![]() |
The Weblog at The View from the Core - Wednesday, March 03, 2004
|
Blog Stuff I haven't been feeling well for a couple of weeks. First, a bad cold; now, a throat infection. I'm going to take it easier for a few days. Lane Core Jr. CIW P Wed. 03/03/04 05:49:12 PM |
NYT Coverage of "Strange, Alien Species" So far, it looks like The Blog from the Core called this one right. Terry Eastland looks at the first month of the New York Times' coverage of the conservative beat, at The Weekly Standard today: .... In fact, division turns out to be the dominant narrative of the journalism so far. Consider the headlines of the first three stories: "Bush's push for marriage falls short for conservatives," "Conservative groups differ on Bush words on marriage," and "A concerned bloc of Republicans wonders whether Bush is conservative enough." Moreover, those and other "conservative" stories have proved more than a little strained. The words "conservative" and "conservatives" are used to excess 24 times in one story as though to assure readers that the Times is on the conservative beat. And people otherwise not known to be important conservatives turn out to be major, on-the-record sources, no doubt delighted that the Times has reached them. Was the point of actually announcing a "conservative beat" to interest conservatives in becoming sources?.... Sound vaguely familiar? See my When Will NYT Be Assigning a Reporter to "Examine" Liberal "Forces"? .... I think "what this is about" is playing up as much as possible if not more the differences of opinion among various conservative camps, to make it look like the general conservative movement in the country is weaker than it actually is. They will, concomitantly, downplay or ignore the differences between various liberal factions. (Thus ignoring, at their peril, Core's Law of Old Media.) .... Surely, this kind of cutting-edge See also Armavirumque Agrees With The Blog from the Core. (Thanks, Ryan.) Lane Core Jr. CIW P Wed. 03/03/04 05:37:14 PM |
On Diversity in Marriage Julie Ann Ponzi writes an editorial at Ashbrook Center, March 2004: .... It is ironic, is it not, that liberals who clamor for diversity in every other aspect of human relations, now argue for homogeneity in marriage. For, ultimately, that's what homosexual marriage is. It is a redundancy. Perhaps it is an exercise in narcissism. Perhaps it is laziness or cynicism. It is easier to "love" that which is familiar and what can be more familiar than that which is just like you? This is not to say that there can never be any joy or pleasure or personal fulfillment for the parties involved in a homosexual union. But it is safe to say that whatever those benefits may be, the reciprocal benefit to society is in no way equivalent to that of a heterosexual marriage. Obviously, then, society need not recognize, support or encourage these unions. What we should recognize, however, is ordinary human decency and compassion. Sodomy laws, while probably not unconstitutional (as the Supreme Court argued last spring), are probably also pretty stupid. Clearly, homosexuals should be able to visit their sick "partners" in the hospital. There should probably be some reasonable accommodations made with respect to inheritance and insurance laws. But these things do not require a recognition of homosexual marriage or even a formal recognition of so-called "domestic partners" in the law. These are harsh words. I know that. In ordinary times one would not dream of uttering them in a public way. But then, if the times were ordinary, one would not need to utter them. It could be argued their utterance is uncharitable and that the proper attitude to assume with respect to people who punish themselves by denying themselves higher goods is sympathy. But again, these are not ordinary times and it is clear that sympathy is not wanted or appreciated by the huge homosexual lobby in this country. The hand of decent Americans is forced and we must come to the debate with an equally strident approach. Too much is at stake for us to mince words. We cannot sacrifice the truth on the altar of polite conversation. (Thanks, Peter.) And Margaret calls my attention to Dennis Prager's article at TownHall, yesterday, in which he ruminates on how removing the diversity requirement from marriage will play out in society: .... Most of the activists in the movement to redefine marriage wish to overthrow the predominance of Judeo-Christian values in American life. Those who oppose same-sex marriage understand that redefining the central human institution marks the beginning of the end of Judeo-Christian civilization. Let us understand this redefinition as clearly as possible: With same-sex marriage, our society declares by law that mothers are unnecessary, since two men are equally ideal as mothers and as the creators of