Vox Popoli

Waterboy refuses to carry water:

Vox: “In unrelated news, in light of our recent discussion on what makes a media whore, this post of hers did make me laugh”

Waitaminute, holdonhere.

You link to MM’s post about where she’ll be appearing, alluding to her “whoreness”, yet you do the same here and here and here

You don’t see any difference between appearing on one local radio show a month and (at least) three television shows in two days? Which, in your opinion, would be more accurately described as chasing cameras? I am invited onto a show where the hosts read my column and with whom I have regular interaction, Ms Malkin has her agent trying to put her on as many shows as possible regardless of who they are. I’m expecting her to show up on Wayne’s World any day now.

There’s nothing wrong with telling people where you’ll be on, in case they’re interested, it was simply the sheer volume I was pointing out.

Ironically, Saint Paul asked me to be on the Northern Alliance show with Ms Malkin later today, but I declined because I am more interested in an outing with Space Bunny. I’ll take a pretty blonde over a camera or microphone every single time. The defense rests.

From Drudge:

KERRY CAMPAIGN CALLS FOR BOOK BAN. The Kerry campaign calls on a publisher to ‘withdraw book’ written by group of veterans, claiming veterans are lying about Kerry’s service in Vietnam and operating as a front organization for Bush. Kerry campaign has told Salon.com that the publisher of UNFIT FOR COMMAND is ‘retailing a hoax’… ‘No publisher should want to be selling books with proven falsehoods in them,’ Kerry campaign spokesman Chad Clanton tells the online mag.

So much for the fantasy genre. And Star Trek is right out! But at least we know Kerry’s position on the First Amendment. I’m struck by the thought that my title for next week’s column was bloody prescient.

I’m honestly beginning to think that Kerry won’t even make it to November. Seriously, if Kerry had any sort of case at all, he’d go on one of the big shows, invite four or five of his fellow vets and throw down. That would put an immediate end to the story and probably hand him the election, as he would walk away looking like Duke Nukem, kicking ass and chewing gum, except he’s all out of gum. But he won’t do that because he can’t. He can’t because he, more than anyone else, knows that he’s full of merde

I’ll cheerfully slash Ms Malkin to shreds all day long on her newfound love for the G, not to mention her defense of FDR, but she definitely didn’t deserve the rude mistreatment she received at the hands of Chris Matthews.

This foaming jerk Matthews, who called me irresponsible and kicked me off the show admitted that a) he himself had not read the damned book, b) he was not interested in asking Kerry about the specific doubts raised by vets about his wounds, and c) he had not and would not question Kerry about these specific allegations.

“Are you saying he shot himself on purpose?” Matthews hammered. I repeated myself again clearly that I was referring to the allegations about self-inflicted wounds in the book. When I tried to explain that the vets who were with Kerry had cast a lot of doubt on whether enemy fire occurred during the first two incidents, Matthews cut me off again. “Why did you say that?” he badgered. Because, I said, I was talking about what was in the book, which he had admitted he hadn’t read.

“Don’t you wonder?” I asked.

“No, I don’t,” he bellowed. “It’s never occurred to me.”

With that, I was kicked off the second segment.

As the show broke for commercials, Matthews scrambled for his producers to see if what he said was true. And I’m irresponsible? One staffer ran to the office where I had left my copy of the book, and handed it to Matthews, who–for the first time, apparently–started flipping through it. I asked for my book back and politely said thank you. After I left, he trashed me again on the air and his scurrilous charges were repeated by his MSNBC colleague Keith Olbermann, who called me an “idiot.”

Of course, had Michelle simply pointed out that it was John Kerry who stated that he had wounded himself in his much-abused tushy in Tour of Duty, she could have easily trounced Matthews. Got to be quicker on your feet, Ms Malkin.

In unrelated news, in light of our recent discussion on what makes a media whore, this post of hers did make me laugh.

I would like to know precisely how many car chases, missing children stories and murder trials the Fox News Channel has covered since 1996. I’m not a Fox junkie, so I’m not really up on this, but if anyone happens to know, let me know. Thanks.

JJ poses a question:

I’m just curious, Vox – who would NOT count as a media whore? Is it possible for someone who is a member of the media full time not to be a media whore?

The criteria are three. To three, thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Thou shalt not count to five, neither shall thou count to two, excepting in that thou then proceedeth to three.

1. Are they camera hungry? Do they give off an air of wishing that this brief shining moment when the eyes (or ears) of the world are upon them could go on forever? Do they show up despite having nothing to add to the conversation? Do they allow others to speak, or do they try to monopolize the microphone.

