James Fallows is outraged over this item in the Washington post by Jennifer Rubin that said in part:

Some irresponsible lawmakers on both sides of the aisle — I will point the finger at Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.), who sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee and yet backed the Gang of Six scheme to cut $800 billion from defense — would have us believe that enormous defense cuts would not affect our national security. Obama would have us believe that al-Qaeda is almost caput and that we can wrap up things in Afghanistan. All of these are rationalizations for doing something very rash, namely curbing our ability to defend the United States and our allies in a very dangerous world.

Fallows says the following:

No, this is a sobering reminder for those who think it’s too tedious to reserve judgment about horrifying events rather than instantly turning them into talking points for pre-conceived views.

he closes by referring to the piece as “false and hysterical”

Strangely enough he didn’t have a bad thing to say about this piece by Max Flecher called Al-Qaeda’s problem with Norway

It’s natural to wonder whether al-Qaeda, the world’s most famous terrorist organization, might have been involved. But why would the group target Norwegian government infrastructure? Last year, after several immigrants to Norway were arrested plotting terrorist attacks on behalf of al-Qaeda, Thomas Hegghammer and Dominic Tierney wrote “Why Does Al-Qaeda Have a Problem With Norway?” for TheAtlantic.com. Here are some snippets:

There are several theories about why Norway would be on al-Qaeda’s hit-list — but they raise more questions than answers.

Somehow neither this article nor the one it quotes manages to earn the epithet “false & Hysterical”.

I’m sure the fact that it appeared in the Atlantic has nothing to do with it.

One can critique the lack up an update by this time (although it’s possible that like I was yesterday she is away from a pc, after all some of those other posts might have been scheduled) but the False & Hysterical business and the demands for an “Apology to the world” seems to be yet another example of what the Anchoress has been describing:

The press is running with the “right-wing Christian Fundamentalist” narrative with almost unseemly enthusiasm. Those very words appear in the very first sentence in this New York Times report.

Is he a “fundamentalist Christian,” though? In what way is this a verified as fact? I’m seeing it all over the place, but while his ideology is pretty clear, I’m not seeing (yet) where he is pronouncing himself a Christian, fundamentalist or otherwise; I’m not reading about church-affiliations. I’m sure if he has written anything that will emphasize his faith, we’ll be seeing it. He may very well be a “fundamentalist Christian”, but as of right now, I see nothing in the press to back it up beyond they’re saying so.

He’s apparently a Mason, though I have no idea what that has to do with anything. Someone, I’m sure, will find it relevant.

Strangely enough I seem to remember when home-grown jihadists have been arrested in the US, the press has studiously avoided mentioning religion but now the left seems to be going all in. As Clayton Cramer puts it:

But it does seem plausible that this guy was the equivalent of Timothy McVeigh.

I do think it will be interesting to watch how leftists who make excuses for Islamic terrorists (being victims and all that) will make no such excuses for this guy.

Also I suspect you will not see anyone Christian groups giving out cakes or naming schools after this fellow, I expect to see stuff more like Pam Geller:

SIOA and SIOE declare our sympathy for the victims and relatives of the victims of the heinous mass murders in Norway. We denounce the attacker and reiterate our dedication to the defense of free societies and opposition to all vigilantism and violence. Attempts to link us to these murders on the basis of alleged postings by the murderer mentioning us are absurd and offensive. Our work is and always has been wholly focused upon defending humane values and freedoms. There is no way that any sane person could possibly conclude that committing mass murder of children would advance the principles for which we stand. And if he was not sane, then any imputation of responsibility to us falters on that basis. Islamic jihadists and supremacists routinely invoke Islamic texts and teachings to justify violence, and thus those teachings are and should be rightly held up to scrutiny; by contrast, our record of support for human rights and the dignity of all human beings is consistent and unbroken. This murderer should be punished to the full extent of the law; any attempts to tar freedom fighters with his actions is deplorable.

This would be the same Pam Geller that my caller on the show today tried to use to link the killer to the tea party.

One might almost think there is a factor of relief that after so many false starts they finally managed to find a story that fits the template they have stored for years. There is odd oddity however:

he didn’t belong to any known factions in Norway’s small and splintered extreme-right movement and had no criminal record except for some minor offenses, the police official told the Associated Press.

