SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Wayners who wrote (703844)9/25/2005 10:52:34 AM
From: paret  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769670
 
One of the Washington Post's tricks of concealed bias is the phrase, "critics say." Which translated means: we here at the Washington Post want to make an editorial point on the front page, but since that's not quite kosher professionally we'll find some "critics" or "experts" to make our point for us.

But whatever bias the Washington Post conceals in such practiced formulations on the front page percolates up more visibly through larger cracks in its other sections. In search of an outlet the paper's bias can usually flow through a large opening in the Post's Style section.

Take the Post's frank horror at John Bolton, President Bush's nominee for ambassador to the United Nations. While its front page has been regularly doing a variation of the "Bolton is a jerk, some critics say" story, these mincing efforts hadn't really sated the Post's reporters' disgust for the man. It fell to fashion writer Robin Givhan, battle-tested after savaging Dick Cheney for wearing a "drab" parka at an Auschwitz ceremony in January, to compress their loathing for Bolton into a critique of his physical looks, attire, and appearance.

"Bolton's Hair: No Brush With Greatness," ran the headline of Givhan's piece last Friday. She didn't like Bolton's "thick, dull slab of hair" that he hadn't bothered to coordinate with his "snow-colored mustache." She dug up a photo of him from the 1970s in which his hair looked presentable, unlike now when it looks "as if he'd stepped from the shower and shaken his hair dry in the manner of an Afghan hound."

"The fulsome silhouette of the mustache makes for a particularly dreary distraction," she wrote. And it made him "look mean," a quality she can't stand in others. Nor did Givhan like his too-tight shirt, and inadequately knotted tie: "Not slightly crooked or just a hint off-center but looking like [sic] it had been knotted in the dark. The tie itself was an uninspired dark red with bright yellow stripes." If the pacific Barbara Boxer wants to take Bolton to anger management, lady Robin Givhan would like to take him to finishing school. After all, his hair was "so poorly cut, it bordered on rude," another quality she simply won't stand for in herself or others.


We should mark here with sadness that another cherished liberal attitude has bitten the dust. Remember liberalism's reverence for slobs and contempt for squares? (That Bolton looked presentable in 1970 would have been counted as a demerit by the left at that time.) Liberals once had so much respect for slobs they imitated them. For a time it was evidence of honesty and integrity to go to great lengths to dress like them. Unruly locks, and disconcerting facial hair, were points of pride, obvious proofs of authenticity. And how could anyone except a member of the pitiless establishment be so insensitive and superficial as to judge the content of a man's character by the color of his tie?

All gone. Since any stick will do in a fight, the left just can't afford to let past attitudes close off avenues of attack. Indeed, the more pre-rational and infantile liberalism becomes -- throwing pies at conservatives and the like -- the more attacking appearance will become sport on the left. If a conservative has a beard, point it out and belittle it. If he is looking obese, by all means mock him. The same juvenile impulse that once inspired liberals to dress down as slobs now inspires them to assume the role of high school snobs.

Though Givhan's article might have been a little too catty for even an unofficial high school newspaper in, say, Beverly Hills. Saying as Givhan does that Bolton's mustache looks as if it "should be attached to geek glasses and a rubber nose" would have given gossipy youth editors pause. On the other hand, perhaps Givhan is gifted with the power of looking into the soul of public figures and detecting the malice driving their fashion choices. She sensed Dick Cheney's disregard for the deceased of Auschwitz in the self-regarding, heavy parka he wore at the January event marking the 60th anniversary of the liberation of that camp.

He was, she wrote, "dressed in the kind of attire one typically wears to operate a snow blower"¦Some might argue that Cheney was the only attendee with the smarts to dress for the cold and snowy weather. But sometimes, out of respect for the occasion, one must endure a little discomfort." Some critics might say that this was a cheap shot at a vice president with a well-known heart condition.

From Slob to Snob (Today's lib has become what he -- she -- once disdained.
The American Prowler ^ | 4/19/2005 | George Neumayr



To: Wayners who wrote (703844)9/25/2005 10:55:38 AM
From: paret  Respond to of 769670
 
Post Blunders, Dems Join In (and Specter too!)
powerlineblog.com ^

Betsy Newmark wrote us to point out that her daughter's blog had reported on an error committed on Friday by the Washington Post: an error that resulted in this anti-administration headline: "Change Means Fewer Students Will Be Eligible For Pell Grants". The article claimed that 80,000 to 90,000 low-income students would be knocked out of the Pell program on account of new regulations issued by the Department of Education.

