Thursday, August 12, 2004

Beneath Contempt

Let me quote in total an article in my hometown newspaper, the Ann Arbor News:

President Bush vows in his latest campaign ad to "bring an enemy to justice before they hurt us again" although Osama bin laden remains at large and only one US defendant, Zacarias Moussaoui has been charged with crimes related to the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

"I can't imagine the great agony of a mom or dad having to make the decision about which child to pick up first on September the 11th," Bush says in the 30-second television ad, which sstarted airing Wednesday. "We cannot hesitate, we cannot yield, we must do everything in our power to bring an enemy to justice before they hurt us again.

Meanwhile, the Democratic National Committee launched a radio ad that also mentions the terror attacks and claims that Bush has distored Sen. John Kerry's record on Terrorism in a Republican radio ad. That, the Democratic commercial says, is "beneath the office of president." (emphasis mine)

Where do I begin? First, the paper specifically disputes the content of the Bush ad by noting that Osama Bin Laden is still at large and that Moussaoui is the only one charged with the attack as yet. Both of these statements are true. There is no mention of the thousands of US troops actively searching for Bin Laden; the status of the Moussaoui trial; the fact that the Germans have dismissed a case against another suspected 9/11 terrorist and released him; the recent terrorist arrests and information obtained from them, etc. etc. etc.

So, they provide factual statements that dispute the President's statement in the ad, and NO facts that might show how actively we are pursuing the people who killed 3000 Americans.

Second, they present the Kerry ad without providing any disputing facts (like, for example that Kerry voted against the financial bill to support the troops; that he is opposed to the death penalty for terrorists; that he has stated repeatedly that the judicial system is where terrorists should be held to account etc., etc. etc.). From their perspective, obviously, Kerry's ad should just be taken at face value.

Then, finally, to add insult to injury, they quote a Kerry official dissing the Bush Administration for daring to criticize Kerry!

Let me just say that it is very difficult to "distort John Kerry's record on terrorism" when in actuality there is NO RECORD TO DISTORT.

Frankly, I'm sick and tired of the Ann Arbor News and its editorialization of news articles. When I personally talked to one of the editors to complain about this type of story a few months ago, they responded, "Well, the NY Times does it."

Anybody who does it is beneath contempt.

No comments: