Some Breakfast Reading to Help Mr. Kerry Move Those Ore-Ida Kosher Products (C) Through.

Hugh Hewitt.

Tearing John Kerry's Ass:

"Senator, last week your staff said you hadn't been in Cambodia on Christmas Eve, 1968, even though you had written and spoken emphatically about having been there on many occasions, including the floor of the Senate. How did you make such a mistake?"

"What persuaded you last week that your memory from all those years was wrong?"

"...Could you please tell us everything about that trip, your conversation with CIA man, and whether any members of your crew participated in that conversation?"

"...Which day did that occur?"

"How many commandos were there? What date did this occur on?"

"...Historian Douglas Brinkley has said that your journals indicated three or four cross border missions to Cambodia, where you acted as a ferry-man for SEALs, Green Berets and CIA men. Is he right about his number?"

"...Will you hold another press conference tomorrow so we can follow up on your answers?"

"What do you think about war veterans who exaggerate their accomplishments in order to advance their careers?"

................................

I know everybody's going to be bolding that last part today, but screw you I'm original in other ways--eghm, excusez.

And then of course Hugh goes on to endulge playfully with the question of whether any real pressroom would ever bother Kerry with an actual line of questioning the way they try and do the President, but I stop paying attention at that point, doesn't anybody else?

Yeah, the media is biased. Yes, so are my professors. My professors are idiots. So are the unemployed J-school grads you tend to meet in skin-bin dance clubs. So are retarded people, toward foam balls and slobber. So what?

There aren't many people smart enough, intellectually resourceful enough to do real dialectic on an issue. To take a statement, a policy, a body of utterances, and parse it logically, identify its principles, isolate the mistakes, and then put the machine back together, with a critique appended. This Hugh is bright enough to do, and as I say not many people are that bright.

So I'm a little disappointed anymore when something I was enjoying starts pretending to be stirred about Liberal Bias, because it's not that hard to ignore the fucking media. America at large is doing it constantly; they're getting better and better at it actually, we all see that.

So isn't publically chewing over media bias like giving your enemy a friendly diagnosis?

Shouldn't we be saying, don't worry about the Liberal Media, friends, it's on its way out.

Just nobody get in its way, hmm?

........

Also I am completely mistaken about this. Hugh is a big-deal in the Blogospere, one of the biggest deals, not as big as me. First, second, third-time bloggers, casual bloggers haven't heard about this the number of times I have, and so that they will CONTINUE TO PARTICIPATE in the freemarket process that is bringing down The Gray Lady and her incest cult, they need to hear about Media Bias, today and tomorrow and the next day.

And a person that can explain as well as Hugh can would be remiss not to do so often from his huge bullypulpit.

I have corrected myself, it would seem, and that's the only reason I'm standing corrected, so don't read too much into it.

But please feel free to stay a minute and discuss which one of my personalities you think is on the right track. Myself, I have no preference...