No More Hiding

Some of our countrymen want us to lose in Iraq.

Most military members saw through the media’s condescension toward them and most voted for President Bush. As a result, some reporters are no longer bothering to hide their contempt toward the rough men (and women).

This morning, I watched a reporter badger a Lieutenant General over US casualties during a Pentagon news conference on the progress of the Fallujah battle. The reporter (Charlie-something) attempted to bully the general—heh--into giving a fixed number of casualties. That Charlie was unsuccessful is a given. That the attempt was pathetic was also a given.

It was also the very first question asked. Charlie didn’t care about winning, about our troops, nor about the Iraqi people. With his faux outrage, he *does* “care” about those dead American bodies, however. Well, he’s not alone in this world: our enemies care about dead American bodies as well.

UPDATE: Yep.  They sneer at real military men and women but will actually fawn over the words of that great military strategist, the well-informed Madonna (or whatever name she's using).

"Global terror is in California. There's global terror everywhere and it's absurd to think you can get it by going to one country and dropping tons of bombs on innocent people."

Shut up, you no-singing, brainless, never-was!  I'm willing to bet that John Kerry wishes that people like you had kept your mouths shut as well.

(Thanks to Jim at Bill's place)

UPDATE: The "Charlie-something" mentioned above is Charlie Aldinger of Reuters.

(Thanks to FoxNews)

Comments

[caltechgirl]

I saw that too. I thought the general did a pretty good job of dealing with a bunch of idiots. One moron-ette asked him what the "best case scenario" was for Fallujah. Come on, can't you answer that yourself?

It's too bad that politics brings out the worst in people, and that they can't appreciate the meaning of the sacrifice that is being made for their freedom and the freedom of the Iraqi people

[ricardo]

oh come on.....you gotta say madonna is a no singing gal? you should say no-acting gal..she can't act for shit!

[JSAllison]

iirc 'journalists' have credentials that allow them access to these soiree's. I think it would be very amusing to start pulling said credentials on confirmed sitings of stupidity, laziness and contrarian attempts to embarrass rather than investigate. I'd pull the credentials the first time someone pipes up with: "I want to ask a question of n parts (where n is greater than one) and is designed to maximize the face time of said 'journalist'. We could start this off with the White House press pool and then let it trickle down, muahaha!

[Iron Mike]

"Hello General. Ibrahim Abdul from Iraqi Times. Where are your tanks and may I count them?"

Remember the great Lt General from Desert Storm who did all the press reports during that time? He was famous for great responses.

"General, could you tell us about the patriot system?"

"It's an anti-missile missile system."

"Could you describe its capabilities?"

"It is fast."

"How fast, General?"

"Very, very fast. Next question."

I loved watching him. And apparently others thought so too, because I remember him actually being on Jay Leno!

[HeavyHanded]

Whatever happened to real journalism? In "the old days", I think they did a good job of hiding their opinions and politics and stuck to reporting the facts. I guess there has been such a slow erosion of factual reporting over time that we didn't even notice what was happening. Thank heavens for talk radio and the internet! Keep praying for our service men and women.

[David Blue]

I can only assume it's voters who think like Madonna that continually elect representatives like "Baghdad" Jim McDermott and Patty Murray (of Osama bin Laden's day-care centers fame).

[Eskimo]

Logic would dictate that at some point, the celebrity crowd would realize they the only people who take them seriously are those who watch MTVs Real World and think it's...well....real.

[Fred Schoeneman]

Hey,

Did you notice that in paragraph 2, the writer makes a big deal of the number of dead -- ten -- and then points out that this is more than were killed during the assault on Fallujah back in April...

Except that most of the ten killed so far died from pre-assault car-bombings, and not the assault itself.

Pretty unfairly written.

The thing that bothers me, is they're so transparently on the other side.

f

[cooper]

She simply seems to have forgotten the Hamas threat to her own children if she gave a concert in Israel.

Oh yeah, I forgot, she has her own security. She doesn't need anyone else's.

[birdwoman]

I thought it was pretty funny that you kept calling the reporter "Charlie." I'm not at all military, but from some of the stuff I've seen "on t.v." I thought that the enemy was referred to as Charlie. (sorry if I've got that wrong.)

Then you go and update with his name really being Charlie. I thought it was just you being metaphorical...

(*)>

[StinKerr]

I saw that too although I didn't catch the "news" service name. The Reuters "reporter" must have tripped the BBC "reporter" by getting to ask that question first. @$$hats! I kicked Reuters to the curb a long time ago on the news sites I use. I don't even look at them any more. They're as bad or worse than al Jazeera. They always want to concentrate on the negative and ignore the postitive because that's their story line.

One of the things I admire about Rumsfeld is the way he handles reporters asking stupid questions: He hands them their @$$es. More officials and spokesmen should take this tack. It could lead to better, more insightful questions and answers rather than a bunch of fools rephrasing and asking the same question for thirty minutes. (Check the whitehouse daily gaggle transcripts for examples)

[baldilocks]

Stinkerr: Yep. I saw Rumsfeld give this same Charlie the "Rummy" treatment. It was a thing of beauty.