Slashdot Mirror
Karl Rove's IT Guru Dies In Small Plane Crash
A dozen readers have submitted the story of the death in a plane crash of Mike Connell, Karl Rove's IT adviser, the man who set up and ran the gwb43.com mail server, and an important figure in GOP tech circles since 1997. The closest thing to straight reporting to be found in a mainstream media outlet is a piece from KDKA in Pittsburgh giving a detailed backgrounder on Connell's work for Rove, two generations of the Bush family, and many GOP congressmen and committees. CBSNews.com is now mirroring the KDKA reporting. Almost all the early media coverage comes from the left and some of it is frankly conspiratorial. Among the milder pieces (although it could not be called balanced) is this interview with Mark Crispin Miller, NYU professor and author of two books about the 2004 election in Ohio. Connell was compelled to testify on the day before the US election in a lawsuit involving Ohio election irregularities in 2004. Connell, an experienced pilot, died on Sunday when his plane crashed two miles short of the runway of Akron-Canton Airport in Ohio.
Seriously, wtf is up with this write-up? This story barely qualifies as Slashdot material (apparently if you work in IT, your death is now Slashdot-worthy). On top of that, kdawson uses it as an incredibly flimsy pretext to slam the mainstream media for no apparent reason. Christ man, this discussion is already destined to devolve into the same old political flamewar 90% of every other discussion around here ends up in without you trying to actively stoke the fires by taking the opportunity to slam the "left wing media".
I know kdawson loves conspiracy theories, so I'll give him my conspiracy theory: kdawson only has a job because Slashdot needs the tax breaks they get for hiring mentally challenged people. This would also explain samzenpus.
Conspiracy theory angle? Check.
Coming from the crazy wing of the left? Check. (Why can't we have more crazy wing of the right stories on Slashdot? Where are all the stories concerning the gold standard? Where?)
Write-up worded in a way to encourage crazy conspiracy talk? Check.
Good ol' kdawson. So dependable.
Ah, the Wikipedia method. Enough "independant sources" in collusion can sway history to one side or the other. Do you think that perhaps that these "independant sources" might be biased, or in collusion?
As a rather extreme example, a far left wing reporter might put out a story that President Bush has been communicating with members of the armed forces without going through the DoD, and make it sound like he's planning a coup to stay in office.
You mean, let's take a fictional example rather than the real situation in which reporters suck up to President Bush http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Miller_(journalist) and believe his lies https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/general-reports-1/iraq_wmd/Iraq_Oct_2002.htm until he fucks up so completely that the truth becomes undeniable and even his sycophants desert him.
Capital is not tied to persons. After the great depression the nazi party came to power and they punished the jews in a scapegoat manner. I hope no new political movement will hunt down bankers... Capital by definition has nothing to do with people or nations or moral. Interestingly the communist intellectuals always understood that, but not the communist pratictioners who found it rather useful to slay the "capitalists". Your bank is not responsible for selling you a toxic bond if the rating was AAA. It acted in a rational way as you did when you invested in these bonds. The reasons are systemic failure. I guess the US is the only nation where the public still overstresses the personality aspect of capital with the CEOs as high priests (where is Steve Jobs gone btw.?) It is a myth. The economy is like in a cybernetic system. It is not a matter of moral to invest in Exxon or Microsoft as long as these companies generate sufficient profit, real profit or stock market gain.
As a result of the crisis I think the US will adopt Ainternational accounting standards (IAS) which are more conservative than US-GAAP.