Yeah, I didn’t hear about Smith until I read “Home of the Brave”.

The media did everything they could to make this happen, now the dhimmis are runnin’ things. Indeed, Mission Accomplished.

Tony737 on November 9, 2006 at 11:08 PM

Some day they may be held to account and it won’t be pretty.

TheBigOldDog on November 9, 2006 at 11:12 PM

A reporter for Time magazine, who embedded with the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment, had his article completely rewritten by editors who felt his portrayal of American troops was too positive.

Tal Afar….that was the location. The reporter promised them a fair report. They got nothing. Tal Afar….that was the place where the 3rd ACR got the shaft from Time as they laid it on the line. Great bunch of troopers those boys, with a great big knife sticking out of their back.

Limerick on November 9, 2006 at 11:28 PM

To borrow from that great VDH piece, Islamic Facisim 101,of the Muzzies:

“Nothing a fascist (Democrat) says can be trusted, since all means are relegated to the ends of seeing their ideology reified. So too Islamic (Democrat) fascists, by any means necessary, will fib, and hedge for the cause of Islamism (Liberalism). Keep that in mind when considering ( the Dem’s) protestations about
(anything the Republicans stand for.)

As Lenin said;
‘The press should be not only a collective propagandist and a collective agitator, but also a collective organizer of the masses.’ And America had better get off their asses and shut these f**kers down.

auspatriotman on November 9, 2006 at 11:32 PM

I think there are a lot of elements in the old media that have steadily lost credibility over the years, but the propaganda that they consistently display is just so saturated and coordinated, its difficult to resist them. Rumsfeld was villified, Iraq looks like a worthless waste of time, and the national debt is going to let the Chinese take over. It’s all BS, but it’s draining morale to have to constantly object to that BS. THERE. ARE. FOUR. LIGHTS!

Savage on November 9, 2006 at 11:36 PM

I think it gives credit to out military that there have not been any accidental shootings of some of these embedded traitors.

Congratulations on not being murderers?

Nonfactor on November 9, 2006 at 11:44 PM

Nonfactor,….

As the grandson of a soldier, as the son of a soldier, as a former soldier, and as a father of a soldier I can tell you one sure FACT for your trolling little head…….the media will do anything to throw mud on the military. Go troll, troll.

Limerick on November 9, 2006 at 11:56 PM

Congratulations on not being murderers? — Nonfactor

…y’know…there’s something in the tone of that question that smacks to me of disappointment…

I’m sure that our troops, who’re responsible for folks who accompany them, are probably getting a pretty jaundiced view of the “embedded” by now…particularly given the tone of the reporting coming out of Iraq…why should they carry into and out of combat someone who will, as has proven the case in the past, delight in showing you up as a killer?

…all this *for the benefit* of papers and networks who routinely portray you as patsies or as the under-educated dregs of society….

Puritan1648 on November 9, 2006 at 11:58 PM

I think it would be a mistake to convince yourself of this. It’s a lazy explanation that excuses the fact that you might be wrong and allows you to place the blame on others.

I think it is a mistake to underestimate the power of repeating a message over and over. Especially when it goes unchallenged. The ME is burning with hatred for America fed to the people by dictatorships that want to deflect the anger Arabs have because of their miserable lives.

All of us are willing to admit we are wrong. If you want to stop speaking in generalities I would be happy to address your specific criticisms.

Bill C on November 10, 2006 at 12:02 AM

Nonfactor: You are. Good name.

ahem on November 10, 2006 at 12:02 AM

I made a valid point. This election should be a wake-up. To ignore what happened and blame it on the media wouldn’t help Republicans at all.

Nonfactor on November 10, 2006 at 12:06 AM

Let’s see, we’ve got the NYT purposefully spinning negative news about the war and Rahm Emanuel purposefully hoping for bad news about the war…real nice. But, of course, it’s unpatriotic to question their patriotism, right? Geez.

CP on November 10, 2006 at 12:11 AM

nonfactor, to the extent that the Media made everything we Republicans did look bad and poisoned the political atmosphere irredeemably for us with the American public, I will indeed lay a large part of the blame on them.
Yes, the GOP-controlled Congress should have gotten a lot more done and for that they were “whomped” at the polls, but the Media almost single-handedly created the cesspool here at home.
They made it “Job 1″ to sap the American people of their will to fight to keep their country using whatever it takes to do that and they did…as this story shows.
Emmanuel himself is ADMITTING they counted on and used the Media!
I’m happy to say that the Media hasn’t succeeded in this ultimately; sure, they swung an off-year election to the Dems, but they didn’t have the anti-war election they wanted to have.
Now, they admit their big issue was the “minimum wage…” *snort*
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA–and the Dems’ big NYT October surprise was their “shocking” story about how the Iranians built their bomb from the plans for Saddam’s bomb that we had posted on the Internet, thus cancelling out the Times’ previous Big Story from a Leak© that Saddam wasn’t building any nukes!
No wonder their stock’s diving–they suck.
I live in Dallas: for decades, Neiman-Marcus was the gold standard for luxury department stores. Now, you can find the same stuff (and better) at Nordstrom’s, maybe even Walmart. So sad.
The NYT is to newspapers what Neiman Marcus was to retailing.

Jen the Neocon on November 10, 2006 at 12:24 AM

The media did everything they could to make this happen, now the dhimmis are runnin’ things. Indeed, Mission Accomplished.

Tony737 on November 9, 2006 at 11:08 PM

Yep, they did do their part. However, don’t think that they didn’t have help. Biased or not, the scandals were real and those responsible for that should have known better.

Their behavior was reprehensible, to say the least. Just because Demmies did it years ago and got a pass doesn’t make it right.

They did their part, too.

I made a valid point. This election should be a wake-up. To ignore what happened and blame it on the media wouldn’t help Republicans at all.

Nonfactor on November 10, 2006 at 12:06 AM

Yes, you did - but just as Republican leaders had a hand in it, so did the media. They do have an in built bias towards what will get them ratings - no matter what happens to people or to America.

Believe that!

I’m sure that our troops, who’re responsible for folks who accompany them, are probably getting a pretty jaundiced view of the “embedded” by now…particularly given the tone of the reporting coming out of Iraq…why should they carry into and out of combat someone who will, as has proven the case in the past, delight in showing you up as a killer?

…all this *for the benefit* of papers and networks who routinely portray you as patsies or as the under-educated dregs of society….

Puritan1648 on November 9, 2006 at 11:58 PM

Puritan, you have got it totally right - they are tired of the embeds from the “Crescent News Network” who have even been known to try to provoke firefights on the troops they’re with then lie to those troops chain of command when they (the troops) defend themselves.

The media do, indeed, look at us as the dregs of society.

Then again, newspapers haven’t quite fully figured it out yet, but they are about as extinct as dinosaurs. In great part because:

1. Compared to the net, they’re so far behind, they’re yesterday’s news today.

2. People get tired of being spoken down to.

3. In many cities, there is only one newspaper and they are very much the arrogant, elitist sort. On the net, however, there are thousands of sources to choose from from all walks of life, positions, areas, and opinions.

4. As with anything in a free market economy - competition is great and “googling” as well as surfing is pretty much free. These weenies actually charge for their service like it’s a subscription. If people wanted a subscription, they still be reading their papers (which they’re not).

Everything considered, it is mainly because of orders that our soldiers still carry these parasites around. Believe me, it isn’t love.

and in the long run,

Somewhere, Ernie Pyle is crying buckets
Jen the Neocon on November 10, 2006 at 12:05 AM

Believe it! He was truly the best - right along with Joe Galloway. True Soldiers’ reporters who were real truth-tellers. I hope that we could see their like again.

Emmett J. on November 10, 2006 at 12:29 AM

I made a valid point. — Nonfactor

…if you have to point that out, then maybe you might not’ve made a point at all.

The Republicans — largely leaderless, focus-less, abandoning their base, groping for direction, off-message and off their nuts — lost the election. Pure and simple.

That said, the media — overwhelmingly demonstrably biased, reporting right out of the opposition’s playbook — *WAS* a significant factor. The Republicans were an easy target, but the glee with which the press went about their hatchetwork was more than unseemly. It was anti-democratic. Added to this, the Democrats were pitched to underhand.

That said, there’re a number of overseas interests which funnelled money or favorable circumstances to support the Left in this country, like the upturn in violence in Iraq, sponsored by Iran.

That said, we’ve gone far too long expecting that we can succeed as a nation knocking down and overturning standards, some as simple and key as standards of polite conduct; producing popular culture kitsch which proselytizes a political point of view; and have elevated cynicism to an active social good.

Yesterday, we had Miss Gulch, a pinched, peevish, pushy and prunish busybody in the “Wizard of Oz”, all too impressed with her own righteousness to see that enforcing that righteousness on others is wrong. Today, we have activists, who have “causes”.

