Drudge-Wow!

[freeandfun1]

Here's a little flash for you bud - I neither require nor desire any respect from the likes of you. If your only criteria for measuring one's service is as shallow and stupid as you state, then your respect or lack thereof is totally meaningless.

Ditto

 

[Merlin1047]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, Matt Drudge cannot be trusted with the truth. He's nothing but a Republican gossip and propaganda henchman. He also reported that Kerry had an "intern problem." What happened to that one Matty old boy?
acludem

Hey man, where have you been? You need to post more often. I've had to pick on poor AJ just to have some entertainment. See the sorry state you've reduced me to?

 

[acludem]

What independent media outlet rating Drudge as "dead center"? Fox News Channel? The National Review? The Wall Street Journal?

acludem

 

[Democrat4Bush]

Surprise surprise, a study done by UCLA and Stanford.

Media study

 

[Annie]

Surprise surprise, a study done by UCLA and Stanford.

Media study

So Excellent! :teeth:

 

[musicman]

Surprise surprise, a study done by UCLA and Stanford.

Media study

Your avatar is only the coolest thing I've ever seen!

 

[freeandfun1]

You'll never hear again from the "doubters". Every time they are proven wrong on something, they leave the thread never to return to it.

 

[sitarro]

Your avatar is only the coolest thing I've ever seen!

I agree , that avatar is outstanding . That kid looks like he is not only a great judge of character but will have a devastating right hook someday .

 

[Democrat4Bush]

Thanks, that picture says it all.

I wonder how many Bill felt like that?

 

[acludem]

Having done these studies myself, I strongly question the validity of the measuring device used. How can they possibly equate the "slant" of a source based solely upon who is quoted in a story?

acludem

 

[Annie]

Having done these studies myself, I strongly question the validity of the measuring device used. How can they possibly equate the "slant" of a source based solely upon who is quoted in a story?

acludem

Read the methodology, you don't have to agree with it. Having done these studies yourself, how did you ascertain the validity of the measuring device?

 

[Annie]

http://www.thenationaldebate.com/blogger/archive/2004_08_01_TND-ARCHIVE.htm#109208825223358170

BARNES & NOBLE SWIFT BOAT VETS BOOK - HACK OR INSIDE JOB?

Human Events magazine reported today that the BarnedandNoble.com web site was "hacked" - accessed by unathorized persons - and that an image of a bookcover, a book critical of John Kerry, was replaced with a different image. The title of the book "Unfit to Serve" was changed to "Fit to Serve" and the photo on the cover was changed from a recent photo of Kerry gesturing during a speech with a photo of Kerry with his Swift Boat crewmates taken during the Vietnam War.

The National Debate has learned from high-level sources at Akamai, the internet hosting provider for BarnesandNoble.com, that investigators do not believe the bookseller site was "hacked", as originally reported by Human Events magazine, but rather that an unauthorized person gained access to the "customer account portal" using a compromised password.

The National Debate was told "it is most likely that the passwords that controlled B&N account had been compromised...just like if your PIN code was compromised on your ATM card." Asked if this might have been an inside job, TND's source told TND, "it could be...there was no sign of 'breaking and entering."

 

[Annie]

INSTAPUNDIT

August 09, 2004
I'M ON HUGH HEWITT: His website is down, though so you can't listen live over the Internet.

Via the show, I heard a Carl Cameron story on the Kerry/Cambodia issue that ran last hour. It sounded devastating, and the Kerry campaign sounded disorganized and un-credible. They're now saying that Kerry was "near" Cambodia (58 miles away), but can't explain why he repeatedly said he was actually in Cambodia.

UPDATE: Several readers note that the "near Cambodia" completely destroys the point of Kerry's original statement. This is representative:


If the campaign is really saying Kerry was just "near Cambodia", isn't that phenomenally lame?

When Kerry brought up Cambodia, he was always doing it in the context of presidential lying--i.e. "I was in Cambodia, listening to the president say we had no troops in Cambodia".

With this re-write, it becomes "I was *near* Cambodia, listening to the president say we had no troops *in* Cambodia, which, okay, was true as far as I could tell, but if I'd been just, like, sixty miles further west, it would've been a LIE!"

I hope he can do better.


Me too.

posted at 06:46 PM by Glenn Reynolds

 

[Annie]

D'oh, my bad! Lots of embedded links to be found: http://vodkapundit.com/archives/006402.php

What difference does it make if their claims are 'venomous,' if it turns out they're telling the truth? I didn't notice you or your paper discounting Joe Wilson last year, and he was spewing venom aplenty. Heck, you even gave Wilson prime space on your editorial page to attack his critics just last month, while virtually ignoring the oversight reports that found him to be full of partisan hot air.

Given the weight of the Swift Vets' accusations, and the fact that Kerry has based his entire campaign upon those four months in Vietnam, wouldn't they have reason to be upset if their claims are accurate?

We'll never know if Brownstein is on the case. He never bothers to ask the question. Insteand, he goes on to laud John McCain (you know, the same guy who wanted to make it illegal to criticize politicians) for being "willing to set boundaries on the partisan fervor."

Please. McCain doesn't like it when anybody disagrees with him, period, and he's not a bit shy about lashing out harshly when he gets upset (the press only seems to notice--and applaud--this when he lashes out against Republicans). Brownstein and his ilk need to start worrying more over the facts of the Swift Vets' accusations and less over the "partisan fervor" surrounding the race. For gosh sakes--it's a campaign! It's supposed to be partisan!

