NY Times Public Editor Arther Brisbane gets guffaws with this query:
Should The Times Be a Truth Vigilante?
I’m looking for reader input on whether and when New York Times news reporters should challenge “facts” that are asserted by newsmakers they write about.
Please. I am sure that as long as they limit their fact-checking to Republicans their readership will be in heaven. No one wants or expects the Times to challenge anything out of the mouth of Barack, Nancy, Harry, or any other prominent Democrat.
And that expectation is reinforced by Mr. Brisbane himself - in ruminating about the wisdom of including more fact-checking in their "news", Mr. Brisbane offers Clarence Thomas and Mitt Romney as recent examples. Dems can relax and continue to run their mouths.
NO MERCY FOR THE DEAD HORSE: On my list of things that will never happen I include a Times reassessment of their non-coverage of Obama's evolving story about the Obama-Ayers relationship.
The Times has never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
Posted by: matt | January 12, 2012 at 01:10 PM
Walter Duranty was unavailable for comment
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 12, 2012 at 01:18 PM
Groucho unavailable for comment.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | January 12, 2012 at 01:18 PM
Interesting word choice, "vigilante" - someone who illegitimately performs a government function.
Like determining what the truth is.
Posted by: bgates | January 12, 2012 at 01:35 PM
Interesting that comments are no longer being accepted.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | January 12, 2012 at 01:35 PM
ChaCo,
You're using the wrong post code. Try 10024 and you'll be able to post comments all day.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 12, 2012 at 01:40 PM
Charlie,
People sent you a bunch of love and condolences in another thread if you missed it. I hope you are doing okay.
Posted by: Jane | January 12, 2012 at 01:44 PM
Ha, JiB, it does seem that way. The commenters seem to view "truth vigilante" as a term for "one who attacks Republicans."
Several have pointed out Romney's "lie" about Barry's apologizing ways, because, you know, he hasn't literally said "I apologize."
Posted by: jimmyk | January 12, 2012 at 01:45 PM
Link to an interestng wire story; 2006 Fed meeting transcripts are available. The story has very short exerpts but a link to the entire transcript. I will read tonight. One short exerpt: in 2006 Turbo Timmie sees no housing risk-- figures: http://www.nasdaq.com/article/update-fed-2006-transcripts-bernanke-before-the-housing-debacle-20120112-01036
Posted by: NK | January 12, 2012 at 01:47 PM
--On my list of things that will never happen I include a Times reassessment of their non-coverage of Obama's evolving story about the Obama-Ayers relationship.--
On Planet Time's, making assertions of false facts about Republicans when it counts is exactly equal to ruminating post hoc about not doing any fact checking on Dems.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 12, 2012 at 01:48 PM
Oops. Appears I used a superfluous apostrophe.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 12, 2012 at 01:49 PM
Herbert Matthews was unavailable for comment.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 12, 2012 at 01:52 PM
Completely moot discussion. NYT editors wouldn't know the truth if it bit them on the ass.
Posted by: NK | January 12, 2012 at 01:58 PM
Most lefties I've met would be perfectly comfortable having the Times fact check both sides equally.
They actually believe they deal in reality and those they disagree with don't.
That they are afforded this idiotic conceit precisely because their sources of info never actually do fact check their lefty pals is apparently one of those facts which is incapable of penetrating their skulls.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 12, 2012 at 02:03 PM
Remember Gerald Walpin, the IG who got fired over the Obama Americicorp scandal? WEll they have now cut that IG's office funding by 75% so the investigation can't go forward. Must be some real dirt on Obama there.
Of course the media doesn't care.
Posted by: Jane | January 12, 2012 at 02:04 PM
And as a corollary to my 2:03, I believe it actually places lefties at a disadvantage and conservatives at a comparative advantage in the battle of ideas, that conservative ideas must run a gauntlet of both false and factual criticism to survive while lefty ideas which should have emerged still born live long dysfunctional lives incubated and nurtured in the hothouses of their uncritical, unexamined minds.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 12, 2012 at 02:08 PM
Imagine the number of pages it will take future historians to chronicle the lies, cover-ups, thuggery and outright criminal activity of this administration. A Samuel Eliot Morison would have a difficult time compiling and cross-referencing it all.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 12, 2012 at 02:25 PM
MelR-- the children at ZeroHedge noted today's lousy 30 year auction and Bill Gross's reaction. Time to panic about THE END?
