The political and cultural coverage in "alternative" weeklies such as the Village Voice tends to be even more left-leaning than that of the MSM, but the Voice, probably America's best known alt-weekly, is likely to become less tendentious under its incoming editor, Erik Wemple. 

Wemple, who takes the helm at the Voice in late July, has been the editor of Washington City Paper since early 2002. (The politically eclectic City Paper long has been one of the exceptions to the left-wing alt-weekly rule.) He recently told the New York Times, "My ideology...preaches loyalty to the great story. I really don't care if a story begins with leftist sympathies, and I really don't care if a story begins from a more conservative set of sympathies. If it's a great story, we're going to report it out."

Just before the 11:00 hour (10:56pm EST to be precise), CNN ran a piece reported by Jeanne Moos about the Ann Coulter brouhaha. Included in her report was video footage of last year's attempted pie attack on Coulter by members of "al-Pieda" (in fact, the footage was used twice in a three minute report!) The second use was shown under Moos' sign-off at the end of the piece, at which point they came back to CNN anchor Carol Lin, who smiled and said (referring to the pie attack footage), "Lots of people enjoyed seeing that!"

Oh really? I wonder if it would've been so funny had it happened to Al Franken or Barbara Streisand.

Haditha: Is McGirk the New Mary Mapes?
June 9th, 2006

Evidence accumulates of a hoax in Haditha. The weblog Sweetness & Light has done an estimable service gathering together the articles which cast substantial doubt on the charge of a massacre of civilians at Haditha . Because the blog is too busy gathering and fisking the news, I offered and the publisher accepted my offer to put what he has uncovered in a narrative form.

Having done so, I can tell you that the story has a whiff of yet another mediagenic scandal like the TANG memos or the Plame “outing.” While the Marines quite correctly will not comment on the case pending the outcome of their investigation, I am not bound by those rules, and I will sum up the story for you.

On this years edition of MTV's Movie Awards, Jessica Alba was the recipient of the award for sexiest performance for her role in the film "Sin City." In her acceptance speech, Alba decided to use her platform to indoctrinate our nation's youth with liberal propaganda. We all know about President Bush's recent efforts to curb the spread of disease and unwanted pregnancies through abstinence only education programs. Last I checked, he was elected president by the majority of voters in the 2004 election. Well, apparently, Ms. Alba thinks she's more qualified to advise our youth on matters of public policy. In clear defiance of the president, Alba urged viewers to have safe sex. In a time of war it is essential that all citizens follow the sexual instructions of our elected president. Not that Alba cares that we are at war.

Jealous guardians of high standards or just . . . jealous? There was a rare bit of consensus on tonight's Fox News Watch, as pundits from left and right came together to condemn Ann Coulter for what they judged to be money-motivated excesses in her latest opus, 'Godless: The Church of Liberalism'. The focus was Coulter's controversial statements about the Jersey Girls - the 9/11 widows turned harsh Bush administration critics. Highlighted was this excerpt from Ann's book:

"These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them . . . I have never seen people enjoying their husbands' death so much."

In his latest "Regarding Media" column in the Los Angeles Times (Sat. June 10, 2006), the perpetually clueless Tim Rutten claims that author Ann Coulter is a "pornographer" and her latest tome is "pornography" and "hate." ("Like most pornographers ... [Coulter] is resourceful in the service of her own economic and other interests.") In addition, Rutten expounds (emphases mine),

That Bigoted Hypocrite Hillary Clinton Should apologize to Ann Coulter For being so evil & mean Spirited. Every one who is honest with themselves knows what Ann Coulter expressed was the truth . The Problem is Ann Coulter is Not supposed to Tell the truth in Hillary Clinton's Thought police world of politically correct speech & that in itself is why Hillary is unfit for the presidency . Mr's Clinton does not have the mental strength to control her speech , Thoughts & emotions when confronted with reality In every day Life, & that is very Dangerous.
Mr's Clinton accused conservative columnist and author of the new book "Godless" Ann Coulter of being meanspirited and heartless for her comments regarding some of the 9-11 women who lost loved ones and are now actively political.

That Bigoted Hypocrite Hillary Clinton Should apologize to Ann Coulter For being so evil & mean Spirited. Every one who is honest with themselves knows what Ann Coulter expressed was the truth . The Problem is Ann Coulter is Not supposed to Tell the truth in Hillary Clinton's Thought police world of politically correct speech & that in itself is why Hillary is unfit for the presidency . Mr's Clinton does not have the mental strength to control her speech , Thoughts & emotions when confronted with reality In every day Life, & that is very Dangerous.
Mr's Clinton accused conservative columnist and author of the new book "Godless" Ann Coulter of being meanspirited and heartless for her comments regarding some of the 9-11 women who lost loved ones and are now actively political.

MRC's Mike Rule noticed on Friday that CBS "Early Show" co-host Hannah Storm held fast to deeply pessimistic questions in an interview with Sen. John McCain. She began by wondering if Zarqawi's death would have any effect at all:

"Well, even the president, Senator McCain, had a notably cautious response yesterday to the fact that al Zarqawi was dead. He said we can expect terrorists to carry on without him. What's your assessment? Will his death have any impact on the level of violence? Particularly the civil war that's raging in Iraq now?"