So, it’s a fairly — to use a Democratic word — nuanced thing which Lady Liberty stepped in last Tuesday. She’ll be two years trying to find a place to wipe her sandal. I wish her luck.

Puritan1648 on November 10, 2006 at 12:36 AM

…I might be a little back-woodsy, but I grew up learning that is called lying. — AZ_Redneck

…my redneck Dad would’ve referred to it using a bovine metaphor.

…when there’s no right and no wrong, one is supposed to admire a good lie. Maybe when we die, AZ, the liars will all have an easier time of it. ‘Cause I’ve got a fairly well-calibrated bovine metaphor detector….

Puritan1648 on November 10, 2006 at 12:39 AM

Then again, newspapers haven’t quite fully figured it out yet, but they are about as extinct as dinosaurs.

…somebody might do some research (someone better at research than I am) and see the impact on print news circulation when TV news began to take hold. It would be interesting.

The establishment press used to perform one function above all else: it validated the news. You’d hear the news, or thought you’d heard it, even local news, but it wouldn’t be official until it was in print, or it came out of Walter’s or Chet and David’s mouths. The NYT lives amid the illusion that it still, as the oracle of the industry, serves that function overall. “All the news that’s fit to print”…or so they say.

Now, after plagerism and invented news scandal after scandal, bias so blatant that Ray Charles could’ve read the LA Herald-Examiner or the Chicago Sun-Times by smell, and the unchanged and unchanging tone of faux-aristocracy seeping out under the doors of the editorial boardrooms, we’re seeing circulations plummet.

…no wonder “The Daily Show” is as much a source of news for some as Couric’s Cutsey Evening News or the Boston Globe.

…added to that, finally, we now have the blogosphere: particatory, interactive news!

If for no other reason, the blogosphere is important because, until the EU or UN or Hillary get ahold of it, it’s unregulated…it’s democracy in action.

For another, the quality of writing here and elsewhere in blogotopia ranges from poor to absolutely stellar…rather than from trite to insulting to annoyingly hip. Some of the best writing — and I’m talking style, humor, balancing of facts, impartiality, and even-handed advocacy — is here among the bloggers.

Sure…one blog slants one way, another slants another. I don’t hang out over at DU or at Daily Kos for a reason, but would take a steady diet of that over the NYT. At least treason there is served up without the added stink of self-bestowed inerrancy.

The NYT is dying. They’re trying to get into other media, but they’re messing that media up as they get there, as with the Discovery and History channels. It refuses to die quietly, and that’s most annoying.

The blogs are democracy I think that they’d recognize in the Agora of Athens…except for the trousers…and the pyjamas….

Puritan1648 on November 10, 2006 at 12:55 AM

…yes, Emmett…but it also has the problems of democracy. Democracy can easily fall into fashion, inaccuracy, is often victim of it’s own pettiness, and is a very human thing…and I don’t mean that it any kind of a good way.

Democracy requires reason and mature judgment. That is in short supply today. But, when you have it, democracy can’t be beat.

Puritan1648 on November 10, 2006 at 1:11 AM

I regard the blogosphere as the Village Tavern of the 21st Century, where patriots (and traitors, as in Kos or DU) gather to make their feelings and opinions known, as our ancestors did during the Revolutionary War in the 18th Century.

Jen the Neocon on November 10, 2006 at 1:29 AM

Really well said. Quite possibly more so than we know.

Emmett J. on November 10, 2006 at 1:38 AM

Given Americans’ doubt that their government will prosecute journalists who have disclosed secrets they think were of great importance to their national and personal security, I’m surprised they never seem to bring up private vengeance as a real possibility. In particular, the American journalists themselves seem not only to have little fear of prosecution, but to have little fear that, out of three hundred million Americans, even one will decide to take matters into his own hands–or to contract a professional. We know some Americans harbor intense indignation and malice toward specific members of their “MSM” whom they regard as dangerous traitors. I guess the orderly, self-restrained thing to do is to praise them for their orderly self-restraint. They keep their seats, hands in their laps, following the rules, even while crazy men seize the cockpit and conduct them to their destined end.

Kralizec on November 10, 2006 at 3:33 AM

Point 1: “I’m sure that our troops, who’re responsible for folks who accompany them, are probably getting a pretty jaundiced view of the “embedded” by now…particularly given the tone of the reporting coming out of Iraq…why should they carry into and out of combat someone who will, as has proven the case in the past, delight in showing you up as a killer?”

In point of fact, embedding reporters with the troops turned around the biases of almost all the US reporters involved, and they reported accordingly.

These reporters found it impossible to maintain their biases when they were eating and drinking, shitting and shaving, and ducking with the troops. You might call it “The Stockholm Effect.”

What happened is that the EDITORS decided to recast/rewrite the stories in a negative light. Many if not all of the reporters objected strenuously. So much so that the editors started withdrawing them.

Point 2: The Agora on the Internet.
The print and broadcast media are top-down hierarchical structures with the editor/publisher at the top. They make all the decisions as to what is to be printed or broadcast.

The information flow is ONLY from them to us. Always. If a TV station or newspaper accepts “letters to the editor,” they are ALWAYS edited and may be tossed without publication. Again, the information flow is always one way - them to us. And the editor always got the last word.

The Internet changed all that. First it was email lists and Usenet, then the web and now blogs.

This medium is a TWO WAY medium. This means that the top-down structure collapses because the READER/VIEWER can answer back. Information may be challenged (Rathergate) for accuracy or omission. Disputes with the purveyors of the information may become public. Not only can the editor not control the flow of information, they no longer have the final word, either.

I do not know how many “hits” this blog gets. Somewhere there is an “Arbitron”-type service that conveys this information. But I suspect that the number of readers of THIS blog is substantial.

As the editor of a magazine once said, he can post a message on the net (specifically an email list or Usenet — I don’t remember which) and more people than the daily circulation of the Washington Post will read it. Or as he put it about WashPo: “Oops, you’re a newsletter.”

That is how much power WE, as individuals have using the new medium. It is a power that the gatekeepers cannot control or suppress and they know it.

And that is why the left hates us so — they cannot control expression or suppress those whom they do not like. It is why they CENSOR postings at DU and DKOS. And it is why the new Congress will move to (1) take down talk radio by re-imposing the Fairness Doctrine. This they can do because of the FCC’s power to control the spectrum. (2) Suppress webs/blogs they don’t like by extending McCain Feingold to cover political blogs. There are demands from the left that this be done, BTW. This is less certain as M/F has almost zero power over INDIVIDUAL speech under the law and would run afoul of the 1st Amendment if they tried.

But they COULD pull down Hot Air or MM if they could link in law a dollar amount equivalent that a blog contributes to a party or candidate.

You can take it to the bank, however, that they WILL try both shutting down talk radio and the blogs because they cannot retain control as long as we can speak. And if we can speak, we might succeed in changing some minds and end up tossing them out of power, again.

Point 3. Ann Coulter’s idea on what to do with the New York Times sounds better and better, doesn’t it. God forgive me for thinking that….

georgej on November 10, 2006 at 5:39 AM

Nice work GeorgeJ, and yes, they WILL try shut down talk radio or at least try the “Fairness Doctrine” again. Yet they call themselves the protectors of the Freedom of Speech.

Tony737 on November 10, 2006 at 6:46 AM

And this is news? Duh. Stuff I’ve been saying for years.

webproze on November 10, 2006 at 7:45 AM

Cheer up folks. With the Dems in charge now we will have nothing but positive news regarding the situation in Iraq. They will need to paint a pretty picture to bolster the Dems argument for retreating, er redeploying, umm quitting, nah Peace with Honor, damn to leave Iraq and bring all of our “kids” home. Soon we will be treated to Iraqi’s queued up outside clinics and children in schools and people shopping in the markets with cell phone towers all over the place and new electrical relay stations and water treatment plants. You know all the stuff that is happening now and has been happening for awhile but will just magically appear on the front page as if the Dems made it happen
Oh yeah and we probably don’t have to worry about leaked classified intelligence stories on the front page.
Ahhh feel the love, nothing but Peace and Prosperity everywhere you look.

LakeRuins on November 10, 2006 at 9:22 AM

You know what’s better than winning? Cheating and winning. It so discourages the opposition.

honora on November 10, 2006 at 9:38 AM

Across the country, at the urging of Mr. Emanuel and his Senate counterpart, Charles E. Schumer of New York, Democratic candidates began demanding the resignation of Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld. As they did, Mr. Emanuel would later admit, he gave private thanks that the president had not robbed the Democrats of a potent issue by firing Mr. Rumsfeld before the campaign was engaged.
Images of battlefield violence, blended with pictures of Mr. Bush, were pressed into the service of Democratic television advertisements, many of which Mr. Schumer screened on his home computer, staying up until 1 a.m.

I believe I shall also file this in my “Bush tanked the elections so the Dems can help him shove amnesty up our ass file”, as well. Truthiness be damned.

