Brutally Honest

The Craig Toilet Saga: Something smells

While eating dinner last night, the missus and I watched ABC's network news program.  Yes, I know, not exactly smart.  Of course at some point they brought up the Craig sex solicitation in an airport bathroom story.  What amazed me last night was that the only thing ABC brought up as to damning evidence was the Senator tapping his foot while sitting on the loo.  The cop making the arrest reported that this was a common signal for sexual favors.  Tapping your foot while... umm... taking care of business... that was all that ABC News reported.  No lie.

Later that night, there were others reporting  unusual behavior by Craig on a number of sites.  Signaling under the stall side wall with his hand, placing his bag at the foot of the door to obstruct vision, actually touching the cop's foot in the adjacent stall with his own foot.  All sounding pretty damning.  And then of course, the guilty plea to a lesser charge.  So I joined the rush to judgment and considered the man to be guilty.

Since then, I've read the transcript of and listened to the interview conducted by the arresting officer after the arrest.  And I'm here to tell ya that something stinks.   Here's that transcript  and here's the actual audio tape.  Take a moment or two to read through it and listen to it or both.  I did.  A number of times. 

As someone who has cops in the family, I tend to be rather supportive of police action.  I can't say that I am here.  I think the evidence is weak.  I think entrapment indeed occurred.  I say that admitting I don't know a damn thing about homosexuals signaling each other in a bathroom stall but what I've heard on the tape, and hearing the cop kind of lose it while accusing Craig of lying, I think their case is weak and I find it hard to believe that a Senator's career is going to be ruined over the particulars of this incident.

I post this understanding that Craig could be as queer as Liberace.  I say it understanding that there are others alleging Craig has engaged in this sort of behavior before.  But I also think that we're in a political climate where the appearance of impropriety is enough and that simply making the charge is tantamount to guilt. 

I think Craig deserves the presumption of innocence.  I didn't hear a damn thing on this tape that would suggest anything else.  If there's more out there to damn him, somebody better produce it cuz this ain't it.

And those weak ass Republicans who've thrown Craig under the bus after this, they disgust me.  If they have more on the man and that's why they're all weak-kneed, then produce it for God's sake.  Otherwise, quit acting like a bunch of wussified panty-waists.  God I've never seen such weakness in a party as I've seen in the last 24 hours.  It's simply amazing.

UPDATE: Captain's Quarters is asking "What exactly is the crime?"  Amen.  I've been in airport toilets... I can tell you they're cramped and though I think it harder to touch a guy's foot in the next stall with your own foot than it is easier, I'm thinking it's not out of the question.  But that can be easily tested by someone going to that particular airport's bathroom and testing this out.  How far apart are the freakin' stalls?  And tapping your foot is a signal?  Holy crap.  I'll superglue my shoes to the floor the next time I sit in an airport stall... I'm a foot tapper folks... but no more.

Again I say that Craig could be exactly what this cop alleges him to be but in this particular incident, there's not enough evidence and I think the episode to have been overblown (so to speak).

Signs of cultural decay

First it was dodgeball.  Now it's tag.

The pussification of society marches on.

My kind of weather report

Watch the network news much?

Not a wise idea:

Nearly two-thirds (.pdf) of Americans still rely on network TV as their primary news source.  Thus, it is not surprising that by mid-2005, the Pew Research Center found that the “steady drip of negative news from Iraq” created a widespread awareness of the rising American death toll that was significantly undermining support for the US military operation.

The establishment media has developed ever more creative ways of reporting US casualties.  For example, in April 2007, the McClatchy newspaper chain reported that “March… marked the first time that the U.S. military suffered four straight months of 80 or more fatalities,” without any suggestion as to why the number 80 had any significance. Indeed, the four prior months averaged over 80 casualties; they just weren’t as evenly distributed.

