And a good Monday morning to all. The start of the work week. How about a beer?
Video: Never Take a Man's last Beer
And many in the media will need a beer after they read this commentary by Robert Kagen at the Washington Post (h/t Blogs for Bush)
A front-page story in The Post last week suggested that the Bush administration has no backup plan in case the surge in Iraq doesn't work. I wonder if The Post and other newspapers have a backup plan in case it does.
Leading journalists have been reporting for some time that the war was hopeless, a fiasco that could not be salvaged by more troops and a new counterinsurgency strategy. The conventional wisdom in December held that sending more troops was politically impossible after the antiwar tenor of the midterm elections. It was practically impossible because the extra troops didn't exist. Even if the troops did exist, they could not make a difference.
Four months later, the once insurmountable political opposition has been surmounted. The nonexistent troops are flowing into Iraq. And though it is still early and horrible acts of violence continue, there is substantial evidence that the new counterinsurgency strategy, backed by the infusion of new forces, is having a significant effect.
Now that it is actually working, what does the media do? As Mr. Kagen writes, does the media have backup plan? Their #1, and only plan, was to defame the president, spin and lie about WMD and the reasons for the war, avoid any mention of what Democrats, intelligence agencies, and world leaders said about Iraq pre-war, avoid mention of the attrocies by Saddam and his regime, shift blame, use the Lefty talking points about Saddam having no link to 9/11, avoid mention of Saddam's support for terrorism, including shelter for Al Qaeda members, and highlight ever little wrong by our troops while on the battlefield.
The have performed in concert with the Democrats and kook fringe to undercut the war, and whether they have thought about it or not, and whether they even care or not, they have given aid and comfort to the enemy. So, as the surge is working, are they even covering it positively? That would be mostly a big "nyet."
Mark Noonan at Blogs for Bush emphasizes the consequences of the highly partisan and destructive rhetoric coming from the Left, including the media. There are, as he writes, "consequences, massive consequences."
Captain Ed takes the tone that look, we are there. There is not time machine to go way back and not do the war. So, let's not push for surrender. "Plan B should be victory by another means, not defeat by surrender to terrorists."
Now, of course, those on the Left will say "hey, you are trying to censor me. Don't be messin' with my Free Speech Rights! I can say and write what I want!" Which, of course, would prove that they have either not read the Constitution as a whole, and certainly do not understand it, the 1st Amendment in particular, and the reasoning behind the First.
Furthermore, with Free Speech comes responsibility. Republicans were not happy with FDR's decision to go to war in Europe. Hey, they didn't attack us, Japan did. But, when it started happening, they shut their mouths, so as not to undermine the war effort. Today's liberals have no problem undercutting the war effort. The (not ha ha) funny part is, Iraq might have been done with had they practiced responsibility and not emboldened the Iraq insurgents and the terrorists streaming in from all over the world.
Send a trackback to this post, but don't forget to link it.
