Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
You forgot the {sarcasm} html.
I think what he meant was that the admin listed quite a few reasons why we should invade Iraq - I listed some of them earlier today, and, if you were here way back then, you should remember all of us debating all of those points - but that apparently confused the poor media, and they, in their reporting, seemed to cover only the WMD reason with any great effort or breadth, and so the national conversation centered on that. And Powell centered on that in his presentation, I think because, at that point in the discussion, that was the main argument that people were focusing on. (I wish he had been more broad in his approach, but that's hindsight.)
|
I disagree that the MSM was so powerful, or the bush administration was so inept at communications, that the message was dictated by the MSM's inability to grasp more than a single cb. It's hard to believe they were calling the tune and the bush administration had to dance to it, especially if you posit that they were too dumb to figure out how to sell newspapers on the idea that SH was a ruthless sociopathic mass murderer who had the capability and intent to do us harm too. It also flies in the face of the well-documented fact that the neocons had great concerns about Iraq leading up to the war, and also bush, cheney and rumsfeld's - I'll be charitable here - great interest in Iraq even before 9/11.
This incidentally illustrates what I believe to be an error in viewing the MSM as liberal or conservative. They are neither - that gives them too much credit for actually having an ideology and sticking with it. They are, plain and simple, whores to whoever is in power at that moment. They will crawl across 20 miles of hot broken glass to lick the tire tracks of the trucks carrying the laundry of someone who will give them a WH inside tip, no matter how small or insignificant, be it Democrat or Republican.
