme Court acted to disbar a former President.

In his autobiography, My Life, Clinton expressed the hope that his golfing buddy would "be able to forgive me for the mess I had gotten him into"(p.779).

Do you find it interesting that at The N&O Taft and DeLay's problems and a golf trip Dan Quayle took a quarter century ago are front page news while all that happened to Clinton and Jordan is ignored?

You may be asking whether The N&O mentions anything remotely scandalous involving a Democrat and golf.

Yes, it does. One person.

He's David Watkins, a minor functionary in the Clinton White House, who took an unauthorized trip to a golf match on the President's Marine helicopter and later resigned.

Can you see why I think the story reads more like a Democratic National Committee talking points memo than a genuine news story?

No liberal bias in The News & Observer's news columns.

Can you believe that?

If you'd like to take another look at The N&O's front page story, here again is a link .

An MSM paper helps the Left: Chapter 1

(THIS IS THE FIRST CHAPTER IN A SERIES THAT EXAMINES HOW ONE MSM NEWSPAPER, RALEIGH'S NEWS & OBSERVER, REPORTED ON THE SATURDAY, SEPT. 24, RALLY IN WASHINGTON, D.C.)

Last Saturday's "anti-war" rally in Washington, D.C. was a serious challenge for Raleigh's News & Observer, one of the McClatchy Organization's most profitable newspapers.

As a liberal, perhaps really a Leftist news organization, The N&O naturally wanted to report the rally in the most favorable way possible.

But N&O staffers knew there was so much about the rally - its goals, organizers, speakers and participants, - that would disgust, even anger, many of its readers..

So how could The N&O report the rally in a way that was sympathetic to the Left without alienating many N&O readers? It was a tough problem.

If you doubt that, consider just two examples of what N&O staffers faced as they prepared to report the rally "sunny side up."

There was first the problem of the rally's principal sponsor: International A.N.S.W.E.R.

N&O staffers knew if their readers went to A.N.S.W.E.R.'s web site they'd learn that besides supporting the terrorist al-Zarqawi's demand that American and other coalition forces immediately withdraw from Iraq, A.N.S.W.E.R. wants an end to what it calls America's "threats against Venezuela, Cuba, Iran & North Korea"; an American "withdrawal from Puerto Rico" (I'm not kidding); and a ban of military recruiters from not just our schools but from every one of our communities. If you doubt what I'm saying , go here to A.N.S.W.E.R.'s web site. It's all there.

A second problem for The N&O was the rally speakers and what they represent. Example: Lynne Stewart, an attorney recently convicted of aiding the jailed terrorist Omar Abdul Rahman by passing information to his terrorist supporters in Egypt. Rahman was the spiritual leader of the group that carried out the first World Trade Center bombing and was planning to blow up the Lincoln and Holland Tunnels connecting New York City and New Jersey.

Another speaker was former attorney-general Ramsey Clark who protested America's treatment of Saddam after his capture and expressed his belief Saddam was innocent of the charges brought against him.

Clark's love for the Left is nothing new. For decades he's praised Jane Fonda for her Vietnam War trip to Hanoi during which she expressed support for our then enemies who were holding and torturing American servicemen.

N&O staffers knew A.N.S.W.E.R., Stewart, and Clark's actions and goals posed a serious threat to their reporting plans. They had to act quickly if they were to have any chance of reporting the rally in Sunday's editions as a "sunny side up" event.

Staffers agreed they'd do what journalists refer to as "just leave it out." The term pretty much means what it says, and is easily understood even by people with little or no training in professional journalism.

Thus it happened that The N&O's rally reporting made no mention of its principal sponsor or of speakers such as Lynne Stewart and Ramsay Clark.

The N&O had managed a major news problem.
_______________________________________________________

Tomorrow, in Chapter 2, we'll learn some of what reporter and author Christopher Hitchens said about the rally and its organizers. He'll tell us things The N&O didn't. We'll also look at how The N&O dealt with the anti-Israel and anti-Semitic rally activities

NOTE: The N&O's rally story appeared Sunday, Sept. 25, on pg. 3A. I'm sorry I can't provide a link to it but The N&O is available in most North Carolina public and university libraries. For Lexis/Nexis searches, use the identifying information already given as well as the lead: War protesters march in D.C.

Raleigh News and Observer posts

I'll be posting tonight by 10 PM eastern on The N&O's coverage of last Saturday's "anti-war" rally.

Tomorrow by noon I'll post on an example of The N&O using golf in "news story" that was really just one long exercise in liberal news bias. And The N&O did it in a front page story.

Paris latest terrorist target. Surprised?

Do you believe those MSM pundits and terrorist apologists such as George Galloway and Cindy Sheehan who say London and Rome are terrorist targets because their governments support U. S. policies in Iraq?

If you do, you're in for a shock. Paris, capital of the Western nation that's arguably done the most to undermine U.S. policies in Iraq, is the terrorists' latest target.

Agence France-Presse this morning headlines: Terror suspects eyeing up Paris metro, airport

It reports:

Terror suspects detained in France had been eyeing up the Parisian metro network, an airport and the headquarters of the domestic intelligence service as possible targets, sources close to the investigation said.
<...>
Among those being held is Safe Bourada, 35, who was released from prison in 2003 after five years for helping organise a series of bomb attacks in France in 1995 for the Algerian Armed Islamic Group (GIA).
<...>
Officials said the men were members of the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC), an armed Algerian group that grew out of the GIA and has links to the Al-Qaeda network. Bourada was described as their ringleader.

The GSPC has threatened to carry out attacks in France and it is seen as a credible danger by intelligence officials.
<...>

I'm sorry for the French people that they must live under terrorist threat.

I hope this latest news will help diminish the number of people who provide excuses for the terrorists. They're only making it easier for the terrorists to spread and inflict terrorism.

Be sure to Open Newmark's Door

Be sure to open Newmark's Door today and visit with Craig. He posts on a range of topics from MSM misreporting of Katrina events to a theory regarding why the NYT would charge extra for people to read Paul Krugman et al. Craig doesn't necessarily support the theory but it's safe to say he acknowledges it has a certain plausibility.

One post touched me deeply. I think it will you as well.

Here's Newmark's Door.

Learning about the Vatican

CNN reports an Italian magazine has published what it says are portions of a secret diary keep by a Cardinal during the recent conclave that elected Pope Benedict XVI.

Two sharp bloggers, Ed Morrissey at Captain's Quarters and Betsy Newmark at Betsy's Page, post on the matter.

I'm glad to leave the serious analysis to them and just tell you a little story about understanding the Vatican.

It seems back many years ago a reporter was assigned to cover the Vatican. He wasn't a Catholic and didn't know anything about the Vatican.

A Cardinal friend agreed to help him. The Cardinal made special arrangements for the reporter to actually live in the Vatican for four weeks.

Two weeks into his stay, the reporter was granted a private audience with the Pope.

Pope and reporter got on so well the Pope invited him to stay for dinner; just the two of them.

Near the end of the dinner, the reporter asked the Pope if he thought living in the Vatican for four weeks was enough time to gain at least a basic understanding of how it really worked.

The Pope paused for a moment and then said, "Four weeks is good but four months would be better, and four years not enough."

Another threat to MSM news organizations

(WELCOME VISITORS FROM MUDVILLE GAZETTE, MICHELLE MALKIN, AND OTHER BLOGS I'M SURE I'VE MISSED.

I WROTE THIS POST SATURDAY NIGHT AFTER THE RALLY. MY PREDICTION ABOUT HOW RALEIGH'S NEWS & OBSERVER WOULD REPORT THE RALLY SUNDAY WAS ACCURATE. HOW DID YOUR LOCAL NEWSPAPER DO? THANKS FOR VISITING. John)

I'm beginning to recognize the power of photo blogging, and the challenge it poses to MSM news organizations.

Maybe you've known for a while about that challenge. But I haven't, so please listen to my story.

Tonight, Saturday, Sept. 24, I went to Michelle Malkin's blog and saw photos of today's anti-war rally in Washington, where assorted Democrats and Leftists demanded America do what the terrorist al-Zaquari's been demanding: Pull our troops out of Iraq.

The rally photos Michelle posted included one of an activist holding a sign about the Vice-president: "Convict and castrate Cheney." Another was of a group marching down an avenue holding a large banner proclaiming: "911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB." Below that was an Internet address: "www.ny911truth.org"

At other blogs I found more rally photos. One showed activists holding a large sign: "THE POLICE ARE THE REAL TERRORISTS." Another in script declared: "From Baghdad to New Orleans Capitalism means Mass Murder. Socialist Revolution is the Only Answer."

At that point (it was about 9 PM Eastern time) I asked myself: How is MSM reporting all of this?