Althouse has an interesting take:

A Facebook page matching his name and the photo given out by the police was set up just a few days ago. It listed his religion as Christian and his politics as conservative. It said he enjoys hunting, the video games World of Warcraft and Modern Warfare 2, and books including Machiavelli’s “The Prince” and George Orwell’s “1984.”

So, this is the information he wanted you to find. Assuming he set up this page and he is the murderer, these statement could either be precisely true, deliberate misinformation, or something in between.

The man knows about Machiavelli. What would Machiavelli post on Facebook before embarking on a massacre?

ADDED: Of course, disinformation is a big theme in Orwell’s “1984.” I’m tempted to say that the cues that his statements are lies are so strong that they suggest paradoxically that he is not lying.

I find it kinda odd that the facebook stuff was only set up a few days ago, usually people like this are all over the net, perhaps as the Anchoress suggested:

what I can’t help wondering as I look at these pictures of 32-year old Anders Behring Breivik is: were these professionally-done headshots meant for this moment? Did he have them done in anticipation of seeing them splashed all over the world and included in history books?

Did he mean to look as posed as possible for posterity?

My guess? I’m figuring this fellow has his own manifesto and we will almost certainly hear it at his trial, we still don’t know if he was working with anyone or not, but I’m used up my allotted quantity of speculation, but I suspect that the anti-anti’s will be running wild on this for a long while.

Update: Charles Johnson posting with tweets from CAIR as his credible source. I never thought I’d see the day

Update 2: Michelle Malkin has a question for Mr. Fallows:

More to the point, to whom and for what shall Rubin or I apologize? To Mullah Krekar? Ansar al Islam? To the other jihadi groups and operatives who supported and applauded the attacks under the assumption that it was a fellow Islamic militant?

That’s a good question, I wonder if he has a good answer.

As Peg of What if would surely tell you, the secret of being a good bridge player is being able to take into account all the factors when bidding and see several tricks ahead of the one you are currently playing.

Lee Fang is apparently not much of a Bridge player as he hits Rick Santorum on his statements in Egypt at “Think” Progress

it’s good to know that despite all of Santorum’s talk of freedom and liberty, apparently that rhetoric doesn’t extend to the people of Egypt. And it appears that if he were to become president, he would stand with the world’s most autocratic regimes as long as they’re pro-U.S.

Alas for Fang, he blindly leads his Ace oblivious to what is actually happening on the ground as the LA Times reports

The pressing concern among independents and secularists is that the Brotherhood, the nation’s largest and best-organized party, may win about 25% of the seats in parliament and control even more through a coalition. This could give the organization the power to infuse the new constitution with conservative Islamic ideals to limit rights for women and non-Muslims.

well hey it’s not like we are seeing a repeat of 1979 with a radical Iman returning to influence the political situation…oh wait:

A case in point: Egyptian Islamic theologian Yusuf al-Qaradawi was welcomed back to Egypt after a 50-year hiatus and a 30-year ban from leading weekly Friday prayers. Best known for his program ash-Shariah wal-Hayat (“Shariah and Life”), broadcast on Al Jazeera and Islam Online, Qaradawi has long played a prominent role within the intellectual and spiritual leadership of the Brotherhood. His obscurantist philosophy, support of terrorism, and advocacy for killing the Jews have been judged so harmful – socially, economically and culturally – that countries such as the US and the UK have prohibited him from entering. Even many Muslim academics in Saudi Arabia, Iraq and the Palestinian territories have condemned him for giving sacred Islam “a bad name.”

How about that? It would appear that Santorum has a better grasp of all the cards in the deck, while Fang as usual appears not to be playing with a full one.

Sarah’s Emails and the MSM’s Ride

 

Listen my readers and you shall now hear
Of the weekend slide of the MSM’s cheer.
On a weekend in June in Two Thousand Eleven;
The Papers assumed they would achieve heaven.
From e-mails in storage from Yesteryear.

The Times and the Washington Post said to friends:
“Before the Palin e-mails come to light
Fill out our form; join our common end
For our staffs are cut by the internet’s might
Be our hands, and new eyes to see
And we in our newsrooms awaiting will be
Ready to declare and spread the alarm
Through every media outlet, urban or farm
Protecting America from Palin’s odd charms.”

