February 17, 2005

Hear Ye, Fast Zombies

Posted by Jeremy Brown

I am a Gullible Ass

To put it another way: I am still a daily reader of the New York Times. I tell myself I’ve learned to separate the wheat from the chaff and the chaff from the manure. But a few days ago I let one piece of manure slip by me.

The offending kaka missile emerged from that recent NYT piece on how we pajama-clad bloggers are tearing across the country – at high-speed, just like those fast zombies in Zack Snyder’s Dawn of the Dead – forsaking our sheltered nests out in places like Kansas and Iowa to invade the streets of New York City and rip out the hearts of our betters, namely people like Dan Rather and Eason Jordan.

Yes, well that sort of view is basically fine. It’s fairly funny, really. But the article quotes Jeff Jarvis in a very misleading way:

But while the bloggers are feeling empowered, some in their ranks are openly questioning where they are headed. One was Jeff Jarvis, the head of the Internet arm of Advance Publications, who publishes a blog at buzzmachine.com. Mr. Jarvis said bloggers should keep their real target in mind. "I wish our goal were not taking off heads but digging up truth," he cautioned.

To which Jeff responds on his blog:

And, of course, that makes it look as if I'm wringing my hands over the morals of my fellow bloggers when, in fact, I'm worried about precisely what The Times is doing here: using this episode to call us a lynch mob. Here's what I said after that line:

We don't want to be positioned as the news lynch mob -- which is where a radio interview yesterday tried to go -- but as the press of the people. Of course, big media can be a lynch mob, too. But that doesn't mean it's an example we should follow.

What a handy 'snip.'

My initial reaction after reading the Times article on Monday was to reaffirm my solidarity with the opinions of one Jeff Jarvis as against those of the Jeff Jarvis with whom I bitterly disagreed in the NYT article. But, it seems, the latter Jeff Jarvis was an invention of the NYT reporters. Anyway, I feel I owe the real JJ an apology for thinking that straw effigy was him. Sorry about that.

My take on the Eason Jordan affair is that it’s a simple matter of accountability. And in this regard we the blogs are just a kind of community coalition taking media accountability into our own hands, the same way traditional community groups have taken it upon themselves to police the police or to put a small flame to the buttocks of their political representatives, etc. We the citizens are the boss of the police, of the courts, of the government and, ultimately, of the press. We literally own the broadcast spectrum, for one thing, so why wouldn’t we feel free to make a noise when a high ranking executive of a TV news network makes a serious charge without evidence, one that his network has not reported. All we wanted was to know what the hell had happened, what the man really meant. I don’t recall many bloggers calling for Jordan’s head on a pike. But so what if some had?

It wasn’t bloggers, or readers who fired Eason Jordan. CNN fired Eason Jordan (or accepted his resignation, as the case may be). Why? We don’t know, do we, since they won’t tell us. CNN seems quite happy to hide behind the cover of this bloggers-as-lynch-mob idea. Do we really have the power to defenestrate journalists we happen not to care for? I almost wouldn’t mind if we did. Bang! There goes Dowd, pumping gas. Pow! There’s Krugman scooping ice cream. Kablamachunk! Chomsky’s long-windedly explaining the Tilt-a-Whirl’s height requirement to a dazed Belgian child at Euro Disney.

But alas, bloggers don’t actually have that kind of juice.

Brent Bozell (hat tip: Captain’s Quarters) sums this up well:

Amazingly, most of the major "news" media avoided this news -- especially CNN. So when Jordan resigned, it made the blogs seem so powerful that liberals started attacking them for recklessly destroying Jordan's career, even using goofy terms like "cyber-McCarthyism" to denounce it. But what the bloggers did here was deliver information and accountability, the same things the major media purport to be providing -- unless it's one of their own in the hot seat.

An interesting footnote, via Jeff Jarvis, is this change in the headline of the NYT article cited above. It was, when I read it, “Bloggers as News Media Trophy Hunters” but it was subsequently changed to, “Resignation at CNN Shows the Growing Influence of Blogs.”