The world has taken another turn for the bizarre. CNSNews reported on Friday (hat tip to NB reader RJ) that a new family movie about football, “Facing the Giants,” has been given a “PG” rating by the Motion Picture Association of America apparently for having too much religious content.

Too much religious content? Are you kidding me?

This story appears to have first been reported by Terry Mattingly at the Scripps Howard News Service on Wednesday: “‘What the MPAA said is that the movie contained strong 'thematic elements' that might disturb some parents,’ said Kris Fuhr, vice president for marketing at Provident Films, which is owned by Sony Pictures. Provident plans to open the film next fall in 380 theaters nationwide with the help of Samuel Goldwyn Films, which has worked with indie movies like ‘The Squid and the Whale.’"

Just what kind of “thematic elements” are present? The article elaborated:

On Friday, talk show host Laura Ingraham laughed at how MSNBC's Chris Matthews started demoting Zarqawi on Thursday night's "Hardball" as a minor-league threat, a "Triple-A" terrorist instead of a real "World Series" win. MRC's Geoff Dickens passed on the transcript:

"Well could one concern be that if they bragged, and appropriately so bragged, about killing Zarqawi, a real bad guy, who killed Nicholas Berg and a number of other people in the most vicious way, beheading them, that they would expose the fact that they haven’t caught Mullah Omar, the head of the Taliban, haven’t caught Zawahiri, the number two guy, number three guy over there, and they certainly haven’t caught Bin Laden. Are they concerned that, that bragging at this point would look like bragging about a Triple-A World Series rather than a real one?”

On the day of the running of the final leg of the Triple Crown, we've got a new leader in the Wackiest Zarqawi-Take Stakes. The new favorite in the kooky conspiracy derby is far from a colt. Galloping ghosts! It's De-Frosted Anti-Vietnam War Man and battle-hardened Jane Fonda veteran Tom Hayden. His winning notion? That Zarqawi might really have been our guy in Iraq.

In this Huffington Post piece, Hayden tries to give himself cover by stating "I have no reason to believe Zarqawi was an [American] agent," but then immediately goes on to contradict himself, darkly musing:

AP is scraping the bottom of the barrel today: "unidentified source claims a man looking like wounded al-Zarqawi was beaten by American troops". Oops sorry, apparently he was "pulled out of the ambulance and beaten". CBS is right on top of this unsubstantiated claim: "U.S. troops arriving on the scene wrapped the man's head in an Arab robe and began beating him."

I am shocked, shocked, at the possibility of this gross misconduct. Having dropped two 500 lb bombs in order to eliminate the terrorists in the first place, they really should have dropped to their knees and given the man immediate mouth to mouth resuscitation. In fact isn't killing a terrorist against the Geneva convention? Well if not, surely we can dig up some other agreement which this brutal act would contravene. Despite the setbacks "Democrats Vow to Fight On After Zarqawi Loss."

The media has begun a higher level battle against both Bush and our military after the death of al-Zarqawi. They have glorified him as a freedom figure betrayed by his own comrades. They write of our military wiping blood from his body so pictures could be taken.

Both liberals and media now are moving towards defining defeating terrorism as the death of bin Laden. We have destroyed a crucial sector of their force, received no recognition for doing so, in fact mocked for the manner in which our military handled the mission. The left sits on the fence as to pursuing the details of al-Zarqawi’s death, demeaning Bush and our military, or pushing for retreat. If the war is not over until bin Laden’s death, what are our options?

The AP ran a story today which opens the gates to pursuing the details of al-Zarqawi’s death, Witness Says U.S. Troops Beat Al-Zarqawi After Bombing. These people have no facts, want everything immediately, simply do not take the time to think, and go for it all simultaneously. They will once again back themselves into corners from which they cannot escape.

JDW

Shown the Thursday Washington Post headline, “Victory in California Calms G.O.P.” followed by the New York Times headline, “Narrow Victory by G.O.P. Signals Fall Problems,” NPR's Nina Totenberg exclaimed on Friday night's Inside Washington: "The Times is wrong!" Syndicated columnist Mark Shields suggested his disagreement with the spin of the New York Times: "I don't think there's any question that if the Democrats had won they'd be yelling at the tree tops.” Shields added his analysis that the Times missed: “The culture of corruption, I think, is not a viable campaign message for 2006 for the fall. That ought to be a warning to the Democrats.”

On Thursday, in postings for the MRC's TimesWatch and on NewsBusters, “Double Huh: NYT Headline Says GOP's Cali Win Means 'Fall Problems' for Party,” Clay Waters provided a look at the tilted June 8 front page New York Times article about the congressional race in which Republican Brian Bilbray beat Democrat Francine Busby to replace imprisoned Republican Randy 'Duke' Cunningham.

Let us not lament the changing of our national tone lest we sound like our aching elders. It's OK what she says. Let her accuse the widows of enjoying the deaths of their husbands. Let her call me traitor godless liar whatever. these words belong to her. They are the chains that keep her tied to the anchor of her easy conclusions. All those who climb aboard her back are destined to drown in a thoughtless wreck together alone in the center of a cold dark ocean.