On their webform and blog they invited the hoard
A tactic quite different from accepted norm,
For they knew where once old AOL lay
Arianna in e-mail blast had asked the same.
The Huffpo, a new-media man-o-war;
A virtual juggernaut with modern guile
Where payment of writers was not their style,
A huge hit engine, that was magnified
By a big money merger and a wink of her eye.

For the Media burned for revenge and relief
As their writers and Newscasters , with eager ears,
Had languished in the silence around them to hear,
The muster of riders of a bus tour.
A tip a hint, an IM or tweet.
On the measured tread, of bus-tires clear
Rolling from DC to where? To what shore?

They had climbed in their cars, cellphones prepared
Charged laptops, blackberries and Ipods to tread,
To locations unknown, in utter dread,
For the Palins neither worried nor cared
Of the mess of all their schedules they made
No set shots, no prepwork, no judgement of shade
Just follow the bus get the story and shot
We don’t care if the media keeps up or not
We won’t pause to listen or look down
If the 4th estate is not anywhere ’round
For a lead-in for their 6 p.m. slot

Via facebook, and tweet, silent as the dead
The Palin fans found path and hill
Though wrapped in secret so deep and still
That the media could not hear their tread
Through Tornado and pizza, the caravan went
Rolling along from event to event
Seeming to suddenly shout “We are here”
And lo, like a flash mob, supporters would cheer
Of the place and the hour; no Soros foot tread
No pre-arranged counter-protest to cover instead
No SEIU call No union lament
To arrange coordination of an AstroTurf view
No “Palin is booed” on the Evening News
Frustratingly, the template the MSM wrote
Is not effective as an offsite remote

Though painful the chase of her foolish bus tour
The MSM believed, soon would be the cure
Though Wiener indiscretions dominated the waves
And his tweets and photos had provided a lure,
The Alaskan e-mails would provide them the save!
Her idiocy would shine. her incompetence shown
Cross country all of this could be known
Though information requests did surely take time
MSM’s full vindication would now soon arrive
(Perhaps even as Andrew did sagely pursue
Of Trigs parentage at last we would know the full truth)
All of this new info of months of misrule
With Sarah’s own words she’ll make her the fool
The bumpkin unmasked by our readers with glee
Our readers are anxious to do this work too
And best of all it will be done for us free!

Yet some words of caution did now arise.
From allies of sober experience known
Whose senses of PR were firmly honed.
Would not an attempt to recruit such new eyes;
When once we decided to avert our gaze
At the friends candidate Obama once made
Their tapes still locked within our safes.
Might this be a move, not so wise?
Could it strengthen that worst of Brietbart crowd’s lies?
Of media Bias, their ultimate prize?
Though the danger of Palin we minimize not
It’s a bridge much too far, a hill too steep?
Nay! The Times and the Post continued their leap
The die had been cast, whatever the cost

It was one Eastern Standard by the clock
The mails were released, now what can be ’round?
They would not falter they would not stop
Though the first batch was fruitless more would they download
They’d continuing examining with a fine tooth comb
Till at close of day, nary a story found

On Saturday morning they sprung up anew
The volunteers started with a loud yawn
Plenty more e-mails to process and chew
Lots more to read, now slightly aghast
As the minutes and hours fruitlessly bared
And their gaze grew dim there, was there NAUGHT there?
They day was near finished the hours had passed
And still not a story worth looking upon

By evening, they had gone through the lot
Dismayed that ’twas no smoking gun found
For this? Hours of weekend for naught?
Where was the bombshell to spill on the web?
The goods upon Palin? Huge Memeorandm threads?
For this we gave our night on the town?
No incriminating email, no message of dread?
We signed up eagerly awaiting her fall
Yet instead twas our template lying dead
And disappointment awaiting us all!

How could this be, the books we have read?
John Stewart had proclaimed her a massive air head
On Colbert and Conan the audience did roar
Morning Joe and George Will dismissed her and more
Did not Katie Couric show her so lame?
(Now where is Katie reporting again?)
Instead of the simpleton insipid and slow
Once again is the Palin of Lock and Load?