So I read The Associated Press' Internet account of the rally.

And oh, as the AP told it, the rally was all just grand, and no one carried signs and banners such as I'd just seen.

Here's the AP, a news organization every bit as objective as The New York Times and The BBC, reporting to you:

Crowds opposed to the war in Iraq surged past the White House on Saturday, shouting "Peace now" in the largest anti-war protest in the nation's capital since the U.S. invasion.

The rally stretched through the day and into the night, a marathon of music, speechmaking and dissent on the National Mall.
<...>
In the crowd: young activists, nuns whose anti-war activism dates to Vietnam, parents mourning their children in uniform lost in Iraq, and uncountable families motivated for the first time to protest.

And what about the signs and banners, you may be asking? Didn't the AP tell us about them?

Well yes, it did, sort of. But it only mentioned two; and neither one of them have we been talking about. But that doesn't surprise you, does it?

Here's everything the AP told us about signs and banners at the rally:

"Bush Lied, Thousands Died," said one sign. "End the Occupation," said another.

That's it, folks. There was nothing else.

Now, how do you think an MSM news organization such as Raleigh's News and Observer is going to report the rally?

Do you think you'll read anything in The N&O about castrating Vice-president Cheney or that "THE POLICE ARE THE REAL TERRORISTS?"

I don't.

But when The N&O's devoted readers say tomorrow morning after church or coffee or during a cell call, "Well, I didn't see anything in The N&O about the sort of signs you're talking about," the other person is going to be able to say, "I'd like to show you these Internet sites here and here and here."

And therein lies photo blogging's challenge to MSM news organizations like The N&O still trying to hang on to a "we control information; we know what you need to know" world.

Take a look at tomorrow's N&O.

And then let's talk more about all this Monday.

Here.

Excellent Rita coverage sites

There are many places to go for excellent Rita coverage. Michelle Malkin and Glenn Reynolds' blogs are two of them.

Closer to home in North Carolina, Confederate Yankee is one of my first stops. He tells us today:

WRAL-TV in Raleigh, NC has what appears to be a complete list of links to local television (including some excellent live webcasts) and newspapers in Texas and Louisiana.

So far , it is the absolute best resource I've found for covering Hurricane Rita on a local level.

And visit Raleigh's News and Observer. The paper gave extensive coverage to Katrina and I's sure it'll do the same with Rita.

Let's hope things are not as bad as predicted and do what we can to help.

Cindy's "peace activists" should say a prayer

In February 2003 the following letter to the editor appeared in The Wall Street Journal. It made sense then and does now. It's thoughtful and timely as Cindy Sheehan and the bash-America first, most and always "peace movement" crowd assembles today in Washington.

______________________________________________________________


To the editor

In his Feb. 12 op-ed (The Antiwar Anti-Semites) Rabbi Michael Lerner says: “Imagine my surprise when I found out that I am banned from speaking at a peace really (in San Francisco) this Sunday.” The rally’s organizers banned Lerner, a veteran political activist, after he denounced the anti-Semitism of those on the far left who dominate the leadership of the anti-War movement.

While I admire Lerner for speaking out, I can’t imagine why he was surprised the rally organizers decided to silence him. Surely he knows that the far left, like the far right, tolerates neither dissent from its doctrines nor criticism of its leaders. The American far left would no more tolerate criticism of its anti-Semitism than the Communists and Nazis tolerated criticism of theirs.

Lerner says he will continue his antiwar activities. If one of those activities is a rally at which he speaks, I hope the rabbi will invite the participants to join him in asking God’s blessing on the protectors of their freedoms: America’s Constitutional government, its tolerant citizens, and its armed forces.
________________________________________________________________

Amen.

Knucklehead of the Day winners

William at Florida Masochist is a fine blogger who does a lot of good for his community, Palm Beach, and his state.

One way William does good is with his Knucklehead of the Day award. Recipients typically include loud and the lazy bureaucrats looking for reasons to enforce dumb rules and people who carry signs that say things like, "Cindy's real great! Hillary/Cindy in '08!"

Today's Knucklehead winners are a pair of thieves who stole a gas station employee's car. An hour later they came back to the same station, to gas it up!

Go read. And be sure to take a look around while you're at Florida Masochist.

Turning terrorists loose

Blogger John Byrnes calls our attention to a Sept. 22 London Telegraph report that includes this:

“More than a dozen prisoners released from Guantanamo Bay have returned to the ‘battlefield’ to fight Americans. The terrorists, freed in the belief that "they posed a very low threat", have either been killed, captured or wounded in attacks on coalition forces in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Others are thought to be still organizing attacks with the Taliban or al Qa'eda.”

John reacts to the Telegraph report with very thoughtful commentary on matters relating to enemy combatants. Here's part of what he says:

It is unlikely that this evidence will convince the left that (Guantanamo) is a necessary evil of modern life. But there is hope that it will convince anyone who merely harbored doubts. It is unfortunate, that America, the symbol of democracy worldwide, must maintain such a prison. But we must remember why.

John makes the "why" so clear even Sen. Dick Durbin and Rep. Nancy Polosi should understand it:

We didn't ask to be attacked on September 11, 2001. We didn't ask the Taliban to harbor al-Quaeda. We didn't tell them to wage a war of terror. We didn't force them to fight as non-state guerillas. And we certainly didn't tell the prisoners we released to pick up arms again.

Here's John's closer:

Do our liberals have any good answer to the problem? For years we've allowed murderers back on the street in America. Respect for the constitution has forced us to tolerate that. But the constitution calls on the Government to provide for self defense. It does not require us to allow foreigners to walk free while planning our destruction.

John has first hand experience with terrorists and their evil. As a NY National Guard member, he was a responder at the WTC beginning on 9/11; and he recently completed a tour of duty in Iraq.

John's post is here.

To Ralph Neas: Thanks for reminding us

Ralph Neas, president of the liberal advocacy group, People for the American Way, is not a happy guy right now. No one's worked harder than Neas to prevent the confirmation of President Bush's judicial nominees. And now things seem to be falling apart for Neas.

Just yesterday,the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Patrick Leahy, announced he would vote to confirm Judge Roberts. That threw Neas into a fit of anger:

''When John Roberts becomes chief justice and votes to erode or overturn longstanding Supreme Court precedents protecting fundamental civil rights, women's rights, privacy, religious liberty, reproductive rights, and environmental safeguards, Senator Leahy's support for Roberts will make him complicit in those rulings."

Gone now are what for Neas were the happy days when he could insist that eminently qualified nominees like Miquel Estrada and Priscilla Owen not even get a full Senate vote on their nominations. That both had received the American Bar Association's highest rating for judicial nominees, Well Qualified, was beside the point. Neas didn't want them confirmed. That's what seemed to matter

Neas' happy days were only a few years ago. What changed in the meantime?

The Senate went from Democratic to Republican control.

It's elections, not the Ralph Neas inside the beltway, that matter most. We sometimes forget or deny that. Neas' anger fit reminds us they do.

Thanks, Ralph Neas.

Kerry uses Katrina for fund-raising

Scott at Right in Raleigh gives us details concerning Sen. John Kerry's use of Katrina for campaign fund-raising.

You'd think people wouldn't do that, especially a guy who lives in 5 houses, has 3 SUVs registered in his name, travels in a private jet, and sails a 44 foot motorized yacht.

I guess it takes all kinds

Cindy Sheehan and hot dog stands

Confederate Yankee tells us about Cindy Sheehan's latest rally in New York City. As always, he has details and sharp observations.

Detail: Sheehan drew a crowd of 150.

No, I didn't drop some zeros. It was 150.

In The Big Apple you can sometimes find that size crowd at popular hot dog stands.

Read Confederate Yankee for more.

Crying for Dan Rather, CBS and others

Michelle Malkin calls attention to the "crocodile tear-shedding, lip-quivering meltdown" of former CBS News anchor Dan Rather during a speech Monday night in which, according to ABC News/Reuters, he "complained of a climate of fear running through newsrooms stronger than he has ever seen in his more than four-decade career."

A climate of fear in newsrooms? Really?

And what does Rather think ran through the minds of tens of millions Americans, including millions who had trusted him and CBS to tell them the truth, when they learned the identity of the anonymous source of the forged documents Rather and CBS used in the Texas Air National Guard story?

For more than 10 days Rather and CBS assured us their anonymous source was "unimpeachable." And they wouldn't lie. They were news professionals.

Then a year ago tomorrow, Sept. 21, the Washington Post told us the name of their "unimpeachable source" and something about him:

The man CBS News touted as the "unimpeachable source" of explosive documents about President Bush's National Guard service turns out to be a former Guard officer with a history of self-described mental problems who has denounced Bush as a liar with "demonic personality shortcomings."