Posted by Jeremy Brown at February 17, 2005 10:10 PM
Comments

Let the Witchhunts continue!
Really -- each trophy is a previously powerful person who should have been, but wasn't, held accountable by the MSM.

You mentioned a few -- but I hope the bosses of the trophies are in the sights: Moonves at CBS; J. Klein (?) at CNN.

Wait until LaShawn, or somebody, starts boycotting advertisers of CNN/ CBS until the Leftist news includes some pro-life, pro-America, pro-Tax Cut voices.

And I've wanted Jordan to be fired since April, 2003, when he admitted to broadcasting only Saddam approved "news" from Iraq. These top power people almost all have histories; bloggers watch and google the records.

If MSM is trying to keep politicians honest; bloggers are doing that to MSM. Much more effective on the right against MSM, because Leftist MSM is already a lynch mob of critics against anybody on the right (like Arnold's "groping" of women before he was elected). So Left bloggers mostly copy what the "famous" Lefties say -- Dowd & Krugman can be looked at as NYT bloggers made famous. (But why would I bother?)

Posted by: Tom Grey at February 18, 2005 01:03 AM

Zippy fast zombies? Lynch mobs and stampedes? The best metaphor I have for blog behaviour is that of an immune response to an attack, in this case the presentation of a lie by the media.

Posted by: angry_in_t_o at February 18, 2005 04:35 AM

I am a Gullible Ass.---JB

I always find it sad when someone is forced to deplore himself due to the malignant influence of the NYTs.
In regard to continued support of the Times(via actually buying the accursed thing),a more appropriate phrase might be -- ' If you are not part of the solution;you are part of the problem'.It is more a matter of just kicking the monkey than it is a matter of intellectual deficit,when it comes to reading the Times.
Just say NO !!

Posted by: dougf at February 18, 2005 05:14 AM

Way to check yourself Jeremy, intellectual honesty is the only way to go.

Posted by: Mike T. at February 18, 2005 07:11 AM

Kablamachunk? What the hell kind of weapan sounds like that?

Posted by: at February 18, 2005 07:55 AM

Disclosure: I changed 'airwaves' to 'broadcast spectrum.' Is that so wrong? If the Times can change its headline, then I can correct my copy. It ocurred to me, and correct me if I'm wrong, that 'airwaves' is one of those words, like, 'irregardless' that doesn't really exist and makes people embarrassed for you when you use it. There's radio waves. There's airways, I guess, but airplanes use that too (or is that 'aeorplanes?')

Am I wrong about this?

Posted by: Jeremy Brown at February 18, 2005 07:59 AM

I've been waiting like fifteen years to use the word 'Kablamachunk' in a piece of published or semi-published writing. It was spotted as a sound effect in an actual comic book by an acquaintance of mine. It has a permanent spot on my shelf of trophy words. Last night I took it down, smelled the cork, and poured a small glass of it out for my esteemed friends here at Michaeltotten.com.

But if I were to tell you what actual weapon makes that sound, I would have to kill you.

Posted by: Jeremy Brown at February 18, 2005 08:04 AM

What a handy 'snip.'

how cynical of you. Trust the MSM. They may be a little bit biased, just like everybody, but they aren't intellectually dishonest.

Are they???

Posted by: Carlos at February 18, 2005 08:06 AM

But if I were to tell you what actual weapon makes that sound, I would have to kill you.--JB

Would we get to actually 'use'the weapon before you had to 'do what you had to do'?A weapon like that could possibly make you 'world-leader' overnight.

Posted by: dougf at February 18, 2005 08:35 AM

O powerful bloggers, when you fire the kablamachunk weapon, can you have Maureen Dowd scooping ice cream instead of pumping gas? that fits better with MoDo fantasy...

Posted by: Joe at February 18, 2005 08:35 AM

Wow, you approvingly quoted both Jeff Jarvis and Brent Bozell in the same post. That's gotta be a first.

Posted by: Stephen Silver at February 18, 2005 09:41 AM

I rather think that's because both Jarvis and Bozell want pretty much the same thing here--that is, some transparency (which will of course, lead to accountablility) from Jordan and CNN and the rest of the MSM in general.

