Will the whoring for war by the media never end?
Apparently not. If you doubt the whoring that's taking place, read Katherine Skiba's report for the Chicago Tribune -- she is reporting -- entitled "Durbin votes for Syria attack, says situation different from Iraq War." In a functioning press, reports like Skiba's would make up at least half the coverage. In a healthy press, they would make up over 70% of the coverage.
Instead, Skiba's report is a rarity and we're instead confronted with the crap of David Weigel's which keeps changing headlines (currently "The Phantom of Baghdad") when what it needs to change is the text. We don't link to Weigel so look for it yourself, it was posted at 8:06 pm last night at Slate. And you get crap like Ben Jacobs' "Iraq Hawks' Flip-Flop" (Daily Beast) and it just goes on and on. Ask yourself why Amanda Terkel pens "The Iraq Hangover: Lawmakers Who Backed War Now Skittish On Syria"? Why is the position of no to war the one that's treated as suspect?
The media has decided the narrative on Congress and Syria will be: Look at these people who supported the Iraq War and now won't support war on Syria?
That goes to how f**ked up American media is and they never grasp it. 'What's the problem,' they would insist, 'this is news.'
No, it's not, it's whoring.
News would mean if you were covering the Iraq War supporters who are opposed to attacking Syria you would also be covering the Iraq War opponents who are now supporting an attack on Syria.
But that's not what's going on. Skiba's report is a rarity.
And that's because the press narrative is: Look at these freaks who supported war on Iraq but now don't want to attack Syria.
The press is not trying to explore or inform.
They're a little more mature than Chachi lookalike Rachel Maddow, but they've accepted war as normal and as needed. Which is why in 2002 and 2003, they demonized those against the Iraq War and why they ridicule and treat as strange those Republicans who are against attacking Syria.
The default setting on the press is pro-war. It's past time that this was seriously addressed by media watchdogs.
On the left, we pretend that it's addressed. When a Republican takes us into a wrong war, CJR and others churn out stories about the media bias. But today, where are those articles?
No where to be found because it's not really a press critique that CJR was offering, it's a I-don'-t-agree whine.
The media, in the US, keeps helping every administration (regardless of political party) sell war.
Rachel Maddow grins like the biggest yokel at the county fair as she delivers her idiotic commentary. She grins like that because she knows many will embrace that crap, especially the press. It fits the message.
And the message is always: "Shut up! We want war!"
I have not quoted Donald Rumsfeld here. I have not quoted anyone from the Bully Boy Bush administration re: Syria. I have no desire to because I'm disgusted by them.
'Well so is Rachel!'
Then she might need to be disgusted with herself.
Ms. Maddow's quite the liar.
A) She supported the Iraq War before it started. She was not a national personality then and most people are unaware of her actual stance.
B) In 2004, she was a radio talk show host on Air America Radio and pimped the Iraq War. On her show, you did not get anti-war voices. (Her shows: Unfiltered, The Rachel Maddow Show, etc. -- she failed to find ratings repeatedly before becoming MSNBC's problem.) You could find critics of the way the war was being run but that was about it. When a guest for another topic raised the Iraq War and the need for the US to leave Iraq, Rachel would stop them and insist that the US had to stay. She would cite Colin Powell and his Pottery Barn analogy. It was false, Pottery Barn does not have a you-break-it-you-buy-it policy. Rachel should have known that because she laughed and joked on air when the story about Powell getting it wrong first broke. But she's an idiot and a whore and it was less than two weeks after laughing at Powell that she was repeating the Pottery Barn story as true.
C) Madcow had her on air meltdown when our own Elaine pointed out on Rachel's message boards that "Ask A Vet" never included anti-war veterans. It was as though Elaine had pointed out what Ava and I had: That Maddow could and did excuse away a pro-war veteran guest for beating his wife but she wouldn't bring on anti-war vets. When people objected to that veteran being on the show, Rachel's response was to invite the criminal (the wife left him and filed charges) back for the Friday party show and have fun with him on that.
There are many who will embrace Rachel's whoring.
They'll pretend "Go now" is a message of peace.
The only piece Rachel knows is the one she's had tongue up.
"Go now" is a message of war. It is "Shut up, we want war!"
That's all Maddow's capable of.
And all the media appears capable of as they accept war and the desire for it as normal and work overtime to portray any reluctance to war as an oddity, as freakish.
The whoring is about selling war. Real press critics, real media watchdogs would be pointing this out but they too accept war as normal.
War is not a guitar. It doesn't sound better in the hands of Barack than it did in the hands of Bully Boy Bush. War kills, it destroys. Iraq is destroyed and will be for years because the US government wanted to 'help' the Iraqi people.
NINA reports a Kirkuk car bombing has left 2 dead and nineteen injured, a second Kirkuk car bombing injured three people, a third Kirkuk car bombing left five people injured, 1 person was shot dead in Falluja, 3 homes were bombed in Tikrit killing 1 man and leaving one woman injured, 7 homes were bombed in Kirkuk, the home of Duraid Kashmula (former governor of Nineveh Province) was bombed, and, in Falluja, Sheikh Mohammed Dhari Jumaili was shot dead as he left his home.
That is just some of today's violence. It is not 'normal' and it is not 'acceptable.' It is, however, the product of the US government which started the war on Iraq.
The pretense that the US has left Iraq (State Dept, contractors, military 'trainers,' CIA, Special Ops -- with Barack sending in another unit last fall, etc remain in Iraq) is so popular because, let's get honest, it allows a lot of Americans to sleep easier and pretend all is well. The media sells comfort food. They'll dole out careful bits for you to be outraged (at the actions of this or that individual -- never about the people in the power or in the current government). They'll sermonize and patronize. They just won't report.
And they're not reporting now. They're glomming on members of Congress who won't go for an attack on Syria so that they can ridicule these people and silence them. They're trying to turn them into outcasts, the untouchables. Shame them and maybe a few will turn and maybe it will cause others to toe the line.
I lack the grace to quote a Donald Rumsfeld. But don't mistake Rachel's attempt to shame him into silence as 'anti-war.' She is and remains one of the most prominent pro-war voices on the so-called left.
The media sells war. You can see it right now with the Syrian coverage. You can also see it right now with the refusal of US outlets to cover Iraq.
The following community sites -- plus Dissident Voice, Susan's On the Edge, Jody Watley, The Diane Rehm Show, Pacifica Evening News, Adam Kokesh, Antiwar.com, Chocolate City and Cindy Sheehan -- updated last night:
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
iraq
the chicago tribune
katherine skiba
the huffington post
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq
iraq