which I referenced a little earlier

The Liberal Media

I'm vacationing in California and I thought I'd let you know that the LA Times reports in 4 short paragraphs "House Passes Compromise Bill" on page A11. Obviously that story is much less important than the front page stories, which include:

"Hard-earned Million: Lil Wayne is a Tough Act to Follow"

and

"Multiple Choice for SAT takers"

It's jarring.

It's VERY jarring.

The WaPo had a piece up yesterday that didn't even quote any opponents of FISA. And the other day when Taguba talked about the Bush administration committing war crimes the Post ran a story that totally downplayed this explosive charge.

I sent the following to them in their online chat but of course they never answered.

I have a couple of questions about a Joby Warrick story that appeared on page A7 of the Post:

Exams Back Up Reports of Detainee Abuse, Group Says

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/18/AR2008061800336.html

I almost missed this story because I was looking for a headline that talked about a former Bush administration general accusing the administration of war crimes.

Why did the Post bury the headline on this story? Does the Post believe it is not newsworthy that a former General accuses the administration of war crimes?

Included in the Warrick piece was this single characterization about what Taguba said. It was at the end of the piece and did not include his actual quote:

"In a statement accompanying the report, retired Maj. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba, who led the Army's first official investigation on Abu Ghraib, said the new evidence SUGGESTED a "systematic regime of torture" inside U.S.-run detention camps."

Do Warrick and the Post really think that Taguba only SUGGESTED torture when he said:

"There is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes. The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account."

Why did Warrick and the Post go out of their way to downplay this story?

As noted earlier here by someone Barack made sure to reassure AIPAC(by doing so telegraphing to Israel and American ME militarism/economic colonialists) that he will not be rocking these peoples boat. Score one for AEI,PNAC and Heritage and the Brookings folks and those who they front or instigate behind scenes with/for.

Some very big American West Asia policy dies are being set in Iraq as this telecom cave-in unrolls before us.

One should remember that American WH contenders must run to the middle after having played to the outer ring crowds in the primary elections. Barack will be surely now doing just that.

His very direct endorsement of letting Bush/Cheney get what it wanted from a DEM run Congress surely intended to appease not those of us in the American political left outer ring but to soothe the middle and near right realms.

Expect more of it.

By the time Barack Obama gets to the WH in Jan.2009 he will have had to affirm,confirm and validate that he is not going to bring on any wide and deep 'yes-we can' to WashingtonDC but something much more along the lines of 'maybe-but not now'.

As seen with the fiscal ruin in WashingtonDC,the rampant and deeply entrenched Pentagon WashingtonDC high temple cult and the inability of Congress to do much other than rearrange the same failed set of failures and shortfalls.

The DC DEMs surely going to great lenghts to do just this very thing since November 2006 election.

This American Occupation/Colonization of Iraq is shaping up to be very much a two party WashingtonDC creature.

Now with Bush/Cheney regime surely scrambling to put in a SOFA in Iraq that will be without any near exits going well into next WH regimes time frame the pieces of this game are being setup. Iran surely will be attacked with the matter of soon,sooner or soonest only consideration yet to be set.

One could suppose that Pelosi,Reid and the rest of the DC DEMs should out of simple shame submit resignations for being so duplicitous and craven.

Yet one can fully count on these people to be standing behind and around Barack Obama at his WashingtonDC coronation.

The American Imperial Capital will have more of the same and we Americans who are left outside looking in will either need to swallow how we get played over and over some more or go with being politically apathetic.

Historically it all has happened before.

It will come down to the money or in truth the lack of it that will pull the whole rotted pile down.

But that is a ways off likely enough.

Perhaps in another 100-150 years after all this periods senseless mayhem and untruthful dance Americans of that time will know a better America.

I am not happy with the America of this early 21st century and it is not hard to figure out Nancy,Harry and quite likely Barack are not going to truly gut out the rot and do right.

At the risk of resurrecting the "cult of personality" hub-bub, let me say: An eloquent, articulate, clear, concise, passionate and kick-ass post, Glenn. You are truly a part of the Patriot tradition, in the very best sense of the word. It has done a lot towards removing the needle in my brain that was yesterday...

I'm now even more committed to preventing the tyrants, the colluders, the cowards and the corporate shills from continuing their assault on the principles and foundations of our Country. And I'll start by not giving another dime - not one cent - to the DNC or the Obama campaign. (This is not a "who I will or won't vote for" pledge). My money and time are now going to ActBlue, the ACLU, Iraqi refugees and Cindy Sheehan's campaign to unseat Benedict Pelosi (regardless of how quixotic that may be).

Let's see, a Chicago politician that's shown little spine when it comes to the gun lobby, fully defending women's rights (and please give me the lies about "present" votes, they're lies by a supporter who wasn't even involved at the time and we know that), and pretty much every litmus test he's faced. No surprise that he caved in. No surprise that, like any conman, he played the "trust me" card.

That's how con-men work. They get your trust, then they screw you over. So, knowing that, and my wife and I having supported him once, only to be repeatedly burned, we're striking out in a new direction.

This year, we're both voting green. We simply believe that taking the least crappy of two shit sandwiches isn't going to change our government at the fundamental level it needs changing.

We believe that we need an upheaval and that it takes courage to make it work. Like the one that almost came to fruition in 1992. Or, better yet, one that lead to the rise of the then populist & "liberal" Republicans from the old and ineffective Whig party.

But voting Democrat or Republican... That's not in the cards anymore. Both parties have, for the most part, betrayed the average american for power and treasure.