So thus was the media forced to report
After days of warning and cries of alarm
That the Palin e-mails would do her much harm;
The voluminous emails gave no support
To their voice of darkness their cry of fear
That something quite evil was lurking here
That hidden in all those e-mails past
Was the secret likely to foil her at last!
That from their templates, so careful built
The people would waken, and listen to hear
Discarding MSM spin convention and tilt
The message of Palin; unfiltered and clear

With Apologies to Henry Wadsworth Longfellow and thanks to the MSM without whose obsession this would not have been possible

Update: I totally forgot that I did this once before this year concerning the Wisconsin Senate but considering the current Palin news what other poem could be used?

but only because Ann Coulter mentions it in passing on the View:

In case you are new to the blog, Ken Gladney is a black man in St. Louis who was called a nigger and beaten by a White SEIU supporter of Obama for selling Tea Party themed things at a Tea Party event.

The Local NAACP wasn’t interested

The MSM wasn’t interested

the man was charged with a misdemeanor and the paper called it a “Town hall disturbance

An NAACP leader declared Gladney “Not black enough

Oh and there is video.

My first post on the subject was Aug of 2009

But it never made the media. Why, for the same reason why Democrats want Anthony Weiner to resign, there is no way to blame this on Republicans or use it to advance the Democratic Party so it has to go away.

We’re at 6:04 and they are trying to duck the story as a joke.

It makes sense because their coverage of the story HAS been a joke.

One week ago they were in the best single position to talk this story, to lead this story and to comment on this story. They choose not to.

Now you have a story where not only is the left discredited, but Andrew Breitbart is vindicated.

So they will of COURSE stay away in the first 15 minutes, because this is the bit that is repeated in the 8 a.m. hour.

Does anyone seriously doubt that if Weiner was a republican that it would have been the lead?

Cripes who is the program director there: Charles Johnson? It’s like Watching North Korean or Syrian TV where stories they don’t like doesn’t exist.

If you want to know the difference between those who choose to spin and those who choose to report, you have now seen it, I suspect they will attempt to avoid the entire story for the entire show. UPDATE:They led in the 6:30 hour and gave the subject less time then they gave hitting Sarah Palin. Of Course they did!

The day they hit a republican on any kind of sex scandal we will be throwing this in their face.

Oh and they no longer have any authority to hit Andrew Breitbart EVER or hit Gingrich on his affairs either.

Update: They don’t have the ability to LEAD with Gingrich or Breitbart

Update 2: I was reading Ed Driscoll who linked to a line on the PJ Tatler called: “The Borg Deactivate”

I took the liberty of going over to the site to see what exactly they’ve written on the Weiner matter, and lo and behold it was like watching Morning Joe

Their one post on the 31st said this:

I’d suggest CNN producers should have asked themselves the same question before booking Breitbart today, and before they allowed him to go on the air and repeat crude speculation that the Democratic Congressman was having some “relationships” with “young women” and “girls that are quite young.”

Note that the usual Breitbart rhetorical recklessness was too much for CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, who appeared right after Breitbart. Dismayed by Breitbart’s “outrageous” insinuations about Weiner and “young girls,” Toobin said it was “too bad that he got to say that stuff on CNN.”

Agreed.

Rather interesting that Morning Joe is following George Soros/Media Matters lead isn’t it?

Remember Media Bias is not as much about how one reports, but what stories they choose to report.

Update 3: Stacy McCain in the Spectator on the Media:

Why should Haberman or O’Donnell expect anyone to believe their predictions? Haven’t they spent the past ten days being wrong, wrong, wrong, while Breitbart was right, right, right? Didn’t MSNBC and Politico, along with most other media outlets, credulously repeat Weiner’s claim that his Twitter account had been “hacked”? Did Haberman or O’Donnell protest when Joan Walsh of Salon accused Breitbart himself of being the hacker? And didn’t Weiner, by attempting to stonewall his way through the scandal, enable those who smeared Breitbart? Indeed, wasn’t Weiner betting on the media’s liberal bias as his hole card in a high-stakes bluff?

Let me remind you of something I said about Bill Sparkman:

Mr. Sparkman was counting on the media blaming the right for his death for his scam to work. He intentionally tried to frame us for his murder!

Anthony Weiner was playing the same game that Bill Sparkman was, he counted on the MSM’s hatred of the right to support his version of events.