Posted by: NK | January 12, 2012 at 02:30 PM
Wasn't a lousy auction at all, IMO.
Those comment threads are the chatrooms of the Ronulans.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | January 12, 2012 at 02:38 PM
MelR-- it looks like major Fed 30 year Bond buying at that rate; correct?
Posted by: NK | January 12, 2012 at 02:39 PM
What was Haley Barbour thinking?
Posted by: Ignatz | January 12, 2012 at 02:43 PM
Iggy, I'd like to think you're right in your 2:08, but that seems to presume that the truth somehow asserts itself. It may eventually, but not necessarily in our lifetimes, and then only if we survive as a civilization.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 12, 2012 at 02:45 PM
Congrats Iggy; you found a Poppin' Fresh post without an "in fairness" clause. I posed your question earlier in the week. I think he has the right to do it but I think it was highly ill-advised. I understand developing an appreciation for the content of somebody's character through interactions but this is dumping on the verdict of juries for horrendous crimes, none of which seem to be in question. I don't know why one of his advisers didn't give him a WTF head's up on this.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 12, 2012 at 02:53 PM
That Warren Buffet guy is pretty clever.
He whines that he needs to be taxed more and after Mitch McConnell says if he's so worried about it he can contribute more anytime he wants, Warren brilliantly counters that he'll match any amount Republican lawmakers contribute.
Since the Republicans are saying we don't need more taxes while he is, Buffet's response is not only idiotic it's a non sequitor.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 12, 2012 at 02:55 PM
--Iggy, I'd like to think you're right in your 2:08, but that seems to presume that the truth somehow asserts itself.--
Jimmy,
I don't know when or if the truth asserts itself, but my point was that conservative arguments become inherently stronger through the rigorous gauntlets they run. And conversely lefty ones are inherently weak because they don't.
That doesn't mean conservative ones will win and lefty ones won't but IMO, there is considerable implicit importance and satisfaction in holding strong and tested positions rather than mindless, worthless ones regardless of whether others hold them or they triumph.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 12, 2012 at 03:01 PM
Warren again proves that making large amounts of money is not necessarily a sign of intelligence or being a good person. No wonder he stiffs his secretary.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 12, 2012 at 03:02 PM
OT - Major snowfall in Alaska. Where is daddy? Will mama stay home with the girls? This from Drudge:
"Anchorage schools were open Thursday, but some school bus routes were canceled because of whiteout driving conditions. It mainly affects students living south of Anchorage and buses that must use the Seward Highway."
Posted by: Frau Schneeschaufel | January 12, 2012 at 03:04 PM
NK-
Perturbation of Operation Twist.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | January 12, 2012 at 03:05 PM
--I understand developing an appreciation for the content of somebody's character through interactions but this is dumping on the verdict of juries for horrendous crimes, none of which seem to be in question.--
No kidding, CH. Our pastor has developed a fairly close relationship with Tex Watson who is imprisoned near here and who apparently had a real conversion to Christ over 35 years ago, but I doubt he'd pardon him.
Is there some evidence the first degree murderers still in prison had done something to warrant a pardon besides acting like nice guys when it suited their purposes?
Posted by: Ignatz | January 12, 2012 at 03:05 PM
Buffet's ordinary income is taxed at the highest marginal rate. His capital gains income represents appreciation of assets he originally acquired with income that had already been taxed at ordinary income rates.
How hard is that to grasp? How hard is it for some Republican--any Republican--to point this out and shut that old fool up?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 12, 2012 at 03:07 PM
--OT - Major snowfall in Alaska.--
Wish he'd send some this way.
So far this is the driest year I've ever seen in CA including our two terrible drought years of 1975-76.
I can see the mountains right in front of Tahoe which are at nearly 10,000 feet. Not a speck of snow visible on them. Our Yosemite property at 5,000' which ought to be inaccessible with 2 or 3 feet of snow is so dry I can drive right to it and a plume of dust follows me on all the dirt roads.
Pitiful.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 12, 2012 at 03:11 PM
--How hard is it for some Republican--any Republican--to point this out and shut that old fool up?--
Buffet promised to triple whatever McConnell donated.
By my reckoning ol Warren is about 5,000 times as wealthy as Mitch, so Mitch ought to see if Warren is willing to plunk down 10 or 15,000 times what McConnell does. After all Warren believes in progressive taxation right?
McConnell could probably plunk down a half million without too much sweat. Think Warren would ante up $7.5 billion with a smile? Me neither.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 12, 2012 at 03:21 PM
If it wasn't for out of control leftists, there wouldn't be near as much insanity.
"In other words, Obama is sending the Coast Guard to protect ships from his supporters."
http://weaselzippers.us/2012/01/12/report-obama-regime-sends-coast-guard-to-protect-ships-from-violent-union-goons-occupiers/
Posted by: pagar | January 12, 2012 at 03:38 PM
Obama the Sap? we'll find out if McConnell's August calculation works or fails. 'Bam has formally requested another $1.2 T debt authority. House/Senate have 15 days (January 27th) to pass a joint resolution rejecting. The House will do so, unless there are significant spending cuts. Dirty Harry Reid will tie up the Senate so the Senate doesn't vote, and the $1.2 T debt will be issued ALL because of 'Bam. Will that help or hurt 'Bam in the election? we'll find out.
Posted by: NK | January 12, 2012 at 03:53 PM
"How hard is that to grasp?" Apparently a vast swath of the Repulican party doesn't understand taxes or the free market.
Posted by: MarkO | January 12, 2012 at 03:53 PM
BTW-- where is the MSM, Sully, Glenn Greenwald, and Project Pink (or whatever) shrieking that 'Bam and Panetta and Biden are all personally responsible for the jarheads pissin' on the AQ corpses.
Posted by: NK | January 12, 2012 at 03:56 PM
NK,
I wondered that last night. I also wondered what the hell were they thinking? If you are going to do something dumbass like that, don't record it.
Posted by: Sue | January 12, 2012 at 04:06 PM
For the record, I say "piss away".
Doesn't bother me in the slightest.
Posted by: Jim,MtnViewCA,USA | January 12, 2012 at 04:07 PM
I am green with envy. I would like to add to my bucket list, pissing on AQ ( dead or alive machs nix ).
Posted by: GMAX | January 12, 2012 at 04:08 PM
Apparently a vast swath of the Repulican party doesn't understand taxes or the free market.
Jay Cost explained last week that almost half of Republican primary voters are uninformed. Extrapolate that to all voters, and then to all adults, and the fraction would surely dwindle quite a bit.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 12, 2012 at 04:14 PM
Maybe with some bacon wrapping or lard slathering as well?
Posted by: jimmyk | January 12, 2012 at 04:15 PM
Sue-- I have nothing but the greatest respect for the Corps and its people. But the grunts are 19-22 yos, the 2nd lieus 22-24 yo, the sarges mid to late 20s-- they are all kids, and kids today video everything. They -- allegedly-- desecreated bodies of Taliban who snipe at them and plant IEDs that kill indiscriminately. The grunts broke discipline and showed the dark ugly face of war. This pales compared to what the Greatest Generation did to dead Japanese troops in the Pacific, but it is wrong and if true they'll be rightly punished. My question stands, where are the peace protests demanding the ouster or war criminals Obama, Biden and Panetta?
Posted by: NK | January 12, 2012 at 04:15 PM
Someone could also point out the that Warren has contrived to make his taxable income a tiny fraction of his wealth, while most of us don't have that privilege (other than by actually reducing our true income). What a hypocrite.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 12, 2012 at 04:17 PM
For the record, I say "piss away".
Doesn't bother me in the slightest.
Me either.
Was it you who said Patton did the same thing?
Posted by: Sara | January 12, 2012 at 04:31 PM
NK,
I think they should be disciplined within the Corps, administratively. Stern letters in their files, whatever. Otherwise, I'm not too concerned over what they did. Just annoyed, like you, that the press is not blaming Obama and his administration.