Over the past three years, retired Lt. Col. Bill Burkett has given dozens of newspaper and television interviews accusing the president and his aides of destroying documents and stealing elections. In e-mail messages to an Internet chat group for Texas Democrats, he has also said that the "Bush team" sent "goons" to intimidate him at his ranch in Baird, Tex.

"They can go to hell," the retired officer, 55, wrote in a March 29 posting. "I'll continue to defend the freedom of this nation -- not the liars who have wrested its helm."

There's much more. Read the whole thing.

Rather's crying for himself, CBS, and those in the news business like them.

Pointing the way to a thinker's "gems"

At Betsy's Page she reminds us of "the gems" to be found in Thomas Sowell's Random thoughts columns. She provides examples from his Sept 20 column. My favorite was this one:

Students can graduate from even the most prestigious colleges and universities wholly unaware that there are not simply different opinions about particular issues but a whole comprehensive framework of ideas and analysis through which those issues can be seen in a way that leads to very different conclusions from the ones their professors have taught or insinuated.

Betsy got me to go to Sowell's column to see all "the gems." Here are two more I liked:

Do the people who are making so much noise about the difficulties of creating a constitution in Iraq have any awareness that it was 13 years after the Declaration of Independence before the Constitution of the United States was created?

When Ronald Reagan said that the government was spending money like a drunken sailor, he apologized to the sailors, who were after all spending their own money.

I hope you read Sowell's column and find some "gems" yourself.

President Clinton's trustworthiness

Remember when a federal judge cited President Clinton for civil contempt and fined him $90,000 for giving "intentionally false" testimony under oath?

Do you recall that the bar association in Clinton’s home state, Arkansas, investigated him further; and then recommended to its state Supreme Court his disbarment?

The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed its bar association’s recommendation, and so informed the United States Supreme Court.

Thus it was that on October 1, 2001, without dissent and for the first time in the nation’s history, the Supreme Court acted to disbar a former President.

The court’s disbarment procedure allowed for a 40-day appeal period.

Clinton assured friends and foes that he would appeal and vigorously fight his disbarment.

Of course, Clinton did neither which was just what friends and foes expected.

Now, Clinton is using Katrina and its aftermath to attack President Bush.

Do you think what Clinton’s saying now is any more trustworthy than what he’s said in the past?

I don't.

The Boston Globe's good call and bad call

The Boston Globe editorial board today made a surprising good call and a disappointing bad call.

The good call:

Barring the revelation of an outrageous scandal, Judge John Roberts is about to become the next chief justice of the United States, and based on his testimony last week, he deserves to be confirmed. In the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, Roberts called himself a ''modest judge" and appeared smart and even-tempered.

Roberts "deserves to be confirmed." Quite a statement from a very liberal paper owned by The New York Times Company. A hat tip to The Globe on that.

Now the bad call:

As Roberts approaches the high court, there is also a job for Congress. Senator Tom Coburn, an Oklahoma Republican, virtually wept about the nation's divisiveness, but he and some of his colleagues have been the source of intemperate rhetoric that could weaken the independence of the judiciary. Once Roberts is confirmed, Coburn and other conservatives need to cool their rhetoric and let the chief justice do his job

So The Globe feels "conservatives need to cool their (intemperate) rhetoric."

And what about liberals? For example:

Senator Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) who said of Judge Priscilla Owen: "This is not a person to put on the bench for a lifetime appointment. This person is wacko! She's wacko!"

Harkin made his remarks shortly after the American Bar Association, by unanimous vote of its committee on federal judicial nominations, had given Owen its highest recommendation:Highly Qualified.

And there's Senator Chuck Schumer (D- NY) who said: "For years, the federal courts served as the shield protecting basic civil rights in this country. This administration wants the courts to become the sword that destroys those rights. And don't think this stops with Judge Pickering. He's just the tip of the iceberg."

Judge Charles Pickering,like Owen, received the ABA's Highly Qualified rating.

And then there's The Globe's own home state Senator, Ted Kennedy (D-Mass). Remember what Kennedy called a group of President Bush's judicial nominees, all of whom the ABA had rated Qualified or Highly Qualified? He called them "Neanderthals."

Clearly, liberals have engaged in a great deal of intemperate rhetoric concerning judges and the judiciary. For The Globe to ignore that while singling out conservatives for intemperate rhetoric is a bad call. It suggests partisan favoritism and will lead liberals to reasonably conclude they can engage in such rhetoric with no fear of criticism by The Globe.

I hope we soon see a Globe editorial reminding liberals they too need to cool their intemperate rhetoric. That would be a good call.

Rather and CBS's falsehoods remembered

A year ago today CBS was still standing by the Dan Rather/Texas Air National Guard story it had broadcast 10 days earlier on 60 Minutes II.

In defending what most people knew by then were forged documents which served as the basis of the story, Rather and CBS had repeatedly claimed their anonymous source for the documents was "unimpeachable."

Rather and CBS knew a lot about their "unimpeachable" anonymous source, Bill Burkett.

Remembering that and what we learned a few days later about Burkett helps us to realize just how honest Rather and CBS were with the public.

This from a Sept. 21 Washington Post story:

The man CBS News touted as the "unimpeachable source" of explosive documents about President Bush's National Guard service turns out to be a former Guard officer with a history of self-described mental problems who has denounced Bush as a liar with "demonic personality shortcomings."

Over the past three years, retired Lt. Col. Bill Burkett has given dozens of newspaper and television interviews accusing the president and his aides of destroying documents and stealing elections. In e-mail messages to an Internet chat group for Texas Democrats, he has also said that the "Bush team" sent "goons" to intimidate him at his ranch in Baird, Tex.

"They can go to hell," the retired officer, 55, wrote in a March 29 posting. "I'll continue to defend the freedom of this nation -- not the liars who have wrested its helm."

There's much more. Read the whole thing.

And sometimes it only takes a sentence

There were raised eyebrows in Washington this week when Judge John Roberts' opening statement at his confirmation hearings lasted less that 7 minutes.

That's understandable in a city where 10 and 15 minute "questions" from Senators aren't unusual.

But the length of Roberts' statement was fine for his purposes.

And than there's Mr. E. Housley of Edinburgh, Scotland. In a recent letter to The London Times, he needed only one sentence to effectively call to our attention the self-contradiction of a prominent British politician:

Sir, Last night I heard Ken Clarke, on BBC News, say that he does not believe in referendums but then, in the same breath, say that politicians must listen to the people.

Yours faithfully,
E. Housley

I think Judge Roberts would like Mr. Housley's letter.

E. J. Dionne got me smiling today

With his Washingto Post column today, E. J. Dionne got me smiling. He didn't mean to but he did.

Dionne was going on and on about how awful it was that Judge Roberts just wouldn't answer the Senators' questions. That, according to Dionne, is reason enough not to confirm him. "The Senate is under no obligation to give the president or Roberts the benefit of the doubt," he thundered.

Just so we'd all understand how darn uncooperative Roberts was, Dionne offered us this:

Schumer got so frustrated that he was reduced at the end of the hearing Thursday to asking Roberts what question he would ask himself that might be revealing. Roberts, with great affability, said he thought the committee had been "very effective" in the questions it had already asked.

Are you smiling too?

A little fun with Senator Schumer

I recently had a little fun at Senator Chuck Schumer's expense. I was helped by Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and the Senator himself, although I should tell you Schumer's help was unintentional.

Schumer started it all when he wrote to President Bush advising him how to select judges. Schumer identified for the President a person whose method of choosing judges was so exemplary, Schumer wanted Bush to follow his example. The person Schumer was referring to was, you may have guessed, Schumer himself.

"I start by encouraging you to use the same principles that guide me in evaluating judicial nominees. I consider three criteria: excellence, diversity and moderation."

Well, you wouldn't expect someone as sharp as Scalia to pass on the chance to puncture an ego as bloated as Schumer's, would you?

Speaking recently at Chapman University Law School in California, Scalia said:

"Now the Senate is looking for moderate judges, mainstream judges. What in the world is a moderate interpretation of a constitutional text? Halfway between what it says and what we'd like it to say?"

When I read Scalia's remarks, I said it was understandable Schumer would oppose Judge John Roberts. After all, do any of us want people around who point out our foolishness, especially if they have lifetime appointments?

So there was all of that, and then along came National Review's September 26 issue in which it noted Scalia's remarks and added: Teach, Scalia, teach.

Yes, teach, Scalia; and we'll all understand if Schumer doesn't learn.

Hat Tip: Raymond Keating, Newsday.

Take a look at PEER Review blog

PEER Review has an incisive post that's part takedown of E. J. Dionne's latest effort to diminish President Bush and part analysis of how Bush uses power. Give it a look.