Kid from Brooklyn on November 10, 2006 at 10:25 AM

The mainstream media was on the side of the democrats?!?!?

Get the f— outta here!!!!!

thirteen28 on November 10, 2006 at 10:32 AM

Just watch how quickly the newcast cuts back to the Anchors when Mr. Ellison’s true support begin their chant of Allah Akbar. I thought they weren’t allow to say that unless they were beheading someone. Like three christian schoolgirls in Indonesia.

Lurking_Canuck on November 10, 2006 at 10:35 AM

I don’t expect the MSM to spin the outcome of the election in any way that is not 100% favorable to the Democrats, so common sense says ignore all the coverage and move on.
What I don’t get, is why Bushes seemed to take a stance as long as a year ago to purposely ceed the election to the Democrats.
It all started when GHW Bush started this crazy blood brother/father son relationship with Slick Willy. Reports had Barbara refering to him as her surrogate son and Jeb calling him Bubba. How dim is that? Nobody could be that gullible to think he would be their all time best buddy and everything would be kum-bi-a with both families. It’s akin to putting a pit bull in a cage with a bunch of poodles. As the saying goes, “Something is rotten in Denmark,” was my first reaction.
Then GWB’s ridiculous stance on the border issue. This is such a hot and unpopular issue with his base (second only to the war) that I was amazed at his blindness, or antipathy toward them. He had to know that he was enraging their wrath. I guess Jeb, being married to a Mexican, could have had a bearing on his thought pattern.
Then lastly, he waits until the election is lost and then sacks Rumsfeld. How stupid is that! Everyone who is not in a fog knows that it would have been politicly savy to send him packing back in September, when it could have brought some of the undecided to our side. If he was so committed to Rumsfeld, then why fire him at all? Maybe a scapegoat is in the making,
I guarantee you there will be little or no legislation of any meaning, to the Republican side of the aisle, passed during the next two years. GWB will let the Democrats run rough-shod over him and set the agenda without much resistance other than an occasional veto threat now and again. In nautical parlance, “Batten down the hatches” ’cause it’s going to be rough sailing for a couple of years.
By the way, who ever taught GWB how to wave when getting off his helicopter at the white house? If he doesn’t look like a pansy, I don’t know what does. It’s certainly not presidential. Can you picture Reagan waving in this manner?
I thought not.

gunter on November 10, 2006 at 11:14 AM

hey, Bush is the decider but what the hell makes you Lincolnesque?!?

Jen the Neocon on November 10, 2006 at 12:05 PM

There will be a RECKONING….there has to be. Stay vigilant righty bloggers!!!!

seejanemom on November 10, 2006 at 1:22 PM

honora, I’m sorry–whatever can you mean?
I did indeed point out that you and your party are the ones that believe in cheating to win.
Not only did Owlie Bore try it in 2000, but LBJ successfully helped JFK pull out a “victory” over Nixon by stuffing ballot boxes with the names of the dead in Texas, Chicago and West Virginia in 1960.
The SCOTUS didn’t “select” President Bush; they stopped Al’s fraudulent chad counting in 4 cherry-picked Florida counties!
And yet when they “win” as on Tuesday, there is no talk of faulty Diebold machines or butterfly ballots. Funniest thing.
But to get that win, your Dems had their enablers in the MSM tell lies, sling mud, make up scandals and generally moan and complain 24/7 for the last 6 years…
BTW, why are you still snarking at us?
Haven’t you joined the new Age of Aquarius that dawned the other day?
It’s our turn to whine!–”Nancy Lied. People Died.”

Jen the Neocon on November 10, 2006 at 1:45 PM

No, honora. I told you: Now that you Donkeys are “in control,” we’re the ones who get to bitch at you!
That’s the beauty of Tuesday’s election for us!

Jen the Neocon on November 10, 2006 at 3:02 PM

Whereas you clueless losers will be operating “heavy machinery…”
God help us all.
When push comes to shove, I don’t give a sh*t whether you’re a cheerleader for the Blue team or the Red Team, I JUST WANNA LIVE!
In that more of us seem to die under the policies of the Blues, I’m gonna pick Red everytime so how ’bout a big steaming cup of STFU?
Get busy and ride your new empowered leaders in Washington to govern how you want and leave me alone!

Jen the Neocon on November 10, 2006 at 5:17 PM

As if the American people needed to read a classified report to know the war in Iraq is going badly and contributing to increased terrorism.

Yeah. What the hell was Rahm Emanuel thinking?

Allahpundit on November 10, 2006 at 6:12 PM