Posted by: Sue | January 12, 2012 at 04:32 PM
"almost half of Republican primary voters are uninformed."
That's why the really nice people at the NYT are going to put so much effort into fact checking over the next eleven months. They want to use all their experience and knowledge to help uninformed people make the right decision.
Isn't that neat of them?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 12, 2012 at 04:33 PM
When a Republican is in the WH and someone in the military does something wrong, the Republican in the WH is blamed.
When a Democrat is in the WH and someone in the military does something wrong, the last Republican in the WH is blamed.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 12, 2012 at 04:39 PM
Sue-- I wouldn't be so glib. Violating the rules or war is a big deal. The discipline on this matter will be handled pretty far up the chain of command; much further than usual because of the publicity.
Posted by: NK | January 12, 2012 at 04:45 PM
PS: there will be court martials, right or wrong; this won't be handled with a field NJP run by some major.
Posted by: NK | January 12, 2012 at 04:48 PM
NK is right; the brass will not be happy about this coming out and there'll be more hell to be paid than you would think it merits.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 12, 2012 at 04:50 PM
CaptH-- unfortunately all true; and if the rear eschelon pukes get involved, they'll have these grunts up for wrongfully killing the AQ bastards.
Posted by: NK | January 12, 2012 at 04:52 PM
Perhaps President Obama could invite the Taliban leadership to the White House for a beer summit? He could make a full apology, complete with bow, and then offer to share some pulled pork sandwiches as a gesture of respect. Maybe giv'em a two week Predator break to sweeten the pot.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 12, 2012 at 04:54 PM
It's true that these guys can and should be punished, since rules are rules. I think the "ok with me" comments are just questioning how seriously they should be punished.
It would be nice if the rules were motivated primarily, if not exclusively, by strategic considerations and not so much out of sensitivity to the feelings of AQ and their ilk. Yes, there's the argument that this could inflame them into retribution, or recruit more into their ranks, but I'm skeptical that's much of an effect on net.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 12, 2012 at 04:57 PM
RickB-- given the Obamaniacs' moronic lack of protocol they probably would invite the Taliban for a BEER summit;
JimmyK- IF TRUE, the grunts aren't being disciplined for 'strategic considerations' they should be disciplined for self-indulgently breaking discipline and violating well known rules by desecrating enemy dead.
Posted by: NK | January 12, 2012 at 05:03 PM
Giuliani calls Newt Dumb and I agree!
Posted by: Rocco | January 12, 2012 at 05:03 PM
I have been waiting for Jimmy Carter to die so I can do the same as those grunts. But then, I think there's a long line of us.
Posted by: matt | January 12, 2012 at 05:06 PM
NK, that's what I meant by "rules are rules." But presumably the rules are there for a reason.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 12, 2012 at 05:12 PM
Where has Clarice been, lately? Prolly playing with her new cooking toy.
Anyway, saw this at Weasel Zippers (taken from the NY Post):
Still curious to find out if there is a shot of AF1 in the movie!
Posted by: centralcal | January 12, 2012 at 05:14 PM
--This pales compared to what the Greatest Generation did to dead Japanese troops in the Pacific, but it is wrong and if true they'll be rightly punished.--
If peeing on a dead guy rates a court martial these days then my uncle and the rest of his Marine pals who swept from HI to Okinawa would have been hanged by the neck until dead for what they did to not only dead Japanese but live ones.
How did they ever win with such rank ill discipline?
Posted by: Ignatz | January 12, 2012 at 05:14 PM
The ads for that Red Tails flick look pretty bad.
The effects I saw were like some lame animation from some Military Channel dog fight reject from ten years ago.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 12, 2012 at 05:17 PM
Too bad the progs don't show the same solicitude for babies about to be subject to partial birth abortion that they show for dead Taliban.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 12, 2012 at 05:18 PM
I took Jimmy Carter in the dead pool (among others). Is he close?
