Terry Neal over at the Washington Post wrote a column lamenting the recent criticism levelled on the media by bloggers and talk radio against the mainstream media.  According to Neal, the criticisms serve as a diversion from the issues surrounding the story.  Neal's column is only one of many by the MSM and their supporters that attempts to point blame at their critics rather than their faulty work.  The CBS fake documents scandal is used as an example of how inaccuracies by journalists are used to take what he calls the "real issue" surrounding the story. 

If Neal actually thinks the question of President Bush being suspended for missing a physical is more important than the news division of a broadcast television company using fake documents for an expose' two months before a presidential election - regardless of whether the use of those sources was intentionally or unintentionally meant to discredit and embarrass the president - then that's his opinion, and he's entitled to it.  If Neal also thinks that flushing a Koran or any other book - considered holy or unholy - once used by a terrorist is more important than a major news magazine using a single faulty source to report on a government investigation, resulting in riots and deaths, then he's entitled to that belief as well. However, I'm not willing to waste valuable space on this blog to argue how absurd those beliefs are. 

However, Neal's column implies that the mainstream media should be the sole director of topics and issues within the American poltical landscape, and that any interference would be a disservice to a free society:

The historic role of the free press in free democratic societies is that of government watchdog. There have always been journalistic mistakes, controversies and scandals, and there always will be, as long as media are run by human beings. Today, however, what's clearly objectionable is how those mistakes are being used to deflect attention from more important government and political scandals and controversies.

First, we should ask the question, "What is a watchdog?"  A watchdog is a person or party that makes sure no corruption or inaccuracies take place by a person or group they are monitoring.  Hence, how can you be an adequate watchdog if you can't provide accurate facts and information?  Sure; human beings make mistakes, but the mere fact they can possibly make them doesn't mean they should be absolved from criticism when they make one, and should be set aside for the issue that the watchdog wants someone to focus on.  The evidence that the watchdog lays out and the credibility of the evidence or the source is just as important as what or who they are criticizing.

Indeed; the fact that journalists are calling for someone to ignore or set aside criticism for what they would consider as the greater good in advancing issues is a very strange twist of irony.  Neal criticizes the Bush Administration over the arguments and evidence that led to the Iraq War (and once again, I won't argue about the accuracy of his points; others have refuted a number of these before), yet he's willing to give a pass to errors made by journalists.  Where is the consistency?  Are politicians the only people in American society that should be held accountable for their actions, or is it whomever the press decides should be accountable (which would virtually guarantee they never will)?

This also ignores the main tenet of journalism.  A journalist's first job is to report the story, not to advance an issue.  If a journalist can't write a story that is backed by accurate and credible sources and evidence, he's doing a disservice not only to the profession but to the public to which he claims to serve by spreading faulty information.  With expose' stories like the TANG Documents and the Koran flushing that heaps lopsided criticism onto a certain person or group, the absence of credibility and accuracy makes those allegations the equivalent of propaganda.  Why should the American public place faith in the press if they can't get their facts right?

Yet, the blur between reporting and advancing issues has been a problem for the media over the past couple of decades and has resulted in a lack of trust and respect within American society.  That lack of trust and respect has resulted in the drop of subscriptions, drop in ratings, and the reliance of alternative sources by more people as the years have gone by.  When people turn on the news or open up a newspaper, they don't want to be told what they should be concerned about and how they should think.  They only want to know what happened.  Neal and others want to dictate what is and isn't important, and that's not their job.  The blur in this instance is shown though the fact that Neal is described by the Post as a staff writer; however there's little to no difference between what he writes and what a op-ed columnist would write.  There should be a distinction, but just like a number of newspapers, there isn't.

We're seeing more and more evidence, not only from Neal but from others, that the press doesn't simply want to be a watchdog.  They want to be THE watchdog, and they don't want a watchdog watching over them.  It's the equivalent of a crooked pastor that tries to deflect criticism by saying he's doing God's work.  Just as God works through other vessels besides pastors, free societies are enhanced by the numerous voices and viewpoints that are allowed to participate within the political spectrum. 

