MediaBloodhound

Story of the Day

The New York Times continues the sympathy for the devil routine today with their headline:

Compassion for Cheney as Victim Heads Home

And the following opening line:

"Declaring that 'accidents do and will happen,' the 78-year-old man who was shot by Vice President Dick Cheney at a weekend quail hunt emerged from the hospital here Friday looking tanned, cheery, robust and speckled with bruises."

Incidentally, if you see the photos of Whittington speaking to the press, he looked neither tanned nor cheery nor robust. Speckled with bruises, yes.

Meanwhile, here's a story from the AP detailing some of the many discrepancies surrounding FuddGate. Too bad it's already old news to much of the mainstream media:

VP Accident Filled with Discrepancies, by Calvin Woodward and Nancy Benac
The Associated Press

Story of the Day

So when you're Dick Cheney and you shoot a guy in the face and don't tell anyone about it for nearly a day, this is what happens:

Man Shot by Cheney: 'Accidents Do and Will Happen', by Ed Lavandera
CNN

Story of the Day

The CBS News headline may be misleading here, but they don't disappoint by opening wide and swallowing Karl Rove's Fuddgate spin whole. Forget about ol' Harry, riddled with birdshot, some lodged in his heart; it's Dick Cheney's party, and yes, he'll cry if he wants to.

From the CBS News website:

"Cheney is in a 'state of meltdown' over shooting his friend and the political fallout it has caused, a source close to the Cheney has told CBS News."

So Karl Rove, in grand Orwellian fashion, attempts to drum up sympathy for Mad Dog Cheney (the shooter), and it appears the mainstream media is ready to tug on our heartstrings. The current headline on CNN's homepage:

President: Cheney 'Profoundly Affected' by Shooting

Oh, and here's one of the most absurd lines from the CBS story:

"Cheney was soft-spoken and somber during the interview with Fox's Brit Hume."

Really? He seemed like the same arrogant and implacable dark force we've all come to know and hate. The kind of villain who wilts flowers and triggers thunderclaps by merely entering a room.

Aside from being utterly unapologetic about not informing the media earlier, this is how Mad Dog Cheney closed out his "soft-spoken and somber" interview with FrankenHume:

Cheney: One of the problems we have as a government is our inability to keep secrets. And it costs us, in terms of our relationship with other governments, in terms of the willingness of other intelligence services to work with us, in terms of revealing sources and methods. And all of those elements enter into some of these leaks.

Yes, he's a well of sadness, isn't he? So racked with grief that it's a wonder how he manages to incorporate that inspiring call for more secrecy in government, that trademark of democracy.

Mr. Cheney, your bento box of evil leaves me breathless every time.

Go on without me:

Rove Pushed Cheney to Talk
CBS News

Story of the Day

The exclusive Cheney interview with Brit Hume of FOX News today was both entertaining and, if you read between the lines, raised some serious questions.

Highlights:

Cheney says of Whittington: "But he's a great man, he's in great shape, good friend, and our thoughts and prayers go out to he and his family."

Two questions later:

Hume: Would you describe him as a close friend, friendly acquaintance, what --

Cheney: No, an acquaintance.

How is it possible Cheney can call Harry a "good friend" and a minute later downsize the man to "an acquaintance." And naturally, Brit Hume, being the pro (and yes, I am using the slang for prostitute here) that he is, doesn't appear to think such a detail warrants a follow up.

And then this gift from the comedy gods:

Cheney: But the image of him falling is something I'll never be able to get out of my mind. I fired, and there's Harry falling. And it was, I'd have to say, one of the worst days of my life, at that moment.

Yeah. Tell that to your friend you shot in the face, and then subsequently demoted to "an acquaintance." Adding insult to injury, this was how Cheney expressed his immediate concern for his fallen brother:

Hume: And what did you do then? Did you get up and did you go with him, or did you go to the hospital?

Cheney: No, I had -- I told my physician's assistant to go with him, but the ambulance is crowded and they didn't need another body in there. And so we loaded up and went back to ranch headquarters, basically.

Hmm. He "had other priorities," maybe? Could it be that he was drunk, which many have speculated? Or...that he had to scramble back to his cabal and figure out what the next move was if ol' Harry were to up and die. The national press has not raised this point, but I think it warrants consideration. You'll notice that Cheney's defense of waiting all that time to contact the media was that he wanted to be absolutely sure of Harry's status first, that the medical information being sent back to him was "accurate." And it wasn't until he was assured that Harry was going to be okay that he contacted the media. Remember, Harry's "mild" heart attack occurred after the fact; Cheney didn't see that one coming, much as Harry didn't anticipate Cheney's birdshot.

Cheney: But we really didn't know until Sunday morning that Harry was probably going to be okay, that it looked like there hadn't been any serious damage to any vital organ. And that's when we began the process of notifying the press.

