Bush and Bullets
There's no better way to energize our Readers Who Comment than to write that a few things (not the polls) are going President Bush's way. Peter Baker has really energized the RWC this morning. For the most part they find his premise disgusting, dismiss Baker as an uninformed tool of GOP talking points, and the newspaper (for which Baker has a long history of careful reporting) as a liberal rag. Such is the state of civil discourse these days.
Another big story, a joint project by the Post and CBS News's 60 Minutes, reports that the FBI has abandoned as unreliable a bullet test used as evidence in many criminal trials. The specifics of one case -- and whether the conviction now under review was valid -- are discussed in today's chapter. With a few exceptions our RWC find this situation appalling.
First, the Bush story.
We'll start with an exchange between theOtter and puciret, which pretty much captures the context of the entire discussion. theOtter said, "...GWB isn't perfect, nor even close. His verbal gaffes are the stuff of legend and his policies (and politics) aren't always the great boon... Still... I see a basically good man, honestly trying to do what's best for the nation he loves..."
To which puciret replied, "...And the 3 bears lived happily ever after."
gasmonkey was one of those who thinks we're missing the story, saying, "...It's simple fatigue. The media simply no longer amplifies the embarrassing gaffes that occur nearly daily. How about the woman in Immogration who awarded a prize to the white agent in blackface? The faked news conference? The hundreds of Bush political appointees who are now burrowing in to career civil servant jobs so they can remain on the gravy train? That never gets covered."
And ccatmoon said, "Of all the delusional pieces I've read in the WaPo, this one is right up there. The press has set the bar so low for BushCo that when any routine event occurs (i.e., the gummint doing its job) that would barely be a blip on the record of any other administration, it's called a "success" by the WaPo...So put away your cheerleading pompoms, WaPo...you stopped fooling people a long time ago."
And just to prove that you can't make anyone happy, bobmoses said, "...As usual, the Post wraps any good news for Bush along with a bunch of bad news. This is similar to the today's story about declining violence in Iraq [mentioned high in Baker's analysis], with a few examples to the contrary... Just a further example of the Post's overt liberal partisanship. If the media wasn't marchhing in lockstep against Bush, his approval ratings would be in the 60s."
But chiefnugt wrote, "Because the violence in Iraq is lessening does not in any way excuse George Bush for starting an unnecessary war based on lies. He's still responsible for thousands of casualties and $1.5 trillion of our tax money wasted - that's simply unforgiveable, regardless of the war's outcome."
And danigo, quoting the article, said, " 'The war in Iraq seems to have taken a turn for the better' means what? Are the Turks not preparing to invade? Are veterans not committing suicide in large numbers? Is the quiet in the streets of Bagdhad the only criteria? Maybe the Iraqis are exhausted and are being quiet in Bagdhad to allow the US to leave. If the US does not leave, this will be a lull before another disaster."
nads1 said, "Sounds like Karl Rove wrote this one. Excuse me while I puke."
And Lamentations asked, "What about Musharraf in Pakistan? That's really going well, isn't it?"
But Baker has his supporters. vatownsend said, "Yo Pete, you can't write something like this in the Washington Post and expect the liberal readers to be nice to you. I know what you are doing and saying but it ain't gonna work here bubba. LOL!!"
Now we'll turn to the Post-CBS report on the abandoned bullet-testing process and the questions about justice that it raises.
bghgh said, "Thank you Washington Post and 60 Minutes for this expose. The FBI lab has long been known for poor work, but covering up a faulty test that put people in jail is not poor science or technology, it is a moral failure... Here is something worthwhile for all those US Attorneys to do instead of cooking up cases against Democrats in their states."
lotsacats wrote, "The window for appealing a conviction based on new scientific evidence should never close. The very idea of a time limit flies in the face of the concept of protecting the innocent..."
rmbus54 noted that "This is yet one more argument against the death penalty. Why is it that so many of those who say government cannot do anyting right have so much faith in government when it comes to capital punishment?"
phila_reader added, "It's extremely disappointing, but not surprising, to read of an erroneous prosecution practice that is more likely to affect low income defendants than high income defendants. Unfortunately the low income defendants can't afford the high-priced lawyers that may have prevented them from serving decades in prison unjustly."
Today's article brought many similar comments, but also an opposing view from aldous, who wrote, "Liberal Trial Lawyers at work. Freeing murderers. Think about the victims, for once."
But edwcorey responded, saying, "...So it's OK, in your fascist ghoul world, to convict anyone on concocted evidence? Give me a liberal any day, if justice is the goal. Your lynch-mob mentality is anachronistic, unevolved, and sickening."
The FBI should be stripped of its many extra roles and return to only operating in their area of expertise, whatever that is. These clowns should not be in charge of counter-espionage or counter-terrorism, or anything that might force them to use a computer.
11/19/2007 1:38:15 AM
We'll give the last word today to lou1, who said, "They have to give this guy a new trial. If the evidence is sufficient, they will get a guilty verdict. But they cannot leave a man in jail with testimony from an "expert witness" who clearly perjured himself."
All comments on the Bush article are here.
All comments on Part One of the bullet testing series are here.
All comments on Part Two are here.
Posted by: ogwnfxiel dgiwnfcyq | January 5, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: geas sytkjg | January 5, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: iqtejzfmc taxk | December 6, 2007 12:04 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: fprcqgbx nlvshfj | December 6, 2007 12:03 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: Anonymous | November 27, 2007 10:56 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: Gatsby1 | November 25, 2007 4:12 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: noah | November 22, 2007 2:54 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: Marcus Taylor | November 22, 2007 9:57 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: Kevin Larmee | November 21, 2007 10:22 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: onwvcsm wgqsyfmjh | November 21, 2007 8:23 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: vqobn dsifyz | November 21, 2007 8:22 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: Cymric | November 20, 2007 11:45 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: lmao | November 20, 2007 7:57 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: Anotherliberalwhiner | November 20, 2007 7:22 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: mikelemm | November 20, 2007 9:26 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: Fedup1 | November 20, 2007 8:08 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: Aldous | November 20, 2007 2:28 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: blameislam | November 19, 2007 8:19 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: Unrepentant Liberal | November 19, 2007 4:52 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: jhbyer | November 19, 2007 3:49 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: Bartolo | November 19, 2007 3:31 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: H. Sap. Modernensis | November 19, 2007 3:14 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: jhbyer | November 19, 2007 3:03 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: boscobobb | November 19, 2007 2:54 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: khoreia | November 19, 2007 2:21 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: wmd404 | November 19, 2007 2:11 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: Jayne K. | November 19, 2007 2:00 PM | Report abuse
The comments to this entry are closed.