Saturday, September 10, 2005

Cleaning Up After the MSM

The MSM types are sticking to their guns. The strategy of reporting stories inaccurately, getting caught by the blogosphere, and then still not retracting or apologizing continues. Three examples:

President Bush has been harshly criticized by both the media and the Democrats for saying, "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees" in New Orleans. However, Michelle Malkin points us to Pat at Brainster's Blog, who argues that Bush's critics have wrongly interpreted the "anticipations" that people had of New Orleans' levees in the event of a Huricane as powerful as Katrina. Pat says that there was a fear of "overtopping" the levees, but not "breaching" them. The difference is that "if the levee had just overtopped, then the flooding would have ceased once the storm subsided." This small bit of knowledge seems extremely valuable if we are to look at the critics' arguments with any amount of scrutiny.

Perhaps one of the reasons that Katrina has caused so much commotion is the images that are gracing our televisions. The major broadcasting networks allow clip after clip of the devastation to go on the air. The American public has been fed a steady diet of drowned bodies, horrible living conditions, and other graphic images. But where is the discretion? Instapundit points out that the major networks were quite hesitant in displaying the graphic images of 9/11, in most cases refusing to air any such footage. For instance, images of people jumping from the World Trade Center were kept OFF AIR. So why not have the same standard for this catastrophic disaster? The answer: it doesn't fall in line with the bash Bush agenda of many MSM figures.

Remember when we were told of the apocalyptic proportions of the loss of lives due to Hurricane Katrina? New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagins made alarming predictions that Katrina could have caused 10,000 lives to be lost. But after the first street-by-street sweep of the city, far fewer bodies were found than had been feared. This is good news, of course, but it simply highlights the MSM's eagerness to jump on bad news and report it.

I highly doubt that any of these stories get any reasonable amount of press. I wonder why.

Friday, September 09, 2005

The 4th Circuit Gets It Right

In an important ruling for the war on terror, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the Bush administration. The court ruled unanimously that it is permissable for the government to hold a U.S. citizen under military custody if that citizen is viewed as an "enemy combatant." The person in question, Jose Padilla, was labeled as such by President Bush back in 2002. Padilla is believed to be closely associated with al Qaeda, and was arrested in 2002 after returning from weapons and explosives training with members of al Qaeda in Pakistan.

The court's decision is a crucial one in stregthening the effort against terrorism. It ensures that the federal government will keep the authority it needs to properly pursue the war on terror, and though it may not appear to be of much consequence, the court's ruling is a great victory for the administration. Judge Michael Luttig wrote the opinion, in which he very accurately explains why the court made the right decision in this case. This is just another example of the why Luttig would make a good choice for the president in his second nomination for the Supreme Court.

To The Agenda Journalists

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, many members of the main-stream media have dreamed about the downfall of the Bush Administration. The problem is, the American public isn't buying the MSM's call to take down the president.

If you're wondering what WILL happen instead, Newton Emerson of the Irish Times gives a sound opinion.

I Wonder If They'll Ever Learn

If you haven't heard about the Louisiana state government BLOCKING the Red Cross from entering New Orleans, I suggest you check out the story. According to Fox News' Major Garrett, the Red Cross was had prepositioned water, food, blankets, and hygiene products for delivery to the Superdome and the Convention Center in the immediate aftermath of the hurricane, but was blocked from delivering the goods by the Louisiana state government. The story broke on Brit Hume's show on Fox News Channel on Wednesday, and was immediately followed up by way of an interview on the Hugh Hewitt Radio Show. The transcript of this interview is included with the story I've linked to above.

This story is a crucial one. It gives more hard evidence showing the ineptitude of the Democrat-headed Louisiana state government. It is simply stunning that in a time of crisis when people were desperate for help, the relief they sought was not allowed to reach them. But don't expect the Democrats to shoulder any responsibilty for their actions. Despite these specific instances where the "horrible management of the relief effort" is clearly their own doing, Democrats insist on blaming FEMA and President Bush. Even after the Red Cross story broke, Senate Democrat Chuck Schumer urged people to sign an online petition to fire the director of FEMA.

Meanwhile, the relief effort along the Gulf Coast continues. So while the Democrats are using this natural disaster as a vehicle for political advancement, the Bush administration will continue to work on fixing the damage that Katrina caused.

Wednesday, September 07, 2005

The Blame Game

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, it seems that everyone is searching for somewhere to place the blame. Especially Democrats. Many key Democrats have chimed in on the issue, with the majority of their criticisms going against the administration and the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Michael Brown. In her perfect 20/20 hindsight, Hillary Clinton was quick to point out that she "would never have appointed such a person." Democratic chairman Howard Dean also made some foundationless comments asserting that race played a role in who was rescued.

The striking thing about all of this is that so many of those making the accusations conveniently overlook their Democratic allies (who are actually more directly involved in the situation than either the president or Brown). It just better serves their purpose to point fingers at Republicans. Meanwhile, people like Lousianna's Governor Kathleen Blanco and New Orleans' Mayor Ray Nagin are avoiding any large amounts of criticism. I hate to point out the obvious, but both Blanco and Nagin are in positions that allow them to do MORE than either the president or Brown. State governments and localized city officials are in charge of initiating evacuations and mobilizing their people in preparation for the arrival of natural disaster like Hurricane Katrina. But this fact is overlooked by Democrats. Perhaps a better grasp of Federalism might help their cause.

Arnold's Re-Election Campaign

It looks like the Terminator is gearing up to run for a second term as the governor of California. In a move that will surely make the majority of voters in California happy, the Arnold camp announced today that he intends to veto the same-sex marriage bill recently pushed through the California legislature. The bill would have made the state the first to legalize same-sex marriages through its elected lawmakers. This is a good move for Arnold because it re-establishes his promise to listen first to the voters of California, a message that got him elected in the first place. The bottom line: Arnold isn't going anywhere.

Hurricane Katrina Timeline

For a timeline tracking what was happening in New Orleans prior to, during, and after Hurricane Katrina hit, Right Wing Nuthouse has a good recounting of the events. This timeline should prove vital in assessing how the relief effort could have been better coordinated. (Thanks to Hugh Hewitt for the link).