Random Notes Posted by: Dale Franks
on Tuesday, February 21, 2006
Just a few jottings of things that occured to me today.
Words of wisdom: Friends help you move. Good friends help you move bodies.
My military ID card hasn't been working. Actually, it never worked. My computer couldn't even read the card. So, today, I had to go to the Personnel Support Detachment at Camp Pendleton, which is run by the Navy. When I got there, I saw a female PS1 who was displaying some uniform oddities. First, she was wearing Fleet Marine Force "wings". Second, despite the fact that she had red chevrons instead of gold ones, she was wearing a Kuwait Liberation Medal ribbon, which means she was on active duty, in theater, in 1991. That means she was on active duty 16 years ago.
So, I've been trying to figure out how this is possible. Let's say that she did a hitch in the Marines, then went over to the navy. That would explain why she didn't have 12 years good conduct, and hence, was wearing red chevrons instead of gold. But even if she was a Marine, how does a female marine get FMF wings? I didn't think there were any female marines in the FMF.
I wish I'd been able to get a chance to ask her for an explanation.
One reader apparently listed to our podcast last night, and felt compelled to comment:
DALE (quoting from the podcast): I think you certainly can point to specific reporters, people like Erick [sic] Alterman let’s say, who, can’t do a news story without poking in their sort of ideological hobby horse in the middle of it somewhere, so within individuals I think you can point it out.
Uh-huh. But here on QandO, Dale sits high above on his hobby horse with the luxury of not having to present both sides of the story. So it’s easy to take the high road. But until you give both sides of the story, your criticism of reporters, like your hobbyhorse, carries little weight.
OK. First, why single me out for this criticism? I'm mean, it's not like I'm given to railing about media bias. I even did a search of the archives to see if I wrote some post about media bias that I didn't remember, and couldn't find one. So why is this guy getting all cranked out on me?
Second, immediately after the sentence quoted above, I went on to say that I didn't think it was possible to point out some monolithic media bias on the part of the press, if only because there are no easy metrics for defining it.
Third, since when did this blog claim to be an objective source of news? We clearly have a bias. We're proud of it. We plaster it across the top of the page with the "Free Markets, Free People" tag line. We are an opinion outlet, not a reportorial one. As such, we have no obligation to neutrally report on the day's events, any more than op/ed writers in the opinion section of the paper do. Our only obligation is to write down what we think about stuff. If you want to know what other people think about stuff, then you can go read them.
I just thought this was one of the dumbest criticisms I've read in a long time.