Via RWN:
Cindy Sheehan: The Dennis Rodman of the peace movement.
Joe Wilson: World’s most intensely private exhibitionist.
Michael Moore: Rumors of his depth are greatly exaggerated.
John Murtha: The reason soldiers invented “fragging.”
George Bush: My Commander-In-Chief.
John McCain: War hero and let’s leave it at that.
Alec Baldwin: Our main source of so-called “greenhouse gases”.
While Hillary has become accustomed to (and in many ways, thrives upon) being vilified by conservatives, she’s not used to being boo’d by her own ‘people’.
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) drew boos and hisses from an audience of liberal activists yesterday as she defended her opposition to a timetable for withdrawing U.S. forces from Iraq, and later she received an implicit rebuke from Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) for failing to acknowledge that her support for the war was a mistake.
The audience turned against her when, in what she called a difficult conversation, she restated her long-standing position about timetables for withdrawing U.S forces.
“I have to just say it,” she began. “I do not think it is a smart strategy either for the president to continue with his open-ended commitment, which I think does not put enough pressure on the new Iraqi government, nor do I think it is smart strategy to set a date certain. I do not agree that that is in the best interest of our troops or our country.”
Yes, the moment was captured on video. Heh.
Welcome to the big leagues Hillary. The comfort you’ve been afforded by a Senate security blanket and the complicit MSM and won’t be enough to protect you from the harsh spotlight of a presidential campaign. You’re centrist charade won’t cut the mustard with your base. They won’t tolerate your “have it both ways” masquerade.
That’s the entirety of the BlackBerry message sent by Attorney Robert Luskin to his client Karl Rove yesterday.
Around 4 p.m. on Monday, June 12, special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald alerted Mr. Luskin that he had decided not to charge his client with a crime in the ongoing investigation into who leaked the name of C.I.A. operative Valerie Plame.
“Obviously, he was happy and relieved,” Mr. Luskin said. “And then the rest of the conversation is personal …. ”
What Luskin isn’t keeping private is his opinion of leftists in the media, and particularly the moonbat side of the blogosphere, who for the last several weeks have drummed up baseless allegations and propagated endless rumors about an imminent indictment of Rove.
“It seems to me that there are lots of constituencies who have treated this as the story too good not to be true,” he said. “And people have all had their own reasons—whether they’re political, whether they have to do with opportunities to put themselves forward personally, whether or not they are motivated by efforts to show up the mainstream media.”
The criticism of blogging, in fact, goes right to the story of the White House’s relationship with reporters in the “mainstream media.”
“The big criticism of the mainstream media is that they live in this community, they’ve got continuing relationships with their sources and the people they write about, and the blogosphere says that that makes them spineless,” Mr. Luskin said. (Like Judy Miller?) “I think one can make the exact opposite argument, which is that the premise is true but that makes them accountable.”
He recalled an episode from last month, when a report on the liberal Web site Truthout.org, written by Jason Leopold and citing “high-level sources with direct knowledge of the meeting,” claimed Mr. Rove would be indicted on charges of perjury and lying to investigators, the results of a marathon session of negotiations in Mr. Luskin’s office that he claims never occurred.
And then Luskin provides this little nugget:
On the one hand, it seems to me that the CBS National Guard stories were the poster child for the principle that sometimes the blogosphere keeps the mainstream media accountable, and it seems to me that this story is, if you will, the poster child for the fact that the blogosphere is itself often not accountable, and that there are a universe of folks out there who have got personal or political agendas who were masquerading as news sources. That is just as destructive in its own way, or more than the mainstream media’s insularity is on the flip side.”
He’s right.
When Truthout.org passed along the rumor of Rove’s imminent indictment, it did so under the guise of a legitimate investigative news report. They used the right words. They used a news-like writing style. They claimed not not one but up to five exclusive sources. They were able to convince a large audience that they had the inside scoop. Nevermind that no one in the MSM was reporting the story. Commenters on Truthout.org’s dismissed the professional media claiming they weren’t reporting because they were either in the pocket of the White House or they were intimidated by the svengali power of Rove himself. Days and weeks later, when deadlines for the indictment announcement came and went, many of Truthout.org’s readers refused to believe they had been duped. Even now, a full day after the announcement that Rove will not be indicted, many on the left still believe he will.
Just like MSM reporters, bloggers need to check facts and figures. We can’t cut corners. If we intend to beat the traditional media and break news stories, we need a double measure of substantiation and multiple named sources. It’s about being credible. More importantly, bloggers must correct themselves immediately when they get the story wrong.