John Peter Zenger didn't go to trial in 1735 to only give freedom to those who could afford printing presses, but to give freedom to all who had voices and were willing to use them to speak truth without fear of government retaliation.  The blogosphere and the rise of other alternative media is a testament of that belief.  It's too bad that the main beneficiaries of Zenger's trial are the ones who have yet to understand that concept.

Here's what Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) said about Janice Rogers Brown while speaking on the floor of the Senate today:

"What does Janice Rogers Brown want to be nominated for; dictator? Or Grand Exalted Ruler?"

I'll get the full quote later, but this is a despicable comment, and one that should have been immediately denounced by Harry Reid and followed with an apology by Schumer.  As Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama) stated, it was a cheap shot to imply Brown wants to be a Klan leader.  It's obvious that asshat will say anything to advance his point no matter how stupid it sounds.

Ha!

It's not surprising that Kerry waited until well after the election to release his grades from Yale.  But now the Democrats can say, "No wonder he lost to Bush.  He's just as dumb as him."

But to all of those willing to clown Bush or Kerry, ask yourself:  do you have a college degree?  Is it from an Ivy League school?  Do you have a masters or an MBA?  And if you do, how hard did you work to get it?

Yeah.  Most of the people calling Bush stupid would be lucky to pass a 3rd grade spelling test, yet have the nerve to criticize a Yale graduate.

Well, I said in order for Miami to win, Wade would not only have to show up but have a big day.  And 20 points does not equal having a big day.

Yes, several people will laud praise on him for that heroic effort last night and say he did a great job.  But great players find ways to win under laudable circumstances.  Wade was not able to work around those circumstances all night.

Now, I had a few disagreements with Charles and Kenny, and I shockingly agreed with Magic a couple of times.  For example, while Wade does have to learn how to make other players on his team better and learn how to get them involved in the offense, this is a superstar-driven team.  You can't expect Eddie Jones or any other role player to step up to help you win that game, especially with a strong defensive team like Detroit. 

Wade and Shaq couldn't leave anything for chance in that game.  They have to make things happen.  And as you saw with Detroit, role players keep their roles, and the leaders lead.  When circumstances warranted, who stepped up?  Chancey Billups stepped up and stank free throws at the end of the game, which now seems like a unappreciated art.  Rasheed Wallace stepped up and sunk some great baskets, including one where he was fading away with a hand in his face only a foot or so in front of the arc.  Rip Hamilton provided the consistent offensive attack in the first half.  Sure; they didn't have the pressure placed on them to produce like Wade and Shaq did, but they did what they had to do to win and didn't leave it to others to step up.  That only works if you can produce, however, and Wade going 7-20 in a Game 7 isn't going to cut it.

But all in all, I'm glad Detroit won because it makes for a better Finals than an injury-riddled Miami team.  Miami would have went down in flames within five games, because Ginobili would have had a field day buzzing past Wade and Shaq was already out of gas in that series.  Now you have some great matchups in the Finals:  Groundhog Day vs. Sheed,  Rip vs. Ginobili, Billups vs. Parker, and the ultimate one is Brown vs. Popovich.  This will be a great series just to see how teams are able to adjust to each other's strengths and weaknesses.  Detroit and San Antonio represent the two best franchises in the last four years.

Oh, and remember:  I will liveblog the whole Finals.  Game 1 starts Thursday on ABC at 9 EST.

Hillary Clinton had the nerve to say this yesterday:

"There has never been an administration, I don't believe in our history, more intent upon consolidating and abusing power to further their own agenda," Mrs. Clinton told the audience at a "Women for Hillary" gathering in Midtown Manhattan this morning.

Now either Hillary's been smoking some really great crack, or she takes the American people for a bunch of absent-minded fools.  If Hillary Clinton wants to find a president who abused power more than this one, all she needs to do is look for her husband, who has had more indictments and convictions around his dealings inside and outside of the White House than any other president in history. 

The White House had illegally obtained over 700 FBI files of Republican Party members.  Hell, her former campaign finance director is standing trial right now in regards to filing false disclosures of a fundraiser in Los Angeles during her 2000 campaign.  And that's not forgetting about the countless campaign finance violations through the 1996 and 2000 elections, the pardons of 2000, the impeachment charges, and her involvement in Whitewater.  I suppose the American public is supposed to brazenly ignore these things among the several scandals that made a mockery out of the Oval Office.

The truth is, Hillary Clinton as well as the Democrats are hoping the public somehow forgets or even ignores their corruption in order to focus on Republican ethics; Tom DeLay's in particular.  But the truth is that nothing DeLay has done could ever measure up to the crimes and abuses that went on by the Clinton duo and their friends.  Clinton better hope the American people do indeed have short-term memories, or she has no chance to win the presidency.

Anger is seen from both the left and the right after today's opinion was made public today.  Stevens, Souter, Scalia, Ginsberg, and Kennedy voted to confirm while O'Connor, Thomas and Rhenquist dissented, making it a 6-3 decision.

The case came down to the question whether Congress had the right to regulate intrastate marijuana use, and do federal authorities have the right to arrest and jail violators in those states that approve it's use.

I think the latter was fairly obvious; if it's a federal law, then federal authorities have jurisdiction within any American state or territory.  Hence, really this case was only to reargue whether the marijuana bans by Congress was unconstitutional, something that was only argued about five years or so ago.  And if I'm not mistaking, Thomas actually sided for Congressional power in that instance.

Although Scalia's siding with the more leftist members of the court is a surprise to many, it really isn't.  There are a number of conservatives criticizing him for the overturning of a state law, but he's also a traditionalist.  Scalia isn't willing to overturn drug laws that have been on the books and upheld by every SCOTUS since the 30's.  I have no idea of what his exact reasoning is, but as far as I know he's upheld them all, and will continue to do so.  Call that activism if you like, as it might be a fair accessment.

As for the other supporters, it's real simple:  the legal justification of the marijuana bans were tied into the interstate commerce clause, which allows Congress to regulate all interstate commerce.  During the time of the New Deal, this clause has been used to justify a number of government programs, taxes, etc that allowed FDR's programs to be declared legal.  If those justices were to throw out Congress's marijuana laws, that would mean the interpretation of the clause would have to be reconsidered, and that's a no-no. 

The idea that Congress doesn't have the express right to regulate everything that's made a law would bring other Congressional regulations to question by that same judicial precedent.  So it's not surprising to me that the other supporters upheld it either.  It's a small negative to maintain a bigger positive.

Hopefully this will be more entertaining than the other Game 7's we've seen in the playoffs this year, but I'm not so sure if it will be.  The Heat have a lot more obstacles to overcome than the Pistons do, and it's going to be tough for the Heat to pull out a win.

I'm not set on Shaq putting up a big game to save the day.  As we saw in Game 6, Shaq is too banged up to put enough points on the boards in order to beat the Pistons.  That means Dwayne Wade will have to put up a big game in the face of injury in order to get to the Finals.  And he might have to put up at least 30.

On Inside the NBA the E.J., Kenny, and Charles were saying this is the perfect opportunity for role players to step up and make things happen for their team.  But the only one that might have some success against this Detroit defense is Eddie Jones, and I don't think he'll have enough to make a difference in tonight's game.

Miami's main hope is that Detroit has the same offensive hiccups they had in Game 5, and that they are able to get some kind of production from the bench.  Wade will play in this game, but I don't know if he can have the kind of impact needed to place his team over the top.  The one good thing going for the Heat is that they are at home, where they should have a rabid Miami crowd that will be able to keep them motivated and intense.  Hopefully the home factor will help them keep this close.

If I were the Spurs, I would want Miami to win.  They are wounded and fatigued right now, and could easily be swept by a team that will have over a week off by the time Game 1 of the Finals tips off.

It was a good fight, but very poorly called.  The referee allowed it to get as dirty as it could have been, but only gave "warnings", and never bothered to penalize either boxer. 

Tszyu had an obvious knockdown in the fight, but the ref called it a low blow.  Now I can somewhat give him a pass for that, but then you're not going to penalize Tszyu for it?  Later in the fight, after Tszyu was warned for a low blow, Hatton lept in with a low blow that was obviously intentional.  Once again, no point deduction.