Posted by: Jane | January 12, 2012 at 05:22 PM
Steve Rattner, Barry's car czar defending Romney and Bain at CNBC.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 12, 2012 at 05:22 PM
cc, right you are, but I've been checking in and around. I doubt that shot will make it in the film even if my suspicion about the overflight of NYC is correct.. C
Posted by: Clarice | January 12, 2012 at 05:23 PM
Ig-- the pacific 1942-1945 was a different world; your uncle and his pals were fine with the chain of command seeing as a 4 star Admiral (ultimately) told his sailors and marines "Before we're through with them the only place Japanese will be spoken is in Hell" and his standing orders were: "Kill Japs, Kill Japs, Kill more Japs." Taking gold teeth and scalps was easy when that's what you heard from the commanding Admiral -- William F. (Bull) Halsey, Jr.
Posted by: NK | January 12, 2012 at 05:25 PM
Clarice-- AF1-Red Tails; dang the cowards won't put in the movie. Course no doubt it WILL BE in the private screening for 'Bam. I detest that self-adoring SOB.
Posted by: NK | January 12, 2012 at 05:28 PM
Are we a more effective fighting force because we dot the I's and cross the T's now?
Maybe, but then again maybe not.
Perhaps the scorched thrashing Germany and Japan got, and our more recent enemies have been spared, is part of the reason Iraq and Afghanistan have been such a prolonged problem in comparison and have such an excellent chance of returning to belligerency as soon as we leave.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 12, 2012 at 05:30 PM
Don't forget that BOzo is trying to make a bug out pay off with the Taliban to keep them from grabbing the reins from the current kleptocracy as soon as our last plane goes wheels up. He's trying to get them to hold off until after the election and this is going to raise their price.
They'd be as likely to keep the agreement as the Ali Babas in Libya are to lay down their arms in the civil war in Libya going on as a result of Obama's magnificent R2P efforts but that won't stop BOzo.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 12, 2012 at 05:32 PM
Let's stop micromanaging this war, please. Our soldiers are enduring long deployments under difficult circumstances in some Godforsaken areas of Afghanistan with Taliban attacking them day after day. They see their comrades killed by IEDs (cause the Taliban can't shoot for sh*t) and they have to put on a brave face and carry on. If some get carried away and piss on the dead body of an AQ, so be it. Let the sergeant deal with it.
Posted by: Barbara | January 12, 2012 at 05:36 PM
The ads for that Red Tails flick look pretty bad.
The effects I saw were like some lame animation from some Military Channel dog fight reject from ten years ago.
I've never understood the fascination with Lucas, whose storylines are about as innovative as Vince McMahon's. In this case I assume he's taking genuine heroes and going so far over the top with them that anybody that knows the history will have to be taken to an opthamologist to have their eyeballs restored to their proper positions after excessive rolling.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 12, 2012 at 05:36 PM
"I have been waiting for Jimmy Carter to die so I can do the same as those grunts. But then, I think there's a long line of us."
I would add John Kerry, George Soros, and hopefully someone will erect a tombstone for the NYTimes. And maybe a beer garden in the middle of it all.
Posted by: Bill in AZ sez it's time for Obama/Holder murder trial in Mexico | January 12, 2012 at 05:37 PM
OT, I skimmed through the novelization for 'Act of Valor' that movie about the Seals
that Danube mentioned last night, sort of an antidote to the sentimental notion of the enemy, that earlier story suggests,
Posted by: narciso | January 12, 2012 at 05:49 PM
PBS documentary looks at Bill Clinton's career
In my heyday I played lead guitar in rock bands and was a student government president (you might be as amazed as I was that there are student government groupies), so I think I'm qualified to ask: WTF were these women thinking? Bill Clinton???I said the same thing about voters, so I obviously have a serious blind-spot. I just don't get it, and I guess I never will. Put me down with Stephen Hawkings.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 12, 2012 at 05:58 PM
Barbara - personally a NJP from the units senior officer imposing loss of priviliges is probably a just punishment in order to keep discipline, but at the same time let the other marines know they are still combat troops that have to kill. It won't happen that way now.