The establishment media also has become more willing to show graphic video of US casualties at the hands of the enemy.  CNN aired an insurgent sniper video obtained directly from the enemy.  The NYT posted video of a Marine being shot, reporting his death before his family could be contacted.  ABC News aired video of a Bradley armored vehicle blown up by an improvised explosive device as six American soldiers died inside, then exploited the grief of family members to attack the current “surge” of troops in Iraq.  Similarly, CBS News spiked a story containing video originally posted on an al Qaeda propaganda website, but posted the same video on its own website. Throughout the conflict, the establishment media has shied away for the truly graphic images of the enemy beheading civilians.

Conversely, there are the stories “journalism by remote control” misses, or chooses not to cover.  As early as September 2003, establishment reporters admitted that “good news” stories were getting short shrift; three years later, nothing had changed.  If anything, by late 2006, the stories missed were getting larger.

Take, for example, the coverage of events in Anbar province.  In September-November 2006, the Washington Post ran a series of articles suggesting that the US military was unable to defeat the bloody insurgency in western Iraq “or counter al-Qaeda’s rising popularity there.”  These stories were echoed in the New York Times/International Herald Tribune, The Christian Science Monitor, NBC News, ABC News, CNN, the AP and others, down to local TV.

But this was not the only picture of events in Anbar.  In “Will the Real Anbar Narrative Please Stand Up?”, Bill Ardolino juxtaposed the WaPo stories against analysis by bloggers and embedded reporters like the Times of London’s Martin Fletcher and Michael Fumento for the Weekly Standard.  Bill Roggio’s military and intelligence sources were angry over the media’s characterization of the secret reports cited by the WaPo. Roggio examined how the claims made in the WaPo coverage were taken out of the larger context of events in Anbar.  Roggio and the Mudville Gazette’s “Greyhawk” charted the formation and rise of the Anbar Salvation Council — the alliance of 25 of the province’s 31 tribes in the fight against al Qaeda.  Roggio and Greyhawk followed up when the Anbar tribes got US air and artillery support — a development ignored by the establishment media.

We now know which narrative was more accurate.  Al Qaeda was not increasingly popular in Anbar.  To the contrary, the local tribes were overwhelmingly opposing and increasingly waging war against al Qaeda, with support from the US military.  Bloggers — carefully following and synthesizing information from their own sources, military information, embedded reporters, Arabic media and isolated stories in the establishment media over the course of a year — proved to be better remote journalists than those at the WaPo, NYT, CSM, AP, CNN, NBC and ABC (and any others I have overlooked).

There's tons more folks... tons... go now and read the rest and pass this to those you care for... it's important.

What media bias?

This media bias:

John Kelly
Senior Vice-President of NBC News Network Sales
30 Rockefeller Plaza
12th Floor
New York, NY  10112

Dear Mr. Kelly,

We understand that MSNBC and CNBC (the “Networks”) are refusing to sell advertising time to Freedom’s Watch (“FW”) to air a series of educational advertisements. It is our understanding that the purported basis for the denial is a Network policy denying access to groups that wish to sponsor advertising on controversial issues of public importance.

Given your recent history of airing such ads (see below), we must wonder if your denial to FW is a subjective decision because the network officials disagree with the FW ads’ message? If you continue to refuse to air FW’s advertisement we request an explanation of your basis in writing or station policy within two (2) days from the date above as time is of the essence.

FW has requested time on your networks to air advertisements discussing the War Against Terrorism. Your reporters and commentators discuss this issue on your programs at every hour of the day so you clearly agree this is an issue of great public importance. FW’s advertisements, to be sure, present a view of this debate that rounds out your coverage. These ads feature Iraq War Veterans and their families discussing their sacrifices in personal terms and their belief that we must allow the military time to complete its mission in Iraq and seek victory. This is a side of this issue that should not be silenced by national cable networks. We believe that rather than censor these American heroes, you should let the American public hear their story.