Looking at the Anthony Weiner case there is one thing that hit me this morning.

Weiner seems to be totally taken aback by the MSM (with the apparent exception of the Morning Joe squad) willingness to question him.

One of the few advantages of an overwhelmingly liberal press is it tends to sharpen conservatives who rise to the top. You know that every day you are going to face a press whose primary goal is to bring you down.

Conservatives who have forgotten this fact then to be blindsided when the Media turns on them (Hello John McCain)

Anthony Weiner is was a rising (you just can’t avoid the Double Entendres on this story can you?) star in the democratic party. In the past the MSM never seriously challenged him. The closest thing to it I ever saw was Joe Scarborough on the first responder bill last year.

When challenged by the MSM in this situation, he literally had no idea what to do. It was more of a “Do you know who I am?” moment than anything else.

And even as the MSM interviewed him on the subject, their frustration at having to do so leaked through. Wolf Blitzer at the end of his piece finished with: “You should have done this yesterday”. Has he ever made a similar statement when confronting a member of the GOP?

Even this incredibly funny John Stewart piece tells the tale near the end.

The point is congressman to help us help you…

Help us help you? If this was Todd Palin would you be telling asking him to help us help you? Or would that singer have been accompanied by a full band with the lyrics on a large screen for the entire audience to sing along with?

Remember when Stewart said that he actually means it. He and the rest of the MSM WANTS this to be gone, they would love to rehabilitate Weiner as a happy warrior against the republicans.

Apparently all the fawning coverage in the past has had the same effect on Weiner as the self esteem movement on a student about to enter the workforce to compete in the real world; they simply can’t cope.

Contrast that to say Sarah Palin. Since the moment of her announcement in 2008 she has been under constant attack, by the media, by democrats and by the GOP establishment and the sub rosa allies of Mitt Romney. Yet she not only carries on she manages to impress those who oppose her:

For Governor Palin, this is not only how she operates a potential pre-campaign bus tour. It’s about how she governs as a politician as well. Over two years ago, to the disappointment and frustration of some Alaskans, Governor Palin rejected federal stimulus dollars for some educational and arts programs. Rather than huddling down in her office and ignore those who protested the her decision, she went out in the cold sans a coat and talked with her protesting constituents. The woman who organized the protest even conceded that Governor Palin was very open to a dialogue, expressed honestly her reasoning for rejecting the funds, and encouraged the protesters to remain engaged with their legislators on the matter of those funds

She is like the British Public during the blitz, she (with apologies to Joe Scarborough and the no labels crowd) keeps calm and carries on.

I’m sure that democrats given the choice of easy coverage and bigger blowups vs tough coverage would rather keep the status quo, but everything has a price and this inexperience in dealing with a hostile press has to be paid for.

Anthony Weiner is now doing so.

Darwin’s theory of natural selection advances the idea of “the survival of the fittest”. Over the last several days the Anthony Weiner case has given several media figures an abject lesson of this theory in practice.

During the long weekend when the tweet heard round the world first hit the internet only the blogs, mostly right leaning, were willing to cover it. The MSM did not want to touch (Anthony’s?) Weiner with a ten foot pole. Howard Kurtz’s reaction was typical. When users of Twitter (known on occasion as twerps) intrigued by the “interesting” follow patters of Congressman Weiner, suggested he cover the story his reply on Twitter reeked of elitism:

To twerps demanding I cover Anthony Weiner Twitter scandal: Whole thing appears to be faked. Sometimes it pays to wait for the facts.

Robert Stacy McCain a blogger with years of experience as a shoe leather reporter for the Washington Times, and American Spectator disagreed. He along with, Ace of Spades and Lee Stranahan pursued the story, other smaller bloggers followed suit, large bloggers such as Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit linked and aggregated the coverage while the public with years of experience In the use of social networking ate up the combination of the powerful up and coming congressman and his “interesting” collection of lovely ladies he choose to follow.

Still the established media came slowly, pro-forma messages of a “hack” were reported in some locations but on Tuesday, the morning shows as a whole took a pass. Most notable of them was MSNBC’s Morning Joe.

