Getting My Crank On

I was reading what passes for journalism, written by what passes for journalists, in the USA Today newsrag yesterday and I got a little cranked up. Fortunately, I have a means of un-spinning the liberal slant and a venue to shine the light of common sense on the issues. I call it yelling at the newspaper in my living room.

(headline) Most fliers accept intrusion in the name of security -- Untrue spin by idiot journalist. The truth of the matter is that most fliers do not accept the personal intrusions, they endure them. Why? Because every time we hear or read about someone who complains too loudly (anything louder than a whispered aside to fellow disgruntled travelers), the complainer is declared disruptive, pulled aside, detained, delayed and possibly arrested. So because we act like sheep, fearful of cattle prods, this putz of a journalist declares us to have accepted this treatment.

• We do not like taking our shoes off.
• We do not like emptying our pockets.
• We do not like leaving behind all of the stuff we like to carry around with us.
• We do not like the long delays followed by the mad dash to make the flight.
• We do not like big dogs sniffing our crotches.

Using the definition of "going along with the program to avoid personal trouble or embarrassment" for the word acceptance, is like saying the majority of 18th century African slaves accepted their slavery. Or that the Jews were down with the Nazis. Doing what we are compelled to do is hardly acceptance.

(headline) Report: U.S. not ready for disaster -- No shit! If we could anticipate every possible scenario of every middle-eastern madman with a bomb and every variation of natural phenomenon (hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, etc.) and know and train precisely for every contingency and minimize the impact of such events . . . then I guess they wouldn't be disasters, would they?

The very definition of disaster says, "a sudden event that causes great damage or loss of life".

But what we have here is not so much a "news" story as another "hit piece" on the administration for being "unprepared" for disaster. It is another game of "attack dog journalism" where the dog gnaws at a "no win situation" bone for the sole purpose of slanting public opinion. We will never be prepared enough to satisfy everyone, especially the critics who prefer failure to what's good for America -- if it suits their political agenda.

(headline) Democrats urge ABC to withdraw 9/11 movie -- Guess what? There is a movie coming out that may actually tell the truth about the events, political bungling, and liberal policies that led up to the 9/11 disaster. It portrays a White House that is so tangled up in the Monica Lewinsky scandal that it left the nation on autopilot. And apparently, former members of the Clinton administration do not want the light of truth shown on their incompetence.

Wow! Aren't these the same guys who nodded in approval when Michael Moore was disseminating his vicious lies about George Bush? Where was their moral outrage then?

"But it might affect me, personally!" they are heard to whimper.

This is known as the true battle cry of all liberals. It also explains their stance on war.