Posted by: NK | January 12, 2012 at 06:01 PM
Ex-- don't know about the women but banker friends of mine (Gulfstream liberals) who paid big bucks to the '96 campaign and the to the Library/Foundation after 2000 for private dinner meetings all said they were mesmerized by his charm and genius. Who knows-- Queer as folk as the Brits say.
Posted by: NK | January 12, 2012 at 06:06 PM
I don't know if those who can see the avatars can also see that Bill Clinton pic I posted, but is it common for people to have their teeth filed? Maybe that's the missing piece of information I need before I can understand this dirtbag's appeal.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 12, 2012 at 06:14 PM
Delingpole's book Watermelons just came so I will post a review this weekend.
If anyone else gets the post-holiday crud that is floating around, do not wait until you cannot speak to go to the doctor. Being confined to a chair is conducive to researching or blogging but not to writing or undecorating the house. May have to turn the Carollers into a Valentines tradition at this rate.
Posted by: rse | January 12, 2012 at 06:20 PM
I believe that teeth filing is an adjunct procedure performed after dehorning and the tail clip.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 12, 2012 at 06:22 PM
--WTF were these women thinking? Bill Clinton???--
Considering the numerous nutty women who sincerely want to marry imprisoned rapists it doesn't seem that odd there'd be plenty who would go for one who avoided prison.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 12, 2012 at 06:28 PM
From a Drudge link, Obama in Iraq being a pr*ck:
Posted by: centralcal | January 12, 2012 at 06:29 PM
The villains, are particularly savage and amoral, in this tale, one wonders how much of it will translate to the big screen, for their
way of dealing with plain clothed combatants, is nothing like Gitmo,
Posted by: narciso | January 12, 2012 at 06:32 PM
That's not un-Obamalike; that's him to a T and when he's tired he lets his guard down. What's really surprising is that's a State Dept reaction; the guy must be a noob.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 12, 2012 at 06:34 PM
This isn't a terribly surprising revelation, despite it coming from Hastings, who often speaks with hydra headed tongue, this is what
often comes across to us, but the aura is certainly off the 'Lightbringer'
Posted by: narciso | January 12, 2012 at 06:38 PM
Considering the numerous nutty women who sincerely want to marry imprisoned rapists
My roommate in college (a Muslim, btw) raped the woman who became his wife, so I've tried to accept some level of understanding on that point, but ... Bill Clinton?
Anyway, I don't want to derail the discussion, but Bill Clinton? Bill Clinton???
I'll never get that.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 12, 2012 at 06:45 PM
we all know he's deeply uncomfortable with the military and I am sure his personal feelings as a Chicago community organizer/political activist would have shown through quickly.
There have been numerous incidents of less than rapturous receptions in military settings.
He would like to take credit for things like the Bin Laden hit, but even there, he is uncomfortable with the necessity to take some lives.
This of course conflicts fundamentally with his authoritarian streak and desire to be followed unquestioned.Everything and everyone around him is a prop in the narrative.
He is deeply unpopular mainly for his policies, but I am not sure he can personally withstand the way the cracks in the facade are beginning to show.
His wife gets even snarkier press after she plays the role poorly while the drip, drip, drip of behind the scenes stories turns into a steady stream.
The multimillionaire machine made man and child of privilege is now trying to fan the fires of class warfare as his last hope and is alienating the same people who put him in office.
This almost calls for some Randy Newman....
Posted by: matt | January 12, 2012 at 06:47 PM
Very different than W's Thanksgiving surprise for the troops in Baghdad at a time flying into that airport was extremely dangerous. That is what won my heart and what I will always remember when I think of GWB.
Posted by: Sara | January 12, 2012 at 06:55 PM
"he is uncomfortable with the necessity to take some lives."
hundreds, eventually thousands, of Mexicans hasn't bothered him a bit.
Posted by: Bill in AZ sez it's time for Obama/Holder murder trial in Mexico | January 12, 2012 at 06:58 PM
This almost calls for some Randy Newman....
Did a saw off runt just walk into JOM?
"Short people got no reason to live..."