Of all the shows deciding not to follow the story, Morning Joe was the most perplexing. The show originates out of NY, Anthony Wiener has been a frequent guest on the program and both the show in general and Joe Scarborough in particular is known for their use of both twitter and social media. The host has even been known to exchange public tweets with both fans and detractors during the show and on weekends.

Yet other than mentioning in passing that “a lot of hacking is going on this weekend” (PBS was hacked by supporters of wikileaks this) Morning Joe avoided the story completely. Even Willie Geist’s “News you can’t use” segment, normally highlighting the odd and absurd, decided to give it a miss.

Alas for both Congressman Weiner and MSNBC others picked up the slack. The NY post covered the story and ran an op-ed concerning it Tuesday morning and by afternoon viewers of CNN were amazed to see the congressman ducking questions to the point of insult. When evening came Jon Stewart, despite his long friendship with the congressman, not only covered the story but lambasted the media for leaving the job of reporting it to bloggers.

And report they did, bloggers continued to dig and were rewarded with increased traffic driven by the congressman’s inability, over a series of increasingly disastrous interviews, to confirm or deny that the photo in question was of him.

By the time Howard Kurtz finally deigned to cover the story and his belated piece ran in the Daily Beast, Congressman Weiner had done almost as much damage to his pubic credibility as the series of Tornadoes on Wednesday did to Springfield Massachusetts and the surrounding towns.

Only slightly less damaged was the reputation of media members like Mr. Kurtz and the Morning Joe team who, in the Darwinian world of reporting, were the slowest members of the pack.

…winning Iowa so who do they start pushing and talking about?

Herman Cain

They show video mention his poll number and start pushing him when they have not before.

Gee I wonder who might have predicted that

Now I’ve already said I like Herman Cain, but mark my words, the “Journo-listic” MSM will suddenly find him a lot more interesting and worthy of coverage for as long as they think he will take votes away from Palin.

Will Herman take advantage of it? He’s not running to lose so of course he will, but I suspect that if the media’s attempt to use him to neutralize Palin succeeds then they will no longer consider him newsworthy or electable.

Talk about transparent. (and no Anthony Weiner either, what a shock).

One of the things that has enabled the conservative blogosphere and Fox news has been the refusal of the MSM to cover stories that might portray a democrat in an unfavorable light.

The Monica Lewinsky case made Matt Drudge because Newsweek when given the chance to cover a story with every element that would attract readers; Sex, Power intrigue, declined.

The same thing happened with the John Edwards story. The MSM continued to ignore it until the National Enquirer caught him with the lady in a hotel.

Consider: If Newsweek does it’s job, how much smaller is Matt Drudge? Does he inspire others? Does an Andrew Breitbart who worked with Drudge get his start?

Let’s say you are a hard left person; what would you today give to have neutralized Matt Drudge and all those who would follow him?

And consider 2000. Do you think an incumbent Al Gore would have lost to George Bush? I think not.

Consider myself and the Weiner business. If the MSM reports do I end up with an Op-ed in the NY Post, or the Lars Larson radio and Fox TV gigs? Would I even get the Instalanche if the MSM makes the points that I did first?

Which brings me to Joe Scarborough again.

This morning I stated that this was an important show for Joe Scarborough. There is a definite connection between the show and Weiner but Joe Scarborough is very familiar with Twitter and would understand the potential problems with Rep. Weiner’s story.

Yet his own dismissal of Andrew Breitbart and association with people such as Joan Walsh of Salon who railed about the Weiner business being all about conservatives attacking teenage girls, and the Huffington Post who confined the story to the NY section, transformed any confrontation with Weiner from simple reporting to act of courage. It would be standing against the people he hangs with at parties and events. It is the type of thing that would make the “no labels” crowd uncomfortable.

Confronted with this choice, #weinergate was not covered in any segment, and his name was mentioned only in passing about “hacking” in general. It didn’t even make the “news you can’t use” segment. (Can you imagine this happening if the congressman in question was Paul Ryan?). No coverage of the lawyering up, no coverage of the alleged hacker offering to submit to investigations and no coverage of Rep Weiner choosing to not answer questions. Nothing.

Normally there would be no damage as only Fox would cover the story and their niche market would never hear about it. Unfortunately for Joe and Company CNN decided no act in a very atypical way for an MSM network.

