What Boyd vs. Powerline Really Reveals

On August 18th, John Hinderaker and Scott Johnson of Powerline published this piece in the Minneapolis Star Tribune (sorry, the commies at the Strib make you register for their site and I can't just post the articles here because they turn real capitalistic when it comes to their content) discussing the controversy surrounding John Kerry's statements about his Vietnam service and the allegations of distortions made by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Strib editor Jim Boyd responded a few days later by denouncing my fellow bloggers Hinderaker and Johnson along with the Swift Boat Vets and the "Republican smear machine." H&J responded to Boyd here but Boyd, being the Strib editor, got the last word. Hinderaker and Johnson invited Boyd to appear on their Northern Alliance radio show, but, huge suprise, Boyd refused to debate his opponents on the air.

I'll leave the analysis of this exchange for another post, and won't comment on Kerry's Vietnam service as that has been covered extensively elsewhere, at the Kerry Spot just for one example. What this exchange really reveals is the bias of the so-called mainstream press, or more aptly the "lamestream press." When Hinderaker and Johnson write something, you know their bias (right-leaning) because they readily reveal it; similarly, when Boyd responds on the editorial pages, you know his bias (left-leaning), because he admits it. You can therefore filter the writings on both participants with whatever you feel is the most appropriate mental filter.

What's most galling about the whole Kerry vs. Swift Boat Vets affair however is the attrocious treatment of it by the supposedly "objective" mainstream press. Last spring, when the National Guard service of George W. Bush was under attack, including charges that he was AWOL, the mainstream press treated the allegations as credible, demanded that Bush release all his service records (which he did, showing that he never absent without leave), and never questioned the motives or backgrounds of his accusers. Michael Moore's two hour celluloid orgy of anti-Bush propaganda was never fact-checked nor was it called a "smear," and the press didn't even raise any eyebrows when Moore showed up in a seat next to former president Jimmy Carter at the Democratic National Convention. When MoveOn.org and America Coming Together compared Bush to Hitler, or worse (Satan), that apparently wasn't a smear either, and their was certainly no reason to investigate them or question the wisdom of allowing 527 groups to raise unlimited funds.

Now, however, it's Kerry's service record that is under attack, and shock of shocks, the media coverage is far different. 527s are evil and President Bush should shut them down, particularly the Swift Boat Vets organization (when did Bush get sole and absolute authority over the First Amendment? I must have missed that.). Rather than addressing directly and factually the allegations made by the Swift Boat Vets, and demanding that Kerry answer the allegations and release ALL of his service records, the media attack the Swifties organization: individual reputations are attacked, motives are questioned, collaboration with the Bush campaign is alledged, and the Swiftie's charges are dismissed as "smears." The media focus on one outside Bush lawyer who also advised the Swift Vets group, ignoring the revolving door between the Kerry campaign and various left-leaning 527s. The bottom line seems to be that charges against Bush are automatically assumed to be credible until (and sometimes even after) proven groundless, and the accusers assumed to have the purest of motives, while accusations against Kerry aren't worthy of investigation due to the presumed corruption of the accusers. Oh, but there's no left-wing bias in the mainstream media, of course.

That's why people are beginning to turn off and away from the networks news broadcasts, CNN, The New York Times, Washington Post, and the major newsweeklies; we can see through the bias, and if all we can get is biased news, we'd prefer to get it from sources that at least make their bias clear. That's why alternative media -- the blogosphere (particularly Hugh Hewitt's site), talk radio, Fox News, etc. -- are gaining so rapidly in popularity. The lamestream press has been exposed for the "objective" fraud that it is.

- posted by Tom Pick @ 11:04 AM