Gallup's reporting raises questions

One reason The New York Times’ reputation has sunk in recent years has been its willingness to use headlines to spin stories. “Fake but accurate” comes immediately to mind. Another reason is The Times' habit of placing far down a story important information that goes counter to its headline spin.

I thought about that yesterday when I visited The Gallup Organization’s website and read its report comparing poll results of blacks’ and whites’ responses to a range of questions related to Katrina.

Gallup headlined:

Blacks Blast Bush for Katrina Response
Most believe racism was responsible for delays in providing relief

Its lead paragraphs support the headlines:

Whites and blacks have sharply differing reactions to the federal government's response to Hurricane Katrina, with blacks more likely than whites to believe that racial bias was a factor in slowing the government's response, and blacks especially critical of President Bush's performance.

Aside from Bush, whites and blacks have similar perspectives on how various entities handled themselves in the Hurricane Katrina disaster. Most whites and blacks agree that FEMA, state and local Louisiana authorities, and New Orleans residents did a poor job initially, but that in recent days each has been doing a good job.

Some questions are in order here.

Why did Gallup decide to headline: Blacks Blast Bush for Katrina Response? Haven’t blacks, by percentages sometimes in the 90s, been blasting Bush for years for just about everything he’s said or done? What’s headline-worthy about them blasting him for his Katrina response?

And what about the following information which isn't reported until the eighth paragraph of Gallup’s story:

The percentage of blacks approving of the job Bush is doing as president is 14% today, little different from the 15% recorded in August. Similarly, the percentage of blacks holding a favorable view of the Republican Party is now 16%, versus 18% earlier this year.

So in the aftermath of Katrina, Gallup’s own polling finds no statistically significant difference from pre-Katrina levels in blacks’ approval of the President or their favorable view of the Republican Party. Those are important findings given all that's been said these past few weeks.

Why didn’t Gallup think them worth a headline or at least a mention in one of the first few paragraphs?

The answer’s obvious, isn’t it? “No change post- Katrina in blacks’ approval of Bush or favorable rating of Republican Party” just doesn’t go with:

Blacks Blast Bush for Katrina Response
Most believe racism was responsible for delays in providing relief

In a similar way, when Gallup told people in its second paragraph that:

Aside from Bush, whites and blacks have similar perspectives on how various entities handled themselves in the Hurricane Katrina disaster

it had the problem of what to do with some of its findings that contradicted its "whites and blacks have similar perspectives" claim. Findings such as:

While only 17% of blacks have an unfavorable opinion of New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, 38% of whites view him unfavorably.

Three-quarters of blacks (77%), compared with only 44% of whites, consider the post-hurricane looters in New Orleans to have been mostly desperate people trying to keep themselves alive.

Half of whites and only 16% of blacks (viewed the looters) as mostly criminals taking advantage of the situation.

Gallup made no reference to those findings in its lead paragraphs.

I’m going to send Dr. Frank Newport, Editor-in-Chief of The Gallup Organization, a link to this post and invite him to respond. I’ll publish in full his response.

Like most Americans, I respect The Gallup Organization and count on it for objective presentation and interpretation of data scientifically obtained.

I hope those headlines and lead paragraphs aren’t a sign it’s drifting in the direction of The New York Times.

I’d hate to wake up one morning, go to Gallup’s site, and see the headline: Our latest poll results fake but accurate.

Novak: Owen frontrunner; met with Bush last week

At Realclearpolitics.com blog columnist Robert Novak is reporting:

The belief in legal and political circles is that President Bush will name a conservative woman, and the front-runner is Federal Appellate Judge Priscilla Owen (5th Circuit, Austin, Texas).

According to White House sources, Bush met secretly with Owen last week. While not decisive evidence, this was no mere get-acquainted session beginning a long exploration. The president knows and admires his fellow Texas Republican. The countervailing political pressure on Bush is to name a Hispanic American, and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is a Texas Republican the president knows and likes even better than he does Owen. But signals last week that he might name Gonzales probably should not be taken seriously.

Read the whole thing here.

Hat Tip: Powerlineblog.com

No news bias at Raleigh's News & Observer?

Almost everyone I talk to at Raleigh's News & Observer, a McClatchy paper, insists there's no political bias in its news columns.

I thought about that as I read a July 26 N&O story off the Associated Press wire about Mike Blanton, a former North Carolina public official who went to prison for his part in a corruption scandal.

"I was guilty of withholding some things from the FBI," said Blanton, who has started his own public relations firm near Raleigh. "I was trying to protect my boss. I was trying to protect my job. I was being loyal."

Blanton's boss was former State Agriculture Commissioner Meg Scott Phipps who the AP tells us:

pleaded guilty last year to extortion, conspiracy and other charges tied to accepting thousands of dollars in bribes from carnival operators seeking lucrative State Fair contracts. She is serving a four-year prison term.

Phipps is the daughter and granddaughter of former North Carolina governors. Blanton said he knew all about his boss' political pedigree but wished he had done more homework on her before accepting a job in her administration.

Yes, Blanton knew about his boss' political pedigree including her party affiliation, which not surprisingly was the same as his. He knew her father and grandfather's party affiliation; also the same as his.

But N&O readers are never told the four's party affiliation.

What is it?

If your familiar with how most MSM news organizations operate, you're probably raising your hand right now and saying, "I know! I know! They're all Democrats."

You'd be right, of course.

And those people I talk to at The N&O? Well, I've already told you what they say.

On 9/11: Remembrance and Resolve

The following story from Steve Dunleavy's column in today's NY Post reminds us of the sacrifice and courage we witnessed on 9/11:

On that sunny day of Sept. 11, which will always be remembered as one of the darkest days in our history, Ed Beyea was trapped on the 27th floor of the south tower, imprisoned in his wheelchair.

Old Abe Zelmanowitz, Ed's co-worker and fast buddy at Blue Cross and Blue Shield, refused to leave his side. Capt. William Burke of Manhattan's Engine 21 had just evacuated his men from the approaching inferno.

He made his way to Ed and Abe, and Abe made a call to his family, telling them that it was OK because the firefighter was there.

"He would not leave these two friends and, of course, at 10:46, when the tower went down, we never saw him again," said Burke's sister Janet Roy. Janet will be one of today's recipients at the White House, at a ceremony presided over by President Bush, of the Medal of Valor.

All representatives of firefighters and cops killed on that day of monstrosity will be honored.

"I am honored, but Bill earned it," said Janet.

Along with sadness for the loss of Abe Zelmanowitz, Ed Beyea, William Burke and all the others comes gratitude and pride for who they were and what they did.

They're now part of our heritage. Our responsibility to them is to give life to America's heritage so that, as Lincoln would remind us, they will not have died in vain.

Blogger says, "Lincoln must be weeping."

When John Byrnes, Iraq vet, blogger, and frequent op-ed contributor to the New York Post tells us "Lincoln must be weeping," he doesn't mean Lincoln's weeping over the events of 9/11.

John's talking about how he thinks Lincoln must be reacting to one of those Leftist bash-America "art" exhibits that's being hosted at Cooper Union Institute in New York City; the same institution where Lincoln delivered one of his most memorable speeches.

Read John's post to see how one more once great American educational institution is now a host for the America-bashing dredges of "the art world."

The post saddens but I think it will also fire our resolve. John gives us links so we can learn more about the exhibit and some contact information so we can express how we feel.

John's post is here.

Nonsense from Flight 93 Memorial architect

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports today:

There's a growing outcry that one element of the newly chosen Flight 93 National Memorial represents Islam and is a slap in the face to the passengers and crew members who died on the hijacked plane four years ago. ( Here’s a visual of what has people upset – JinC note)

The winning design, announced Wednesday in Washington, D.C., includes what is called the "Crescent of Embrace." That element of the project calls for two rows of red maple trees to be planted around a bowl-shaped piece of land adjacent to crash site.
<…>
Almost immediately upon seeing the design, online bloggers suggested that it is inappropriate to use a red crescent in the memorial.

A few thoughts:

According to the Post-Gazette, Paul Murdoch, the Memorial's leading architect, says of the crescent:

"You can call it all kinds of things. We can call it an arc. We can call it a circle. We can call it the edge of the bowl. The label doesn't matter to us in terms of intent.”

But an arc is a segment of a circle. Arc and circle are mutually exclusive terms among people who believe words have agreed upon meanings.

“We can call it an arc. We can call it a circle.”

Murdoch sounds like he’s been spending too much time with the Mad Hatter and Alice in Wonderland.

He’s also quoted as saying, “The label doesn't matter to us in terms of intent”

Actually, it isn't only the label that has people concerned. It’s the crescent shape and color. And those are extraordinarily important concerns, despite Murdoch’s dismissal of them.

