Absolutely essential reading, along these very lines:
Posted on 8/13/2004, 6:06:30 AM by JohnHuang2
The mask is off. Further denials are useless. After the events of the past seven days the ingrained leftist, pro-Democratic Party bias of the nation’s mainstream media has been fully exposed. All it took was for a certain Vietnam veteran to write a book daring to question the war hero status of Democratic presidential hopeful John Kerry. Media lips are now drawn into a permanent snarl; the knives are out and the scent of blood is in the air. Circle the wagons and may the effort to protect the Democratic candidate proceed.
To make this scenario as clear as possible, I ask you to remember one basic difference between George Bush and John Kerry. George Bush is not running on his record of military service during the Vietnam War. John Kerry is. John Kerry is not running on the basis of his recent service as an elected official. George Bush is.
Now … turn back the calendar to earlier this year. George Bush was asking the voters of this country to reelect him on the basis of his previous four years as president and commander in chief. Suddenly Democratic detractors come forward with questions about Bush’s service in the Texas Air National Guard over 30 years ago. Democratic sycophants were using words like “AWOL” and demanding investigations. Blood had been thrown in the water with the media sharks and the White House press briefings immediately turned ugly. Reporters wanted details – all of the details – of Bush’s National Guard service. They wanted pay records, dental records, medical records, flight records and statements from fellow guardsmen confirming Bush’s participation. The AWOL word had been used and it was George Bush’s job to provide all of the information necessary to prove that it wasn’t so.
If you think back I’ll wager you can’t remember one single story from any of the alphabets (ABC, NBC, etc.) questioning the motives or the honesty of the people who brought the AWOL charges. Their motives were assumed to be worthy and pure. It was the president on the spot, not the detractors.
Now … let’s turn the calendar pages to early August, 2004. A group of Vietnam veterans step forward with some questions and charges about John Kerry’s record of service in Vietnam, the very record that John has presented to the American people as the sole and exclusive reason (save for their hatred of George Bush) that he should be the 44th President of the United States. If the media’s treatment of the George Bush AWOL charges were a guide, we would expect to see an immediate feeding frenzy from the mainstream media. Demands would be made of the Kerry campaign that records, documents and any and all other available evidence be presented to prove Kerry’s claims of heroism.
The Kerry campaign would be handling multiple demands from The New York Times, the Boston Globe, ABC, NBC and the rest of the locusts for all of the medical records pertaining to Kerry’s second and third Purple Hearts. Apologies would be demanded of the Democratic and Kerry lawyers who referred to Dr. Louis Letson, the physician who applied the band aid to Kerry’s first Purple Heart wound as a “phony” physician. Maureen Dowd would be opining about obscene Republican operatives daring to question the medical credentials of a man who undoubtedly had saved far more lives in Vietnam than John Kerry. Obviously, it hasn’t happened exactly that way. We haven’t heard one objective reporter asking Kerry to defend his lawyer’s name-calling. Change the fact situation just a tad. Have Dr. Letson make a statement supporting Kerry’s claims, and have a Bush lawyer refer to him as a “phony” physician. I don’t have to tell you how outraged the media would be, do I? I didn’t think so.
And what of the people supporting Kerry’s detractors? One columnist referred to a Houston homebuilder who had made a donation to the Swift Boat veterans as a “mysterious Republican moneyman.” Mysterious? A Texas homebuilder is mysterious? I think a Hungarian financier who finances Moveon.org and The Media Fund, both Kerry surrogates, might qualify as mysterious, but has anyone seen dark hints about the money behind these organizations?
If anyone else out there has a plan to write a book exposing liberal media bias in America, they should consider applying their efforts to another cause. The media is doing all too good a job of exposing itself.
good morning
G'morning backatya, amigo
;-)
lol
Thanks for posting this.
Congressman Billybob
Latest column, "Says the Wuss: Ma, He's Touching Me"
If you haven't already joined the anti-CFR effort, please click here.
4 eggs, toast, coffee,, oops,, sorry wrong page....Mornin! :-)
I like Dennis Prager and Hugh Hewitt. I think they do good jobs for the most part.
morning
George Bush is not running on his record of military service during the Vietnam War. John Kerry is. John Kerry is not running on the basis of his recent service as an elected official. George Bush is.
Brilliant.
Thanks for the links, Congressman
Absolutely essential reading, along these very lines:
You could! That's why we here in freeperland hope you're successful in your run for Congress.........but why you would want to go into that cess pool is beyond me, we're just glad you do!!
bttt
 The media "jumped the shark" on this stuff a long time ago. It's to the point now where people are just laughing at it.Take a look at that poll of the battleground states. At least 60% of the people had heard about the SwiftVets' ad, and among undecided voters the effect was breaking 3-to-1 against Kerry. The so-called "mainstream media" isn't mainstream anymore. They are the nation's leftist kooks, running a propaganda organ for the Democratic Party. Only fellow Democrats still imagine that they are viewed any other way. Poll after poll shows that people simply do not trust them anymore. And why should people trust them? As Boortz points out here, their behavior is that of cheerleaders for the Democratic candidate. People aren't so stupid that they don't notice this. The media does this every election. In spite of which, the Republicans hold the White House, both houses of Congress, and a majority of the Governorships. Is the media an effective cheerleader for the Democrats? Obviously not. People have learned to apply a huge amount of rightward windage to anything that comes out of the media. If the media says the Democrat "has corrected the record," that means he lied. If the media calls some critic of the Democratic candidate a liar and a thief, that means the guy has the goods on the Democrat. People have figured this out, and they adjust for it. Watching "the news" in this country is like watching an ad for the Democratic Party's agenda. People apply the same filters to it that they would apply to an infomercial about The Amazing 100-in-One Power Tool. The thing probably does half of what they say it does, and it probably costs twice what it is worth. Knowing this, the people vote in the Republicans, even as the left-leaning media becomes ever more shrill in pushing the Democrats' agenda. |
bump
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.