As noted above, it’s troubling that the Networks appear to be airing messages on issues on a selective basis. Our research indicates that your network has accepted and aired advertisements dealing with controversial issues of national importance in the recent past. For example, the Networks aired an advertisement entitled “Shameless Politicians” sponsored by Move America Forward regarding the war on terror in October 2004. In November 2006, the Networks aired advertisements sponsored by the American Medical Association entitled “Patient Voice” concerning the controversial issue of access to health care and coverage for the uninsured. During July 2007, the Networks aired advertisements sponsored by the Save Darfur Coalition. Your history of airing other issue advocacy advertisements makes the denial of FW advertisements troubling and raises the issue of whether your denial is based on an editorial disagreement with FW's message.

These ads are about important issues that will shape our national security policies for years to come. These ads present a point of view that your viewers are not now receiving.

Your viewers deserve to hear all sides of this issue so that they can make informed judgments about the future of their country.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this request. Please respond to me through Larry Weitzner at Jamestown Associates.

Very Truly Yours,

Bradley A. Blakeman
President and CEO

H/T PJMedia.

The Cross

Something other than circular reasoning.

Good stuff.  No lie.

"We're just Sodom and Gomorrah"

Posted by Guest Blogger BroKen:

"Hear the word of the LORD,
you rulers of Sodom;
listen to the law of our God,
you people of Gomorrah!"
Isaiah 1:10

Sodom and Gomorrah had been gone for around a thousand years when Isaiah said that. Who was he speaking to? Clearly, though the cities and the people were gone, the prophet of God saw that their spirit was thriving. He saw that spirit in the rulers and people of Judah; that they were more interested in their position and power than in purity.

One need not be a prophet to see that same spirit is with us today. Think of San Francisco. Think of a Gay Pride Parade in New York. But it's too easy to condemn those cities and that's not the point of Isaiah's message. Look it up and you'll find in the next few verses complaints about religious practice in the temple. Not pagan practice. Not worship of Baal. God was fed up with his people; their worship in the temple. Not because they were doing it wrong, but because they were coming to him while guilty. Here is my paraphrase.

"You folks are as bad as Sodom and Gomorrah. Why do you even bother coming to church? Do you think I need your offerings? Who asked you to come into my house, anyway? I am sick of it! Forget your potluck suppers and Easter Cantatas. I will not listen to your prayers because you are guilty. Wash the blood off your hands or get out of my sight. Get your act together. Do right. Defend the helpless!"

Pretty harsh words, I know, but they are in The Book. Isaiah is not talking to obvious sinners. He is talking to the "church folks." You see, you don't have to go to San Francisco or New York to find the spirit of Sodom and Gomorrah. It is all right here in McLean County. Sex sells. It's part of our culture. It's like the air we breathe. Personally, I hope I never see the infamous Paris Hilton video, but I've seen her Hardee's commercial. That was pornography enough. And it ran on prime time.

You say, "But I don't support that stuff. I don't approve!" Yeah, well what have you done to stop it? Of course, you probably wouldn't succeed. But what have you done to try?

And we are not content to feed ourselves this rancid flesh. We export it. Think for a moment about a people who are so modest that women cover their hair and face in public. How do you think they feel about what we pump into their homes through HBO, Showtime, and the rest, 24 hours a day?

When you hear some radical Islamicist call the United States the "Great Satan," remember these things we feed to them and to ourselves. Then you can reply, "You're crazy, man! We are NOT Satan. We're just Sodom and Gomorrah."

Michael Vick's statement of regret (updated, now with video)

I watched Michael Vick's statement to the press today and was surprised.  Mrs. BH and I watched it together and reacted similarly.  We both think the man's regrets, his apology, his remorse and contriteness, were genuine.  Once I find video I'll post it and you'll be able to make your own decision but based on what I saw, I think the man's sorry for what he's done.  Here's his statement:

      "For most of my life, I’ve been a football player, not a public speaker. So, I really don’t know how to say what I really want to say. I understand it’s not important as far as what you say, but how you say things. So, I take this opportunity just to speak from the heart.