I like the metaphor of an immune response. Heh.

Posted by: Eric Blair at February 18, 2005 11:06 AM

C'mon everyone, grab your pitchforks and torches, join us in the town square, and lets all shout together "Rabble, Rabble, Rablle!!!".

Posted by: Mike T. at February 18, 2005 11:16 AM

angry in t o -

Immune response, indeed. Right at the top of the "Where's Eason?" thread I made a similar response.

Busllshit doesn't fly anymore, despite the best efforts of some organizations to clothe it in the most impressive wings imaginable.

Even Howard Kurts pasted some feathers. Go figger.

OT:

Closest I've ever heard "kablamchunk" was any really slick 105mm howitzer crew - but the noise there was definitively "BOOMchunkchunkBOOM". Lanyard pull/breech opens at end of recoil, spitting out the empty base cannister, new round and cannister goes in as the tube travels back into battery, breech slams shut just as the next pull of the lanyard begins.

Definitely music of the night.

On the other hand - a dirty or slow semi-auto 12 comes to mind...

Not the same at all.

Posted by: TmjUtah at February 18, 2005 12:24 PM

Jeremy - Your post - beginning at "My take on the Eason Jordan affair" all the way up until "Bang" ( we don't really want to celebrate the DC sniper now do we?)- succinctly sums up for me the only way a fair and impartial person could really view this whole affair.

I do notice though in the tone of your words a slight sense of guilt or something, like - could we possibly be as mean and heartless as they make us out to be? Are we, god forbid, an "angry mob?"

(examples: "so why wouldn't we feel free...", "all we wanted...", "Do we really have the power....?")

There's a kind of rueful tone there as if you aren't sure. I wonder if that's the feeling that MSM journalists have after taking down some political figure in a sex scandal? Or do they gather at a local restaurant and pop a bottle of champagne and toast themselves?

I hope not (although I suspect they do) because there's nothing to celebrate in the demise of someone's career (unless the someone is really evil).

But there's nothing to be ashamed of in asking difficult questions of people who have alot of power. And Eason Jordan has alot of power. If they won't release the tape then he could at least release just a portion of the transcript containing his comments. The bloggers are demanding no less of him than he has demanded of many others over the years. If he can't stand the heat then he should get out of the kitchen. That's all there is to it as far as I'm concerned. It ain't personal.

Posted by: Caroline at February 18, 2005 12:57 PM

TmjUtah,

Goddamn I envy you. What I wouldn't give to fire heavy weaponry at stuff. The biggest I've gotten is a .44 Mag Taurus revolver and a .338 Win Mag. Uzi's and Kalashnikov's are fun, but still none of 'em quite do it for me. Oh well, I suppose my PS2 is gonna have to do for now. That is at least until I purchase my first .50 cal BMG sniper rifle or a Javelin missile launcher... : )

Oh, and if you think I'm crazy, my redneck uncles started burying the shit on their 5 acre central Fla. swampland plots when the Assault Weapon Ban went into effect in the '90's. Sadly for a few years there we were relegated to conventional firearms and potato launchers.

Posted by: Mike T. at February 18, 2005 01:03 PM

It ain't personal--Caroline

Exactly.

W-e-l-l ------------ Sometimes it might be a teensy-weensy bit personal as well,but that is merely like having desert if you have already decided to dine out.And there is no law against enjoying what you do so long as you are doing the 'objectively'right thing.Would that not be just a 'fringe-benefit'?

Posted by: dougf at February 18, 2005 01:08 PM

Now if we could just see one blogsphere equally outing idiot CNN producers, Rightwing Porn Producer/White House Press people, and the whole host across the board.

The blogsphere has the potential to change the face of news and reporting as we know it. However, there is always the very real risk that the corruption and parsitan hackery will manifest here, just as it did in the press. It will be a challenge and one not easily met.

