It was just a Travel-section puff-piece

When you’re dealing with a powder-keg like the far-right activists who make up much of the GOP base, you’re never quite sure what kind of match will set off an explosion. This harmless NYT story, for example, which ran in the Travel section, seemed like an easily forgettable article.

Just an hour and a half from Washington, across the 4.3-mile Chesapeake Bay Bridge, or less than 30 minutes in a government-issue Chinook helicopter, is the Eastern Shore of Maryland and the primly groomed waterside village of St. Michaels.

[tag]St. Michaels[/tag] has begun to lure V.I.P.’s who, some boosters would have it, could propel it into the gilded realm of the Hamptons and Nantucket. But that will take a while. There’s little for the young — just a few bars and no beaches or nightclubs — and these new householders are too circumspect and perhaps too old to be showcasing their excesses, baubles and abs.

One is Vice President Dick [tag]Cheney[/tag], 65, who paid $2.67 million last September for a house that resembles a wide, squat Mount Vernon. Another is his old friend Defense Secretary Donald H. [tag]Rumsfeld[/tag], 73, who in 2003 paid $1.5 million for a brick Georgian that was last a bed-and-breakfast.

It was routine [tag]Travel[/tag]-section fare about a quiet town with “old farm families and the wealthy weekenders.” From a political perspective, the article might have been a reminder that guys like Cheney and Rumsfeld are far too wealthy to be “regular Joes,” but it barely would have caused a blip on the political radar.

That is, except for the far-right’s reaction to the piece.

As [tag]Glenn Greenwald[/tag] discovered, several high-profile Bush supporters interpreted the article as a roadmap for terrorists who want to try and attack Cheney, Rumsfeld, and their families. There’s no indication that they were kidding.

Darkly lurking beneath the rustic, playful tone of the NYT Travel article is a homicidal plot on the part of the reporters and editors of the Times to provide a roadmap to their Al Qaeda allies so that they find Cheney and Rumsfeld (and maybe even Mrs. Rumsfeld) and murder them.

Reading over the far-right reactions gives new meaning to the word “unhinged.” One conservative posted the home address and telephone number of the Times photographers on his website. Another went even further.

So, in the school of what’s good for the goose is good for the gander, we are providing this link so YOU may help the blogosphere in locating the homes (perhaps with photos?) of the editors and reporters of the New York Times.

Let’s start with the following New York Times reporters and editors: Arthur “Pinch” Sulzberger Jr. , Bill Keller, Eric Lichtblau, and James Risen. Do you have an idea where they live?

Go hunt them down and do America a favor. Get their photo, street address, where their kids go to school, anything you can dig up, and send it to the link above. This is your chance to be famous – grab for the golden ring.

Considering these threats of violence, the substance pales in comparison, but it’s worth remembering that the NYT article didn’t even report anything new. First, other news outlets have reported on Cheney and Rumsfeld living in St. Michaels before. Second, their home purchases are a matter of public record. And third, their weekday addresses are equally well-known.

The Travel-section piece wasn’t a road map for al Queda; it was a puff-piece about a sleepy hamlet in eastern Maryland.

Do you ever get the impression that some conservative activists made a right turn at “merely wrong” and are headed straight for “dangerous”?

They aren’t that crazy (well maybe they are) – for a weekend they’ve managed to deflect attention off of Iraq and the Hamdan decision, seize control of the media agenda and put progressives and Dems on the defensive, as usual. Just like the Swift Boaters managed to do – and by reacting and responding and putting them front and center we’ve let them. Expect more of the same all through the Fall. They may be “crazy” – but there’s a method (and a highly successful one) in their madness.

  • Little Timmy McVeighs, all wanting to take their revenge on the cruel world that opresses them.
    This would wake up the MSM that the “the truth is somewhere in the middle” meme is false, if waking them up was possible. But the corporate infotainment machine will roll blissfully along, until some nutjob pulls the trigger.

  • I’ve always been impressed with how the righties deal with gifts like this. All the left should do here is what the right would do, which is look these guys in the eyes and say something like, “Are you sitting here today saying that the travel reporters for the New York Times are trying to murder Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld? Is that what you are saying?”

    Just making somebody repeat a claim like this usually has the effect of making it look ridiculous. An eye roll would be an adequate follow up.