I suspect Murdoch's dismissal is a pose. Surely he knows how important they are.

Murdoch wouldn't present the International Red Cross-Red Crescent organization with a logo design dominated by a red cross and a red circle, would he?

But for a Memorial to some of America’s heroes? Well, arcs and crescents and circles – they're all the same.

And you know what's the saddest part of it all? A lot of well-intentioned people believe Murdoch.

To learn more about the planned Memorial and how you can voice your opinions visit Michelle Malkin and Captain's Quarters' blogs.

Katrina death toll may be lower than feared

Last evening blogger Bob Owens at Confederate Yankee predicted the death toll from Katrina would be lower than feared. He based his prediction on the number and location of bodies recovered so far; and comparisons with death totals for some previous natural disasters.

It looks like Bob called it right.

The AP has just reported that during the first systematic sweep of the city, authorities in New Orleans:

found far fewer bodies than expected, suggesting that Hurricane Katrina's death toll may not be the catastrophic 10,000 feared.

"I think there's some encouragement in what we've found in the initial sweeps that some of the catastrophic deaths that some people predicted may not have occurred," said Terry Ebbert, New Orleans' homeland security chief.
<...>
The sweep was carried out by the Police Department, the Army's 82nd Airborne Division and the National Guard, and covered every part of the city reachable by land, boat or air.

"Numbers so far are relatively minor as compared to the dire projections of 10,000," Ebbert said.

That's sure very good news.

Take a look at Bob's post. It's a fine example of using current and historical data to reach a reasoned conclusion.

Hold back some Katrina money: Update

I said last Saturday Katrina relief giving then was very important, but suggested you hold back for a few weeks or months some of what you could afford to give.

That way, as you learned more about who did what and were doing what, you could target your giving to groups, sometimes small and volunteer staffed, who you thought were especially effective.

I said I wanted to target some of my money to those who:

during the worst hours in the worst places (acted) heroically to make things better. Ministers, for example, who with their congregants and others organized to feed neighbors and homeless, and (cared) as best they could for the sick.

Instapundit calls our attention to a group that acted just that way. Here's part of their story:

When their homes began to sink in Katrina's floodwaters, elders in the quarter here known as Uptown gathered their neighbors to seek refuge at the Samuel J. Green Charter School, the local toughs included.

But when the thugs started vandalizing the place - wielding guns and breaking into vending machines - Vance Anthion put them out, literally tossing them into the fetid waters. Anthion stayed awake at night after that, protecting the inhabitants of the school from looters or worse.
<...>
In the week after Katrina pummeled the Gulf Coast, Anthion and others created a society that defied the local gangs, the National Guard and even the flood.

Inside the school, it was quiet, cool and clean. They converted a classroom into a dining room and, when a reporter arrived Monday, were serving a lunch of spicy red beans and rice. A table nearby overflowed with supplies: canned spaghetti, paper towels, water and Gatorade, salt, hot sauce, pepper.

At its peak last Wednesday, 40 people called the second and third floors home. The bottom floor was under water. Most of those taking up residence at the school were family, friends and neighbors of the poor, forgotten niches of this community.

Anthion and the other Uptown elders don't seem to have a formal organization to which we could send money, but if they do, they'll get some of mine.

Meanwhile, their story is both inspiring and a reminder of the countless small groups and organizations, frequently staffed by volunteers, who are doing critical, sometimes unique, recovery work by operating in ways and filling niches the large relief agencies often can't.

N&O editor still silent on important questions

MSM reporters and editors want their questions answered promptly and "drop everything" when they want an interview. So how has one MSM journalist responded when she was asked some important questions? So far, not at all.

On August 9, Raleigh News & Observer's executive editor for news Melanie Sill blasted North Carolina officials for, as she saw it, not responding quickly and fully to her and other N&O staffers' questions and interview requests. Sill's special targets were Governor Mike Easley and his staff.

Sill detailed complaints about the governor and his staff's treatment of N&O reporters. She was particularly upset that she'd been denied an interview with the governor which Sill said she requested only "to hear (his) side of things."

Instead of an interview, Sill told readers she received a "lengthy email statement from (a staffer) in the governor’s press office saying that our reporters are free to chase down the governor at public events (as they do as often as they can) and ask him questions."

But Sill didn't provide readers a copy of the email. So I called Governor Easley's office and requested one.

I posted on August 29 linking to Sill's column and providing a full text copy of the email which I had received from the governor's office within an email.

You can read Sill's entire column here. You can read the entire email here within the post.

You'll see there's quite a difference between Sill's description and the email itself. The email's much more than "reporters are free to chase down the governor at public events"

So in my post I asked Sill the following questions; and sent her an email link.

Why didn't you link readers to the email from the governor’s office or publish it in full?

How did withholding the email text from readers serve their interests?

Since you told readers you “sought to hear Easley’s side of things,” what do you say to readers asking why you didn't make the email available to them so they could "hear" for themselves his "side of things?"

Is your reporting on the email and Governor Easley and his staff a fair example of how N&O staffers report on public officials and their staffs?

I told Sill I'd publish in full her responses to these questions as well as her responses to related questions readers might ask.

A few days later, hearing nothing back from Sill and seeing no response to the questions at her blog, I emailed her again.

I'm sending Sill a link to this post. It's my third and final effort to get Sill's responses to the questions.

If Sill again makes no response, her frequent assurances to readers that she values our questions and is eager to respond will seem shallow at best.

And the North Carolina public officials who have read Sill's column and my posts will have no choise but to conclude she's a member of the "One standard for thee; and a different one for me" congregation.

Not all liberals are equal

Following Chief Justice Rehnquist’s death, his Supreme Court colleagues and legal scholars offered judgments of him. For me, those of three well-known liberals stand out.

First, were the remarks of Professor Alan M. Dershowitz, Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, delivered on Fox News’s Hannity and Combes, a few hours after Rehnquist’s death. Among other things, Dershowitz said:

“He was a Republican justice and his vote could always be counted on by the Republicans.”

and

“He started his career by being a kind of Republican thug who pushed and shoved to keep African-American and Hispanic voters from voting.”

Then, from the Supreme Court came a statement by the justice generally regarded as its most liberal member, Justice John Paul Stevens:

"William Rehnquist's independent, impartial and dedicated leadership of the Supreme Court has been an inspiration to those of us privileged to serve with him -- and to the entire nation as well. Charles Evans Hughes, a great chief justice whom he particularly admired, would have been proud of the example he set as the leader of the court.

"He was truly the first among equals in discharging his judicial duties in a prompt, scholarly and fair manner. He was a good friend, maintaining his sense of humor and proportion throughout the difficult period that marked his most recent service. We shall miss him."

Also from the Supreme Court, this statement by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg:

"Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist was the fairest, most efficient boss I have ever had. Speaking of his role in a 2002 address, he said: 'The chief justice has placed in his hands some of the tools which will enable him to be primus among the pares but his stature will depend on how he uses them.'

In his leadership of the U.S. Judiciary and his superintendence of the Supreme Court, William H. Rehnquist used to great effect the tools Congress and tradition entrusted to him.

A plain speaker without airs or affectations, the chief fostered a spirit of collegiality among the nine of us perhaps unparalleled in the court's history.

He regarded an independent judiciary as our country's hallmark and pride, and in his annual reports, he constantly urged Congress to safeguard that independence.

On the obligation key to judging, he cautioned that a judge steps out of the proper judicial role most conspicuously and dangerously when the judge flinches from a decision that is legally right because the bottom line is not the one 'the home crowd wants.'

I held him in highest regard and affection, and will miss him greatly."

Justices Stevens and Ginsburg’s judgments stand as graceful and informed tributes to an admired colleague and friend. Their statements also deserve further study for what they tell us about the inner workings of the court that is counter to what most of MSM has been telling us. But that’s for another day.

And what about Professor Dershowitz?

His remarks brought to mind words of another Harvard professor, the great social psychologist Gordon Allport : When we speak of others, we may or may not be revealing something about them, but we're always revealing something about ourselves.

Harvard's Alan Dershowitz on Dershowitz

Within a few hours of Chief Justice Rehnquist's death, Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz was on Fox's Hannity and Colmes making a series of ill-informed, partisan, and down-right mean remarks about Rehnquist.

Example: Dershowitz told viewers Rehnquist "started his career by being a kind of Republican thug who pushed and shoved to keep African-American and Hispanic voters from voting."

Dershowitz's remarks have been ably refuted by James Taranto at Opinion Journal and Betsy at Betsy's Page. Their posts are well worth reading if for no other reason than as examples of how intelligent people with class respond to someone speaking as Dershowitz did.