First I want to apologize for all the things that I’ve done and that I’ve allowed to happen. I want to personally apologize to Commissioner Goodell, Arthur Blank, Coach Bobby Petrino and my Atlanta Falcon teammates for our previous discussions we had. I was not honest and forthright with those previous discussions. I was ashamed and totally disappointed in myself, to say the least.      

I want to apologize to all the young kids out there for my immature acts. What I did was very immature so that means I need to grow up.      

I totally ask for forgiveness and understanding as I move forward to better Micahel Vick the person, not the football player. I take full responsibility for my actions. Not for one second would I sit right her and point the finger and try to blame anybody else for my actions or what I’ve done. I’m totally responsible. Those things did not have to happen.      

I feel like we all make mistakes. Just I made a mistake in using bad judgment and making bad decisions. And those things just can’t happen. Dogfighting is a terrible thing and I didn’t reject it.      

I’m upset with myself and through this situation I found Jesus and asked him for forgiveness and I just turned my life over to God. I think that’s the right thing to do as of right now.      

Like I said, for this entire situation I never pointed the finger at anybody else. I accepted responsibility for my actions and what I did. And now I have to pay the consequences for it. But, in a sense, I think it’ll help me out a lot as a person. I got a lot to think about in the next year or so.      

I offer my deepest apologies to everybody out therein the world who was affected by this whole situation. If I’m more disappointed in myself than anything it’s because of all the young people, young kids that I let down, who look at Michael Vick as a role model.      

I have to go through this and put myself in this situation. I hope that every young kid in the world watching this interview right now who’s been following the case would use me as an example – to use better judgment and make better decisions.      

Once again, I offer my deepest apologies to everyone. I will redeem myself. I have to. I got a lot of down time, time to think about my actions and what I’ve done. And how to make Michael Vick a better person. Thank you."

God will ultimately judge the man's heart as He'll judge my own.  For my myself I ask for mercy.  I can do no less for Michael Vick, especially after seeing him deliver his statement.

You?

UPDATE: Let's go to the video tape:

Gonzalez out, Democrats gleeful...

... but, as expected, it's not enough:

The resignation of Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales today did little to silence his critics or calm the Democratic assault on the White House.

"This resignation is not the end of the story," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat. "Congress must get to the bottom of this mess and follow the facts where they lead, into the White House."

Rep. John Conyers, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said the resignation leaves a lingering "cloud of suspicion that the system of justice has been manipulated for political purposes."

"Unfortunately, the continued stonewalling of the White House in the U.S. attorney scandal has deprived the American people of the truth," the Michigan Democrat said. "If the power of the prosecutor has been misused in the name of partisanship, we deserve a full airing of the facts. The responsibility to uncover these facts is still on the Congress, and the Judiciary Committee in particular."

Melanie Sloan, executive director of the government watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), said the resignation was "overdue" and called for continued congressional hearings and an investigation by a special prosecutor.

The ineffectual handling of Gonzalez critics is, in my view, the surest indication that this administration is playing out the string.  It's too bad.  When Gonzalez was first attacked, they should've come out swinging... instead they kowtowed to liberals who saw blood in the water and weakness and now you have what you have today.

Bush's reaction:

President George W. Bush on Monday lashed out at critics of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who resigned from the top law enforcement post, for unfair treatment and dragging his name "through the mud."

Bush, before leaving Texas to attend Republican fund-raisers, called Gonzales a man of integrity, decency and principle, and said he had reluctantly accepted the resignation, which came "after months of unfair treatment that has created a harmful distraction at the Justice Department."

"It's sad that we live in a time when a talented and honorable person like Alberto Gonzales is impeded from doing important work because his good name was dragged through the mud for political reasons," he added.

Sadder still is the fact that the Bush administration rolled over and allowed Gonzalez to be pummelled.  Granted, Gonzalez didn't exactly help out his cause but still, politically, the administration showed weakness and the Democrats were on it like stink on poop.

Praying that the next Republican administration has the balls to take these bastards on.

Chris Wallace pile drives Bill Moyer

This, via Hot Air, is simply gobsmackingly good: