In an editorial in Saturday's paper called "The Phony Debate," the Washington Post claims it is Harry Reid who is keeping the US government from agreeing on a sensible withdrawal plan from Iraq. Who wrote this editorial, Mitch McConnell, Bill Kristol, President Bush?
What kind of crack do you have to be smoking to claim that it's Senator Reid and not President Bush who is keeping us in Iraq? That is such an outrageous proposition that it makes you question the Washington Post's credibility, or their sanity.
Look at this absolute crap they printed:
A large majority of senators from both parties favor a shift in the U.S. mission that would involve substantially reducing the number of American forces over the next year or so and rededicating those remaining to training the Iraqi army, protecting Iraq's borders and fighting al-Qaeda. President Bush and his senior aides and generals also support this broad strategy, which was formulated by the bipartisan Baker-Hamilton commission. Mr. Bush recently said that "it's a position I'd like to see us in."
Are you fucking kidding me? I'm so angry I can hardly type. If President Bush really wants this option, you know what he has to do? Order it! It will be done tomorrow. You have to be either retarded or completely biased to pretend that President Bush wants to leave Iraq but the Democrats won't let him. That is turning reality completely on its head.
I often argue that the mainstream media is absolutely cowered by decades of conservatives calling them liberal. They are willing to do whatever it takes, including often perverting the truth, to get them to stop (which, of course, they never will, because the whole point is to intimidate the media -- and it's working like a charm).
Others argue that I am naïve and that the press is bought and sold by a corporate culture that profits from sucking up to power, specifically Republican power that lets corporations run amok in the country without having to deal with any regulation from the government.
I have always thought that position was stretched. I know reporters and they are decent people trying to do their job, with a lot of pressure on them. I have never seen them worry about what the board of the company will say about them.
But who I don't know is editors, publishers and the people who have real power in these large media organizations. The people who order mind-bending, reality altering editorials like this one. I don't know what their motivations are, but the results are obvious. This editorial by the Washington Post is a complete effort to protect the Republicans - who refuse to get us out of Iraq - and try to blame the Democrats who are doing the exact opposite.
For Christ's sake, the Republicans just filibustered a withdrawal plan. And the Washington Post claims they are the ones who want to leave Iraq and the Democrats are preventing it. That is the exact opposite of reality. To skew the facts this radically and this obviously calls into question not just the competence of the Washington Post editorial board, but their motivations.
Who's paying the bills over there? Who is paying them to write this drivel masquerading as facts? Which reasonable journalist in their right mind could argue that the Democrats aren't trying to get us out of Iraq and the Republicans are? No one. Except someone how is paid to argue that ridiculous, preposterous and patently false position.
You know how the Republicans can actually start a reasonable withdrawal from Iraq - by voting for one! They talk a big game about how they might, possibly, one day, really consider getting us out of Iraq and then they vote against it EVERY SINGLE TIME. And the Washington post believes them. I don't even believe that they believe them. You couldn't believe that even if you were sleeping with them. You could only believe that if you were paid to believe that.
And please don't tell me that the people working at the Washington Post are so monumentally stupid as to have bought into the Republican talking point that the Democrats are in favor of a "precipitous withdrawal." No one is in favor of that. Name one Democratic leader who says we should pull out everyone tomorrow. In fact, the Democrats are arguing the opposite. Hillary Clinton is demanding that we do a well thought-out, careful, considered withdrawal. Both Clinton and Obama have talked over and over about leaving troops in the area to keep fighting Al Qaeda and deal with other problems in the region.
You know who else has talked about that? Russ Feingold, and every other "liberal" Democratic Senator in Congress. They have all proposed managed withdrawals, with reasonable timeframes. The phrase "precipitous withdrawal" was made up by Bill Kristol and fed to our barely cognizant president to repeat over and over until the media picked it up. Please, tell me you're not that stupid. Please, tell me you're bought off. At least I can understand that, and adjust my expectations accordingly.
Please don't tell me that you think President Bush wants to leave Iraq but the Democrats won't let him. Please, don't tell me that you're that nonsensical, that irrational, that detached from reality. I'd rather believe you were just told to write the editorial for business purposes so you get some sort of tax break. At least, I would have the comfort of knowing that the people in charge are unscrupulous and corrupt, but not devoid of all reason.
I don't think I want to live in a world where people in power are that stupid or irrational. It makes me question my whole world-view. Who is running this place? Please tell me you have been intimidated into bending the truth or that you have been ordered by your board to support all Republican talking points, but just don't tell me that you're that dense and you're running one of the most important newspapers in the country.