Journalism is Dead III

The Boston Globe received these three letters this weekend.

The first commenting on Obama's Cabinet, notable for its lack of diversity (as the skin-color and gender obsessed define diversity):

Editor,

Acknowledging that all 15 of President-elect Obama’s Cabinet nominees will be confirmed and, accordingly, that Obama will have a less diverse Cabinet than President Bush did when he took office, I was not surprised to see the Boston Globe bury the story of Obama’s last few nominations on page 8 (Obama completes economic team, remainder of Cabinet, December 20).

For the score-keepers, Bush had more African-Americans than Obama will have and they tie on the number of Asian-Americans (2) and women (4). Of course, I’ve always thought "diversity" assumed "of thought" but since the liberal media defines diversity by skin-color (and gender), I provide that scorecard.

I hope the truth is accurately reported by the liberal media establishment and the proper credit is given to President Bush.

I do not expect the liberal media establishment to call President-elect Obama on yet another broken campaign promise. (End of letter to the editor.)

The second calling a Globe columnist on his lies that the liberal extremists now seem bent on perpetuating about Gen. Shinseki being grotesquely wrong about how many troops would be needed to pacify Iraq and why Paul Wolfowitz resigned as President of the World Bank:

Editor,

Mr. Derrick Z. Jackson shamelessly and recklessly smeared Mr. Paul Wolfowitz (8 years on the dark side, December 20, A13).

First, Mr. Wolfowitz was absolutely correct in saying that Gen. Shinseki was "wildly off the mark" when Gen. Shinseki meekishly suggested that "several hundred thousand" more troops would be needed to pacify Iraq after the original multi-national invasion. The "surge" was 30,000 troops. If Mr. Jackson cares to loan me "several hundred thousand" dollars, I'd gladly repay him $30,000.

Second, "corruption" did not end Mr. Wolfowitz's presidency at the World Bank as Mr. Jackson nastily states. As the informed know, Mr. Wolfwowitz was forced out at the World Bank on trumped-up and fabricated conflict of interest charges. Prior to joining the Bank, Mr. Wolfowitz notified the Bank he had a relationship with a Bank employee. Bank General Counsel at the time, Mr. Roerto Danino, even acknowledged in a letter dated May 27, 2005, that, " . . . Mr. Wolfowitz has disclosed to the Board, through you (Mr. Wolfowitz's attorney), that he has a pre-existing relationship with a Bank staff member, and that he proposes to resolve the conflict of interest in relation to Staff Rule 3.01, Paragraph 4.02 by recusing himself from all personnel matters and professional contact related to the staff member."

The informed also know that Wolfowitz was targeted by European Bank Directors for directing billions and billions of dollars of Bank aid to African-continent projects at the expense of Europe-based projects; more evidence that the African continent knows no and has known no greater friend than President Bush, who installed Wolfowitz at the Bank. (End of letter to the editor.)

Finally, the third hoping censorship doesn't reign in an Obama administration:

Editor,

In their second nauseating appreciation in three days of President-elect Obama’s choice for White House science adviser, John P. Holdren, Globe Staff writer Carolyn Johnson and Globe Correspondent Bina Venkataraman write, “His willingness to take strong positions on controversial topics, and his active role in crafting policies, isn’t what the public traditionally thinks of as a scientist (From Harvard, a climatic selection, December 21, A27).”

Though they do add this encouraging quote by Holdren, “I would never expect that what the scientist might prefer is always going to be the outcome but I can tell you, with great assurance, that no one will be ignoring the facts (italics, here and later, Blogger's for emphasis).”

I look forward to January 20, 2009 when a “willing” and un-muzzled Holdren lets the American people know when human life begins . . . based on the scientific facts . . . especially as President-elect Obama is set to sign the death warrants of thousands of innocent, unborn babies on this date by rescinding many of President Bush’s Executive Orders protecting such life.

I certainly look forward to follow-up columns by two Globe writers obviously concerned about government censorship should the Obama Administration try to silence Holdren or if Holdren ever cowers. (End of letter to the editor.)