Untitled Document
Back in May when ABC News openly justified the media's refusal
to cover the Iraq War, I thought it couldn't get worse. Then, a few months
later, I saw that it could, as the
Washington Post began trying to intimidate Democratic politicians and prevent
them from standing up to voice opposition to the war. I figured that was rock
bottom, but in recent days, we've seen that yes, the braindead insulated elitists
in the Beltway media have found an even lower road to take than even this.
In the last 48 hours, we've seen the "objective" mainstream media now
openly attacking people who oppose the Iraq War. Mind you, these aren't the editorialists
or the opinion pundits, these are the people who are supposed to be telling the
objective truth -- and instead they are literally attacking war critics.
Take MSNBC's Nora O'Donnell. In an interview with former FBI agent Coleen Rowley
(now a candidate for Congress), O'Donnell claimed that Rowley "had decided
to align [herself] with anti-war
extremists" because Rowley visited Cindy Sheehan's supporters in Crawford.
Or, take the Washington Post's Mike Allen. He said those who oppose the war
are "PETA,
hippies, Naderites" -- again, a blatant effort to paint those who oppose
the war as fringe, even though polls show a majority
of Americans oppose the war.
These nauseating examples need to be put into a context. They follow the media's
open pushing
of the Iraq War before the invasion and refusal to question what they
knew were pre-war lies. They also come as polls show Americans
oppose the war, want an exit
strategy, and believe the entire mess is endangering
U.S. national security. And they come even as Iraq War veterans themselves
say they understand
that criticism of the war is not criticism of U.S. troops.
All of that should lead any honest person to conclude one thing: other than
a few truth-telling reporters, the Beltway media -- spurred on by the elitist,
bipartisan foreign policy establishment that doesn't want to admit it was
wrong -- actually wants the war to continue, no matter how many American casualties
mount, no matter what the ramifications for U.S. national security, no matter
what the consequencs for our country over the long-term.
Think about it: The reporters who cover politics are comfortably insulated
from the war -- the violence and death of American soldiers to them is an interesting
talking point on the Washington cocktail party circuit, nothing more. And besides,
they cynically look at it all as a spectacle that makes for good TV -- rather
than a national security crisis, and a human disaster.
I'm not sure what's next from the media -- although we've already gotten a
taste. Some local television stations are actually refusing
to air anti-war groups' ads, moving this media problem from one of gross
dishonesty, into one of actually gagging people and infringing upon the First
Amendment. Will it ever end? Stay tuned, I guess.