It's a simple matter now, most political blogs seem to fall along "Pro-War" vs. "Anti-War". If I want to find a blog entry thats critical of the President for, well anything, I don't go to Roger Simon's blog, I won't go to LGF, because I know that they will only report on stuff that is supportive of the war/president or negative of the democrats. MJT has, so far, done a pretty decent job of maintaining a somewhat even keel (though he is extremely fixated on War stories, to the near abandonment of other topics). The War is one story, one single story among a host of other issues, yet it makes up the vast majority of blog posts. I wonder if the blogsphere will survive once the shooting is done?

If the Blogsphere is to come into its own, it will do so in one of three ways.

1. It will become a partisan hack factory, with news that's as trustworthy as CNN or FOX.

2. It will become truly independent and will police its own ranks to call out partisan crap from BOTH SIDES, acting like a Media Watchdog (including bloggers) and a Political Watchdog.

3. It will become the cool, hot thing for 2005 and by 2008 there will be about 5 left, mostly run by weirdos.

I'm hoping for option 2. Though after watching other similar technologies hit the market, number 3 isn't terribly unlikely. Number 1, is, in my opinion, the worst, yet most likely outcome.

It seems to me that people like contraversy more than information. The more contraversial a blog is, or the more likely that a knock-down drag out fight will occur in the comments, the more visitors seem likely (eg. LGF), while less contraversial sites (take your pick from the list on MJT's front page) seem to get much less traffic.

The entire Drudge Report has less information, finesse and quality than I find in any given post here at MJT's... Yet Drudge is a Big Name... because Drudge is a loudmouth hack (in my opinion).

So what will happen to the blogsphere? I dunno. The possibility is there that we may finally have a true Watchdog, for the media and the government. However, I think that will be possible, only if the blogsphere as a whole recoginizes the power and responsibility involved.

But what the hell do I know? I'm just a rodent.

Ratatosk

Posted by: Ratatosk at February 18, 2005 01:08 PM

Tosk: "2. It will become truly independent and will police its own ranks to call out partisan crap from BOTH SIDES, acting like a Media Watchdog (including bloggers) and a Political Watchdog."

Isn't this already happening Tosk? There's certainly been a whole lot of attacks on Juan Cole e.g. from the right and it seems a fair number of attacks on LGF from the left. But how can the blogosphere NOT police itself? In other words, what kind of scenario can you imagine in which people stop having opinions and duking them out over the blogosphere?

Mike T: "Oh, and if you think I'm crazy,"

Well Mike T - let's just say that a prudent person might take a few steps back, duck behind a solid object, and weigh that possibility :-)

Posted by: Caroline at February 18, 2005 01:19 PM

dougf And there is no law against enjoying what you do so long as you are doing the 'objectively'right thing,/i>

Whoa buddy! You're flirting very dangerously with the edge of the self-righteous abyss. Dan Rather thinks he does the 'objectively' right thing too ya know.

Ratatosk: I wonder if the blogsphere will survive once the shooting is done?

The blogosphere will always exist because people are generally vane and want to have a say. In the blogosphere we get to have our voice and sometimes enough of us with the same voice actually influence events. That's a hell of a massage for the ego. That is unless the gov't shuts it down in which case get your guns boys b/c we've got a problem.

Yet Drudge is a Big Name... because Drudge is a loudmouth hack

Yeah I hate when he's on TV and his radio program blows, but you gotta give the man credit. He posts all sorts of stories good, bad and ugly, calls attention to many breaches of journalism ethics, and is always ahead of the game on big stories and breaking news. He's partisan, but a valuable resource all the same if you view it with a discerning eye.

Posted by: Mike T. at February 18, 2005 01:34 PM

"Tosk: "If I want to find a blog entry thats critical of the President for, well anything, I don't go to Roger Simon's blog, I won't go to LGF, because I know that they will only report on stuff that is supportive of the war/president or negative of the democrats"

Precisely Tosk - you go to Andrew Sullivan or Kevin Drum or Baghdad Burning or Martini Republic. But that seems like a better scenario than being passively fed whatever the MSM feeds you. The blogosphere requires someone to be proactive rather than passive. But the only option with MSM as it stands now is passivity. I don’t see a downside. I can even go to bizarre left-wing conspiracy sites if I choose (you never know!).

“The War is one story, one single story among a host of other issues, yet it makes up the vast majority of blog posts. I wonder if the blogsphere will survive once the shooting is done?”

Of course it will – unless history freezes in its tracks once the war is over. it's possible that traffic will slow down somewhat but it will surge every time something happens that it is important to the citizenry.

“However, I think that will be possible, only if the blogsphere as a whole recoginizes the power and responsibility involved.”

Will there be a ceremony whence the blogosphere gathers and utters the secret words of initiation into “power and responsibility”?

“But what the hell do I know? I'm just a rodent.”

IMHO - rats have been unfairly maligned. Used for all manner of despicable experimentation. Anyone who has ever personally known a rat will know of what I speak. But what do I know? I’m just a card-carrying PETA member after all.:-)

Posted by: Caroline at February 18, 2005 01:44 PM

Caroline: Well Mike T - let's just say that a prudent person might take a few steps back, duck behind a solid object, and weigh that possibility :-)

...my poor poor fiancee...

Posted by: Mike T. at February 18, 2005 01:44 PM

Whoa buddy! You're flirting very dangerously with the edge of the self-righteous abyss. Dan Rather thinks he does the 'objectively' right thing too ya know---Mike T.

So distrusting the media,and believing that their sometimes distortions should be corrected,is OK,but viewing every MSM catastrophe as entertainment is wrong?
Why? Is it more acceptable to engage the MSM in order that they become more accountable,but not enjoy it at all?
There is nothing self-righteous in enjoying what must be anyway.It may be in-advised,or jubvenile,but not self-righteous.

Posted by: dougf at February 18, 2005 01:46 PM

"In other words, what kind of scenario can you imagine in which people stop having opinions and duking them out over the blogosphere?"

That's not exactly what I mean...

If the blogsphere continues to trend toward partisanship, overall... then they will be no better news source, nor watchdog, than the media today. Partisan news soruces, traditionally, don't out their own. You don't want to make part of "your team" look bad, because it might reflect on you.

We can live that way, or we could actually make a real live non-partisan watchdog out of the Blogsphere.

If Daily-KOS finds out that a Republican Senator paid off a pundit to promote the new "FOO LAW", then one would hope to see that outing covered by Roger Simon, LGF, MJT, and the rest... right now, I would expect to see it (maybe) on MJT's site, but not the others.

If LGF finds out that Democratic congressmen are secretly blackballing conservative businesses in their district... then we would hope to see it covered by Daily KOS and Andrew Sullivan as well.

Sadly, thats not happening right now... hopefully it will improve though, once the contraversy of Iraq has cooled?

Posted by: Ratatosk at February 18, 2005 01:49 PM

Tosk

Is it possible that blogs that don't allow comments will ultimately go the way of dinasaurs? Maybe they are the folks who don't permit any self correction? I do think that sites like MJT who police their comments to some degree - if only to keep civil discourse flowing - but who nevertheless allow comments - possibly have the potential for greater longevity.

"If the blogsphere continues to trend toward partisanship, overall... then they will be no better news source, nor watchdog, than the media today. Partisan news soruces, traditionally, don't out their own. You don't want to make part of "your team" look bad, because it might reflect on you."

Agreed. So I am kind of curious about something. Does the blogosphere merely refer to the site owners/posters - or does it also refer to the little rats like us that navigate the blosophere maze through the comments section? Is it possible that we little (comments section) rodents are the ultimate watchdogs of the blogs? (although instead of a rat - I want to be a prairie dog. They're just cuter!).

Posted by: Caroline at February 18, 2005 02:10 PM

Now if we could just see one blogsphere equally outing idiot CNN producers, Rightwing Porn Producer/White House Press people, and the whole host across the board.

Tosk,

Maybe because it's a non-issue that is obviously being trumped up by Liberals with small fish to fry?

Posted by: Carlos at February 18, 2005 02:23 PM

Carlos: "Maybe because it's a non-issue that is obviously being trumped up by Liberals with small fish to fry?

Ummm, Carlos ****ing kidding me? A representative propagandist organization is knowingly admitted to White House press briefings under a false name to publicly pose questions to which the answers are favorable to the President's agenda, and this isn't a big deal?!