2. Do they suck up to the host? Conversely, if they are hosts, do they suck up to their guests? Do they pretend to be friend, pals and buddies when they don’t even know the other person and clearly don’t get along with them?

3. Are they willing to abandon their principles any time anyone calls them on it? Do they even have any discernable principles? Do they always seek to please the powerful? Does the end of being on the show appear to justify the means?

I haven’t worked out a formal definition yet, but this should indicate what I’m thinking.

I’m looking for a good Latin term for “media whore”. How does Adlatus Prostostarus strike you? Got any better suggestions? I spoke to the publisher, by the way, and they agreed that “Media Whores” was much more marketable than “History’s Lies”, although they say that their publicist would probably, and I quote, “have kittens.”

I pointed out that I’m the perfect man to write this book, since I have absolutely no desire to go on TV promoting it and I could not care less if Eric Alterman or Brave Sir William don’t want to be my best friend and invite me over for slumber parties. So, we’ll see. I’m already having a good time writing the first chapter, though.

This second generation brought to the forefront men with chiseled jaws and names like porn stars, and bleached blondes with journalism-free backgrounds consisting of acting school diplomas and tasteful nude photographs. This model quickly became de riguer for the local news format, which is now such a matter of rote that one cannot easily distinguish between the ABC affiliate’s newscast in Minneapolis and the CBS affiliate’s newscast in Albequrque.

Who was it that first hired Deborah Norville, by the way? Anyone remember? Was it CNN or CBS? I’m also wondering when the media whore phenomenon really kicked off… sure, Barbara Walters was a precursor, but I’m thinking it really exploded with Clinton’s Lewinsky scandal, since you had all kinds of people going off and having to fill the void of an almost complete lack of information.

The Washington Post reported that the citation for a Bronze Star awarded to Mr. Thurlow for heroism in the incident refers to “enemy small arms and automatic weapons fire,” contradicting his account and bearing out Mr. Kerry’s. The Kerry campaign posted the article from The Post on its Web site, and sent an e-mail to supporters saying the article “completely discredited” Mr. Thurlow and “marks the end of the dishonest and disgusting smear campaign against John Kerry and his crew mates from Vietnam.”

Now that’s funny! As I posted yesterday, the article not only doesn’t “complete discredit” Thurlow, it only highlights that Thurlow and Kerry contradict each other, which we already knew. Thurlow is not his citation, and since he did not apply for a medal or write an AAR, there is no self-contradiction there. Furthermore, the vast majority of men who were there on the river support Thurlow’s version.

Kerry, by his own admission, ran away – as one of his own crewmen says was his wont – so he was not there for Thurlow’s most dangerous action, trying to board an out-of-control boat. This action, suspiciously enough, is not described in Thurlow’s citation. Logic suggests that is because Kerry wrote the AAR that supported his application for a medal.

The fact that the Kerry campaign is desperately clutching at this wholly inadequate straw demonstrates how weak they know John Kerry’s case is.

From “Unfit For Command”, via the Washington Times:

None of these Swiftees recognized the incident as described by Kerry in his report, by Brinkley in “Tour of Duty” [in which, after the mine exploded under PCF 3 on his port side, Kerry recalls his right arm being “smashed” against a bulkhead when “another explosion went off right beside us”] or on Kerry’s Web site. They were furious when they realized Kerry’s fraudulent account.

In reality, Kerry’s boat, PCF 94, was on the right side of the river when a mine went off on the opposite side under PCF 3. The boat’s crewmen were thrown into the water. The officers suffered concussions. A Viet Cong sympathizer in an adjoining bunker had touched off the mine. There was no other hostile fire and no other mines, according to Chenoweth, Odell, Pease and Thurlow. The boats had begun firing after the mine exploded, but ceased after a short time because of the lack of hostile fire.

Kerry’s PCF 94 fled the scene. The remaining three PCFs, in accord with standard doctrine, stood to defend the disabled PCF 3 and its crewmen in the water. Kerry and PCF 94 disappeared several hundred yards away, returning only when it was clear there was no return fire. Chenoweth (who received no medal) picked up the PCF 3 crewmen from the water. PCF 3’s engines were knocked out on one side and frozen on 500 rpm on the other side. The boat weaved dangerously, hitting sandbars, dazed or unconscious crew members aboard.

Thurlow, commanding his own boat, sought a secure hold so he could jump across and board PCF 3. However, he was thrown into the water in his first attempt to board, and the boat hit the sandbars. Later, Thurlow brought PCF 3 to a stop, and the boat slowly began to sink. Rassmann had fallen or been knocked off either Kerry’s boat or the fifth boat, PCF 35. When Rassmann was spotted in the water, Chenoweth’s PCF 23, with the PCF 3 crew aboard, went to pick him up.

