Norman Podhoretz in Commentary,
Among the many distortions, misrepresentations, and outright falsifications that have emerged from the debate over Iraq, one in particular stands out above all others. This is the charge that George W. Bush misled us into an immoral and/or unnecessary war in Iraq by telling a series of lies that have now been definitively exposed.
What makes this charge so special is the amazing success it has enjoyed in getting itself established as a self-evident truth even though it has been refuted and discredited over and over again by evidence and argument alike. In this it resembles nothing so much as those animated cartoon characters who, after being flattened, blown up, or pushed over a cliff, always spring back to life with their bodies perfectly intact. Perhaps, like those cartoon characters, this allegation simply cannot be killed off, no matter what.
Nevertheless, I want to take one more shot at exposing it for the lie that it itself really is. Although doing so will require going over ground that I and many others have covered before, I hope that revisiting this well-trodden terrain may also serve to refresh memories that have grown dim, to clarify thoughts that have grown confused, and to revive outrage that has grown commensurately dulled.
Please read the whole thing, especially if you believe this canard.
Pundit Review Radio recently hosted a debate between the leading pro and anti gay marriage groups in Massachusetts.
We spoke with Kris Mineau, the President of Massachusetts Family Institute. His organization is trying to get a ballot initiative passed that would ban gay marriage in Massachusetts.
From the other side of the issue, we had Marc Solomon, Political Director for Mass Equality, a group that supports same sex marriage and opposes to the ballot initiative.
Enjoy!
On last night’s show we had the pleasure of speaking with Rachel Maddow of Air America regarding two major issues. We discussed The War in Iraq and whether Bush “lied” which has been consistently and thoroughly proven to be a canard perpetuated by the Moore-Kos-Sheehan-Franken-Gore-Kennedy angry faction of the Democrat Party (i.e. mainstream Democrats) who have still not gotten over the “stolen” 2000 election. The only proven “liar” has been the partisan Bush hating Joe Wilson. Check out the official timeline and see for yourself. He is just another poitical hack-retread who has followed in the footsteps of Bill Burket and Dan Rather who have failed miserably in their demented preoccupation with taking down Presdident Bush. The one thing this predident isn’t is a liar. Say what you will about his policies (spening, borders, immigration, tarriffs, McCain-Feingold etc…) the American people trust this president. They may not agree with him, but they know he means and does what he says- unlike his predecessor whose policies and actions were dictated by sticking his finger in the air and guaging “popular” public sentiment. The Democrats know that the only way to defeat Bush and the GOP going into the 06′ elections is to destroy his reputation. The liberals know that they have nothing positive to offer in terms of a forward looking agenda for America and can only deomoniaze thier political adversaries (Delay, Rove, Rummy, “Big Oil,” Homophobic-intolerant-racist-backwards-white-Christians, and the big cahoona G.W.Bush). When you have nothing positive to offer all you can do is criticize and attack those who do. This president has taken such bold and courageous positions that it should not be much of a surprise to any astute political observer that his “popularity” ratings hover around 50%. Partly this is due to the fact that rightward leaning conservatives who represent the majority of this country (socially and fiscally) have been very critical of Bush on spending, border security, and the Mier’s nomination. Since the White House has listened to “we the people” via the New Media blogosphere, and have taken “corrective measures,” expect these poll numbers to go back up. While he may not be “popular” with about half the electorate right now, rest assured that this president- if he remains steadfast in fighting an agressive WOT, nonimating conservative originalists in the mold of “Scallia and Thomas” to the SC, defending the borders, cutting taxes and spending, and reforming SS, healthcare, and education in his next three years in office- will go down in history as one of the greatest presidnets this country has ever known.
We also breifly discussed the Alito nomination and our guest claimed that he was out of the “mainstream” (boilerplate talking points that you will hear ad nausium up until he is confirmed and then like all the other inanities uttered by the left repeatedly- they will just go away to make room for more DNC issues talking points. I asked Rachael if Ruth Bader Ginsberg was “mainstream” in her view and she replied that she was more mainstream than Alito and could only point to Alito’s Rybar dissent where he cited Lopez to say Congress lacks the authority to regulate intra-state possession of machine guns. It is not an “extreme” position to respect precedent ( a quality I always thought liberals held in high regard- or is it just the extra-Constitutional legal precedent of “right to abortion” found nowhere in the Constitution that they esteem so much?). It’s not “extremism” to side with the Constitution. It’s called Federalism. The Commerce Clause has Constitutionaly enumerated limitations and dose not give the government unlimited authority to regulate private business.
As to Ruth Bader being “mainstream” Edward Whelan of NRO The Corner has a brilliant piece here which demonstrates how out of the “mainstream” Ginsberg is. Nobody who Bush nominates will ever meet this “mainstream” standard set by Ginsberg. And that is why the liberal lefties are apoplectic right now.
If, after all, you have dedicated your career to the ideological fiction that men and women are, except for trivial differences in plumbing, absolutely identical (rather than, say, of equal dignity and wonderfully complementary in nature). . .
If you have such disdain for the Founders that you purge their words of imagined gender bias and entrench your own policy preferences into constitutional law in place of the real Constitution. . .
If you regard the traditions of the American people as benighted. . .
If you pretend that abortion and even the utter barbarity of partial-birth abortion are constitutional rights (see Stenberg v. Carhart) and that the Constitution requires that taxpayers fund them (see Ginsburgâ??s chapter on the 1976 Term of the Supreme Court in a book titled Constitutional Government in America). . .
If you believe that it is bigotry not to elevate homosexual relations to the status of traditional marriage (see Lawrence v. Texas). . .
If you think that the Constitution can plausibly be read to prohibit laws against polygamy and prostitution. . .
If you oppose the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts for perpetuating stereotyped sex roles. . .
If you are so removed from reality that you see co-ed prisons as necessary â??to prepare inmates for return to the community as persons equipped to benefit from and contribute to civil societyâ?Â. . .
If you recommend that the age of consent for purposes of statutory rape should be reduced to twelve. . .
If you believe that it is your job as a justice to supplant the political process and dictate for all Americans which interests are part of some New Age â??right to define oneâ??s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human lifeâ? (see Lawrence v. Texas). . .
And if you wonâ??t abide by the same rules (see 5th paragraph here) that you so eagerly impose on everyday Americans. . .
Then itâ??s hardly surprising that your comparatively modest proposal of abolishing Motherâ??s Day wouldnâ??t be memorable to you.
But it is shameful that Democratic senators and the liberal media have the gall to portray Ginsburg as a â??moderateâ? and as in the â??mainstreamâ? while they attack President Bushâ??s outstanding nominees whose records and values are, by any measure, far more in line with those of the American people.
One of my favorite blogs, Right Wing Sparkle says that Carter is 30 years too late. That is true. But I cannot think of a single thing he has said in those 30 years that make as much sense as this,
Former President Jimmy Carter yesterday condemned all abortions and chastised his party for its intolerance of candidates and nominees who oppose abortion.
Mr. Carter said his party’s congressional leadership only hurts Democrats by making a rigid pro-abortion rights stand the criterion for assessing judicial nominees.
“I have always thought it was not in the mainstream of the American public to be extremely liberal on many issues,” Mr. Carter said. “I think our party’s leaders — some of them — are overemphasizing the abortion issue.”
Sure Jimmy Carter has shed too many tears for terrorists. He’s too cozy with tyrranical dictators and his pretentiousness knows no bounds. But this makes perfect sense to me.
The MSM could learn a lot from this simple post,
The post that used to be here has been moved here. I sent the substance to Slate corrections and heard back from Ms. Lithwick. I’m convinced I misunderstood her point and jumped to a conclusion I shouldn’t have. I’m grateful for the correction.
Rather than simply update the post, I removed it because my assertion in it that Lithwick was “irresponsibly” incorrect isn’t fair. Hit the link if you want to read it: As I’ve said before deleting a post in which you turn out to be wrong is a cardinal sin of blogging, but if you’re wrong in a way unfair to someone else, best to split the difference.
That is why certain blogs attract dedicated readers. Because through their actions and words they can be highly credible, trustworthy and valuable sources of information and analysis.
We talked about this very issue with Jeff Jarvis of Buzz Machine. Why do blogs have a better error correction mechanism than the MSM and what could the dinasours learn from the citizen journalists? Click here to listen to the interview.
UPDATE:Mickey Kaus fillets Nicholas Kristoff of the New York Times editorial page today about his unforthcoming, sorry correction, not in the paper, but found “exclusively” on Times Select. Like his colleague Krugman, corrections don’t come easy from Times columnists. Self-righteousness will do that to a man.
Kristoff wrote the first column in which Joe Wilson’s claims about his trip to Niger were published. Like much of what Joe Wilson said, a few key details were simply not true.
So, over to you Mickey,
Kristof: I might have gotten it right! Jack Shafer finally provokes Nicholas Kristof into confronting the flaws in his initial reporting of Joseph Wilson’s now-famous trip to Niger–reporting that set in motion the whole meshugaas surrounding the outing of Wilson’s wife, CIA agent Valerie Plame. There are two main flaws in Kristof’s initial Wilson columns.
Here Kristof may have hit on the marketing breakthrough that will save TimesSelect. Call it TruthSelect. Here’s the plan: Have the columns in the print edition contain flagrant inaccuracies. Figure out what the accurate version of events is, but print the corrected, accurate versions only on the restricted, premium portion of the Web site, where people have to pay $49.95 to get at them. The B.S. is free. The truth you have to pay for! It’s so simple and intuitive it’s genius.
Read the whole thing. Few writers can cut as sharp and witty as Kaus.
This week we are pleased to announce that Rachael Maddow, talk radio host on Air America and frequent political commentator on MSNBC, will be our guest.
A leading new media voice from the left, Rachael will join us to discuss the nomination of Judge Samuel Alito, the ongoing debate over pre-war intelligence and the impact of the citizen journalist movement on politics today. Should be a great show.
When: Sunday, November 6
Where: Streaming live on Boston’s Talk Station, WRKO
Call Us: Toll free at 877-469-4322
About Pundit Review Radio
Pundit Review Radio is where the old media meets the new. Each week Kevin & Gregg give voice to the work of the most influencial thought leaders in the new media/citizen journalist movement. This unique show brings the best of the blogs to your radio every Sunday evening at 9pm EST on AM680 WRKO, Bostonâ??s Talk Leader.
NEW YORK – Time Warner Inc., the world’s largest media company, reported an 80 percent increase in third-quarter earnings Wednesday and raised its stock repurchase program to $12.5 billion from $5 billion in an effort to meet shareholder demands to lift its slumping stock price.
An 80% increase in profits! Un-American I say, un-American. Windfall profits from media conglomerates! They must be stopped. Have you looked at your cable bill lately, we are being gouged!