Congressman Weiner was, to the surprise of even Andrew Breitbart, confronted by a CNN apparently deciding this was a job they would not outsource to Fox (when you are in 3rd place you apparently try harder). The result was classic TV.

The media stars of the left were since the movie all the president’s men, brought up on drams of such confrontations all their lives. All those dreams involved Republicans, but lo and behold when a democrat is the subject it’s still great TV. CNN reporters will look at this and say: Why not me?

This is a disaster for MSNBC. Any MSNBC host this evening who wants to report on this has to show the CNN clip and the left of center viewers who would refuse to turn to FOX to see the story have no such qualms about watching CNN.

Tomorrow morning when this clip is shown on Morning Joe viewers will be wondering why they didn’t hear about this issue on the show. They will remember how many times Congressman Weiner has appeared on the show and will be amazed that they are hearing about this after the fact.

This is an embarrassment and a self-inflicted wound to the credibility of his show.

Why do I care? Two reasons:

1. Morning Joe is the only show on MSNBC that has the possibility of the entry of conservative opinions into their audience. Its fall would likely cause its replacement with a totally liberal show appealing the MBNBC’s niche Market.

2. I genuinely like these people. I’ve met Willie on one occasion and Mike Barnicle on several, they are nice regular guys. The type you would have a beer with and could talk straight with. I suspect Joe and Mika are too. Any parent who sees how Mika reacts around children or sees how she treats her father on the air can’t help but like her. Plus Joe once paid me a complement that was passed on through a 3rd party that was very important to me at the time and an American of Sicilian origin doesn’t forget a favor.

It is painful to watch them do this to their show. I hope they in the future take these words of Robert Stacy McCain to heart:

This story is what we call “news.” No matter how unseemly or inconsequential the story may superficially appear to be, it is entirely legitimate and potentially significant, and it is therefore a dereliction of journalistic duty to ignore or dismiss it.

My appearance on Fox 25 tomorrow precludes me from seeing tomorrow’s show, I sure hope they take what I said to heart but frankly I’m not sanguine.

Update: Poor Joe & Co. John Stewart was all over this. I’d bet real money the only clip they will play if any is the “it’s too big to be him” stuff.

I so didn’t want to wake up typing, I have things to do, Herman Cain is just 2 hours away in New Hampshire, the wife and kids have the day off and I still don’t know where in NE Sarah Palin is going to be and I have two sample ads to write for a potential customer of the radio show.

Not to mention normal Memorial Day stuff.

And yet the Weiner case continues to beckon with developments that are not at all favorable to our friends on the left. So here I am back at the keyboard after mass trying to get an update in before the Memorial Day observance.

The young lady in question put out a statement yesterday that you will find at the New York Daily News, in it she makes some charges concerning a person on Twitter “harassed” her:

The account that these tweets were sent from was familiar to me; this person had harassed me many times after the Congressman followed me on Twitter a month or so ago. Since I had dealt with this person and his cohorts before I assumed that the tweet and the picture were their latest attempts at defaming the Congressman and harassing his supporters.

This will be read by the tens of thousands who read that paper.

What will likely not be read by those same tens of thousands are two tweets she put out last night saying:

1. I never said or implied that the alleged “stalker” was behind the tweet

2. I never once speculated about the alleged hacking.

Say WHAT? This is Bill Clinton grade: “it depends on the meaning of the what the word ‘is’ is” style.

It would seem to me the statement’s purpose was not to deal with unanswered questions but to get the “I’m being harassed by the right” theme out so the left can follow-up with nonsense like this from Joan Walsh:

It’s about @AndrewBreitbart and insane bloggers savaging a 21 year old girl.

Apparently the media not able to contain the story has decided their narrative is going to be about evil right wingers harassing a poor innocent 21-year-old journalism student.

PLEASE!

This narrative is designed to do one thing: to take the spotlight off of the suddenly silent Anthony Weiner and to avoid asking Ms. Cordova some specific questions such as:

1. Did you at any time send or relieve Direct Messages with Congressman Weiner via Twitter or any software used to access Twitter?

2. Did anyone from the Congressman’s office contact you at any time between the time the tweet became known and the release of your statement.

3. Did you exchange direct messages with Tommy Christopher of Mediate before the release of your statement, and if so what was the nature of said messages?

