"How did it come to pass that an opposition's measure of a president's foreign policy was all or nothing, success or "failure"? The answer is that the political absolutism now normal in Washington arrived at the moment--Nov. 7, 2000--that our politics subordinated even a war against terror to seizing the office of the presidency." - Daniel Henninger - WSJ 11/18/05
"the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts." - George Orwell

Thursday, March 15, 2007

Appearances and Perceptions: Dems and the Media

I’ve been painfully busy as of late and have had very little time to post, but yesterday I did post a couple, one of which was “When Democrats say it’s a Big Deal, it Isn’t.”

I received a really good comment from a John (no, I’m not a pro, but I do play one on TV), and is as follows:

“Obviously this blogger has never practised law. It's an incredibly big deal. Forget all the spin, it is SOP to replace all or most US attorneys at the start of a new presidency. Clinton replaced all but so did Reagan in 1981. After that it very unusual for any to lose their jobs during a president's term and they occupy a quasi monarchical position while in office. Real or apparent political interference is a complete no no. Hence the total silence on the Republican benches of congress because they realize how big a deal this is. Given what has happened, Gonzales is probably a goner and it is probable that several of these staffers are in serious legal jeopardy. Schumer has the white house and DOJ on the ropes over this and he knows it.”

Beyond the point that I don’t “practice” anything and without a doubt law; for that I would point John and/or anyone else to someone that has and perhaps does still practice law, Andrew McCarthy, “Playing Politics with Politics.” Please argue this case with him and not me; however you may do this by commenting at this post. Also, the editors at NRO do have a few words to speak of in regard to the subject here, with “Mismanagement of Justice.”

All of the above aside, with the exception of the comment; I commented back that I agreed with the assessment of, “Real or apparent political interference is a complete no no.,” as it speaks to how it can or may appear.

The comment struck a nerve as far as appearances go and what it is politics and/or politicians do with appearances. Appearance goes hand and foot (in mouth) with perception, but an appearance or perception does not make it true nor false for that matter. We all may see the same thing, but walk away with a different impression based upon our perception(s) of an event. In this case the administration did something that appears to many as something scandalous and/or criminal, while others, which include myself whether through ignorance or not, although it is ignorance in the sense that I am ignorant of why in reality it has taken place; perceive it as standard operating procedure for politics.

Again as I began this mess, the use of the term appear as appropriate to appearance is what really bothered me and got me to thinking (something else I don’t practice). Appearance is exactly what the Democrat party and msm has had to work with and has done so with a feverish passion ever since George W. Bush took office. Granted, they at the least are just playing politics or hawking “news” and it appears to me that that is all they are doing (endless debate here), however I believe what they have done is to everyone’s detriment.

NSA Surveillance is the government spying. Katrina happened because Bush is/did not sign on with Kyoto. The Federal response to Katrina was racism in action. The supposed leak in the Joseph Wilson episode was just in retaliation for “speaking truth to power,” forget about Wilson’s lies, Iraq is just for oil, for Dad, for the military industrial complex, for imperialistic reasons……..I could go on and on, but won’t bother.

In each of these instances the Dems and msm (hence this blogs name), took each of these scenarios and made them appear as fact; this even when each reacted and stood (in few if any instances beyond 9/11, Afghanistan, WMDs and Iraq and this may be stretching it), on the side of the perception of the administration. For the sake of this post, I won’t bother going into wordy detail about each as I would imagine perception has/is already taking place as to what kind of an *ss this blogger is; that and most instances have already been covered enough that a reader wouldn’t need any detail.

Appearance, perception and reality don’t all fit together at least as far as they lead to one seeing a reality that isn’t. I believe the msm and Dems, as well as others that feel the need to for whatever psychosis (my perception), have done much damage to this country and the world as a whole. From the msm’s “unbiased” reporting and the Dems politics as usual have come countless opportunities to see and believe many appearances that just are not so. What this has wrought is a world that will prove much more difficult to fix than either of them could ever imagine or perceive.

Most if not all readers will get the gist of what I’m saying regardless of their side of the political spectrum. We have lived each and every episode together over the past six plus years regardless of the perception we walk away with. I think many need pull their heads out of their *sses and select a new conditioner, while others will think the same of me and mine.

Others will think, what’s your point? These latter will just have to practice thinking a little bit more often. Or maybe I just need to learn how to make a point.

Please Note: this blogger is not a psychiatrist, sociologist or any other professional that may or may not be qualified to make the preceeding statements; it’s just my opinion.

  • DeMediacratic Nation Blogrolls
  • Trackback for this Post: http://haloscan.com/tb/blandlyurbane/2557739836505641663

    © blogger templates 3 column | Webtalks