Yesterday, the Post issued a correction. Actually, the new regulations, which are based on updated government data, will expand the number eligible for grants, even though some will become ineligible at the upper end of the qualified income range.

What was most interesting about the story, as Betsy's daughter pointed out, was the immediate reaction of the Democrats. When the original, incorrect story ran, Senator Jon Corzine jumped in:

Sen. Jon S. Corzine (D-N.J.) said he was "outraged that the Bush administration is going forward with these punitive cuts," adding that the change in the eligibility rules was "nothing more than a backdoor effort to cut student aid funding."

"For those working to get ahead, this is a scene from 'The Grinch who stole my education,' " he said.

Got that? The Bush administration enlarges the Pell Grant program, and Corzine--obviously without knowing anything about the subject, doing any independent research, or even calling anyone at the Department of Education for verification--is "outraged" at the "punitive cuts."

To be fair, the outrage wasn't limited to Democrats. The frequently clueless Arlen Specter, who was happy to give the Post an anti-administration quote even though he had no idea what the facts were, "said he was 'very unhappy' and promised to renew the battle for broader Pell Grant funding next year." And Specter wonders why he isn't more respected within his own party.

It's just a guess, but I suspect we'll be hearing about the Bush administration's "punitive cuts" in the Pell Grant program for years to come.



To: Wayners who wrote (703844)9/25/2005 10:57:50 AM
From: paret  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
Washington Post front-page propaganda piece sells lesbianism

"Braving the Streets Her Way" (Washington Post celebrates trashy "gay" lifestyle)
The Washington Post ^ | October 3, 2004 | Anne Hull Page A01

The belt buckle says SEXY. The silk jersey says Denver Nuggets. Both are laid out on the bed as Felicia Holt stands at the ironing board, trying to press some perfection into her Friday night. With sleepy eyes and a smooth jaw, she cocks her chin with satisfaction. What stares back is the creamiest thug on the block.
To be a young lesbian from the trash-blown and violent streets of Newark takes a measure of imagination.
Identifying strictly as butch or femme has diminished in recent generations of lesbians, but human sexual identity is fluid and there are infinite ways to express it. What comes naturally to Felicia -- despite her delicate features and hormonal moodiness -- is letting her khakis ride low around her boxers.
But there is the other edge of the sword. Felicia has been jumped and beaten. Men press her for sex. After Sakia Gunn was killed, Felicia had to become more discerning about the overtures. Some have a hint of playfulness, and she can handle those. Others have menace.
Felicia says that some men view her as competition for their women and want to remind her of their dominance. She has developed her own radar that tells her who might be trouble.
After Sakia was slain, most of the pulpits in Newark were silent. There was one that raged. Liberation in Truth Unity Fellowship Church is a full-gospel, sweat-under-the-armpits, rosewater-scented African American church for gay people. Services are held downtown on Sunday afternoons in a 260-year-old stone church borrowed from the Episcopalians.
Tomorrow: Felicia's song. © 2004 The Washington Post Company

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...



To: Wayners who wrote (703844)9/25/2005 11:00:40 AM
From: paret  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
The Washington Post's New Leftist
...........................................................

By Shawn Macomber
FrontPageMagazine.com | May 26, 2004

People ask whether the media is "liberal"? They should be asking how far left it will eventually become. The recent appointment of Harold Meyerson -- an obscure radical and quaint believer in working class radicalism -- to one of the most coveted jobs in American journalism provides a troubling answer. Meyerson, a political editor for The L.A. Weekly, a leftist throwaway tabloid, and Editor-at-Large for Bill Moyers’ ideological journal, The American Prospect, has been made a regular columnist for the Washington Post. Meyerson also has an activist career as Vice-Chair of the Democratic Socialists of America, and refers to George W. Bush “The Most Dangerous President Ever,” frequently describes America as “belligerent” and “xenophobic,” and openly yearns for a European superstate to “prevail” in blocking American interests and power. “We need Europe to save us from ourselves,” Meyerson recently wrote.

The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), by its own admission, is “the largest socialist organization in the United States, and the principal U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International.” Meyerson is so well respected by the DSA that he was the honored guest at their annual 1995 dinner and is a featured speaker at the Socialist Scholars Conference, an event which annually gathers intellectuals of the hard left including indicted terrorist, Lynne Stewart.



On Sept. 12, 2001, before the smoke of the Twin Towers cleared, before a single mound of rubble had been moved – before most Americans were even completely sure who attacked us – the Left was already knee-deep in plans to oppose America's efforts at self-defense with Meyerson inthe lead. Less than 24 hours after the attacks, Meyerson set the template for the next three years of left-wing talking points on the attacks:



If Bush uses the attack to send Pentagon spending soaring, the Dems have to muster the gumption to say that even with Tuesday's attack, our defense budget is still indefensibly high. If the Administration sees the attack as a graceful way to back out of an open-border policy with Mexico, and the extension of rights and citizenship to million of illegal immigrants, the Dems still must persist in their pro-immigrant line. If John Ashcroft's Justice Department sees this as the perfect pretext to squelch anti-globalization protests and to get more billions for the FBI to monitor the protestors, the Dems must fight the security apparat's consistent inability to distinguish between threats to public safety and threats to conventional wisdom. (Emphasis added.)



“By night, we drop bombs; by day, we drop peanut butter and jelly,” Meyerson wrote of the short Afghanistan campaign that followed, one of the most humane in the history of warfare. “Our daytime rounds, at least at the outset of the campaign, seem more symbolic than our nightly ones; the amount of food we're delivering from the sky does not make up for the amount of food that no longer can be delivered on the ground now that our counterattack has begun.”



As the war on terror moved on, he was soon was begging Europe to rescue humanity from the Great Satan. “Americans must hope that, in this era of global integration, we are not at the brink of the American century. If anything, the Europeans should take some time out from perfecting Europe to project their values more forcefully on the wider world.” Clearly Europe is political home for Meyerson. “At the outset of the 21st century, the battle between Europe and America for the power to shape the century, and on behalf of different models of social organization, is already joined,” Meyerson lectures. “And may I gently suggest that the best possible outcome for the American democratic republic – for the America of Jefferson, Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt – would be an American (or more precisely, Bushian) defeat.”



Meyerson was not so decisive in describing Saddam Hussein's defeat. Genuflecting to the obvious he wrote that the United States was safer now that Saddam Hussein was behind bars.” But he quickly added a laundry list of other things that would make us “safer” than capturing Saddam. Among them, having John Ashcroft step down as attorney general.



It would also make the world safer, according to Meyerson, if Iraq were handed over to the United Nations. “The fact that it's our blood that has been shed among allied forces in the war does not necessarily mean that we are therefore the best qualified, the most experienced or the most politically legitimate force to be in charge of post war Iraq.”



In keeping with his 19th Century class prejudices, Meyerson thinks that investment is not work.



Take a quick look, or a long one, at the tax code as Bush has altered it during his three years as president, and you're compelled to conclude that work has become a distinctly inferior kind of income acquisition in the eyes of the law. Bush tax policy rewards investment and inheritance. Relying on work for your income, by contrast, turns you into a second-class citizen. Republicans are projecting themselves as an inclusive, moderate party, even as their platform snarls at gays and W’s economic plan declares war against the poor.



As a reflector of the paranoid, Marxist fantasies of the Democratic Party left, Meyerson is on target. But as a columnist for the most politically influential paper in America his presence is truly troubling.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shawn Macomber is a staff writer at The American Spectator and a contributor to FrontPage Magazine. He also runs the website Return of the Primitive.



To: Wayners who wrote (703844)9/25/2005 11:02:28 AM
From: paret  Respond to of 769670
 
The Washington ComPost has six reporters assigned to do this piece! Six!
Can anyone tell me how many reporters the Post assigned to investigate Mena?
----------------------------------------------------------

Few Can Offer Confirmation Of Bush's Guard Service
Washington Post | 2.15.04 | Manuel Roig-Franzia, Lois Romano, Mike Allen, Josh White, George Lardner Jr., and Lucy Shackelford
Washington Post Staff Writers
Page A01

MONTGOMERY, Ala. -- On an early summer day in 2000, in the manicured back yard of Sen. Richard C. Shelby's Tuscaloosa home, the moneyed elite of Republican Alabama clustered around the man they hoped would become the next president of the United States: George W. Bush.

