Tuesday, September 07, 2004

AWOL Again?

I am reading Drudge and see that the major news outlets will be pursuing the Bush-National Guard Story again. Furthermore Kitty Kelly will be on the TV promoting her book.

I think this is a great example of how the press treats Bush vs Kerry. When the Swift Boat Vets came out with their book, the press and TV ignored them. Now Kitty Kelly comes out with a book full of accusations...she will be on TV. I am not saying she is lying, etc. We can go into that later. I simply want to point out the difference in the way the candidates are treated when allegations come up.

The press promotes allegations against Bush yet seems to attempt to discredit allegations against Kerry.

I would like to know what is the standard whereby Kitty Kelly and her book (alleging cocaine use at Camp David) gets to be on TV (NBC) and the Swift Boat Vets are dismissed as partisan?

How many times must the press bring up the National Guard angle? It is interesting that they seem to pursue the idea that maybe Bush is hiding something and that the accusations are true. Yet their attitude towards the Kerry Vietnam stories show a completely different take. They are skeptical with regards to the stories about Kerry. This is even more interesting based on the fact that as a result of the Swift Boat Vets...Kerry has had to back of some of his stories.

If the treatment of the two candidates by the press does not show a bias, I don't know what does? This is why more and more people are turning away from the mainstream media.

I for one would like the standards by which one set of accusations are pursued vigorously while another are dismissed.

We at the very least deserve consistency on the part of media.

We are waiting...


Blogger Joe Green said...

There is something not right about George Bush II version of events during the Viet Nam War. And for that matter, there is something not quite right about the Dick Cheney version of the Viet Nam War either.

As I understand it, Bush was a "fully qualified F-102 combat pilot" with the Texas Air National Guard, having obtained that position and a draft deferment because of the actions of influencial friends in high places.

What makes no sense is Bush's claims of "combat readiness" and his offsetting lack of preparation and flying time. Combat ready fighter pilots of that era were always practicing and flying exercises, but for some reason, Bush Jr. was not among them.

However to my mind, what is totally incongruent is Bush's drinking and his flying. If he was an alcoholic during this period of his life as he has admitted, and indeed been charged and convicted when driving under the influence of alcohol, how could have his immediate superiors in the Texas Air National Guard NOT HAVE NOTICED and taken steps to GROUND him pending a full medical report that would have fully disclosed the extent of his drinking problem.

That is the question worth investigating by investigative journalists.

The second question arise out of all the draft deferments that Dick Cheney was able to obtain, even after he flunked out of Yale University. Who was smoothing the way for Dick Cheney to avoid military service?

Its seems to be an important question because neither men have demonstrated much military judgement in their current positions that have cost many unnecessary American lives in Iraq, and which has taken well over 100,000 civilian lives, particularly women and children.

1:13 AM  
Blogger rokkgod said...

I was surfing around and found another George Bush site.George Bush Doesn't Care About Black People This place has a ton of funny videos and mp3s.

4:03 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home