News, No News and Not So News

[Daveparts]

News, No News and Not So News
By David Glenn Cox




I can’t stand to hear a grown Republican cry. McCain likes to spout his differences from George Bush, but he uses the same playbook: when you’re losing, go negative. Today he has become John of Arc, burned for his beliefs by the New York Times, excuse me, make that the Liberal New York Times. And I take offense at that term because I am a liberal and they are no friends of mine!

The cheerleaders in the run-up to the Iraq war, the givers of column space to condemn a US president for writing a book, they are no more liberals than George W. Bush is intelligent. They are a prime example of the lazy media, the waiters of journalism. They serve what comes from the kitchen rather than hunt down the facts. That said, they rejected John McCain’s Op-ed piece for a decent reason, it just really wasn’t very good. Its 881 words were more a response to Obama’s Op-ed than an Op-ed of its own.

Senator Obama said in his Op-ed, “unlike Senator John McCain” three times. John McCain used terms such as, "he mangles the evidence, Obama is also misleading." But in his 881 words he never says how it is the US will remove its combat forces from Iraq. Like a used car salesman when you ask him for the total price, he gives a non-answer, “No one favors a permanent U.S. presence, as Senator Obama charges.”

"Fine" To Keep Troops in Iraq for "A Hundred Years" (John McCain)

“A partial withdrawal has already occurred with the departure of five 'surge' brigades, and more withdrawals can take place as the security situation improves.” Gee, Johnny, how do you figure the five surge brigades being removed is a partial withdrawal? They were supposed to be temporary in the first place, and now you want to include them in the total? That dog won’t hunt!

Senator McCain continues with his Op-ed / tempter tantrum, “Senator Obama has said that he would consult our commanders on the ground and Iraqi leaders, but he did no such thing before releasing his 'plan for Iraq.' Perhaps that’s because he doesn’t want to hear what they have to say.” How does Senator McCain know who Senator Obama contacted? This is just a blind accusation, a rant, not news, not an Op-ed but a temper tantrum.

When I first heard that the New Yuck Times had turned down John of Arc’s Op-ed, I knew that I had to read it, because the Times has a long history of publishing baseless partisan attacks. So to turn down the Republican Presidential nominee, I suspected that it was because it was, well, Lousy, and I wasn’t disappointed. In a way the Times did McCain a favor, everyone should read it. The three R’s are all there, rhetoric and regurgitated redundancy; if you’ve heard one McCain speech then you have indeed heard them all.

His plan for removing combat forces from Iraq? “I expect to welcome home most of our troops from Iraq by the end of my first term in office, in 2013.” That’s the plan? “I expect,”? I expect Santa Claus to come around Christmas, but that is a hope, a wish, a desire, but that is not a plan. McCain’s plan is Bush's plan, to stay forever. To use sovereign countries like squares on a chessboard and to not withdraw because it gives us a tactical advantage to have them there. McCain uses his 881 words to name call and now, by his rejection, he can kick over trashcans and make noise.

Already the media machine kicks into high gear with wailing and gnashing of teeth for John of Arc. A good boy done wrong! Broken on the teeth of liberal intolerance. Lou Dobbs of CNN, “the most rusted name in news,” was wearing ashes and sackcloth for John of Arc last night, describing the New York Times as blatantly biased. He asked in his question of the night, “Do you believe Obama has received more favorable treatment in the press?"

Dobbs had just finished a story where he described the Obama campaign as being very tight-lipped and only allowing certain photos and small amounts of video of Obama’s visit to Iraq. He said that only a few tightly-scripted interviews were allowed but that Obama was now moving into a new, luxurious, and more “Presidential aircraft.” Dobbs knows full well that as part of a Congressional delegation to a combat zone, that it is the military that controls photos and video, not the Obama camp. Obama was well received by the troops although Dobbs didn’t bother to show any of that.

Obama is the Junior Senator on the trip and the rules of the Senate maintain that he can receive no special treatment just because he is a candidate. Dobbs, as an alleged journalist, should know that. Obama’s new, more “Presidential” plane is the one paid for by his campaign. He flew into the war zone in a congressional aircraft and Dobbs knew that as well. He just didn’t bother to mention it. He would much rather blubber and cry about how poor John of Arc was being mistreated by the Liberal Times.

The question of whether Obama receives more favorable treatment in the media is misapplied. The question should be, “Who deserves more favorable treatment in the media?” Alex Rodriguez is always in the media, but let him strike out four times and make two errors and suddenly the media’s picking on him! McCain has called Social Security a disgrace, and his Co-Chairman has said that America is a nation of whiners. He went to Iraq and demonstrated his ignorance between Sunni and Shia’s, he said he doesn’t know that much about the economy. When asked a question about how he voted on a women’s health issue, McCain answered, “I don’t know what I voted.” When pressed on the issue, “I’ve cast thousands of votes in the Senate, I will respond to—it’s a, it’s a…”

The media’s assistance to John of Arc has been by omission. The more you listen to McCain and watch McCain the easier it becomes to understand how it was that he lost to George W. Bush in 2000. Or to paraphrase Groucho Marx, “McCain may look like an idiot and sound like an idiot, but don’t let that fool you. . . he really is an idiot!” And a crybaby and a whiner. He’s got Fox and CNBC, and a host of other Republican newspapers and media outlets coast to coast, to laud his camp speeches and ignore his gaffes. But instead he goes to the high church of New York media to condemn them as heretics because they won’t publish his attack ad as an op-ed. Boo hoo! Cry me a river.


http://groups.google.com/group/james-caird