4. Who if anyone aided in the drafting, editing and presentation of your prepared statement, was a lawyer consulted

Tell me Ms. Walsh would you consider those questions “savaging” anyone?

And incidentally, do you have any questions for the congressman as Stacy McCain explains:

I think if you were keenly observant, you might have noticed something curious over the weekend: The normally loquacious @RepWeiner didn’t have a damned thing to say about this whole “hacking” incident, except a couple of vague jokes.

Does it not strike you as odd, Ms. Walsh, that the New York congressman — who has never been known to be averse to TV cameras — did not rush into a studio, or call a press conference, to rebut the accusation that he had Tweeted photos of his tumescence to a 21-year-old?

So the loquacious congressman says nothing, while his spokesman issues denials and, after 36 “anxiety-filled” hours, we get a confusing statement from the self-described “fan” of Weiner to whom the notorious photo was addressed.

There is something wrong with this story, Ms. Walsh. And what’s wrong has nothing to do with Andrew Breitbart.

Lee Stranahan follows up with two examples of simple questions that Joan Walsh has not asked:

1. Why did Rep. Weiner, who only follows 200 people, choose to follow 21 year old college student Gennette Cordova?

2. And how exactly did he come to follow her?

Ms. Walsh, may I point out that Andrew Breitbart was not following the young lady on Twitter but a certain congressman in a district 2900 miles from her was. I don’t claim to be a professional journalist but it would seem to me that any reporter whose goal is the truth of this matter rather than defending a congressman beloved by the left would be asking questions. Andrew Breitbart is not the story here no matter how much you or the Daily Kos crowd wish it to be so.

Meanwhile as paid reports cry “Breitbart” and unleash the dogs of indignation Ace of Spades contacted the alleged “harasser” who answered direct questions posed to him (I also contacted him asking to speak to him by phone last night, he choose not to speak by phone and I choose not to ask my questions via the net).

Have you been contacted by any law enforcement officers or agents whatsoever?

His answer:

No one. Nada. I keep saying bring it on. I have nothing to hide. Not my IP nothing to hide at all.

No one from law enforcement contacted Detective Colby Hall’s number one suspect in the hacking case of the decade? No one? No one at all?

Excuse Me?

Additionally the gentleman in question has offered to hand over anything an investigator might want concerning this. Ace again:

Isn’t it odd that Weiner and the Comely Coed are not calling the police, while the man the left has all-but-accused as being behind this is the only one who wants a police investigation?

It apparently isn’t odd if you are Joan Walsh or Colby Hall of Mediate. Apparently Ace has demonstrated reporting is one of those jobs American reporters don’t want to do .

Oh and Joan, Colby in case you missed it Bryan Preston notes another Coincidence that a reporter might choose to ask about

It was just a coincidence that Rep. Anthony Weiner had spent much of Friday on twitter (where he could tweet publicly as well as direct message, of course) laying in wait for a supposed Clarence Thomas docu-dump; and it was a coincidence that Weiner happened to see the allegedly criminal tweet, and was able to delete the tweet in question within minutes of it going off into the wild, even though he allegedly had nothing to do with sending that tweet in the first place. He’s a regular Twitter Batman.

Think about it; a “hack” of Congressman Weiner’s accounts DURING THE MEMORIAL DAY WEEKEND that has the potential to damage his reputation takes place just as he just happens to be sitting there ready to delete the offending tweet and picture.

What a lucky guy!

Oh one last thing, take a look at this story from CBS. Here is the headline:

Rep. Weiner: I did not send Twitter crotch pic

Now a person seeing that headline would naturally assume that CBS asked Rep Weiner and he denied it. Unfortunately that’s not what the story says:
(CBS/AP)

NEW YORK — A lewd photograph of a crotch sent from the Twitter account of U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner is just “a distraction” perpetrated by a hacker, his spokesman said Sunday.

Dave Arnold told The Associated Press in an email that the tweet, directed at a woman, was “a distraction” from the married New York Democrat’s “important work representing his constituents.”

So it’s a distraction? I have a question:

Has anybody in the Media spoken directly to Congressman Weiner on the record concerning this matter?

The most interesting part of this story is going to be the MSM spin, but at least they can use it as an excuse to ignore Sarah Palin.