a family; and that fathers are unnecessary, since two women are equally ideal as parents and as the creators of a family. With same-sex marriage, our society declares that there is nothing special or even necessarily desirable about a man and a woman bonding. What is sacred to the proponents of same-sex marriage is the number of people marrying (two, for the time being), not that a man and woman bond. With same-sex marriage, when taught in school about sex, marriage and family, children will have to be taught that male-male and female-female sex, love and marriage are identical to male-female sex, love and marriage. And when asked, "Who do you think you will marry when you grow up?" thanks to the ubiquitous images of media, far more children will consider members of the same sex. With same-sex marriage, no adoption agency will ever be able to prefer a married man and woman as prospective parents. Aside from the tragedy of denying untold numbers of children a mother and a father, this will lead to a drastic diminution in women placing children for adoption, since most of these women will prefer something that will then be illegal that agencies place her child with a man and woman, not with two men or two women. With same-sex marriage, any media films, advertisements, greeting cards that only depict married couples as a woman and a man will be considered discriminatory and probably be sued. With same-sex marriage, those religious groups that only marry men and women will be deemed beyond the pale, marginalized and ostracized.... Lane Core Jr. CIW P Wed. 03/03/04 07:15:21 AM |
Point Blank A St. Blog's Roundup at Times Against Humanity. Lane Core Jr. CIW P Wed. 03/03/04 06:48:28 AM |
Moloch Now Lane Core Jr. CIW P Wed. 03/03/04 06:46:19 AM |
"Kerry Looking for Super Tuesday Triumph" Democrats in Self-Destruct Mode CCXII An AP article at Yahoo News! yesterday. + + + + + John Kerry battled John Edwards from New York to California in a 10-state show of strength Tuesday, seeking to shove his last major rival from the race and claim the Democratic presidential nomination. Pre-election polling gave Kerry an edge in almost every Election Day venue as he sought a lion's share of the victories to make Edwards' presidential bid a political, if not quite a mathematical, impossibility. Kerry was already pivoting toward a general-election fight with President Bush. "Boy, wait until you see the fire in my belly," he told a TV interviewer. The White House dispatched Vice President Dick Cheney to TV studios to criticize the presumptive foe. "He very clearly has over the years adopted a series of positions that indicate a desire to cut the defense budget, cut the intelligence budget, to eliminate many major weapons programs," Cheney said of the four-term Massachusetts senator. Edwards, a 50-year-old freshman senator who barely competed in half the states, targeted Georgia, Ohio and Minnesota for candidacy-saving victories. Surveys showed the race close in Georgia and barely within reach in Ohio, his prospects for survival dim. The only other wild card was Vermont, home of former Gov. Howard Dean. He dropped out of the race last month, but sentimental small-state partisans hoped to give Dean a handful of delegates to leverage his budding reform movement. In all, 10 states with a combined population of 94 million — one-third of the U.S. total — awarded 1,151 delegates, more than half of the 2,162 needed to seize the nomination. In addition to New York, California, Vermont and Edwards' three target states, voters cast ballots in four Kerry strongholds: Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts and Rhode Island. Kerry, a 60-year-old senator, had 701 delegates to Edwards' 205, even before Tuesday's voting. A 10-state sweep could give Kerry about 1,500 delegates — a virtually insurmountable lead. Even with a couple of victories and a better-than-expected showing in several other states, Edwards had to win at least 70 percent of the pledged delegates between now and June — and secure the support of uncommitted party leaders — to overtake Kerry in the delegate chase. The lawmakers took a Super Tuesday time-out in the Senate to vote on extending the ban on military-style assault weapons. The extension passed, and they returned to campaign work after chit-chatting on the Senate floor. The pair spent part of the day in Georgia, with Kerry looking ahead to November. "President Clinton was often known as the first black president. I wouldn't be upset if I could earn the right to be the second," he told the American Urban Radio Network. His unbridled optimism muted, Edwards shook hands outside a polling place in suburban Atlanta, then declined to take questions from reporters. Answers came all day from 10 states with nearly 50 million registered voters, many of them torn between the two