Geeks With Blogs


Google My Blog

Catch me at: The List!

My InstallScript Utility Belt My Amazon Wishlist
My Standard Disclaimer

Chris G. Williams Beware: I mix tech and personal interests here.

Regardless of whether you think he's an idiot or not, he's in charge...   The truly funny thing about this, IMO, is that we as a nation find it newsworthy that Bush prefers Diet Coke and is a stickler for keeping his schedule.

Of course he's annoyed about the attacks, and yes he uses profanity. So what?  Was it really so long ago that we as a nation had more important things to worry about than mindless crap like Bush's soda preference and what Clinton dips his cigars in.

Don't misunderstand. I'm not pro-war or anti-Bush. I disliked Al Gore for a number of reasons, his wife being a significant one, in fact. Bush is just the lesser of two evils, maybe. I'm not even willing to commit in either direction on that. Frankly I think we could have done better, but we didn't... so there you have it.

Personally, I think the damage done by the media to the integrity of the office and the reputation of this country far outweighs any excuse they can manifest in regards to their self-righteous sense of purpose and entitlement. In otherwords, anyone who tells you “the people have a right to know” is completely full of shit. It stopped being about “the good of the people” and “freedom of the press” a long time ago. Scandal sells. “If it bleeds, it leads...“ sound familar?

Shakespeare said “first, kill all the lawyers.” I guess he hadn't met many political journalists at that point.


Posted on Monday, July 17, 2006 11:17 AM General Interest | Back to top

Comments on this post: on Bush

# re: on Bush
Requesting Gravatar...
I have been laughing at the absurdity of this all day. All of the stuff going on, and this is the headline on CNN??? People are dying all over the place, and we are most concerned with one man's potty mouth? Is anyone shocked to hear he says a not so nice word for "poo"? I bet you says a lot worse when he's in the mood.....

The liberal media seem so bent on painting a bad picture of the man they are attacking his language now...sigh

Left by Theo Moore on Jul 17, 2006 12:30 PM

# re: on Bush
Requesting Gravatar...
...Or politicians, for that matter. ;) (In regard to the Shakespeare quote)

It's not the liberal media, it's the greedy media. Watched any Fox news lately? They're airing it.

Why? Because it makes money. The media isn't liberal or conservative, at least not if it concerns where they're going to get their next paycheck from.

When the Iraq War began, the New York times was right there with Fox giving the big gung-ho thumbs up. Because it gets them ratings/subscribers.

Likewise, when the public started to wane in support for the war, Fox news started airing more columnists with bad things to say about Pres. Bush: not because they're pinkos, but because you appeal to how the people feel to make your buck in that industry.

Anyways, you can bet that if any president made such a comment, the media would be scrutinizing it. Because sensationalism brings home the bacon.
Left by Alex Loret de Mola on Jul 17, 2006 11:03 PM

# re: on Bush
Requesting Gravatar...
I must respectfully disagree; I am of the opinion that the media *is* a liberal organization. Admittedly, some media is conservative (FOX, for example), but the bulk of the media has a decidedly liberal slant. Are you telling me that Tim "Mr. Softie" Russert isn't a liberal? Katie Couric? I've seen her interviews with conseratives and liberals alike. She only gets out those little glasses (famous for this) when she wants to pretend to be playing "hardball" with a guest. Whilst Ann Coulter gets the glasses every time, few liberal guests do.

I think Fox will report on things the others do since they can't be left out of reporting the news. You'll see most of the media outlets reporting the same thing for this reason; damages their credibility for CNN to report something but Fox does not. However, it is the tone of the reports that generally indicate a bias.

Just my two cents!
Left by Theo Moore on Jul 18, 2006 4:46 AM

# re: on Bush
Requesting Gravatar...
While I agree that political bias comes out in minor issues, or long after a major issue is dead and gone, I must insist that when the issue is hot and counts it's all up to the highest bidder.

There were no dissenters in the media to the Iraq War for at least the first year... no dissenters to the Bill Clinton scandal until it took a turn to impeachment (and even then a majority of major network stations still gave no dissenting opinion)... likewise, no dissent is to be found on issues like Evolution.

Commentators and columnists are different, and I will agree on that. Anne Coulter, for example, will give a consistent opinion becausae her job isn't to portray the news but rather to give her (slanted) opinion on the subject. Likewise, Paul Krugman will always give his (slanted) opinion. They're both asked to give their opinions though, and not present news. I don't consider either to be news by any stretch of the imagination.

In the end, I think we can both agree that slanting actual news is certainly harmful to Americans' ability to form informed opinions on subjects... and though I don't think there's a specific bias in actual news beyond "chasing the buck", that buck-chasing is still very harmful for those looking for unbiased opinions. It's just that in my view, those opinions shift at will based on a given situation. =)

Actually, an interesting aside... it's my theory that this exact effect is the reason why so many people have contradictory opinions. The wish-washiness of the media has directly translated into the wish-washiness of a great majority of the public who, say, will be strongly opposed to the death penalty and strongly in support of Abortion. Or will be strongly in favor of freedom of religion but strongly opposed to the equally important freedom of speech. Or vice versa on both counts.
Left by Alex Loret de Mola on Jul 20, 2006 9:14 PM

# re: on Bush
Requesting Gravatar...
Ack, this is turning into its own blog post, I apologize for the length of that reply. =) I find the subject fascinating and I tend to not be able to stop myself from talking about it.
Left by Alex Loret de Mola on Jul 20, 2006 9:15 PM

# re: on Bush
Requesting Gravatar...
<stepping up onto soapbox now>

An interesting thing to point out is that we are using the term media pretty liberally (pun intended). You don't hear the term "news" any more because it no longer fits. Whether it be Fox or MSNBC, you don't hear "news" reports, just opinions. The facts are skewed based on who is reporting it.

Is the media doing it's job? Absolutely not! They have only started doing it a little bit recently. For years, so much of what has been going on has gone completely unmentioned in mainstream media because the media fears the administration. Why do they fear them? For many reasons, but let's take the most well known example...Valerie Plame. They made an example to the media of what happens when the truth is reported. Look at the lengths that the administration went in order to intimidate the media. It worked very well, apparently. Now keep two things in mind about the Valerie Plame case.... First, the president spent two years publicly saying that they are going to get the person who is the source of the leak and he turned out to be the actual source. Every person in the administration from Cheney downward has been identified in that case. Two years saying publicly that theyt would catch...themselves. If that isn't scary, I don't know what is. Second, we are now facing a situation in Iran where we really have no clear way of handling it. Valerie Plame was an undercover agent getting our country intelligence from Iran. That's right, the administration outed a CIA operative for very self-serving reasons. Do you think that is hurting us now? Some Intellingence about Iran could benefit us right about now, couldn't it?

Now that the media is finally starting to get at least a small pair, we are finding out that the government is illegally wiretapping, not following any due process, basically making up their own rules. In short, completely disregarding the constitution in just about every way. I could list so many areas that the media stayed completely quiet on, but this reply would almost be a book. They should not be quiet, they should be reporting this. That is their job!

Let's not blame Bush, he is protecting us...right? Let's just get the media for telling us what is actually happening. They must be stopped before the truth gets out!

In my humble opinion, the media is not to blame. They are finally doing their job. Blaming the media is just not a good precedent.

<stepping down from soapbox now>
Left by David Silverlight on Jul 28, 2006 2:18 PM

Your comment:
 (will show your gravatar)

Copyright © Chris G. Williams | Powered by: