Tuesday, August 14, 2007

If the Facts Don’t Fit the Narrative, Can the Facts Be “Wrong”?

The recent Duke non-rape story turned out to be a bust for the main stream media. What really happened here was that politicians, race baiters, a rogue prosecutor, a feckless lab administrator and the media formed quickly into a lynch mob that nearly succeeded in railroading a group of young men who were clearly guilty of being white, rich, privileged, and perhaps of being rowdy and arrogant, but not actually guilty of a crime.

If anyone ever starts a museum of horrible explanations, the one-liner by Newsweek's Evan Thomas about his magazine's dubious reporting on the Duke non-rape case — "The narrative was right but the facts were wrong" — is destined to become a popular exhibit, right up there with "we had to destroy the village to save it."
What Mr. Thomas seems to mean is that the newsroom view of the lacrosse players as privileged, sexist, and arrogant white male jocks was the correct angle on the story. It wasn't. . . .
We now live in a docudrama world in which techniques of fiction and nonfiction are starting to blur. Many reporters think objectivity is a myth. They see journalism as inherently a subjective exercise in which the feelings and the will of the journalist function to reveal the truth of what has occurred. Two results are the emotional commitment to powerful but untrue story lines, and a further loss of credibility for the press. – John Leo

"The narrative was right but the facts were wrong"
Who buys this arrogant crap? Geez. And we wonder why our approval ratings are in the crapper?
I could be crazy but perhaps it is time to focus on the facts rather than trying to tell people what to think.
--http://instapundit.com/archives2/008159.phpMichael Silence on August 14, 2007 http://blogs.knoxnews.com/knx/silence/archives/2007/08/a_classic_mains_1.shtml

U.S. Military Has Increasing Moral Authority In Iraq...

...while Congress, um, doesn't.

In spite of what you may be hearing on the news, especially from such knowledgeable sources as Harry Reid, Jack Murtha, Nancy Pelosi, etc., progress is being made in Iraq, and not just militarily.

Michael Yon frequently imbeds with military units in Iraq, goes on patrols, attends town meetings, and gets out of the Green Zone to get a good idea what’s going on in Iraq. Here’s what he says in his latest dispatch:

Our military has increasing moral authority in Iraq, but the same cannot be said for our government at home. In fact, it’s in moral deficit because many Iraqis are increasingly frightened we will abandon them to genocide. The Iraqis I speak with couldn’t care less what is said from Washington but large numbers of them pay close attention to what some Marine Gunny says, or what American battalion commanders all over Iraq say. Some of our commanders could probably run for local offices in Iraq, and win. To say there has been no political progress in Iraq in 2007 is patently absurd, completely wrong and dangerously dismissive of the significant changes and improvements happening all across Iraq. Whether or not Americans are seeing it on the nightly news or reading it in their local papers, Iraqis are actively writing their children’s history.

Michael Yon is well worth reading every time he publishes a new dispatch. There’s a link to his site on the sidebar, and here’s a link to this article on his site:

Ethics Bill Proves Congress is Corrupt, Does Less to Correct It Than Hide It

Congress is sitting on a mountain of corruption, and the recent ethics bill proves it. From Ed Morrisey at Captain’s Quarters:

We have heard that the new bill keeps lawmakers from accepting free meals from lobbyists, as though a free $40 steak has been the root of all corruption on Capitol Hill, but it doesn't even do that much. There are over 20 exceptions to the food and gift bans in the bill. For instance, lobbyists can still fund trips to "well-attended" events, such as charity golf tournaments and receptions, or events where the lawmaker plays a ceremonial role. They can't give tickets to sporting events, but that changes if the Congressman tosses out the first pitch.
So let's recap. Lobbyists can't buy a meal unless it's part of a fundraiser, which means that the previous $40 steak can be legalized now by providing a $10,000 check to tenderize it. Lawmakers can't accept gifts to sporting events unless the lobbyists can make sure they get all sorts of attention from the crowd, preferably during election season. Lobbyists can't buy a round of golf for a Senator, but that changes if the round of golf comes at a charity function where lots of press usually attend.
Wow -- what a sacrifice our Congress has made for themselves in this ethics bill! No wonder lobbyists object to it. All Congress has done is to increase their prices, not take them off the market. In a way, it makes it even more easier for the richest interests to buy a Congressman and keep the hoi polloi from shopping at the Capitol Hill outlet store.

It’s worth reading the whole thing. Here’s a link: