Just as the MSM and the left are glorifying the courageous act an Iraqi “journalist” committed when he threw his shoes at President Bush, the “journalist” himself has sent an apology letter to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
Yes, that’s right, at the same time Newsweek reporters are describing his acts as “a small measure of justice“, Muntadhar al-Zeidi called expressed his “regret and sorrow” for “the big and ugly act” he perpetrated. But, of course, don’t expect to see any of the MSM to take back their absurd assertions or, for that matter, even note the thrower’s apology.
The apology letter came with a request for a pardon from al-Maliki which appealed to some previous meetings between the two. However, al-Maliki’s spokesperson told Fox News that he rarely makes decisions based on emotion and has not decided on the pardon yet.
But even as the shoe thrower expresses his regret, expect to see his act of idiocy cemented by the media as evidence of the attitudes of everyone in the entire world. And, if the Iraqi journalist is punished by the Iraqi justice system look for the media to play up the outrage around the world and imply that the democratically elected government of Iraq is really a puppet regime controlled by Bush.
UPDATE: Allah at Hot Air has linked to this post. He has an interesting take on the political consequences for al-Maliki in the upcoming Iraqi elections. Though, it seems if Iraqis don’t already see Maliki as a Bush puppet and they view him as working for Iraq then whatever he chooses to do with this guy shouldn’t hurt him too much, especially considering the religious and ethnic dynamics Allah outlined.
In an article heroically chronicling the efforts of 200 union workers “occupying” their old window and door factory the Associated Press made sure to emphasize how the squatters have given the nation’s grim economy a “rallying point.”
Here is how they introduced the story (emphasis added):
The nation’s grim economy now has a rallying point: Employees at a window-and-door factory that went out of business have taken over the building in a siege that has come to symbolize the woes of the ordinary worker.
Yes, that’s right; the AP sees a group of people who are illegally squatting on private property as symbolic of ordinary workers. They even describe the actions of these workers as a “siege” in an apparent sign that the AP thinks people unhappy with the bad economy should rally and lay siege to their work places.
But the AP wasn’t finished glamorizing and militarizing these workers actions:
The Republic Windows and Doors factory closed abruptly last week after Bank of America canceled the company’s financing. Since then, about 200 of the 240 laid-off workers have taken turns occupying the factory, declaring that they will not leave until getting assurances they will receive severance and accrued vacation pay.
Now, not only are the glorious workers laying ‘siege’ to the factory but they are occupying it and declaring their demands for money be met before they leave. As shocking and unlawful as this may seem to others it seems the AP can’t get enough of this behavior.
But the standoff has also come to embody mounting anger over the government’s willingness to bail out deep-pocketed corporations but not average people.
However, even as the AP is cheering on this act which they seem to view as something glorious and militaristic they cast doubts on the legitimacy of the workers claim that the law says they are owed vacation pay because they were not given 60 days notice before they were laid off:
The law allows businesses to close without giving the required notice under certain circumstances, such as if another company that is the sole source of income suddenly goes out of business, said Mark Johnson, president of Erisa Benefits Consulting in Grapevine, Texas, who said he was not familiar with the Republic case.
In an interview with “Extra” Oprah stated the following:
“I said I would be happy to talk to Sarah Palin when the election was over… I went and tried to talk to Sarah Palin and instead she talked to Greta [Van Susteren]. She talked to Matt [Lauer]. She talked to Larry [King]. But she didn’t talk to me.”
Gosh I hope Oprah’s little whinny insinuation is true. I really really hope that Sarah Palin did purposely snub her.
I guess the golden rule still rings true huh Oprah? Do unto others as you would have done unto you.
Yes… that’s right, not only is Obama our new savior but he is now our new Pillsbury Doughboy.
httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_I3br9m-68
Actually, judging by this comment from the owner of the cafe that Obama has shown his grace upon maybe he is a strange doughboy messiah combination, or, in other words, he is a savory savior:
“I think everybody just … thought, ‘Oh, great cookie, great president _ the world is a happy place. Barack’s going to fix all the problems and if I have a bite of this cookie it’s going to make me feel good,'”
Well, not if your the Los Angeles Times I guess. They have refused to release the video to the public. Now, they’ve given several different reasons why since this story came to light but I think their motives are pretty obvious (especially if these claims prove to be true). They simply don’t want to hurt their candidate, sure the LA Times will say that they were the ones who first reported about the tape, but we all know that video of Obama praising a nut job like Khalidi would hurt him far more than a description of Obama speaking at an event involving a nut job like Khalidi, especially when that description is written by a hack organization like the LA Times.
P.s. CBS 3 won’t post the video of the interview. I’m not surprised since, much like the rest of the MSM, they are complete hacks who consider journalistic integrity as a embarrassment… Absolutely pathetic.
Here’s the answer that Sarah Palin gave to a third grader who asked what it is that the Vice President does:
And Here’s the specific part CNN was interested in:
“They’re in charge of the United States Senate. So, if they want to, they can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes.”
Here’s the title of the CNN story (as it appears on CNN.com) regarding her comments:
“Palin misstates VP role”
Now, I’m no constitutional law expert but luckily for me the constitution is written in English so I can pretty well understand it.
And to be quite honest, the constitution doesn’t much address what the specifics of the Vice President’s role are…
In fact, here is the one and only provision pertaining to the Vice President in regards to the Senate:
“The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.”
Seems to me that being the president of something means you are “in charge” of it, at least formally, and when you’re trying to explain what the VP does to a third grader thats not a half bad way of doing it. So if that wasn’t the offending part of this excerpt it must have been the insinuation that the Vice President, “if they want to”, can influence senators on policy.
But if the Vice President isn’t supposed to influence policy in the Senate then what exactly are they supposed to do? Just wait around for the President to die? I mean, besides outlining how the VP is elected (and revising it in the 12th amendment and several others), impeached, and that the VP assumes the office of the President if the President is unable or unfit to fulfill the duties of that office what does the constitution tell us?
Again, only that the Vice President is the president of the Senate and casts the decisive vote when there is a tie. And, again, I’m left wondering what CNN sees as the gaffe in Palin’s statement…
They quote Donald Ritchie, a historian in the Senate Historical Office for what seems to be the real crux of their argument:
Donald Ritchie, a historian in the Senate Historical Office told CNN that Palin’s comment was an “overstatement” of what her role would be.
“The vice president is the ceremonial officer of the Senate and has certain ceremonial functions including swearing in new senators and can vote to break a tie,” he said. “It’s a relatively limited role. It’s evolved into a neutral presiding officer of the Senate.
Ritchie also noted recent vice presidents have played a behind-the-scenes lobbying role on Capitol Hill for an administration’s policies, but called it “somewhat limited.”
Personally, I find these assertions to be contentious. Who is Ritchie to say what kind of Vice President Sarah Palin will be? And if anything the office of Vice President has been moving away from its “somewhat limited” role of influencing senate policy decisions, you only need to look at Dick Cheney to figure that out. Plus, everything I’ve heard Palin say about the kind of Vice President she’ll be points to one that is very engaged in influencing policy. After all, she has the right to be that kind of Vice President if she so chooses.
So, yea, I’m sure everybody already figured that out but I’m just as sure that nobody expected him to just outright say it…
Here’s the story. This won’t be good for Obama because it is a short soundbite friendly gaffe. I don’t know how far this story will go but at least its a plus McCain-Palin. (Reaction from Malkin and Hotair)