For me, Dershowitz's remarks served one useful purpose. They reminded me to keep in mind what the great social psychologist and Harvard Professor Gordon Allport said: When we speak of others, we may or may not be revealing something about them, but we're always revealing something about ourselves.

The real reason Schumer opposes Roberts?

Among my favorite Roberts nomination op-eds is one I read today by Raymond J. Keating, chief economist for the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council.

Here's part of what Keating says:

New York's senior senator portrays himself as moderation's great defender. In a 2003 letter Schumer arrogantly advised Bush on how to pick a Supreme Court justice: "I start by encouraging you to use the same principles that guide me in evaluating judicial nominees. I consider three criteria: excellence, diversity and moderation."

Speaking in California last week, according to The Associated Press, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia made an excellent point: "Now the Senate is looking for moderate judges, mainstream judges. What in the world is a moderate interpretation of a constitutional text? Halfway between what it says and what we'd like it to say?"

Is it any wonder Schumer will oppose Roberts, someone he fears may turn out to be another Scalia.

None of us like people who call attention to our arrogance and ignorance.

Keating's entire op-ed is here.

Hat Tip: Realclearpolitics.com

Former Air Force officer offers help MSM

Teflon at Moltonthought.blogspot.com wants to help MSM understand what's happened regarding Katrina and what needs to done and how.

I hope Teflon's more successful with MSM regarding Katrina than most of us have been on other matters. Teflon begins:

As a former Air Force logistics officer, let me clarify the following for the idiots in the Left Wing Media:

1. Things can get destroyed far more swiftly than they can get fixed.

2. The United States military can wipe out the Taliban and the Iraqi Republican Guard far more swiftly than they can bring 3 million Swanson dinners to an underwater city through an area the size of Great Britain which has no power, no working ports or airports, and a devastated and impassable road network.

3. You cannot speed recovery and relief efforts up by prepositioning assets since the assets are endangered by the very storm which destroyed the region.

4. We do not yet have teleporter nor replicator technology like you saw on "Star Trek" in college between hookah hits and waiting to pick up your worthless communications degree while the grownups actually engaged in the recovery effort today were studying engineering.

5. Getting people out of the stricken areas is the most pressing concern, since we cannot get enough supplies into it to safely sustain them.

6. Getting the airport, bridges, and roads repaired is the next priority, since the supplies and people needed to fix levees, drain the city, and repair the infrastructure cannot be transported via aircraft. You need to truck them in.

Much more follows but I'll bet Teflon lost some of his MSM readers at #4.

Anyway, be sure to read the whole thing. It's packed with infomation.

A heartening Katrina story of the underreported kind

With much of MSM presenting a Katrina "race angle" theme suggesting whites abandoned blacks, it's good to see a needed counterpoint today at Betsy's Page. She begins:

With all the focus on a racial subtext to the New Orleans disaster and Jesse Jackson exacerbating ill will by comparing the evacuees to "Africans in the hull of a slave ship.", this story is a heartening exception.

In the last week, Joseph Brant lost his apartment, walked by scores of dead in the streets, traversed pools of toxic water and endured an arduous journey to escape the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in his hometown New Orleans.

Read the rest of his story. As Betsy says, "(it's)heartening."

A lot of cross-race helping occurred during the worst hours of the storm and has continued since. MSM needs to do more reporting of that. Right now, we're getting a very distorted presentation that serves only those who would divide us for their purposes.

A question about Rev. Jesse Jackson

So Jesse Jackson is comparing the condition of evacuees from New Orleans to "Africans in the hull of a slave ship."

And to whom does Jackson, a wealthy clergyman who wears tailored suits, compare his own condition?

Hat Tip: Betsy's Page

At The New York Times: It's about wishes

However the rest of America may be feeling, you know it’s a good day at The New York Times when the paper runs this headline: Chaotic Week Leaves Bush Team on Defensive

The headline leads what The Times calls "an analysis" by reporter Todd Purdum who begins:

Perhaps not since Richard M. Nixon faced Vietnam-era tumult abroad and at home has an American president had to meet quite the combination of foreign war, domestic tribulations and political division that President Bush now confronts, from the Persian Gulf to the Gulf Coast to Capitol Hill.

Wow! In just one sentence Purdum links Nixon , Vietnam, foreign war, domestic tribulations, and political division to President Bush and events in the Persian Gulf, Gulf Coast, and on Capitol Hill.

Do we need hear anything more? Well, The Times wouldn’t want you to miss this.

The war, high gasoline prices and persistent, low-grade unease that good economic statistics have not left more Americans feeling secure had already taken a toll on Mr. Bush's job approval ratings. The wave of bipartisan criticism of his administration's handling of the hurricane may well constrict his options as he seeks a successor for Chief Justice Rehnquist. His presidency might not be on the level of peril faced by Lyndon B. Johnson, but his authority has come under challenge as never before.

So President Bush’s “authority has come under challenge as never before?” How sweet those words must sound to The Times editorial staff, which has worked ceaselessly since January 2001 to make them a reality.

And lest anyone doubt who’s responsible for the President’s difficulties, The Times has a “presidential historian” explain things to us.

"I think he's really undermined his credibility at this point, and it really saddles him with the kind of problems that Johnson and Nixon faced," said Robert Dallek, a presidential historian and Johnson biographer. "These crises are such a heavy burden, and they are so self-inflicted, except for the court vacancies, that if he is not very careful and tries to put across someone who is seen as an ultraconservative, he is going to touch off a conflagration in the Senate."

Robert Dallek, like historians Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. and Doris Kearns Goodwin, is a Kennedy family “favorite” who can be counted on to provide quotes such as the ones we read above. You wouldn’t expect Purdum to also call someone like Harvard government professor Harvey Mansfield, a conservative, would you?

Dallek overreached on a number of points, especially his remark about an “ultraconservative” Bush Supreme Court nominee possibly touching “off a conflagration in the Senate.”

Federal appellate court nominee Priscilla Owen, unanimously awarded the American Bar Association’s highest rating, is no ultraconservative. But that didn’t stop Sen. Tom Harkin from calling her a “whacko?” Or Sen. Ted Kennedy from grouping her with judges he called “Neanderthals?”

When did the likes of Kennedy, Boxer, Schumer, Leahy, Byrd, Clinton, Harkin, Durbin et al need an “ultraconservative” to set off a “conflagration?” They conflagrate regularly.

No liberal journalist’s current Bush hit piece would be complete without a reference to “the grieving mother.” Here’s Purdum’s:

And that was before a grieving mother named Cindy Sheehan put an unexpectedly galvanizing human face on criticism of the war in Iraq, before the hurricane's desperate victims shined a similar spotlight on the government's failings

Cindy Sheehan a “galvanizing human face on criticism of the war?” Polls show she’s had little effect on public opinion. Here, as in most of his analysis, Purdum’s engaged in wishful thinking.

But count on this: The Times and much else of MSM will do all they can to make those wishes come true.

Hat Tip: Michelle Malkin

Harvey Mansfield on C-SPAN 2 at Noon today

Harvard University government professor Harvey Mansfield is the subject of a 3 hour In-Depth Program today on C-SPAN 2 starting at Noon Eastern.

Mansfield's books on Edmund Burke, Niccolo Machiavelli, and Alexis de Tocqueville are considered classics.

Many of his former students, Bill Kristol among them, regard Mansfield as the greatest teacher they met at Harvard.

If you're interested in endangered species, this is your chance to see and hear a political conservative who survives at Harvard despite constant exposure to its rigid Leftism.

One blogger said of Mansfield: "He's flourished in an environment where even a once- hardy creature like Laurence Summers is threatened with extinction"

C-SPAN 2 starting at Noon Eastern today.

Duhball with Chris Matthews

The Florida Masochist reminds us of an old rule:

Never ask a question in an interview if you don't have a clue to what the answer will be.

The FM then tells us what happened last Wednesday to the eponymous host of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews when he forgot that rule, assuming he ever knew it in the first place.

Matthews was interviewing Texas Governor Rick Perry about his state’s plans to help Katrina victims. He fired questions at Perry in typical Chris Matthews' "God, I know so much" style.

Perry mentioned housing people from New Orleans in Houston's Astrodome.

Matthews pressed about costs and the availability of the Astrodome, obviously unaware the Astro baseball team hadn’t used the Astrodome since 1999.

The following is from MSNBC’s Hardball transcript for August 31:

MATTHEWS: Where‘s Texas getting the money for this—for this effort?

PERRY: Well, you know, we will find the dollars. The fact of the matter is, this is—by the grace of God, this could have been Houston, Texas, that we were talking about today, instead of New Orleans. And our neighbors are in need and we will find the dollars to make it work.

MATTHEWS: A small point. I don‘t mean to be whimsical, but, at this time, it wouldn‘t hurt for a little whimsy. How did you get the Astros out of their ballpark?

PERRY: Well, they‘re playing at a place called Minute Maid now, not the Astrodome.

MATTHEWS: Oh, really? I‘m brought up to...

PERRY: Welcome—welcome to this year in baseball here, Chris.
(LAUGHTER)

MATTHEWS: Well, I haven‘t been follow them that closely. But I will in the future.
(LAUGHTER)

PERRY: You certainly haven‘t.

MATTHEWS: Thanks to your state‘s wonderful hospitality. It‘s great having you on. And congratulations to your state. It shows a great value system, that you‘re doing this.

PERRY: Thank you, Chris.

It’s not for nothing that many people call Matthews' show Duhball.

Thanks Florida Masochist for the cue and the commentary.

Hold back some of your Katrina money

It's wonderful so many are contributing generously to The Red Cross, Salvation Army and other organizations involved in Katrina relief activities.

But I hope people hold back some of their Katrina money for at least a few weeks or months. That way, they can target their "held back" money as they learn more about who needs what and what various organizations have done and are doing.

Those Louisiana NG members serving in Iraq who may have lost a loved one and maybe everything material they had at home: I want to find out how to target some money to them.

MSM has mostly told us about the chaos and looters and Bush-blaming pontifications of Jesse Jackson and others. But you know that during the worst hours in the worst places there were people acting heroically to make things better. Ministers, for example, who with their congregants and others organized to feed neighbors and homeless, and care as best they could for the sick.

MSM will get around to telling us about those heroes. Some of my money will go to the churches and other organizations those people are associated with.

In the next few weeks, we'll hear of hundreds of organizations who are helping Katrina victims in various ways. I'm keeping my ear out for ones that seek to empower the victims and build on their strengths.

Where are the organizations that believe the best therapy for most victims is the dignity and sense of hope that comes with a job; and so will be offering people a chance to work on a day basis in the clean up effort until more permanent jobs are available. I'll support those organizations.

Thank God we have the government, The Red Cross, Salvation Army and other organizations. Only they can do the massive resource allocation and service delivery work.

But thank God too for those small groups and organizations, often staffed by volunteers, and close to the people they serve. They provide effective, diverse and sometimes unique services the large services organizations don't.

Hold back some money for them. I think you'll be glad you did.

And look to bloggers to take the lead in telling you about them.

Planning a fact attack on Bush blamers? Go here.

At Betsy's Page, she has a post that begins:

EU Rota does some Lexis/Nexis research and takes on the theme that it is Bush's fault that budget requests were cut from plans for flood control in New Orleans. Guess what, Clinton did the same thing. And of course, even if we had supplied all the money requested by the Army Corps of Engineers, none of those plans would have had an effect in time for this hurricane.

If you have a soft spot for Bush blamers, warn them away from Betsy's Page.

On the other hand, if you're planning a fact attack on Bush blamers, Betsy's the place to get linked to some high caliber facts.

Look who else Raleigh's N &O blamed

On August 29 Raleigh's News & Observer ran this front page headline:

Off-duty officer blamed in death

The trouble with the headline was that no one except The N&O was blaming the officer.

To its credit, the next day the paper placed a correction in the same front page spot where the "officer blamed" headline ran. The N&O offered no explanation for its headline.

The August 29 headline brings to mind another recent N&O headline that assigned blame.

Airstrikes kill Mideast truce (July 16, Pg. 16A)

The headline ran above an AP story that began:

A Mideast truce was in tatters as Israel killed six Hamas militants in a series of airstrikes Friday and early today after Palestinian fighters unleashed a deadly barrage of rockets and mortars.

Further into the story, the AP reported the Israeli response followed not just the barrage but 2 terrorist attacks in the preceding 3 days which killed 6 Israelis and wounded 90 others.

The AP reported the attacks many paragraphs into its story; and that part of its report doesn't appear in the story The N&O ran. So perhaps N&O editors didn't read far enough into the AP story to learn about the terrorist attacks.

Nevertheless, the AP's first sentence makes clear that Israel was responding to Palestinian attacks.

Using news.google and yahoo searches, I couldn't find even one other American newspaper that ran a headline blaming the Israelis for killing the truce.

The Boston Globe's headline was typical of headlines in other papers reporting the story.

Mideast violence threatens truce; 8 dead

So how did The N&O decide on the headline:

Airstrikes kill Mideast truce

And why?

Readers are owed explanations.

I'm sending a link to The N&O's executive editor for news, Melanie Sill. I'll invite her to respond to this post and agree to publish her response in full.

Editor Sill often says she welcomes readers' comments. Her email: msill@newsobserver.com

Blog Design/Domain/Hosting Auction for Hurricane Katrina Relief Ends Tonight

Bob Owens at Confederate Yankee is helping pass on word of an auction that will help Katrina victims via the American Red Cross and give bloggers a chance to upgrade their site. Bob begins:

Phin at Apothegm Designs has a rather unique fund-raising effort underway for Hurricane Katrina victims, and the fund-raising effort is targeted squarely at the blogging community, with a great payoff for both us, and the American Red Cross.

He is auctioning off a pair of custom blog designs to the two highest bidders through the end of today, Friday, September 2. You've seen examples of his work at the Llama Butchers, The Jawa Report, Naked Villainy and here among many others. Their designs are fast-loading, technically sound, and aesthetically pleasing.

If you're a blogger, read the whole post and please pass the word.

Katrina response: We need Giuliani

The Associated Press is reporting:

President Bush will tour the hurricane devastated Gulf Coast region on Friday and has asked his father, former President George H.W. Bush, and former President Clinton to lead a private fund-raising campaign for victims, the White House said Thursday.

Fine.

Now how about getting former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani involved?

Remember his leadership following 9/11?

Those daily, sometimes twice daily, news conferences? Giuliani's care and candor built trust and cooperation with the people. He reported what had been done each day and explained why other things weren't done. If asked something he didn't know, he said he's report back and did.

Giuliani did more then explain. He called New York and the rest of us to our best. Example: his press conference the night of 9/11. I can't recall his exact words, but they were very close to these: Let us act now so that this our darkest day leads on to our finest hour.

I hope President Bush will ask Giuliani to serve as the national spokesperson on Katrina recovery efforts.

Giuliani should be given a staff to funnel information to him and ask questions of people involved in recovery operations. The President should tell other government officials to treat a call from Giuliani as if it came from him. Giuliani should have direct access to him.

With information in hand, Giuliani can inform the public each day and take questions from the press.

Problems with what I'm proposing?

Yes, at least three, but they shouldn't prevent Giuliani's appointment.

One, the bureaucratic "don't tell" and "blame someone else" Giuliani's likely to encounter.

That's going to be there anyway. Can you think of a better person than Giuliani to cut through it and get information to the public?

Two, MSM news organizations will play up every complaint about recovery efforts from officials and agencies with noses out of joint because of something Giuliani said.

Sure, but most of MSM will by playing up any complaint they get from anyone in order to paint the bleakest possible picture of recovery efforts anyway. Look how most of them have reported Iraq.

With Giuliani responding to MSM, the public will be much better served than with someone like Scott McClellan responding. And so will the President.

Three, some Republican bigs thinking of a presidential '08 run won't like Giuliani getting a lot of national attention.

The only thing to do about that is for Bush to step forward and say, "Country before party."

We need Guiliani now. He's been there and done it.

Welcome Newmark's Door visitors

I'm delighted to welcome Newmark's Door visitors.

Stay as long as you like and read some posts.

My most recent post: Why Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. needs a friend

A recent post with original reporting concerns Governor Easley, The N&O's executive editor for news Melanie Sill and readers. It's here :The editor, the governor and we, the readers.

I don't currently write on economics but will as soon as I learn to balance my checkbook.

Thanks for coming.

John

Why Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. needs a friend

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr, an environmental lawyer who owns 3 large houses and regularly travels in private jets, said the following in a post at Arianna Huffington’s blog.

In 1998, Republican icon Pat Robertson warned that hurricanes were likely to hit communities that offended God. Perhaps it was Barbour’s memo that caused Katrina, at the last moment, to spare New Orleans and save its worst flailings for the Mississippi coast.

The least that’s wrong with Kennedy’s statement is his claim that Katrina spared New Orleans.

The most foolish part is his anointing Pat Robertson as interpreter of God’s will.

The meanest, most self-righteous, and delusional part is Kennedy’s suggestion that Mississippi has been hit by Katrina because its former Governor Haley Barbour wrote a memo opposing the Kyoto treaty, a treaty 95 U.S. Senators voted to oppose.

