Webloggin » Journalists in another Galaxy

Galaxy2 Oftentimes I wonder whether journalists got their degrees in school or if they just sat together drinking tea while passing trite tales of liberal lore among themselves. Nowadays the tea party is the internet so I would have to imagine that it was a combination of the two. In a majority of cases it appears that their degrees were based on the ability to look past facts and report gut feelings; the more sensational, the better.

Today’s Washington Post brought me to one of those moments as I read Eugene Robinson’s op-ed, “President on Another Planet”.

Robinson opines on a common topic in liberal circles concerning their belief that President Bush, “the decider”, is of weak mental intellect. This conviction as held by most editors and journalists in the MSM is most often tied to the failures of the war in Iraq. By extension of course, those who voted for Bush are of the same diminished mental capacity.

The underlying vibe that we must understand is that the elites in the press have a unique capacity to understand what truly happened in Iraq. It is all Bush’s fault. Democrats surely wouldn’t have gotten us into such a situation.

As tales go, the liberal narrative is one rife with omitted facts and false presumptions. The framework for a majority of stories on the failures in Iraq is based on the false premise that diplomacy was working.

Worse, liberals have all but ignored the mass graves and brutal terror the Hussein regime forced upon the people of Iraq and its neighbors. The ability to brush this aside gives way to the lie that Iraqi’s and the Middle East as a whole were better off with Saddam Hussein in power. Omissions such as this would normally be cause for the greatest of outrage yet it is relegated to ancient history for the purpose of supporting the greater cause of spreading liberal ideological doctrine.

Had we maintained the status quo we might never have learned the extent of Saddam’s corruption that starved his people, fattened the wallets of his friends, and helped undermine the United States through an elaborate scheme that rewarded other member nations in the U.N. for their covert and illegal scheme to rearm Hussein. Many of those weapons were used to kill American soldiers and many innocent Iraqi’s. But the MSM roared a collective ssshhh campaign on such stories.

Of course context is the mainstream media’s worst enemy. That is why context is omitted. In their twisted minds it is much better to hear stories about Hezbollah’s promise to rebuild Lebanon rather than report any good news stories about U.S. soldiers who have already made tremendous strides in rebuilding many parts of Iraq. It is not that those stories don’t exist; they do. We just aren’t supposed to talk about them.

The lack of the positive reports about the U.S. military is a by product of the sad sacks in the liberal media who laid their credibility on American failure. This is very much in line with the Democrat party position.

Lack of context allows “professional” editorialists such as Eugene Robinson to twist the words of the President into a new meaning meant to fit nicely into their biased screed.

Rather than debate Robinson I would like to look at the issue of Iraq and the War on Terror from another angle.

If you guys are so smart why don’t you tell us what your solution to Iraq, Israel and the War on Terror would be? What is the liberal plan to save the country? Please don’t tell me that you wouldn’t have had these problems if your guy was President because that “head in the sands” attitude is what led us here in the first place. Likewise don’t iterate your list of democrat successes in diplomacy because that list includes many counter examples that highlight the failures of such pie in the sky propositions. The type that ballyhoo’s the successes and ignores the failures (think North Korea, Israel, Lebanon, Iraq, and most anything related to the War on Terror)

So what is the plan? I would like to hear it. It is an important question considering the Democrat desire to lead us into a different direction. What does that new direction entail?

My bet is that they don’t have a plan; at least not a new one. As David Byrne of the Talking Heads said repeatedly, “same as it ever was, same as it ever was”. Criticize the United States, create a new generation of victims and leave Iraq in the dust so that terrorists can claim victory in a prophetic display of liberal “I told you sos”. All this to regain power that they can’t win legitimately.

As they say out there in Galaxy Lib; it is much better to throw stones than to build houses.

Others Bloggin on this Topic
Blue Crab Boulevard: Normally I don’t Bother