candidates. "The issue that drove me is getting rid of Bush, and that led me to Kerry," said Ron Debry, 47, of suburban Cincinnati. "Maybe Edwards someday, but I don't think he's ready yet." Ousting Bush was the top priority for voters in nearly every Super Tuesday state, with large majorities saying they are angry at the president, according to exit polls conducted for The Associated Press and TV networks by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International. "Bush don't mean nothing to nobody but Bush," said Kerry voter John Richburg, 66, of Cleveland. "His lies done him out. He's got to go." The economy and jobs were the dominant issue in the states, with a majority convinced that U.S. trade with other countries is more likely to take jobs from their states, exit polls showed. Edwards hoped to seize a loser's share of delegates in New York, California and Maryland. He virtually ceded four New England states. His best bet for victory was Georgia, but he needed a triumph outside the South — preferably in a battleground like Ohio — to justify a drawn-out fight for the nomination. Edwards believed his tough-on-trade message would play in Ohio, which has lost more than 250,000 jobs since Bush took office. Kerry won 18 of the first 20 elections, many by routs, in a six-week campaign that drew attention to his decorated service in the Vietnam War and amplified Democratic criticism of Bush. However, with the White House gearing up for Bush's re-election, Democratic leaders grew increasingly eager to end the nomination fight. "Edwards is a team player," New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said. "He'll know what to do." Edwards won a single state, his native South Carolina — and that was four weeks and 11 defeats ago. He has had eight second-place finishes, five third-places and six fourth-places. Bush's re-election campaign begins a multimillion-dollar TV ad blitz Thursday designed to bolster the president's sagging political fortunes. Kerry is prepared to dip into Democratic Party coffers to pay for his own ads. Democratic interest groups, required to act independently of the Kerry camp, laid plans to air ads critical of Bush. Two other candidates, Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio and Al Sharpton of New York, had no chance of winning the nomination. + + + + + The Blog from the Core asserts Fair Use for non-commercial, non-profit educational purposes. Lane Core Jr. CIW P Wed. 03/03/04 06:44:17 AM |
The Big "Winter Soldier Investigation" Lie Scott Swett writes at TownHall, Feb. 24: .... Whether in print, on film, before microphones or on the street, the efforts of Kerry and the VVAW focused on a single objective: to convince the public that America’s military was committing vast numbers of atrocities in Vietnam; that they did so casually and routinely, as a matter of policy. And they succeeded. Many American soldiers returned home from the war to find they were spat upon in the streets, reviled as baby-killers, and treated as pariahs by former friends. For decades the standard media image of a Vietnam veteran murderous, filthy, addicted, and too damaged psychologically to cope with civilian life was taken directly from the dark canvas painted by John Kerry and the VVAW in 1971. But strangely, all those horrific accounts of rape, torture, arson and slaughter that the VVAW had recorded in Detroit seemed to evaporate once the real investigation demanded by Senator Hatfield began. As recounted in Guenter Lewy's 1978 book “America in Vietnam,” few witnesses agreed to talk with military investigators, even after being assured that they would not be asked about their own crimes. Many of those who did permit interviews turned out never to have been in combat. Some of the most gruesome claims came from men who were imposters using the names of real Vietnam veterans. One Marine who had been in combat eventually told investigators that a member of the Nation of Islam had helped prepare his statement, and admitted that he had never witnessed any of the atrocities he had testified to in Detroit. In the end, the Navy was unable to verify any of the hundreds of war crimes alleged by the Winter Soldier Investigation. Neither has anyone else during the 33 years since, including journalists, historians, and military and Congressional investigators. In fact, the entire Winter Soldier Investigation that John Kerry represented so memorably before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee was a fraud; a propaganda effort designed to horrify America into abandoning the war in Vietnam by poisoning public opinion against a generation of American soldiers.... See also Can Kerry Run Away From His Past? Lane Core Jr. CIW P Wed. 03/03/04 06:30:37 AM |
The Blog from the Core © 2002-2008 E. L. Core. All rights reserved. |
Previous | Week | Next |