Liberal or conservative, Republican or Democrat, this is a total afront all who value the principles of intellectualy honesty and truth. I suppose you'd be just as happy funneling the same sort of happy horseshit down your throat through state-run television too huh?

I for one will NOT be patronized by people who view me and the rest of the general population as stooges who they can spoonfeed their bullshit talking points through officially engineered Q & A sessions. That goes for GWB, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton and every other self-important asshole inside and outside the beltway!!

Posted by: Mike T. at February 18, 2005 02:48 PM

Liberal or conservative, Republican or Democrat, this is a total afront all who value the principles of intellectualy honesty and truth--Mike T.

And the White-House Press Corps,beforehand, was NOT a 'total affront to all who value the principles of intellectual honesty or truth?'The Gannon frenzy is blown way out of proportion here.Way out.He is just 1 GUY who lived on a 'day-pass'to the White-House Press functions.ANYONE could do this according to the rules,I heard about.Anyone.
If this would have been a Rove organized operation,the lucky winner would still be asking the 'right'questions and generally helping fend off the sharks inhabiting the press pool.

Posted by: dougf at February 18, 2005 03:07 PM

OMFG!

How about Helen Thomas?

Boy, if you're a minority or gay conservative you can expect no mercy from the liberals, that's for sure.

Posted by: Raymond at February 18, 2005 03:18 PM

A representative propagandist organization is knowingly admitted to White House press briefings under a false name to publicly pose questions to which the answers are favorable to the President's agenda, and this isn't a big deal?!

Mike T,

the only issue I see here is that the White House may have given preference to a friendly reporter. Everything else is noise purely for effect. Don't let it distract you.

And given that the press corps is there to essentially craft the news to their own liking (as in the subject of Jeremy's latest post), I don't see it as a huge travesty that Bush's Press Secretary is trying to do some crafting of his own. That's his job. And there was nothing illegal about. How else is favorable information supposed to be released to the public? Or do you believe only the bad news is worth reporting.

So unless it was illegal, I see much to do about nothing. That's why they Lefty bloggers made such a hoopla about "gay" and "porno" and pseudonyms. It's just noise. Don't fall for the hype.

Posted by: Carlos at February 18, 2005 03:31 PM

Dougf,

I'm not saying it wasn't. Nothing chides me much more than the snide 'holier than thou', 'how long did you beat your wife', type questions put forth by representatives of the MSM. But there is a massive difference between sharks dumped into the water by privately held media corporations, and a state sponsored 'ringer' brought in to craft state friendly propaganda. I may despise them, but I prefer the sharks because they don't control the courts, the police and the military.

Carlos: I don't see it as a huge travesty that Bush's Press Secretary is trying to do some crafting of his own.

I expected you would say something along those lines. You see I do see it as a huge travesty, and guess what? I'm (quite literally) a card carrying Republican. In fact I don't think I've ever voted Dem once in my short life. I don't want my gov't spending money and exercising power to 'sell' any message to me. I'm smart enough to figure it out on my own, and optimistically, so are most Americans. Let the message speak for itself, and if we don't like it we won't buy it. This "our message just isn't getting out" drivel is the same crap the Dems are trying to hawk right now. Say your peace and let me figure it out for myself, but don't engineer propaganda.

By the way, it was once "Legal" to count a black man as 3/5ths of a white man. I'm less concerned with what is legal than what is right. And what did you have to say to Democrats when they said "It's no big deal if the President gets a BJ from a 21-yr-old intern in the Oval Office." Yeah, exactly.

Posted by: Mike T. at February 18, 2005 05:23 PM

I don't want my gov't spending money and exercising power to 'sell' any message to me.

Mike T,

Even if the message is true? You certainly won't hear it on CBS. The MSM is virtually the only way the White House can get its message out, and press corps are the gatekeepers. There is little or no danger of you being "sold" a message by the government. Fear not. I wish I could say the same thing about the MSM.

I want BOTH sides of the story. And we're obviously not getting it. Why should we always have to read it on blogs? Maybe because it's being blocked at the source? And that's why Gannon raised such hackles.

