Huffington Post Whacks Huckabee Upside The Head Again

The Huffington Post ran the story last week about Huckabee helping to get serial rapist Wayne Dumond out of prison. Huckabee took a page out of Giuliani's book and attacked the messenger instead of confronting the facts. With a woman like Arianna running the site, you know H Po wasn't going to take his criticism lying down. Early this morning the blog did not disappoint, shedding light on even more documents that show all Mike cared about was letting this dangerous criminal out of jail to appease Huckabee's Clinton-hating fans.

From The Huffington Post:

Since the Huckabee campaign has questioned the validity of the original report, the Huffington Post has decided to release additional documents from Huckabee's file on Dumond.

[Read the new documents in full here.]

The file, which was provided by a staffer to then-governor Huckabee who was concerned about his handling of the case, includes 12 separate letters written by eight different women. (This includes the three documents posted for the original story). Three of the women reported being raped or sexually assaulted by Dumond. One, whose writings have not been made public up to this point, wrote about her harrowing assault at Dumond's hands[...]

The document provides a clear indication that Huckabee had evidence from state officials concerning Dumond's long history of violent behavior. While on the presidential campaign trail, Huckabee has stated that no one could have anticipated that Dumond would strike again after being set free.

I wonder what the Huckabee campaign will say to these new revelations. We should probably give him some time to respond, since he is now dealing with statements made from Ryan White's mother about his comments about AIDS patients.

Poor guy, meh.

Thank You Captain Obvious

So I was going through The Huffington Post just now and I ran into a post by Peter Mehlman. If you do not recognize the name, he was one of the head writers for Seinfeld. Due to a couple degrees of separation, he got me on as an extra for a show he created (not Seinfeld) a few years back. He is a great comedy writer, but when it comes to analyzing the media, his message is rather depressing.

The gist of it is that in today's media, there are so many outlets for people to choose to get their news from, whether you are liberal or conservative. Because of that, he sees the Information Age is more like "it's the blather-ation age." Well I am glad you notice that Peter, the Information Age does allow many people to express their viewpoints and yes, other people can choose to read whichever they deem fit.

Mehlman highlights the works of Maureen Dowd and Bill Maher on the left and David Broder on the right, showing that as talented as these people are the only thing being accomplished is preaching to the choir. What Peter is missing here is that even though politics is extremely divisive, the world is not wholly black and white. There are (gasp) independents out there that hate both choirs and are looking for a middle ground. In fact, there are more and more Independents being registered all the time.

The most depressing part of his post was the end:

Preaching to the choir is a deadening experience.

Then again, preaching to the heathens isn't much better. On the right, a respected conservative columnist like David Brooks in the New York Times sounds more and more desperate in his attempts to gently get liberals to think another way. Ask a Maureen Dowd fan if he or she read David Brooks today and you get this put upon reaction of, "I started reading but by the third paragraph, I just couldn't stand it anymore."

Instead, we spend our lives preparing for an argument we'll never have with a person we'll never meet whose opinions we could never change.

Now I find this insulting to people that are actively engaged in politics, even if they only want to know what is going on in the world. What Peter seems to be inferring is that with all the sources of information out there, why should we even bother following the news if we can't get through to the other side?

Well if I remember correctly, it is an engaged citizenry that strengthens a democracy. Sure, not everyone is going to follow the news as meticulously as others, but that is perfectly fine. Nevertheless, people's minds do actually change, the Congress, the Presidency and all the elected offices below that do change hands based on how the public feels their leaders are doing. It is how a democracy works (even if ours has been walloped in the head over and over by the neo-cons in the last few years) and we should continue to strive for a better nation that serves its people.

Libby Trial Roundup: 2/7/07

From The Huffington Post:

As well as tossing a dart into Tim Russert's credibility, Libby attorney Theodore Wells's cross-examination helped expose the all-too-chummy nature of insider Washington. He put up on the screen, Meet the Press-style, portions of the motion NBC filed in an effort to quash the May 2004 subpoena compelling Russert to testify in front of the Plamegate grand jury. It was a portrait of pomposity, and a bracing reminder of the way things work in Club Washington:

"Sources provide information to Mr. Russert based on their shared understanding that they are communicating in confidence and that he will not disclose publicly either their identities or the information provided by them. Mr. Russert has determined that absent such an understanding, public officials simply will not speak freely and candidly about the most important issues of the day."