  • Wow! The right is really losing it about the NYT. Death threats and aid and assistance to assasins.

    Bill (gambling adict) Bennett was on Meet the Press yesterday with William Safire (libertarian conservative) and John Harwood and Dana Priest (of the Secret prisions in Eastern Europe fame) and he was the only one calling for prosecution of the NYT over the SWIFT surveillance story. And did he ever seem like a lunatic. But maybe it’s just my perspective. I particularly liked Dana’s zinger right between his eyes noting that some people want to outlaw casino gambling just like some people want to outlaw freedom of the press 😉

    Somehow, the ‘right’ in this country has gotten the idea that they can commit or promote any crime they want if they only blame the victums first. Bomb abortion clinics because everybody inside are baby-killers. Murder editors and journalists because they are traitors and terrorist supporters. Commit voter intimidation to counter Democratic voter fraud.

    I suspect that every one of the crooks in Florida, Ohio and Diabold sleep perfectly well at night, believing they were just countering Democratic voter fraud of duplicate registrations, felony registrations and dead people registrations.

  • Just because Dana Priest deserves the credit.

    From Meet the Press this Sunday. I recommend reading the whole transcript.

    MS. PRIEST: “Well, it’s not a crime to publish classified information. And this is one of the things Mr. Bennett keeps telling people that it is. But, in fact, there are some narrow categories of information you can’t publish, certain signals, communications, intelligence, the names of covert operatives and nuclear secrets.

    Now why isn’t it a crime? I mean, some people would like to make casino gambling a crime, but it is not a crime. Why isn’t it not a crime? Because the framers of the Constitution wanted to protect the press so that they could perform a basic role in government oversight, and you can’t do that. Look at the criticism that the press got after Iraq that we did not do our job on WMD. And that was all in a classified arena. To do a better job—and I believe that we should’ve done a better job—we would’ve again, found ourselves in the arena of…”

    emphasis added 😉

  • Why would al qaeda want Cheney and/or Rumsfeld killed? Bush, Cheney and Rummy have done more to swell their ranks than bin Laden could have ever hoped to do on his own.
    I suspect this is another Rove-calculated assault in the Bush War on Media.

  • I was reading “The DaVinci Code” while listening to a compendium of George Bush’s more philosophical speeches when I realized – using a special key I derived from Fermat’s Last Theorem and the Fibonacci series – that I needed but one more piece to complete the puzzle of Dick Cheney’s undisclosed location. Thank you for pointing me in right direction: the New York Times, Travel Section. At last I know where to send my army of scissorhanded ninjas for Jesus.

    BTW, did that picture of the driveway leading to Rummy’s rustic residence seem just a bit creepy to you? The lonely tree-shrouded lane, the limp flag on the fence, the birdie outhouse?

  • Ed Stephan – shame on you for being so naive – can’t you see the surveillance camera in the little birdhouse? That is one highly sophisticated piece of spy equipment. I’m sure Rummy wanted something that would protect him a bit more, but hey, you build your multi-million dollar estate in a private community on the shore with the surveillance equipment that you have not that you want.

    I have MTP Tivo’ed and am looking forward to seeing that from Dana Priest. For some reason, I doubt that Priest will be on Bennett’s holiday gift card list despite Bennett’s status as a paragon of civic virtue.

    As for the right wing websites that are making these threats, this is truly scary stuff – put yourself in the position of the writer(s). Or their spouse(s). All the dialogue about left v. right and who is more strident seems kind of pale when you start getting into veiled threats towards people’s family. I’ll be waiting patiently for the followup article (by Broder, etc.) on how, gee, maybe some on the right are kind of nutso and we need to shed some light on their borderline illegal conduct. And waiting….

    The borderline illegal part is kind of interesting. Of course there is freedom of speech, but you also can’t yell Fire! in a crowded theater, you can’t slander or defame someone, you can’t sexually harass someone, etc. But these righty web sites also know their audience, have incited them by talking about giving aid to the enemy, assassinating the VP, Rummy, etc., and then ask the loyal and patriotic citizens out here to take the matter into their own hands. Tough case and a slippery slope to be sure.

    I defer on the illegal part, but morally reprehensible is an easy fit.