Do you think the MSM's questions are for the purpose of giving you a full and clear picture of what's going on in Iraq? Do you think they've done such a good job? Weren't you as surprised as everybody at how the elections turned out? You're smart aren't you? Why were we all so pleasantly surprised, even when our own GIs have been trying to tell us this whole time that there is so much good happenning over there. We just don't hear about it. Why? Because we're being sold a message, whether you like it or not--the MSM's message. I'd like some equal time. What's wrong with that? I want my boys in that room asking questions too so that when we get good news or bad news it won't always come as such a surprise.

Posted by: Carlos at February 18, 2005 05:54 PM

OT, a fun read from the very liberal New Republic:

Liberalism is dying

http://www.tnr.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20050228&s=peretz022805

Posted by: Carlos at February 18, 2005 06:21 PM

Carlos,

You and I are political brothers, and that is a fact. But remember that the heart and soul of the Republican party is in de>/i>-centralized government. As soon as you allow gov't control over even one small iota of the media, you threaten our ability as the people to determine our own political reality. I understand and agree with most of your argument, but that not withstanding, my political freedom depends on my ability of political self determination. Gov't influence on the media is a very very slippery slope, and I for one would prefer to trust the intuitions of my fellow citizens as opposed to instutions of my gov't.

I am one who will never be a loyal subject, never a sheep.

Posted by: Mike T. at February 18, 2005 08:44 PM

Yes, apparently I did f*** my html code up. Not so many italics were intended

Posted by: Mike T. at February 18, 2005 08:46 PM

What Gannon thinks:

Jeff Gannon, the former White House reporter whose naked pictures have appeared on a number of gay escort sites, says that he has “regrets” about his past but that White House officials knew nothing about his salacious activities.

“I’ve made mistakes in my past,” he said yesterday. “Does my past mean I can’t have a future? Does it disqualify me from being a journalist?”

Gannon chastised his critics, breaking a silence that began last week when liberal bloggers disclosed his real name, James Dale Guckert, and a Web page, which he paid for, featuring X-rated photos of himself. “Why would they be looking into a person’s sexual history? Is that what we’re going to do to reporters now? Is there some kind of litmus test for reporters? Is it right to hold someone’s sexuality against them?”

As for his critics, Gannon said: “People have said some of my writing expressed a hostile point of view” toward gays. “These people are willing to abandon their principles on the basis of trying to make me out to be a hypocrite. These are the same groups that cherish free speech and privacy.”

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36733-2005Feb18.html

I don't even have the words to express my disgust with the Left.

Posted by: Carlos at February 19, 2005 09:11 AM

I don't even have the words to express my disgust with the Left.

This is still the tiny, utterly impotent Left that has no influence on Democratic politics, as evidenced by the fact that legislators simply do not vote in the fashion that you claim the Left wants them too, right?

Or, more pithily, I don't even have the words to express my disdain for your opinion.

Posted by: Kimmitt at February 19, 2005 05:09 PM

This is still the tiny, utterly impotent Left that has no influence on Democratic politics

Kimmitt:

it's painfully obvious that this is precisely how you must feel--tiny and utterly impotent.

And small fry Gannon has exposed this as much as you've exposed him. Considering your state of affairs, it's quite the triumph.

Posted by: Carlos at February 19, 2005 09:39 PM
: Dish Network. : I use Dish Network.com.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.

Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.

Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network Offer.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dishnetwork.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Dishnetwork.
I use Dental Insurance. Posted by: David Niven at June 23, 2005 11:41 AM

Thanks For The Blog ! Have A Great Weekend

http://www.geocities.com/awillinger/fun_d_mental.html

Posted by: casino at July 1, 2005 07:48 AM

Good Day Guys !

Posted by: health links at July 2, 2005 12:06 AM

lklhkglh ig iygi

Posted by: poker at July 2, 2005 05:02 AM

hello , nice day for blogging !

Posted by: links at July 3, 2005 07:21 AM

Greetings From NY !

Posted by: casinos at July 5, 2005 01:00 PM

Greetings From Encino , Ca !