Blog readers have a responsibility too. In a world where an increasing number of people turn their attention from traditional media to the insta-news/commentary of the blogosphere, it’s important to keep a minimum level of perspective. If one blog reports a story, but NO ONE ELSE DOES, be skeptical. In the critical minutes and hours after a major news story breaks and a gang of bloggers conclude a certain outcome, or in the example of Rove, a level of guilt, be skeptical. Readers and bloggers alike must resist the lemming instinct. Deny the urge to mob.
So for now, we’ll look at this episode as yet another milestone in the age of the blogosphere. We’ll learn from it, be strengthened by it, and become better because of it.
President George W. Bush made an unannounced visit to Baghdad today.
“Good to see you,” Iraq’s new Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki told Bush as they shook hands in one of Saddam Hussein’s old palaces. “Thanks for having me,” Bush replied.
The White House said Bush would be on the ground for more than five hours and would also meet U.S. troops during the surprise trip, begun in high secrecy.
The visit, his first since November 2003 when he went to see U.S. troops for Thanksgiving, comes six days after a U.S. air strike killed Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, leader of al Qaeda in Iraq.
Meanwhile, the MSM is freaking out over the way they were informed of Bush’s visit. According to Drudge:
White House loaded press corps onto bus to go see Bush at Camp David, then when bus left — announced he was in Iraq!
It’s a beautiful day.
There’s mass weeping and gnashing of teeth today. Embarrassment abounds.
The prosecutor in the C.I.A. leak case on Monday advised Karl Rove, the senior White House adviser, that he would not be charged with any wrongdoing, effectively ending the nearly three-year criminal investigation that had at times focused intensely on Mr. Rove.
The decision by the prosecutor, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, announced in a letter to Mr. Rove’s lawyer, Robert D. Luskin, lifted a pall that had hung over Mr. Rove who testified on five occasions to a federal grand jury about his involvement in the disclosure of an intelligence officer’s identity.
Yet, amazingly enough, there are still a few hold-outs.
Lunacy.
Rick over at Right Wing Nut House provides the contrast. Michelle Malkin calls this “Rove Derangement Syndrome Day.”
MORE: “Top Ten ‘Progressive’ Reactions to the End of Fitzmas”.
You know how hard it is to blog when you’re 16 hours ahead of home in the Pacific Time Zone? Real hard. Especially when it seems like it’s ALL ZARQAWI ALL THE TIME (and it is). So, as of right now, I’m jumping into the low to no blogging zone. I’m in Tokyo for 48 more hours, and I’m not going to spend it sitting in front of a laptop in a hotel room.
Would you?
No, you wouldn’t.
See you on the other side.
UPDATE: I’m back, but man am I feeling funky. Jetlag is a mysterious thing.
This is great.
We got him.
Via AP: Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, al-Qaida’s leader in Iraq who led a bloody campaign of suicide bombings and kidnappings, has been killed in an air raid north of Baghdad – a major victory in the U.S.-led war in Iraq and the broader war on terror. Iraq’s prime minister and U.S. officials said his identity was confirmed by fingerprints and a first-hand look at his face.
The announcement came six days after the Jordanian-born terror leader appeared in a videotape, railing against Shiites in Iraq and saying militias are raping women and killing Sunnis and the community must fight back.
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said al-Zarqawi was killed along with seven aides Wednesday evening in a house 30 miles northeast of Baghdad in the volatile province of Diyala, just east of the provincial capital of Baqouba, al-Maliki said.
“Today, al-Zarqawi was eliminated,” al-Maliki told a news conference, drawing loud applause from reporters as he was flanked by U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad and U.S. Gen. George Casey, the top U.S. commander in Iraq.
Finally.
Let’s hope that the death of Zarqawi brings some kind of closure in the lives of the families of the victims who were murdered by the terrorist thug.
…and many, many more.
Meanwhile, the MSM is downplaying the Zarqawi hit, as expected. They’re going on and on about how this will do nothing to quell the terrorist strikes in Iraq. CNN’s Soledad O’Brien is already looking forward finding out who will take Zarqawi’s place. And just now, she’s interviewing a guy who talking about Zarqawi like he’s some kind of terrorist rock star who won’t be easily replaced. Shameless.
OTHERS: Patrick Quinn | WaPo | CNN | NYT | BBC |
VIDEO: Michelle Malkin |
Army lieutenant (and I use that term loosely) Ehren Watada.
No one forced you to sign up for the military sir. When you held your right hand up and pledged to “protect the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, both foreign and domestic”, what did you think that meant?
Coward.
