For eight long years, I watched Republicans exploit terrorism as a political issue.  For their efforts, we got into a war with a country that did not present an imminent threat and that had no Al Qaeda terrorists (at least before we got there) or weapons of mass destruction.  And for their efforts, we came to be viewed as a rogue nation throughout the rest of the civilized world as we discarded basic constitutional principles for “detainees” in facilities as diverse as Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, and a notorious set of “secret” prisons scattered throughout the world.

Guess what?  They’re back!!

After the attempted terrorism incident on Christmas Day, former Vice President Dick Cheney issued a statement criticizing President Obama for his failure to act dramatically in response to a Nigerian’s man’s effort to blow up an airliner landing in Detroit with explosive materials hidden in his underwear:

As I’ve watched the events of the last few days it is clear once again that President Obama is trying to pretend we are not at war. He seems to think if he has a low key response to an attempt to blow up an airliner and kill hundreds of people, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gives terrorists the rights of Americans, lets them lawyer up and reads them their Miranda rights, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if we bring the mastermind of 9/11 to New York, give him a lawyer and trial in civilian court, we won’t be at war.

Mr. Cheney has been joined by an array of conservative commentators criticizing the President.

Guess what?  President Obama acted far more swiftly to the underwear bomber scare than President Bush reacted to the Richard Reid, the shoe bomber, eight years ago.

According to Politico,

Eight years ago, a terrorist bomber’s attempt to blow up a transatlantic airliner was thwarted by a group of passengers, an incident that revealed some gaping holes in airline security just a few months after the attacks of Sept. 11. But it was six days before President George W. Bush, then on vacation, made any public remarks about the so-called shoe bomber, Richard Reid, and there were virtually no complaints from the press or any opposition Democrats that his response was sluggish or inadequate.

It’s refreshing when legitimate news organizations do their homework and expose partisan propaganda for what it is.

• Michaele and Tareq Salahi.  Unless one of the Salahis grabbed a steak knife and used it on White House State Dinner guests, it’s not breaking news that they crashed a party.
• Tiger Woods.  Unless Tiger Woods’ wife beat him to death with one of his golf clubs for being an unfaithful spouse, (yes, I got my news from the National Enquirer while in the grocery check-out line), it’s not breaking news.
• Mark Snyder.  When the Marshall University Thundering Herd loses 52-21 to a hapless University of Texas El Paso football team, it’s not breaking news when the coach resigns.

A former employer of mine likes to say: “You should never go to war with anyone who buys ink by the barrel.”  Sometimes people don’t take this sage advice or my advice about avoiding a death of a thousand cuts very seriously:

Mylan Inc. files suit again the Post-Gazette.

Mylan is suing the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette over a series of stories concerning alleged drug safety violations at its Morgantown facility.  The article suggests that Mylan’s lawyers are making some fairly novel legal claims because a straightforward case of libel would be so difficult to make.  Lawyers have tried many novel legal theories to get around libel legal standards over the years, generally with little success.

Well, at least the lawyers will get rich.

The Morgantown Dominion-Post thus far has remained silent concerning the developing story in its own back door.  The Charleston Gazette has assigned reporter Eric Eyre to cover it.

The half-truth: Washington Post publisher Katharine Weymouth was hosting a series of “salons” where important people could discuss important issues like health care reform.

The whole truth as revealed in a one-page flier provided to potential sponsors (i.e., lobbyists): “Underwriting Opportunity: An evening with the right people can alter the debate…. Underwrite and participate in this intimate and exclusive Washington Post Salon, an off-the-record dinner and discussion…. Bring your organization’s CEO … literally to the table….  What is guaranteed is a collegial evening, with Obama Administration officials, Congress members, business leaders, advocacy leaders and other select minds (later revealed to be Post editorial and reporting staff)…. Offered at $25,000 per sponsor.”

The aftermath: Everyone from the newspaper’s publisher to its executive editor to its ombudsman were busy distancing themselves from the “public relations disaster” (ombudsman’s words, not mine).

What did the poor guy who’s being blamed for this public relations disaster have to say: “There’s no intention to have a Lincoln Bedroom situation.”  I can only imagine what his next quote will be.  My best guess: “I am not a crook.”  This poor guy needs to learn something about marketing … and spin.

03 July 2009. New York Times article concerning the salons.

04 July 2009.  New York Times article concerning the publisher.

10 July 2009.  Publisher’s apology.

10 July 2009.  Slate post the salons.

What young boy did not have or want to have that sexy poster of Farrah Fawcett on his wall?  What person my age doesn’t remember Thriller! or know how to do the moonwalk (not well in most cases)?

These two individuals aged very differently.  Farrah Fawcett, the ultimate sex symbol, went from “Charlie’s Angels” sexpot to “Extremities” victim-turned-victor to drugged-out David Letterman guest before ultimately becoming the very vulnerable face of anal cancer.  Michael Jackson, on the other hand, went from being the ultimate pop icon to a very creepy, almost-white pedophile.

Of the two, Michael Jackson certainly was the most gifted.  But Farrah, for all her flaws, acquired in our consciousnesses an all-too-human face as she approached death, while Michael did not.