Kerry’s PCF 94, returning to the scene after its flight, reached Rassmann about 20 yards ahead of Chenoweth’s boat. Kerry did the decent thing by going to pick up Rassmann, justifiably earning his gratitude. However, the claim that Kerry returned to a hostile fire zone is a lie, according to Chenoweth, Thurlow and others. Meanwhile, the serious work of saving PCF 3 continued.

Kerry’s false after-action report, prepared to justify his Purple Heart and Bronze Star, reports “5,000 meters” of heavy fire — about 2½ miles, the same distance as a large Civil War battlefield. Not a shot of this fire was heard by Chenoweth, Thurlow, Odell or Pease. Kerry’s after-action report ignores Chenoweth’s heroic action in rescuing PCF 3 survivors and Thurlow’s action in saving PCF 3, while highlighting his own routine pickup of Rassmann and PCF 94’s minor role in saving PCF 3.

Make that Swift vets 4, Kerry 0. The Swift vets say that he wasn’t wounded on the river, and it turns out that one of the sources reporting that Kerry wounded himself earlier that day… is John Kerry. “On page 313 of “Tour of Duty,” and evidently in Kerry’s secret journal written on or about March 13, 1969, quoted in that book, Kerry relates his injury from the rice stock explosion.” So, if John Kerry is to be believed, he received two wounds in exactly the same place on the same day, one self-inflicted, one not.

Regardless of what the veterans motivations are – and the fact that so many of them think so little of John Kerry after all these years tends to support the truth of what they are saying, in my opinion – it is becoming more and more clear that John Kerry is a borderline whack job who is totally unfit for any sort of command.

Hank has his doubts about the Swift vets:

Of course it still doesn’t explain any of the contradictions with Thurlow’s story. I’d say it’s his excuse for having botched his story. Still not willing to explain Rassmann’s account or why all those other boats couldn’t pick him up when they were not under fire?

That’s a reasonable question. It seems Larry Thurlow has a rather cogent explanation.

I submitted no paperwork for a medal nor did I file an after action report describing the incident. [Thus, while his current version of the story contradicts his citation, it cannot be considered self-contradictory as some have tried to portray it.] To my knowledge, John Kerry was the only officer who filed a report describing his version of the incidents that occurred on the river that day. It was not until I had left the Navy—approximately three months after I left the service—that I was notified that I was to receive a citation for my actions on that day. I believed then as I believe now that I received my Bronze Star for my efforts to rescue the injured crewmen from swift boat number three and to conduct damage control to prevent that boat from sinking.

My boat and several other swift boats went to the aid of our fellow swift boat sailors whose craft was adrift and taking on water. We provided immediate rescue and damage control to prevent boat three from sinking and to offer immediate protection and comfort to the injured crew.

After the mine exploded, leaving swift boat three dead in the water, John Kerry’s boat, which was on the opposite side of the river, fled the scene. US Army Special Forces officer Jim Rassmann, who was on Kerry’s boat at the time, fell off the boat and into the water. Kerry’s boat returned several minutes later—under no hail of enemy gunfire—to retrieve Rassmann from the river only seconds before another boat was going to pick him up.

I believe that’s another round to the Swift Vets. So far, we have Swift Vets 3, Kerry 0.

Stow the lectures, I’m paraphrasing Helen Thomas. I was just thinking, who ARE the biggest media whores of Left, Right and squishy middle today? Hank, Pete and ihateShrub, go to town, gentlemen, I want to get your perspective on this too. Please note that media whore, as I define it, is a combination of a ravenous hunger for the camera and a certain lack of ideological principle. It doesn’t necessarily mean that I have it in for the individual, although that always adds a bit of zest to the endeavor.

On the Right, I’m thinking Brave Sir William, Me So Michelle and possibly Rx Limbaugh. I’m not quite as sure about Ann, but I’m certainly open to hearing the case for her. I quite like Jonah Goldberg, but I can see where one might be able to argue in favor of him.

On the Left, Maureen Dowd has to lead the way. I’d love to go after Paul Krugman, but he is such a defenseless little mouse and Donald Luskin and the Krugman Truth Squad have demolished him so completely that I don’t know if he’s got enough posterior left to peddle.

I’m a little handicapped in that I don’t watch enough Fox News or CNN to be up-to-date on who the most serious camera chasers are of late. So pity the poor blind cobra….