Does Kennedy believe that God hit India with a tsunami that killed thousands, including babies, because it refused to sign the Kyoto treaty? Even Pat Robinson hasn't said that.

Kennedy frequently directs angry, reckless statements at those who disagree with him. For example, this past April at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, he accused President Bush of a federal crime: “(accepting) money from power industries in exchange for relaxed environmental regulations." ["RFK Jr. bashes Bush," Durham Herald Sun, April 21].

But Kennedy's Katrina is God smiting Kyoto opponents statement is more disturbing than anything he’s said before.

I hope Kennedy has a friend who'll help him see what he’s become; and then help him change.

Right now, Kennedy sounds exactly like the extremists who were attacking his father, uncle, and Dr. King in the months before they were assassinated

Good things right in Raleigh

Blogger Scott Pierce at Right in Raleigh does many good things.

A recent example: A very impressive list of major achievements by our side in the War on Terrorism. Scott draws the list from an article by Christopher Hitchens and a post by the Powerline guys.

The list is most important for being first a tribute to the men and women who have been in the front lines sacrificing, dying and making success happen.

It's also something to clip and save for the next time some MSM follower starts chanting defeatist talk-talk.

Nice work, Scott.

Code Pink: It means "Bash America"

Blogger John Byrnes has an crisp, critical and informative post about the Church of MSM's Mother of Peace Cindy Sheehan and her America bashing Code Pink disciples.

John begins:

This is HOT NEWS. Demonstrating that they have absolutely no shame, decency, morals or contact with reality the Code Pink Movement is now blaming infiltrators along with conservatives and counterprotesters for recent bad press. CNS is running the full story.

Code Pink is claiming that they have been "targeted" for right wing attacks.

More follows.

I liked what John said about the Code Pink people having "absolutely no shame, decency, morals or contact with reality."

My only criticism: I thought he was a little too easy on them.

But nobody's perfect. Not even Al Sharpton or Nancy Pelosi.

Anyway, I hope you read John's post.

Katrina blogging

The best Katrina blogging (most comprehensive and up-to-date) is at Michelle Malkin. Surprised? Of course you're not.

Michelle links to one of our North Carolina bloggers, Confederate Yankee.

And at Pirate's Cove, William shares his recollections of what hurricanes did to folks in North Carolina.

Visit all three blogs.

And if you in any part of the storm area stay safe. And know we'll be watching to see how we can help.

The editor, the governor, and we, the readers.

Editors and governors are important. And so are we, the readers.

Raleigh’s News & Observer is suing North Carolina’s Governor, Mike Easley, for release of documents involving gubernatorial pardons. If the courts rule in favor of The N&O, I understand such release will be unprecedented in our state’s history.

The N&O says it wants the documents only to inform readers.

I thought about that when I read a recent column by Melanie Sill, The N&O’s executive editor for news.

Sill pounded many NC public officials for what she says is their lack of full and prompt responses when N&O staffers, including herself, call with questions, requests for interviews, and “deadlines.” Sill made Governor Easley and his staff her special target. Her column’s title: "Governor’s position? No comment."

But what Sill told readers about Easley and his staff didn't sound right. Stuff like Easley not explaining his thinking on major public policy issues. He does that often.

So I called Governor Easley’s office. Folks were very helpful. And wow, is there ever another side to the story Sill told in her column!

If you read on just a bit, you'll get that other side. It’s a copy of a “lengthy email statement” Sill received from the governor’s office.

Sill used the email to hammer the governor and his staff. But Sill never provided readers with a text copy. She just said what she wanted to say the email said.

What follows first is the conclusion of Sill’s column where she's telling readers about the email. Following that, there's an electronic copy of the email's text. After the email, I ask a few questions and invite questions from readers. I also invite Sill to respond and offer to publish in full what she says.

*******************

The conclusion of Sill's column:

While working on this column, I sought to hear Easley’s side of things. I put in a request to interview the governor or his representative on Monday afternoon, noting I was on deadline. The response? No interview with the governor or anyone else. Instead, I received a lengthy email statement from Cari Boyce in the governor’s press office saying that our reporters are free to chase down the governor at public events (as they do as often as they can) and ask him questions.

Thanks, Ms. Boyce, but that’s not what I asked.

************

Here’s the text of the email statement from Cari Boyce in the governor’s press office to Melanie Sill at The N&O.

Thank you for your recent call to our office about the Governor’s availability to reporters at the News & Observer. Specifically, it is my understanding that you are writing a column on “public officials who will not take or answer questions about public policy matters.” You cited, as an example, Barbara Barrett’s recent story on pardons and clemency.

In the past month, the Governor has had at least six public events in the Raleigh area where he has been available and has made public comments about a variety of issues. The News & Observer staff has been made aware of these events and they have all been open to your reporters. As you and your reporters know, the Press Office staff routinely works with reporters who would like to ask “off-topic” questions at public events and attempt to accommodate them whenever possible. For example, Matthew Eisley spoke with the Governor regarding the bonds for the N.C. Art Museum at last Thursday’s Bill of Rights ceremony. Furthermore, Ms. Barrett was also at the event and had the same opportunity to ask the Governor questions as did Mr. Eisley.

Ms. Barrett contacted the Press Office requesting an interview for her story on pardons mid-afternoon on Monday and claimed that she had a Wednesday deadline. She was given all the information that she requested about the process and the status of the cases in question. Subsequent questions also were answered after her stated deadline. Because of the ongoing negotiations with the legislature over the budget, the Governor’s schedule simply did not permit a one-on-one interview with her.

Other than Ms. Barrett, I am not aware of any recent requests by reporters at your paper for interviews with the Governor on any topic. Your assertion that the Governor does not comment on “public policy matters” is simply not accurate.

The Governor’s Press Office will continue to accommodate media requests when appropriate but it will continue to be done in balance with the other responsibilities and scheduling demands of the Governor

___________________

My questions for Editor Sill:

Why didn't you link readers to the email from the governor’s office or publish it in full?

How did withholding the email text from readers serve their interests?

Since you told readers you “sought to hear Easley’s side of things,” what do you say to readers asking why you didn't make the email available to them so they could "hear" for themselves his "side of things?"

Is your reporting on the email and Governor Easley and his staff a fair example of how N&O staffers report on public officials and their staffs?


There are many more questions readers will ask, but the four above are a start.

I'll publish in full your responses to these questions as well as your responses to related questions readers will ask.

Your prompt and full responses will serve to model what you're demanding our state’s public officials do.

What the editor didn't tell Raleigh N&O print readers

Melanie Sill, executive editor for news at Raleigh's News & Observer, is at it again.

Most of Sill's column in yesterday's N&O was taken up with a highly select and sanitized version of the upset and controversy caused by her series of self-contradictory statements made in response to readers who complained about The N&O's delay in reporting on the Air America loan scandal.

If you missed Sill's column, it's here. If you're new to the story and want background go here and here at this blog. Also, at Sill’s blog go here and here and here.

Before reading her column, it's likely almost all Sill’s print readers knew nothing of Sill's statements these past weeks. Or the questions and comments they provoked. Or how Sill responded to them.

After reading her column, print readers knew what Sill told them but not what she left out.

For example, Sill didn’t tell them that editors of major daily newspapers disputed what she said regarding not being able to report on the AA loan scandal story that has already been reported in other newspapers.

Sill didn’t tell readers she has made a series of statements. Look back at her column. If you knew nothing else about the matter but what Sill was telling you, wouldn’t you conclude she had made just one statement?

Sill offers readers not a single example of what she calls “good questions” or of her responses, in the few cases where made a response.

Didn’t Sill’s print readers deserve at least one representative example of the questions and comments most of her internet readers were offering?

An example such as this on a post thread at Sill's blog:

Reader comment: "I must be lacking in imagination, but I cannot see how these two statements could be characterized as anything other than falsehoods:

'We've checked our news services in recent days and do not find this story'

'(I)n checking our many news services I did not find a story available to The N&O for publication.'

If you could explain to your readers how these were truthful, honest, and accurate statements, I am sure they would be glad to hear it."

Editor Sill’s response: "Can you say more about which part seems puzzling -- how the news service queues work?"

Then there's the matter of Sill casting herself as a victim and telling her print readers about “some twisting of my words.”

Sill doesn't tell print readers she was twice invited to make a response at this blog to what so many of us were asking, commenting, and blogging. I offered to publish in full her response.

Sill never acknowledged my offers, ones I’m sure most other bloggers covering this story would make to her, if they have not done so already.

But if Sill told her print readers about offers to print in full her response to say, this post in which the editors disputed what she said, it would have been tough to convince print readers her words were being twisted, wouldn't it?

More on Sill’s print column in a day or two.

Look for a related post this evening: The Editor, The Governor, and We, The Readers.

Have a good day.