Lampley Is Wrong

From the site that keeps on giving, Jim Lampley lamely attempts to rebut Roger L. Simon. While flailing away and hitting nothing, Lampley shows exactly what makes this blog a joke:

That the magazine is responsible enough to voluntarily admit an error amid the ensuing firestorm is something to be respected, not to be used as Mr. Simon did, as a jumping-off point for suggesting that general media and their reporters have a get-Bush mentality. If general media had a get-Bush mentality, they'd have been much quicker to respond to the significance of the British intelligence memo further substantiating the administration's Iraq buildup perfidy, and for that matter they'd work a lot harder at determining what really happened in the Presidential election of 2004.

Come on, Jim. Newsweek did not admit the error because they felt responsible, they admitted wrong doing because they were caught printing fictional information by the blogosphere. As for the Brit memo and the 2004 election, you might do better posting over at DU or Indymedia.

As for expressed neoconservative outrage over the fourteen deaths, get real. Those of us who oppose this administration and its private $300 billion Iraq war are as saddened as we should be about the fourteen people who died in Afghanistan because of this. We're equally saddened by the deaths of tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians cavalierly sacrificed on the altar of Messrs.
Bush/Cheney/Wolfowitz/Rumsfeld's preconceived "anti-terror" initiative. For pro-Bush writers to attempt to guilt-trip professional reporters for collateral damage is beyond ludicrous. It's immoral.

This "private" war took place in 2003. We had a presidential election in 2004 and Bush, along with his cronies who were all there during the campaign, was elected with a majority of the vote. Something that hadn't happened in a while.

Keep trying, Jimmy. Eventually you might get the hang of this thing.