Last night I caught the beginning of the 10 pm news. This story was the lead. I noticed that, while the names and states these asshats represent were discussed, their party affiliation was not.
Now, way back in high school and college when I was taking journalism classes, we learned that when dealing with an elected official..like say…oh…a congressman, the proper syntax (ok, they said ’style’ but I prefer syntax) is to state the person’s name, then in parentheses their party affiliation and state. Here is an example Sen. Robert Dole (R-KS). See? Always with the party.
But the news story last night, it didn’t tell us if the lawmakers that took the Saddam sponsored junket were dems or repubs. I told the 5/8 and No. 1 Son that those three had to be democrats, because if they had been republicans, the news bimbo would have said so. Instead of the headline being "Saddam Paid for Lawmakers’ Iraq Trip" the headline would have read "Saddam Paid for Republican Lawmakers’ Iraq Trip."
No. 1 Son had some trouble understanding why. I tried to explain to him that the news reporting is mostly biased towards the leftards. That most of the reporters and editors are leftards, and glorify the likes Chavez and Castro, which is why we see so little news about the piss-poor living conditions, and the atrocious human rights violations that occur there.
I don’t think he completely understood what I was getting at. But he’ll learn. We all had to learn that lesson. The hard lesson when we discovered that Dan and Peter and Tom weren’t giving us the full, un-biased skinny and any damn thing they talked about.
Now, the question is, did these fellows know their trip was sponsored by the Butcher of Baghdad? Probably not. I don’t believe that any lawmaker who would travel to Iraq on the eve of the US invasion could be smart enough to figure it out. But then again, only they know. I mean, it was, after all, paid for by a charity group. And seriously, how would these male-bimbos know they guy who runs the charity was getting oil in exchange for getting them to Iraq?
I’m certain though, if the congressmen would have been republicans, we’d be hearing all the screaming and crying of corruption that the leftards are so good at spewing.
Doug Ross manages to succinctly and concisely capture an entirely foreseeable chain of events. Head on over and check it out, it doesn’t take long - I promise.
This video is somewhat disturbing. It comes to me by way of Lane Hudson over at the Huffington Pos. In it we see a student at the University of Florida asking John Kerry a question about whether or not he was part of the (notorious?) Skull & Bones society while at Yale. Before Kerry could answer, the university police begin to remove the petitioner. When the student complains, they tazer him and forcibly remove him from the building.
While the video itself is terribly disturbing, what really caught my attention (aside from the fact that someone on HuffPost actually posted a video that put a democrat in less than stellar light) was that Hudson tried to spin this incident into somehow being President Bush’s doing. That somehow, because a student who asked a question unfavorable to Senator Kerry was tazered and forcibly removed from the forum, is the responsibility of President Bush, and it happened because he is “edging towards ANOTHER ill-conceived war”.
Please, don’t take my word for it, go and read it yourself. It seems that the far left are grasping at anything and everything these days.
Crescent of Betrayal Blogroll
Kansas Bloggers
Stumble it!
About
