Here's what really chaps my ass about the journalism "profession." More and more you will see little statements thrown in that purport to tell you what everyone thinks, or flog a story that has been rebutted or is no longer "news," except to the extent kept alive by reporters.
In a recent CBS radio report about the recent announcement that terrorists are in the country and planning nefarious deeds, the reporter said "The announcement is causing many people to rethink their summer travel plans." Then, nothing. Nothing to support the statement. It hadn't even occurred to me to delay my trip to the heartland in July. My mom and dad, who cancelled a trip to their grandson's 1st birthday only 2 months after September 11, were on a plan 2 days after Ashcroft's latest announcement. I don't think the reporter had any agenda in making that assertion, but she was just intellectually lazy.
Here's a story about Iyad Allawi, the choice for provisional Prime Minister of self-governing Iraq. "Journalist" Tom Perry of Reuters (the news service that can't refer the 9/11 attackers as "terrorists") writes:
It was unclear how far U.S. officials or Brahimi influenced the choice of a long-time exile known to few Iraqis and whom people in Baghdad said was an outsider they could not trust.Emphasis added. It takes Tom about another 9 paragraphs, after you've already got it into your head that the U.S., Brahimi or someone just made a stupid choice by picking someone clearly rejected by the Iraqis, that we get a single quote from a "Baghdad hotel manager" to back up each part of his broad statement, that "people in Baghdad" think such and such. Who did Tom want, al-Sadr?
Then there's the U.S. media, who can't get it through their thick heads that John McCain doesn't want to be on the ticket with Kerry. Disregarding the fact that McCain rates an 84 from the American Conservative Union and Kerry scores a 5, while Americans for Democratic Action give McCain a rating of 9 and Kerry a Kennedy-beating 92, the press still thinks that a Kerry/McCain ticket would be a great idea. Why do they keep pushing this? Some would argue that everyone considered for vice president says he is not interested (John Edwards notwithstanding), but McCain goes several leaps further, professing his support for George W. Bush, saying, among other things, "President Bush has shown resolute leadership to protect Americans in the war against terror. The President will continue to be a strong leader for the people of Arizona," and even serving as a chairman of the Bush-Cheney '04 campaign. While saying that Kerry is not "weak" on defense, he did say that Kerry still has to defend his voting record. Kerry argues that we shouldn't have invaded Iraq without U.N. approval, but McCain has said "The president has handled this, in my view, skillfully. And I would point out that those who are criticizing the failure to get the United Nations to act in accordance with our will were the ones who urged the present vote in the United Nations."
Based on McCain's public statements and congressional voting record, it's much more likely he runs on the ticket with George W. Bush than with John F. Kerry. He and Kerry are political opposites. One conservative, one liberal. One resolute and principled, one shifting an evasive.
Despite all that, the medialibs are still stalking McCain like some lovesick Halle Berry fan. CBS even had the lack of journalistic integrity to run a poll with a Kerry/McCain ticket as a choice (they would lead by 12). Is it odd that CBS didn't ask what people would think of a Bush/McCain ticket? I'd love to see those numbers. It didn't even cross the collective minds of CBS, because they think like liberals. How can their guy win, not how can Bush win. [And CBS ignored another part of their poll, showing that veterans prefer Bush by a greater margin than the generally electorate -- that's something I'd have highlighted as an editor.]
They only pursue this McCain on the Democratic ticket fantasy because they need to have their preferred candidate associated with someone that the public, especially the swing voting independents, like. And they downplay McCain's support of Bush for the same reason.
Or maybe the megacorporate owned media really just want McCain to destroy the Democratic party from the inside by handing the party's number 2 most powerful post to a conservative. Maybe that would be good for the country.
One more thing, if Kerry picks McCain and McCain accepts, I'll turn over this blog to DrFrankLives for a day.
