What have we been tweeting

.

A free society requires a free press. While true, saying fails to mention anything abt corrupt press.

We can’t buy the “bias” angle anymore as it goes far beyond the simple statist cheerleading of this country’s 4th estate.

What inspired that tweet was MSNBC deliberately editing a legislative hearing this week in Hartford, CT to make it look as if Neil Heslin, the father of a Sandy Hook victim who was testifying, was being heckled by members of the audience. In fact, he was not being heckled.

This is shameless journalistic malpractice to alter footage of an event in order to stack the deck against those with whom’s politics you disagree.

We felt a similar manner of disgust in the tone of coverage regarding Abu Ghraib and now Benghazi. We have forgotten the exact figure but the NY Times ran a front page story on the tasteless and disgusting photos taken of Iraqi prisoners by our troops minding the prison for 33 straight days. Howls of indignation echoed from the media-political class calling for Rumsfeld’s and, at times, Bush’s head. We may remind everybody that though, humiliating, none of the prisoners died.

Fast forward some 8-9 years and the absolute fiasco that was Benghazi generates barely a shrug from our nation’s press. We ignored constant pleas for beefing up security there and as a result four Americans are dead from a well-coordinated assault on the Benghazi consulate on 9-11. There is probably a handful of embassies/consulates we would want to pay particular attention to on the anniversary of the worst terrorist attack on this country in its history and Benghazi, a hub of anti-Qaddafi Islamist activity, would certainly be one of them.

And when it all went up in smoke, the administration immediately, and against all logic and reason, blamed some totally obscure alleged anti-Islam Youtube movie trailer. They maintained this lie for weeks and no one had the balls to call them out on it.

And when Hilary Clinton, before stepping down as Secretary of State, beclowned herself in congressional testimony (“What difference does it make?”) she was labeled by the press a tough-minded statesmen who, incredibly enough, may have possibly been using these hearings to launch her 2016 presidential campaign.

As far as we can tell, the only person that has been punished for this travesty is the poor sap who made the crappy Youtube movie trailer.


Again, mere bias doesn’t adequately explain what is going on here. The press has effectively abdicated their responsibility to have an inherently adversarial relationship with a presidential administration. Indeed, it appears quite the opposiste They are all, with few exceptions, corrupt to the core.

Maybe that fact alone is the single best reason for a Republican president.

.

Great moments in the history of Google search engine steering

When we were searching for a news article on the backroom give away that President Obama personally offered up to the unions that would exempt them from having to pay the 40% excise tax on their “Cadillac” health plans we punched in “Obama” and “unions” and this is what Google thought we might like to see to the exclusion of all else:


(click on image to enlarge)

Of course, your opinion may differ

We had jury duty today and though we were de-selected once we made it to the box, we always find the instructions offered by the presiding judge and the line of questioning employed by both the prosecution and defense in order to select the jury to be informative.

Without getting into too much of the details, the case that was to be tried was the allegation that a woman with a history of mental problems (assumed) had committed fraud in illegally obtaining Social Security money.

We have appeared for jury duty probably half a dozen times and though we haven’t yet served in the jury box, the judges opening instructions, though pro forma, are entirely necessary. And this time the judge was no different as he asked us to be impartial jurors and to not let the gender, race, religion or sexual orientation of the defendant, the witnesses or that of the prosecution or defense bias our thinking either in favor or against.

“Is there anyone here, that will not be able to do this? I see no hands raised.”

The attorneys also asked individual jurors (those who had previous experiences with trying to obtain disability or social security, for example) if they could indeed remain impartial throughout the trial if they themselves had a negative experience in attempting to obtain the same.

The judge then introduced a term we had not heard before. It was jury nullification. It goes hand in hand with the requested impartiality but we suppose because of this case where (again, we are assuming) the defendant suffers from some mental health issues, the judge wanted to make sure that our emotions did not get the better of us. The judge illustrated the concept of jury nullification as being where a juror or jurors, regardless of the facts presented before them would move to acquit a defendant in protest of the applicable law(s) or the set of circumstances inherent to the case.

We’re proud we have the justice system as we do. We’re glad the judge takes what seems like an eternity to lay out the simple ground rules for executing a fair trial and that any biases and prejudices are weeded out as best as possible for as fair a trial as possible. And we are glad the lawyers for both the prosecution and defense assist in this effort.

It appears to by a system that is steeped in trying to obtain the highest of standards by demanding the best in mankind’s nature. These high standards which are un-swayed by emotion or prejudice but rather informed by the rule of law. And we think we can all agree that this is the best way to do this.
.
.
.
.
.



“You do what you think is right and let the law catch up”.
- Thurgood Marshall

Too taboo a subject, perhaps?

Kathy Phuc Nguyen, a demonstration organizer and spokeswoman for the human rights group Thanh Nien Co Vang, drew cheers when, speaking through a bullhorn, she said, "Surely, one would not display a photograph of a young Jewish person wearing a Nazi symbol and standing next to a bust of Hitler in a heavily populated community of Holocaust survivors."

So it goes up in Orange County where large protests from the Vietnamese community and a defacement with red paint of one of the works, forced the shut-down of an exhibit sponsored by the Vietnamese American Arts and Letters Assn. which they claim was intended to launch a discussion about freedom of expression in the Vietnamese community.

Now, here is where you get our obligatory preachiness about respecting others’ property and opinions and and where we also denounce vandalism……….

…. There. Glad we could get that off our chest.

Now despite the unfortunate actions of a few knuckleheads, we couldn’t help but feel some pride over the words and actions of many of these protesters. These people lived through the horrors of communism (or the coercion to live through the horrors of communism) – they should know.

There are a slew of Nazi/Holocaust movies out right now and that’s all to the good. Evil is evil and it should be forever documented, dramatized and memorialized as such. We’ve always wondered, however, why it is that “communism” has never received the same treatment from Hollywood or the arts and letters as its step-brother, National Socialism.

The reasons are many - we know this - but at the end of the day it boils down to practicality.

Making a two hour movie that focuses on a corrupt ideology and which is essentially contained to one geographic region, a dozen or so years and one central figure is difficult enough for Steven Spielberg.

Now try a movie that focuses on a corrupt ideology but has literally spanned the globe over the course of centuries now and which has been perpetrated by scores of influential regional and global figures alike and which has, ultimately, claimed the lives of 50, 60, 70(?) million people.

Yep. No wonder Hollywood has never attempted to crack that nut. Completely out of their league… and mood.