Posted by: casino at July 17, 2005 08:41 AM

good day

Posted by: casino at July 18, 2005 07:35 AM

hi guys

viagra

Posted by: casinos at August 2, 2005 12:01 AM

Hi I have been given the task of getting links for our websites thathave good page rank on the links directories.In addition we have many categories so your site will be place on an appropriate page. If you would like to trade links please send me your website details.Best Regards,seopro@walla.com
http://www2w.bravehost.com vs the best casino http://casino.vmedical.us new online casino
casinos
casino
online poker
online gambling
online casinos
online casinos
online casinos
online poker
online casinos
online casino
casino
poker
casino
casino
casinos
online casino
online gambling
casino
poker
neteller casinos
online casino
online slots
online casino
online poker
online casino
internet poker
free online poker
texas holdem poker
poker
online slots
online roulette
online blackjack
poker
online casinos
online casino

Posted by: online casinos at October 5, 2005 11:28 AM

asc
kraob
eves
akupunktura
freesz
puz
domy opieki
mopinsite
oppin

Posted by: epart at December 23, 2005 07:42 AM

There was actually a NY band in the '80's named Kablamachunk.

Posted by: Terri at January 13, 2007 03:43 PM

Stevethe guy who I credit with spotting and sharing the word Kablamachunk, was my brother's college buddy back in the early 80's -- very funny guy as I recall. He and my brother also hung out with a guy named Peter Bohovesky, also a funny guy, who was in the band kablamachunk. So it all traces back to the fellow I mention in this post.

And who knows what worlds may collide now that I have posted this comment.

Posted by: Jeremy Brown at January 13, 2007 07:07 PM

  最好的翻译公司在上海,不仅是使领馆指定翻译机构,同时也是500强定点翻译公司。提供的商务口译,高端笔译同声传译等翻译服务。公司提供英语翻译日语翻译韩语翻译等50多个语种的翻译服务。上海翻译公司立足于学术翻译领域,并且在行业翻译领域如经济翻译法律翻译证件翻译颇有建树。

Posted by: translation at October 14, 2007 06:43 PM

  最好的翻译公司在上海,不仅是使领馆指定翻译机构,同时也是500强定点翻译公司。提供的商务口译,高端笔译同声传译等翻译服务。公司提供英语翻译日语翻译韩语翻译等50多个语种的翻译服务。上海翻译公司立足于学术翻译领域,并且在行业翻译领域如经济翻译法律翻译证件翻译颇有建树。

Posted by: translation at October 14, 2007 06:43 PM
Post a comment













Remember personal info?






Winner, The 2007 Weblog Awards, Best Middle East or Africa Blog

Pajamas Media BlogRoll Member



Testimonials

"I'm flattered such an excellent writer links to my stuff"
Johann Hari
Author of God Save the Queen?

"Terrific"
Andrew Sullivan
Author of Virtually Normal

"Brisk, bracing, sharp and thoughtful"
James Lileks
Author of The Gallery of Regrettable Food

"A hard-headed liberal who thinks and writes superbly"
Roger L. Simon
Author of Director's Cut

"Lively, vivid, and smart"
James Howard Kunstler
Author of The Geography of Nowhere


Contact Me

Send email to michaeltotten001 at gmail dot com


News Feeds




toysforiraq.gif



Link to Michael J. Totten with the logo button

totten_button.jpg


Tip Jar





Essays

Terror and Liberalism
Paul Berman, The American Prospect

The Men Who Would Be Orwell
Ron Rosenbaum, The New York Observer

Looking the World in the Eye
Robert D. Kaplan, The Atlantic Monthly

In the Eigth Circle of Thieves
E.L. Doctorow, The Nation

Against Rationalization
Christopher Hitchens, The Nation

The Wall
Yossi Klein Halevi, The New Republic

Jihad Versus McWorld
Benjamin Barber, The Atlantic Monthly

The Sunshine Warrior
Bill Keller, The New York Times Magazine

Power and Weakness
Robert Kagan, Policy Review

The Coming Anarchy
Robert D. Kaplan, The Atlantic Monthly

England Your England
George Orwell, The Lion and the Unicorn