So…if, say, Harry had died, would they have notified the press? Or even Bush's staff, which was also left in the dark until the next day? (Bush was notified of a hunting accident the night of the shooting but not that Mad Dog Cheney was the shooter.) Would they have notified anyone if Harry had really bitten the bullet?

Something is definitely more than a little fishy in Denmark, folks.

The Raw Transcript: Cheney's Interview with Fox News
The Raw Story

Story of the Day

While FuddGate rages on, here's a good piece by Media Matters on the conservative bias of Sunday talk shows.

No surprises, but it's nice to have facts at hand. Oh, those liberals with their pesky facts! I got your fair and balanced, right here:

If It's Sunday, It's Conservative: An Analysis of the Sunday Talk Show Guests on ABC, CBS, and NBC, 1997 - 2005
Media Matters

Story of the Day

With all the complaints about Democrats lacking a spine (as they so often do), this report by the NY Times is, unintentionally, a searing example of what happens when one of them does attempt to speak truth to power on the national stage. Howard Dean says plainly that Cheney should resign if he ordered I. Lewis Libby to leak Valerie Plame's identity, and journalist Neil Lewis spends the entire article attempting to discredit the underlying correctness of Dean's words. Additionally, I'm not surprised there's no mention here of the news today that Plame's outing caused significant damage to our national security and ability to counter nuclear proliferation abroad, specifically in Iran, in which much of her work was concentrated. Surely if a President can be impeached for getting a blowjob, then a Vice President should be impeached for intentionally blowing a job intended to safeguard our country.

Democrat Questions Cheney's Role in Leak, by Neil A. Lewis
The New York Times

Story of the Day

I have switched the channel during the seventh inning stretch of Yankee games ever since "Take Me Out to the Ballgame" was replaced with Kate Smith's call-to-arms version of "God Bless America." This Riefenstahlian spectacle is also amplified by Bob Sheppard's creepily fascistic introduction, in which he praises our fighting forces overseas for defending, as only Bob can say it, "OUR...WAY...OF...LIFE."

For similar reasons I have been unable to stomach watching the Olympics for years. This incisive commentary by Pierre Tristam about NBC's hyper-jingoistic Olympic coverage perfectly encapsulates why:

NBC Puts on 2-Week Commercial for US Power, by Pierre Tristam
Common Dreams

Story of the Day

We are bombarded here in the States with stories that fuel the fear of terrorism, bird flu and, lately, the veracity of memoirs. But the effects of global warming, which contributed to the surge and potency of natural disasters around the world this year, continue to garner little attention from our mainstream press. So with the majority of U.S. citizens remaining in the dark, or aloof, about this growing crisis, our politicians are not compelled to act. In fact, because talk of acting on global warming continues to be spun here as too risky for our economy, many politicians know they'd stand to lose votes if they pushed the issue.

How many people in this country realize that the United States produces one quarter of the world's greenhouse gases and yet remains one of the only major developed nations to refuse to sign the Kyoto Treaty? So we don't just pollute; we lead by example and inspire other countries to do the same. For instance, just as we turn a blind eye to civil liberty and human rights abuses with our trading partner China, we also look the other way as their country's pollution has accelerated at alarming rates.

And so here's where we find ourselves:

Global Warming: Passing the 'Tipping Point', by Michael McCarthy
The Independent UK

Story of the Day

While ex-FEMA chief Michael Brown is coming clean about White House and DHS blundering and lying before, during and after Katrina, we have this follow-up to Bush's revelation yesterday of the foiled LA terrorist plot. To paraphrase Condi and George and Scotty, I don't think anybody could've anticipated this:

Some Doubt Seriousness of Terror Scheme Described By Bush
Combined Wire Services
(Compiled from Washington Post and Associated Press reports)

Story of the Day

The obvious fishy timing of these foiled attacks (not alluded to in this article). The journalist's use of "Critics say..." (beginning of 2nd paragraph), a common pejorative that blunts the viability of what esteemed critics, from legal scholars to U.S. senators, are saying about the illegality of White House spying methods. The passive mention that Bush incorrectly called the LA target "Liberty Tower" instead of Library Tower, as if this is not another sign of his blinding incompetency. It all contributes to making this Reuters story feel, as Jon Stewart refers to his own reporting, like "fake news."

But what can be more fake than fake news purporting to be real?

(Incidentally, does it even make sense that people would hijack a plane with shoe bombs? Isn't "hijacking a plane" and exploding a plane with a "shoe bomb" antithetical. Isn't it one or the other in this case? I don't mean to split hairs, or shoes, but this does sound a bit screwy.)

Bush Details Qaeda Plot to Hit LA, by Tabassum Zakaria
Reuters