There is no excuse for Tszyu to quit in that fight; I don't care if he was losing every round (and the judges as well as the press had the fight pretty close throughout).  But Tszyu will think twice about going overseas to fight another contender in his home country.  That was probably the most rabidly biased crowds that I've seen in for a fight, and there's no question it gave Hatton the edge intensity-wise and probably influenced the judges as well.

Tszyu should have finished the fight, and it was wrong for his trainer to tell him to quit when there was no dehabilitating injuries.  This is the 2005 equivalent to "No Mas", and it has tarnished an otherwise great career.

But regardless, Ricky Hatton deserves props.  He is a very scrappy fighter, and gave Tszyu all he could handle in this fight, and then some.  Coming in as a 4-1 underdog, Hatton had nothing to lose.  However, I hope there's a rematch, and it'll be on American or even Australian soil.  I doubt it, but we'll see.

I have been a big fan of Larry Brown for many years.  After all, he is a Tarheel, and I recall Kansas vs. Oklahoma as the first national championship game that I watched.  I always thought he was the reason the Sixers got to the NBA Finals in 2001, and Detroit is currently the defending champions.  It's a virtual tossup between Brown and Greg Popovich as to who is the best coach in the league.

However his recent actions have been both shocking and deplorable.  I don't recall any coach in a professional league that has been playing the shell game that he has.  He should have never talked about working for another franchise (President of the Cavs) in the middle of the conference finals series .
What has the Pistons franchise done to Brown to warrant him acting in this manner?  You would think he would be somewhat gracious towards the Pistons given that he got his first world title with a team that was virtually created before he got there (I think the only starter who got there after Brown was Sheed).  Even if Brown planned to stop coaching and wanted to do something else, there's no question that he should have waited until the end of the season.

And leave it to Larry Brown to do something that would get me and Bill Walton to agree.  Listen to this rant that Walton lays on Brown on ESPN's "Mike and Mike In the Morning" that leaves no question that Brown is in the wrong.  Brown wouldn't condone a player asking to be traded in this situation.  Brown wouldn't allow this type of drama to be created in his locker room, yet he's creating it here.  Why?  This isn't fair to the players he coaches, the front office that helped create that atmosphere to win the NBA title last year, and it isn't especially fair to the fans, who's going to be pointing to all of this drama if they knocked out of the playoffs tonight or in Game 7.  Brown's actions have no justifiable excuse.

Now that I think about it, I'm glad he didn't take the Carolina job.  I don't think Baddour would have given it to him anyway, but he was definitely a name that consistently came up for it once Dean, Guthridge, and Doherty left.

Kids, here's a bit of advice:  if a cop pulls you over and tells you to get out of the car, stop what you're doing and get out of the car.

A woman in Boynton Beach, Florida had to learn that the hard way.  As you'll see in the first of two videos, the woman was pulled over for speeding - the cop said she was going 51 in a 35 - and she had a broken tail light, cracked windshield, and wasn't wearing a seatbelt.  As soon as the cop out out of the car she tried to open the door of the SUV and get out.  When the cop told her to stay in the vehicle she informed him that she would do what she wanted, and cursed him out at every turn.

The officer calls for backup, finally gets her license and registration, and goes back to the car to run a check on her.  In the second video, he comes back and tells her to get out of the vehicle, but she refuses, saying she's on the phone with someone to come to the scene.  The cop told her to get out of the SUV SIX TIMES, and in the last four warned her that she would be tasered if she did not comply.   Another officer came on the scene on the passenger side, and when he tried to take the cell phone out of her hand, she swung at him. 

That's when the officer finally tasered her.  You'll hear a very high pitched scream from the woman as she was tasered, and she hit the ground.  After she failed to place her hands behind her back, she was tasered again.

After hearing about a prior incident that left a man dead, I haven't been a big fan of taser use.  But in this instance, the officer appropriately did his job.  This woman was hostile the whole time, despite knowing she was in the wrong from the get-go, she cursed the officer out, she never responded to his requests, he asked her several times to get out of the vehicle yet failed, called someone on a cell phone and told him they had a gun pointed at her, and started to resist when they moved in on her.

She had no one to blame for that incident but herself, and even in that I bet she was being a bit melodramatic.  She acted as if she was about to die.