I'd take the likes of Brownstein a lot more seriously if they'd accord the Swift Vets one tenth of the attention and investigation they spent on Bush's National Guard records early this year. If Kerry's critics are all lying, it shouldn't be that hard to figure out the facts... unless, of course, the media isn't interested in those facts getting out.

 

[Annie]

Unreal, so many links...:

http://vodkapundit.com/archives/006403.php

Simon Says, "I Scoff."
Posted by Will Collier · 9 August 2004
I missed Roger L. Simon and the Blogfaddah on Hugh Hewitt's show today (I would say I have no excuse, since Hugh is now on a decent frequency in Atlanta--but I do have an excuse: I was grilling eggplant and veal cutlets for my wife). Have to catch the replay. In the meantime, Simon says:

Hugh wanted to know if Glenn and I thought the mainstream media (other than Fox) were going to deal with this story thoroughly. We both thought it would take a few days for them to get their fingers out of their ears, but that they had little choice.
After watching the rountable on Brit Hume's show (via my trusty ReplayTV), I'm guessing he's right. Both Mara Liasson and Juan Williams--both NPR reporters and neither members of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy--readily agreed that Kerry needs to explain his Cambodia story, and that Kerry's Vietnam record deserves as much press scrutiny as Bush's National Guard service.

Early spin prediction, based on Williams' commentary: Kerry will assert that he thought he was in Cambodia, but didn't find out that he wasn't until after 1992, when he published a letter to the Boston Globe recounting how being in Cambodia on Chistmas Eve of 1968 was 'seared into his memory.' It's lame, but it might give him an out with the press.

How Kerry explains away blaming Richard Nixon for his being in/near Cambodia nearly a month before Nixon actually took office, I have no idea.

 

[Annie]

INSTAPUNDIT

Roger Simon also on this program, here is his post, mucho links:

http://www.rogerlsimon.com/mt-archives/2004/08/live_from_phnom.php

August 09, 2004: Live from Phnom Penh with Hugh and Glenn

Well, maybe not Phnom Penh. Maybe Orange County. But the Instapundit and I were just on Hugh Hewitt's Show discussing the escalating Cambodiagate Scandal. How deep a hole is Kerry in here? Well, it may depend on what your definition of "near" is. The Kerry Campaign, in apparent disarray when confronted by Carl Cameron of Fox News, insisted that Kerry only said he was "near" Cambodia, despite numerous instances to the contrary, including this record of a Senate speech, in which the geographicaly-challenged Senator stated he was in Cambodia on Christmas of 1968. The Kerry Campaign, unable to deal with their candidates own "statements," told Cameron they would be back later with an update.

It's hard to believe the Kerry Campaign was so clueless not to have a response to an accusation made in a book that has been hovering around number one on Amazon for the last week. [Maybe no one's figured out a good lie yet.--ed. May-bee.]

Hugh wanted to know if Glenn and I thought the mainstream media (other than Fox) were going to deal with this story thoroughly. We both thought it would take a few days for them to get their fingers out of their ears, but that they had little choice. As Glenn pointed out, the mainstream media ignore stories like this at their peril. They may benefit (or think they benefit) in the short run, but in the long run, it is another chink in their "armor of trustworthiness" if they don't cover it.

UPDATE: Another point Glenn mentioned was that Kerry spoke in the Senate about being fired on by the Cambodian Khmer Rouge that Christmas of '68. Reynolds wondered aloud if the Khmer were even in existence then. I wondered quietly, not wanting to get trapped on a history question. Well, according to this article at least, the Khmer Rouge n'existait pas until 1970. Maybe they were firing on Kerry through a time machine.

MORE: Some of Glenn's readers have interesting info on the Khmer Rouge as well. One says they existed in 1968 but weren't active as a fighting force until 1970. A ver, as we say in Spanish.

AND DON'T FORGET: What M. Simon (no relation) said. Ths is up to us. We have the power to make sure this doesn't go away.

 

[Annie]

Here is a roundup of the lies regarding Kerry's service, with links to such sources as the Congressional Record.

NO OIL FOR PACIFISTS

EXCERPT:

Christmas eve, 1968, turned out to be memorable....the crew headed their Swift...only miles from the Cambodian border. Because they were only an hour from that country, Kerry began reading up on Cambodian history.
Brinkley's book says Kerry's boat stopped in the town of Sa Dec, Vietnam that day--which is about 60 miles away, closer to Vietnam's sea coast than to Cambodia. The official campaign website's no help--it includes some Navy records, but both the summary and the "Command History" begin in 1969. And Kerry couldn't have innocently mis-remembered the year--his Vietnam service ended by April 1969.

Kerry clearly lied. Should it matter? Were it only braggadocio, no. Some otherwise reliable vets tell tall tales. But Kerry's foreign policy platform is founded on lessons he learned in Vietnam. For example, Kerry used his mythical memory of Cambodia (quoted above) as evidence against Republican foreign policy:
Kerry attacked President Reagan's actions in Central America, charging they were leading the United States into another Vietnam. He claimed he could recognize the administration's errors because he had firsthand knowledge that the Nixon administration lied about American incursions into Cambodia.

 

[fubar]

The skipper of the boat behind Kerry, on one of his more heroic days, says Kerry hurt himself with his own hand grenade while blowing up a stash of rice. He got a purple heart for that. Just heard it on the news while reading through this thread.....

Seems to me he should have been reprimanded for recklessness, not given a third of the ticket home he was setting a record for.