Well, didn’t die, but it’s tarnished a little, in my opinion. Whoever put together “Quick Hits” for Reason today isn’t very well informed on the Plame/Wilson leak case:
Has the Valerie Plame case morphed into a perjury or obstruction of justice case involving a high-ranking Bush administration official? The circumstances suggest it has.
It then cites this tendentious pile of myths by John Dean (gee, there’s someone with no axes to grind…), which breathlessly cites Wilson’s book about the evils of the Bush administration, and can’t wait for it to come out in paperback. Problem is, of course, that Wilson has been demonstrated to be a notable liar, on this and other subjects, and few people other than rabid anti-Bush partisans still seriously believe that this was an intentional outing of an agent, or “intimidation” by the Bush administration. I doubt if the judge in question believes it either.
Diamandis said that the wealth of individuals is rapidly increasing thanks to the evolving power of the Internet, and very shortly through breakthroughs in nanotechnology. Billionaires and multi-billionaires are making their own future happen, he said.
Diamandis said that the wealth of individuals is rapidly increasing thanks to the evolving power of the Internet, and very shortly through breakthroughs in nanotechnology. Billionaires and multi-billionaires are making their own future happen, he said.
Diamandis said that the wealth of individuals is rapidly increasing thanks to the evolving power of the Internet, and very shortly through breakthroughs in nanotechnology. Billionaires and multi-billionaires are making their own future happen, he said.
I’m still getting ready for a last-minute trip across the Atlantic, but Thomas James has a restorative tonic for Helen Caldicott’s ongoing idiocy about “militarizing space,” and Clark Lindsey has a lot of good stuff on the recent International Space Development Conference in Washington, DC.
I lost my internet connection on Thursday night, and only now got it restored. In addition, I’ve had a family problem come up that will necessitate a trip to Europe as soon as possible, so posting may continue to be sparse here for another several days.
We have another Eason Jordan incident. As Bryan Preston notes, the press should be even more sensitive to such charges in light of the recent Newsweek fiasco, but they seem to remain clueless.
The folks at ABC News apparently need to go back and read their history books. They seem to fantasize that it was Republicans who blocked the Civil Rights Act. In a piece on the current filibuster debate, they write the following, titled “Historical Perspective”:
The filibuster has been used historically by the minority party, which can’t win with a vote count. Democrats have opposed the filibuster before
Ann Coulter reminds us of some Michael Isikoff stories from the past that Newsweek was in no hurry to run:
…apparently it’s possible for Michael Isikoff to have a story that actually is true, but for his editors not to run it.
Why no pause for reflection when Isikoff had a story about American interrogators at Guantanamo flushing the Quran down the toilet? Why not sit on this story for, say, even half as long as NBC News sat on Lisa Meyers’ highly credible account of Bill Clinton raping Juanita Broaddrick?
Newsweek seems to have very different responses to the same reporter’s scoops. Who’s deciding which of Isikoff’s stories to run and which to hold? I note that the ones that Matt Drudge runs have turned out to be more accurate