[snip]

Bush eventually went back to Texas in early 1973, and started dating Bear. She has pictures of their time together -- riding horses and mugging for the camera -- but she keeps them locked up, despite media requests to release them. "I couldn't do that to Laura," she said.

One night in December 1972 in Washington, while staying with his parents for the holidays, Bush went carousing with his 16-year-old brother, Marvin. He ran over a neighbor's garbage cans on the way home, and when their father, then ambassador to the United Nations, confronted them, Bush challenged him to go "mano a mano." Within a month, the elder Bush had found a job for his son at an inner-city youth program in Houston. In the spring of 1973, the younger Bush was accepted to Harvard Business School, quickly finished up his Guard requirements and asked for an early discharge.

The young man finally had a plan.

Romano reported from Tulsa. Staff writers Mike Allen, Josh White and George Lardner Jr., and researcher Lucy Shackelford, contributed to this report.

................................................................
The Washington ComPost has six reporters assigned to do this piece! Six!
Can anyone tell me how many reporters the Post assigned to investigate Mena?



To: Wayners who wrote (703844)9/25/2005 11:03:36 AM
From: paret  Respond to of 769670
 
She was the ombudsman for the Washington Post---

a postion whose SALARY IS PAID BY THE WASHINGTON POST, and whose purported purpose is to be the ETHICS observor, commentator, and regulator of the paper.

Just as she took her position it came out that she had extensive ethics problems herself, both professionally and personally, at the last paper she had worked at.

This below proves she is a left-wing stooge hired by the Post back then to fill their phony "ombudsman" position.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wash Post Big Wig Resigns Post To Protest Brit Hume Honor! (USA Today ^ | Peter Johnson

The National Press Club's plan to honor Brit Hume angered
[left-wing code word--ONLY left wingers are "angered"]
Geneva Overholser, who says Fox practices "ideologically connected journalism." Fox News

Or is that slogan a clever marketing line designed to hide Fox News political tilt to the right?

And with its success — by far, it's the No. 1-rated cable news channel — have journalists failed to challenge Fox News on its boast?

These questions have been raised before. But now, a well-known journalist may reignite the discussion: Geneva Overholser, former ombudsman of The Washington Post, has resigned from the board of the National Press Foundation because it plans to honor Fox News anchor Brit Hume at its annual dinner in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 19.

Past recipients of the group's Sol Taishoff award include TV newscasters David Brinkley, Dan Rather, John Chancellor, Jane Pauley, Barbara Walters and Nina Totenberg.
[ALL of these are as left-wing as you can get---with no 'resignation' from agent Overholser]

Hume, the ABC White House correspondent who joined Fox in 1996 and anchors a nightly newscast, doesn't deserve the award because he and Fox practice "ideologically connected journalism," Overholser says.

"Fox wants to do news from a certain viewpoint, but it wants to claim that it is 'fair and balanced,' " she says. "That is inaccurate and unfair to other media who engage in a quest, perhaps an imperfect quest, for objectivity."

She says groups such as the foundation, before lauding Fox or its lead news anchor, should debate whether the way Fox reports news is good for journalism.

Someday, Overholser says, "I think we will look back on these years and think, 'Why didn't we have a discussion so that the public could benefit from a change in journalism that Fox is very successfully bringing about?' "

Ed Fouhy, chairman of the four-person committee that unanimously voted to give Hume the award, rejects Overholser's argument. "Brit is an excellent journalist," says Fouhy, who at one time was Hume's boss at ABC. "I admire him and his journalism."

Says Fox's Irena Briganti: "Brit Hume is a journalist of tremendous accomplishment, distinction and credibility. We are proud he is being recognized."

Overholser, the former editor of The Des Moines Register who now runs the University of Missouri's Washington journalism program, quietly resigned from the board of the foundation three weeks ago.

"I would welcome a discussion about whether objectivity really exists, which media seem the least fair and balanced, whether objectivity is desirable, whether it wouldn't be better to have a more European-like model — in which media were straightforwardly ideologically aligned," she wrote in an e-mail to fellow board members. "All of those could be helpful to American journalism.

"And I can applaud Fox for all sorts of things, but being deceptively ideologically aligned — being hypocritical about it — far from contributing to such discussions, makes them impossible to have. (Fox News president Roger) Ailes has constructed the perfect trap: you question him, and the finger of accusation comes back at the questioner. One can marvel at his cleverness. But one should not confer journalistic laurels upon it."