Tuesday, December 12, 2006

I'm feeling peevish...

...and the subject, as so often happens, is the news media.

In this case, it's the Los Angeles Times, a newspaper only slightly less rabidly partisan than its partner-in-slime in New York City.

Today, the Times is doing a search and destroy mission on a local member of congress, one Gary Miller.

PARENTHETICAL THOUGHT: Though I once lived in his district, I know less than nothing about Miller. But since the Times, which is slavishly devoted to its Limousine Liberal and Non-White-Lefty constituencies, chooses to go after him, my knee-jerk response is to go to his defense.

The article contains a long litany of malfeasance, ranging from sending a request for Rolling Stones tickets on his office letterhead to raking in money from shady deals. If half the allegations were true, Miller should be peering at Christmas trees through steel bars right now.

As is almost always the case these days, Miller's accusers ("four former members of his staff") are anonymous. According to the article, they are "concerned for their current political jobs."

Whatever happened to the accused's right to face his accusers? Ummm, well, forget that; we're talking freedom of the press here.

Knowing the Times -- a paper I have despised since its days as a mouthpiece for right-wing wackos, right up through its current days as a mouthpiece for left-wing wackos -- I would surmise Miller's primary crime is Governing While Republican.

In this respect, the L.A. and N.Y. Times are remarkably alike: when it comes to supporting the left-wing agenda, they will not let truth or common decency stand in their way.

Whatever happened to the First Law of Journalism?

ANOTHER PARENTHETICAL ASIDE: When I began a year-long tenure as editor of a college newspaper, I gathered my staff and said "forget the First Law. The new First Law of Journalism around here is to get people to read the damn paper!" Neither Times is good at that; both papers are seeing significant looses of readership, due -- at least in my view -- to their shrill partisanship even on the "news" pages.

According to Miller, the Times reporter asked him about one accusation before going to press, and didn't bother to check out his response to that. I believe it.

YET ANOTHER PARENTHETICAL ASIDE: The Times pulled the same stunt when Arnold Schwarzenegger made his first run for governor, dredging up several unnamed female "victims" of Arnold's uncontrolled lechery. Immediately after the election, the issue died; no investigations, no lawsuits (as the Times had promised), no follow-up.

Since the Times on the Other Coast is continuing with similar attacks on various D.C. Republicans -- George Bush, of course, is always Target #1 -- I'm beginning to smell a Rat.

And the Rat's name is: Democrats.

Anyone who is even marginally rational will note that the biggest drawback to the Democrats' promise to "restore integrity in government" is Democrats themselves. When the chosen head of the House Intelligence Committee (personally anointed by Her Highness, Nancy "Attack Dog" Pelosi) can't tell his Sunnis from his Shi'as, when the Congressional Black Caucus is clamoring for William Jefferson, a congressman who was caught with $90,000 in illegal bribes -- apparently part of the $240K that a "fixer" copped to giving him in a plea deal -- to be given back his comfy committee post, when Harry Reid -- whose questionable real-estate dealings barely caused a ripple in the Mainstream Media -- is urging that a Republican who won a very close election not be seated until a new election is held, when a congressman who is also a disbarred judge is even considered for a top post, you know some damage control is essential.

The party that has managed to slip Ted Kennedy, Lyin' John Kerry, Jimmy ("the Jew-hater") Carter and Al ("I invented the Internet") Gore through the cracks is afraid of the spotlight hitting its latest roster of crooks and ne'er-do-wells. Therefore, the lapdog media has to go hunting for Republicans who can be smeared.

Granted, there are crooks on both sides of the party spectrum. I would no sooner call Republicans the Party of Probity than I would advocate an attractive young woman accepting a ride from Ted Kennedy.

But, just once before I die, I'd like to see the focus of both politicians and the media be on what's best for American citizens, regardless of their race, gender, religion or party affiliation.

Forget it. It's too much to ask.

6 comments:

likeisaid said...

I was so into politics and now I'm like .. who cares, they're all crooks! The other night Paul said you gotta see this interview on Hannity and Colmes. I said, I'm not interested. He said WHAT?? You're not interested in politics anymore? I said, nope. He was crushed!

I wish we could kick them all out and start over. :)

MrScribbler said...

I like the way you think, Betty!

Anonymous said...

trying again for the tenth time or so

Anonymous said...

Nopw that I can comment, I forgot what I was going to say.
If the foundation poticians stand on had not been changed to the point of allowing involvement in anything and everything, opportunities for corruption would be far fewer.

Anonymous said...

h o fly

Anonymous said...

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp