I don't want to make a habit of using this blog for politics, especially having listened to Lenn talking about he and Scoble talking about focus in blogging, and Heather talking about using your blog as your calling card, I plan to do a more "personal" blog to tackle issues of the day, and keep this one tech-oriented.

Having said that, I haven't made that personal blog yet, and I want to address this. There is a story in the New Yorker portraying the mistreatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib as the extension of secret "black bag" ops in Afghanistan to kill, capture, interrogate, and otherwise get our hands on high profile targets in the war on terror. I found it via Lenn, who, by the post title and the weight carried by lack of commentary, appears to think that this article is a heavy hitting piece, something of great importance. I couldn't agree less (No offense meant to Lenn, I enjoy his blog very much).

As usual, those who are not fighting the fight sit back and play their game of "get Rummy", and by extension, "Elect Kerry" (which is really just the latest flavor of "Anyone but Bush"). The whole thing is horseshit. The New Yorker article isn't journalism, it's fiction. Whether true || false, it remains unproven, rife with anonymous information and <insert generic high ranking intelligence officer here>. It serves no real purpose other than to continue to try and focus the voters on issues that the left hopes will derail W in November. But, it's their magazine, not mine, and they can print what they want, it just bothers me that something like this is called journalism, when it's really just all the muck that's fit to rake.

The media operates on the theory that most Americans have the mental capacity of a fruit-fly and can only hold one idea at a time, and never two opposing ideas, and cannot think independently of the magic box with all the colors (TV or Computer, take your pick).

I guess the unfortunate reality is that, for the majority of Americans, this theory appears to be right.