  • God forbid the people know where the members of the Politburo live. We should be resigned to knowing the important people in our government are the ones zipping past us in traffic in thier limos and shopping in private stores. I for one rest better at night knowing Cheney and Rummy have the soft double-quilted TP and are not distracted by chaffing and irritation like the rest of us.

    I have the feeling that these two residences resemble Jack Ryan’s house in Patriot Games when the terrorists are trying to kill him…wait, bad example.

  • There has always been a pretty clear choice. The press (and Democrats and liberals) can knuckle under or they can push back hard. The NY Times may be leading Al Qaeda and Bin Laden to the front doors of Cheney and Rumsfeld. But NPR reported this morning the Bush Administration has done little to capture or kill Bin Laden, even going so far as to disband the CIA’s unit responsible for finding him. The NSA domestic surveillance program is allegedly an essential tool in thwarting terrorist threast post-9/11. But Bush reportedly asked AT&T to begin domestic surveillance months before 9-11 and before the “War on Terror” captured the nation’s attention.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=abIV0cO64zJE&refer=#

    As for the right-wing blogosphere, a little digging can reveal all sorts of uncomfortable truths about these freaks. They’ve inserted themselves in the discussion so I’d think that would make them fair game.

    There’s more than enough material to bring these right-wing shits down. All it would take is a fraction of the resources and enthusiasm the press spends on reporting a Natalee Holloway or runaway bride story.

  • I wonder if the little asshole that published the names and addresses of NYT’s management and demanded information concerning their families would have the balls to put his/her own personal information on the Web?

    If these turds want a war, I say let’s give it to them.

  • Theodore Rhapsody (#4) — You’re being pretty naive if you think that there is any reasoning with these folks. Check out the comments section over at Greenwald’s blog where there were over 460 comments about the story. The back and forth went on for at least a day with a handful of right-wingers from the “NYT is treasonous crowd” VS. quite a few of the regular commentors making essentially the same argument that you put forth. After reading most of the comments I didn’t see any evidence that any of the right-wingers minds were changed or that they were willing to pipe down.

    Realistically we should get used to the idea that followers of the radical-right aren’t interested in reason. Their main concern is controlling discourse by making the most noise and demonizing anyone who disagrees with their ideology. What makes sense is not important in this game.

  • So according the the article, Rummy lives at “Mount Misery”?

    Does that mean Cheney lives at “Garbling Asshole Lane”?

  • Back in the day, when liberal Democrats owned Washington, but began to lose their grip on power, did desperation drive them batshit crazy like
    apparently it is doing to these people? I don’t remember it that way, but perspective is everything.

  • CB: I think you mean “gives new meaning to the word ‘unhinged'” rather than “no meaning”??? (I know, I know, I hate being caught out on those kinds of typos too.)

  • Further proof (if proof was necessarh) that these droolers live in Fantasyland, where their “facts” can be proven as fantasies within 5 minutes:

    As anyone who has ever worked at a newspaper knows, things like this Travel article are called filler and they are written in advance of publication. Beyond coincidence, there is no connection at all between the publication of this article in the weekend NYT and the publication during the week of the SWIFT information.

    Of course, the ability to demonstrate that these people are fantasists is not to prove they are not dangerous. To the contrary, my friends.

    Personally, having been on the receiving end of some righty harassment (how dare you build little scale plastic models of airplanes, you filthy librul? We must kill you for that! – no, I am not kidding, that’s where it started) that actually got to the point of one of these little fuckheads getting hold of my unpublished telephone number and making death threats that both the FBI and the LAPD told me to take seriously, these people really do need to be taken seriously, because more than a few of them really are psychopaths.

    It’s like Billy Wilder once told me 20 years ago, explaining how he came to America: starting around 1926, when a good friend was nearly beaten to death on the streets by a gang of brownshirts for the “crime” of being an actor, he started taking the Nazis seriously. And he endured a lot of kidding (and worse) from his friends for doing so, despite the evidence before their eyes in the streets of these thugs’ growing strength. When the Nazis came in with a plurality in the January 1933 elections, that night Wilder packed everything he owned into two steamer trunks, called a cab, went to the Berlin train station, and bought a one-way ticket on the Paris Express. As he put it, “and when I returned 12 years later, none of my friends who had told me so many times that there was nothing to worry about were alive.”

