In an attempt to refute the logic of my previous post about the stolen Presidential election of 2004, Byron York compares the handicapping of the Kentucky Derby to oddsmakers' responses to the exit polls which demonstrated John Kerry was the actual winner on November 4. This is typical neocon disingenuity, a shunt designed to ignore the real question.
Handicapping a horse race is sophisticated alchemy, the highest form of tea-leaf reading but tea-leaf reading nevertheless. To compare the data in the Daily Racing Form directly to the kind of scientifically disciplined information that comes from time-honored exit polls is intellectual garbage and York knows enough to know that.
Did Rep. Conyers' hearings on ballot irregularities truly "fail" to turn up useful evidence of tampering, or did Republicans both in Ohio and on Capitol Hill successfully (at least for the time being)obfuscate, disinform and discredit the earth-shaking charge that a Presidential election was criminally currupted? Hey, what's the point of controlling both houses of Congress if you can't use that for the ultimate Machiavellian insurance?
York's posting proves nothing. Neither, for that matter, does mine, but I think I know who is warmer. What is needed is for legitimate news media, whether old style or new age, to commit to the investigative process of getting to the bottom of what happened in November. At this point in 1973 Watergate was still a brewing story, Alexander Butterfield was months away from revealing to Senate investigators that there was an audio-taping system in the Oval Office. But the truth emerged. So too will it emerge here, if only the fourth estate will do its job.
Byron York won't scare me off. Not with lightweight stuff like that.