That Randy Newman? LOL
Posted by: Gmax | January 12, 2012 at 07:20 PM
Sara, you could tell how effective GWB's Thanksgiving surprise was to the troops because of all the caterwauling by the left to try to cast any negative implications on it. But but but it was a plastic turkey; it was all staged with a hand picked group that didn't hate Chimpy McHitlerburton. It flew in the face of their concept of soldiers like Lurch who hated the CiC and the country.
It must've ruined their whole
Christmaswinter holiday season.Posted by: Captain Hate | January 12, 2012 at 07:42 PM
Not only that, Captain, you could always see the genuine affection and admiration expressed between the troops and W - in both directions. Always heartwarming and inspiring to witness.
Posted by: centralcal | January 12, 2012 at 07:55 PM
There are a number of you tube videos contrasting troop reaction to W's speeches with reactions to El Jefe. Guess which group curbs their enthusiasm?
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vnjagvet | January 12, 2012 at 08:07 PM
Months after that event, we found out that our across-the-street neighbor was there for that visit and had several pictures to prove it.
Posted by: Sara | January 12, 2012 at 08:12 PM
Bill in AZ-
What's your schedule in March?
Travelers would like to know.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | January 12, 2012 at 08:28 PM
EX-
People with extremely chipped teeth get them filed, BTW, of which I would intimately know.
Marathon Man had a reason for me to squirm.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | January 12, 2012 at 08:30 PM
After the talk, out of earshot from the soldiers and diplomats, he starts to complain. He starts to act very un-Obamalike, according to a U.S. embassy official who helped organize the trip in Baghdad.
Wasn't there a photo op with the troops in Iraq early on in his admin where we all noticed how peeved and uninterested he looked? A commander was showing him something in the field and he couldn't have looked more annoyed and bored. I wouldn't be surprised at all if it was the same trip.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 12, 2012 at 08:46 PM
I loved the obvious concern and affection Bush had for the troops and as long as I live I will detest those who did everything in their power to denigrate him and deny him credit for the good things he did and the outstanding character he showed in office.
Posted by: Clarice | January 12, 2012 at 09:45 PM
Amen, Clarice!
You know, whenever I think of Bush and the horrible toll of war, I am reminded of these lines from Morte d'Arthur (perhaps remembered in fragments): "Comfort thyself, what comfort is in me? I have lived my life, and that which I have done, may he within himself make pure. But thou, if thou shouldst never see my face again, pray for my soul. More things are wrought by prayer than this world dreams of."
Posted by: centralcal | January 12, 2012 at 10:00 PM
When American troops crossed the Rhine, Patton took a leak in the middle of the river. He had told his staff that he was going to do that, and so there were pictures taken of the event.
Crude, but not the same as using dead bodies for targets.
(Although the amount of attention this is getting is absurd, and the double standards infuriating. Can you imagine the same attention given to the latest Taliban atrocity against Americans?)
Posted by: Jim Miller | January 12, 2012 at 10:09 PM
Re: Obama and US Troops:
From a new book:
"The book describes a visit to Baghdad:
"After the talk, out of earshot from the soldiers and diplomats, he starts to complain. He starts to act very un-Obamalike, according to a U.S. embassy official
who helped organize the trip in Baghdad.
He’s asked to go out to take a few more pictures with soldiers and embassy staffers. He’s asked to sign copies of his book. “He didn’t want to take pictures with any more soldiers; he was complaining about it,” a State Department official tells me. “Look, I was excited to meet him. I wanted to like him. Let’s just say the scales fell from my eyes after I did. These are people over here who’ve been fighting the war, or working every day for the war effort, and he didn’t want to take fucking pictures with them?"
Posted by: daddy | January 12, 2012 at 10:35 PM
Amen, Amen, Clarice.
Obama is simply vaporizing the bad guys without a shred of due process and there is deafening silence. No transfers to Gitmo, no intelligence gathering cause they are all dead.
Yet, water-boarding created a massive backlash of outrage.
Now, it is peeing on a bad guy. What is the difference between peeing on a terrorist or throwing one over a ship out to sea....salt water?
If they are allowed to try and kill you first before you shoot back, the only fair thing to do is to let our soldiers pee first..doncha think?
Posted by: Ann | January 12, 2012 at 11:30 PM