    Henry Kissinger wrote his Ph.D. thesis on the failure of the governments of the other states of Europe to recognize the revolutionary nature of France after 1789, that the old rules no longer mattered, which was why they were all so easily defeated by the French revolutionaries. We here in America face the same problem – these people have managed to steal a word, “conservative,” and stand it on its head. Looking at George Bush’s “big government conservatism” is not that different from the “big government conservatism” practiced by someone else between 1934-39.

    It is time to understand that these people here are NOT “conservatives.” They are “far right revolutionaries” and their goal is to overthrow the system. The German conservatives made that mistake in 1933, and by the time they figured it out in July 1944, it was way too late. Everyone says “use the Nazi word and lose the argument,” but I am here to say – as Billy Wilder did 75 years ago – that these people are dangerous in the same way, and their goal is not different from that of the Nazis. In fact, another term for “far right revolutionary” is FASCIST. Their glorification of violence and their eliminationist rhetoric is not different from what could be found in “Der Sturmer.”

    As Upton Sinclair put it so well: “When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross.”

  • As Glenn Greenwald reports today:

    I wrote e-mails yesterday to Linda Spillers (the photographer) and Peter Kilborn (the reporter) bringing these accusations to their attention and asking for a response.

    Although I haven’t heard yet from Kilborn, I received an e-mail from Spillers this morning, in which she said:

    “Ironically, photos were taken with Secretary Rumsfeld’s permission.”

  • A contributor at Greenbwald’s blog posted this – highly relevant:

    It’s Happening Here

    We will not recognize it as it rises. It will wear no black shirts here. It will probably have no marching songs. It will rise out of a congealing of a group of elements that exist here and that are the essential components of Fascism….

    It will be at first decorous, humane, glowing with homely American sentiment. But a dictatorship cannot remain benevolent. To continue, it must become ruthless. When this stage is reached we shall see that appeal by radio, movies, and government-controlled newspapers to all
    the worst instincts and emotions of our people. The rough, the violent, the lawless men will come to the surface and into power. This is the terrifying prospect as we move along our present course.

    John T. Flynn, American Mercury,
    February 1941

  • Tom Cleaver, your comments about 1933 and these fascists really rang true for me. It was 1933 when Hitler was named chancellor and, shockingly, the Reichstag (I think their Capitol equivalent) burned to the ground. It was blamed, without any proof, on the Communists, etc., but I think there’s general agreement that Hitler ordered it. If you can believe it, the Germans enacted the Enabling Act, which essentially gave Hitler unfettered power to pass any law and take any action that he saw fit to protect Germany. The Third Reich was born.

    I’m no conspiracy theorist, but in light of the close relationship between the Bush (crime) family, the bin Laden (crime) family and, as CB just reported, the dismantling of the CIA group charged with finding bin Laden, and the use by the Administration of everything 9/11 related, it’s really kind of scary to consider the role that Rove, etc., may have had with it – if not ordering it, then complete quiescence.

  • Welcome to the Washington area, where we walk past embassies in rowhouses nestled a sidewalk’s width from the street, where the press covered the no-fly zone over Cheney’s MD residence long ago (and complaints that it was a 24/7/365 no-fly zone, disrupting traffic).

    If national security were dependent on Cheney and Rummy being distant and invisible, they would have located somewhere deep in the woods, behind fortified fences and armed guards.

    They moved to St. Michaels fully knowing that they weren’t going to lock down the place, put armored barriers at the town’s entrance, and swear everyone in town to secrecy.

  • The Hitler Parallel has always struck me as valid, though my friends often just ignore me when I try talking about my thoughts. Why are we any better than Germany? Are we so wise that we cannot be decieved? Not so you’d notice. Look at our congress. They just want to pass a law so Bush can wiretap or torture or whatever the facists want to do. Look at our so-called free press. Remember Judith Miller shrugging her shoulders when her errors of reporting about the WMD came to light and saying “I got it wrong; we all got it wrong. . . “, but in point of fact, lots of us had it right and we had no voice. I often wonder if the USA that we once knew can be saved, and I guess I think it can. Why else would I, or any of us, stay and fight? Perhaps because there is no USA to flee to for safe haven.

  • Comments are closed.