News Focus
News Focus
icon url

teapeebubbles

12/12/06 9:37 PM

#19453 RE: StephanieVanbryce #19446

Cafferty: “The Decider Has Decided Not to Decide
icon url

teapeebubbles

12/12/06 9:57 PM

#19455 RE: StephanieVanbryce #19446

"I have created this blog in order to provide Americans with a new meeting place where such opinions and viewpoints might be better shared, discussed and debated; a place where conservative and traditionalist Americans might speak truth to power..."

-- Tom DeLay, who just located the Internets

icon url

teapeebubbles

12/12/06 11:55 PM

#19463 RE: StephanieVanbryce #19446

Reagan Budget Director David Stockman Under Investigation for Financial Fraud; "rose to prominence two decades ago as a proponent of trickle-down economics"
icon url

teapeebubbles

12/13/06 1:54 PM

#19469 RE: StephanieVanbryce #19446

For the last couple of weeks, all we’ve heard from the White House is about the “new way forward” in Iraq that the president will present to the nation before Christmas. Bush is going through the motions — meeting with all the right people, especially those who agree with him more than the Iraq Study Group — and the new policy, we’re told, is going to be just great.

Yesterday, of course, Tony Snow announced that the Bush gang will keep us in suspense a bit longer. “[Bush] decided, frankly, that it’s not ready yet,” Snow said. He did not offer a specific date for the speech, telling reporters, “[It] is not going to happen until the new year. We do not know when, so I can’t give you a date, I can’t give you a time, I can’t give you a place, I can’t give you a way in which it will happen.”

At a certain level, this didn’t strike me as terribly surprising or disconcerting. The White House says its new-and-improved policy isn’t ready yet. Fine. The Bush gang says they need more time. Fine. They say it’s more important to get it right than get it fast. Fine.

But upon further reflection, it’s not fine. The president has had nearly four years — the more he dithers and dances through his Kabuki-like “listening tour,” the worse Iraq gets.

We are more than eager for this White House to finally get something right on Iraq. But we find it chilling to imagine that Mr. Bush and his advisers have only now begun a full policy review, months after Iraq plunged into civil war and years after experts began warning that the administration’s strategy was not working.

We would like to believe that the reason for delay is that some of Mr. Bush’s advisers have come up with a sensible change in course and they are now trying to persuade the president to take it. Or that behind the scenes Mr. Bush is already strong-arming Iraq’s leaders to rein in the sectarian militias and begin long-delayed national reconciliation talks.

We fear that a more likely explanation is that the president’s ever-divided policy advisers are still wrangling over the most basic decisions, while his political handlers are waiting for public enthusiasm for the Baker report to flag before Mr. Bush tries to explain why he won’t follow through on some of the report’s most important and reasonable suggestions — like imposing a timetable on Iraqi leaders to make political compromises or face a withdrawal of American support.

That, or the White House believes it’s unproductive to roll out a new product line in late-December.

In the meantime, the delays are causing disruptions here and in Iraq.

The absence of an immediate new American plan for Iraq is adding to anxiety among Iraq’s moderate neighbors, who identify with the country’s minority Sunni Arab population, and has opened the way for new proposals from many quarters, in Iraq as well as in Washington, about the next steps. […]

In an interview, Senator Chuck Hagel, the Nebraska Republican who is often critical of the president’s war policy, called the delay “unpardonable” and added: “Every day that goes by, we are losing ground.” Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader in the Senate, said in a statement, “Waiting and delaying on Iraq serves no one’s interests.”

A senior administration official said Mr. Bush had decided over the last two days to prolong the deliberations based on a concern that a pre-Christmas announcement might quickly be overtaken by events. That happened to Mr. Bush in late 2005 after he used a series of speeches to unveil a “Plan for Victory” in Iraq.

Oh right, the 2005 “Plan for Victory.” Remind me; how’d that one work out?

The NYT editorial get this just right: “If the president is delaying because he is searching for a good option, he can stop. There are none.”
icon url

teapeebubbles

12/13/06 1:54 PM

#19470 RE: StephanieVanbryce #19446

Frameshop: GOP "Smear Gangs" Target Obama
icon url

teapeebubbles

12/13/06 4:04 PM

#19480 RE: StephanieVanbryce #19446

CNN’s Jeff Greenfield’s lengthy segment on Barack Obama’s casual wear, and its similarity to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s no-tie look, raised quite a few eyebrows over the last couple of days. The good news is Greenfield heard the criticism and chose to respond. The bad news is he missed the point of the criticism. Badly.

Greenfield insisted he was just kidding, and that it was obvious that the 2-and-a-half minute segment was meant in jest. Overly-sensitive bloggers, Greenfield said, just didn’t appreciate the seamless way in which he seamlessly blended satire and clever political analysis.

Is some of this my fault? It has to be, for the same reason famed Boston Celtics coach Red Auerbach liked to say that when someone misses a pass, 90 per cent of the time it’s the fault of the passer.

I figured there was no way on planet Earth that anyone could possibly take such a presentation at face value. I was wrong.

Most of what happened here, I think, is a demonstration of the hair-trigger instincts that have grown up among some of the bloggers (not to mention the need to fill all that space every day, or hour, or 15 minutes).

In a political world where partisans routinely assume the worst about their adversaries –and where conspiracy theories stretch from Bill Clinton as a drug ring- and murder-enabler to Bush as planner of 9/11 — there’s a tendency to find malice aforethought.

I like to consider myself someone with a fairly good sense of humor, and reading the transcript of Greenfield’s segment, I did not literally believe that the CNN analyst believed that Obama was going for the “Ahmadinejad look.”

Greenfield seems to have misunderstood why many of us were annoyed with his piece in the first place.

Greenfield didn’t just make an off-hand joke during an on-air discussion, he went to the trouble of putting together a lengthy segment in which he fleshed out his joke in great detail. This may have been a valiant attempt at humor, but as with many failed jokes, there was a problem with delivery — The Situation Room is not The Onion.

There’s also the political/media context to consider. A lot of Dems have seen the media participate in some ugly smears of Democratic presidential hopefuls, and despite his generally positive press thus far, Obama’s turn to get smacked around by objective news outlets was inevitable. Some on the right have already started to revel in the similarities between “Obama” and “Osama,” coupled by the fact that the senator’s middle name is “Hussein.” Right on the heels of this nonsense, Greenfield thought it’d be funny to compare Obama’s and Ahmadinejad’s fashion choices, playing into the notion that the Democrat has a great deal in common with our Middle Eastern foes.

Indeed, the same afternoon as Greenfield’s extended parody, CNN also ran split-screens with Obama, bin Laden, and Saddam. For those of us waiting for the media to start undermining Obama’s chances, CNN’s choice of jokes, segments, and visuals seemed to have all the subtlety of a sledgehammer. Meant in jest or not, as TNR’s Michael Crowley put it, “[O]n some level I’m sure this stuff sinks in.” Indeed, it does, and CNN should know better to play into far-right memes by going for cheap laughs.

CNN is supposed to be the real, credible news network. Maybe it’s best to leave the news parodies to the professionals?

Post Script: By the way, Greenfield’s shot at bloggers — we feel the need “to fill all that space every day, or hour, or 15 minutes” — was cheap and unnecessary. Indeed, this little incident, if anything, demonstrates the problem isn’t with bloggers filling pages, it’s with news networks filling 24/7 airtime. Did CNN so thoroughly cover every major news story on earth on Sunday that the network had time left over for jokes about Obama’s name and clothing? Please.
icon url

teapeebubbles

12/13/06 8:08 PM

#19495 RE: StephanieVanbryce #19446

CNN Puts Obama In Split-Screen With Bin Laden and Hussein
icon url

biomanbaba

03/04/09 7:58 PM

#57149 RE: StephanieVanbryce #19446

what we are reminded of is her loose marbles...........(imagine music from Alfred Hitchcock here)