The Rapid City Journal today has one of their more worthless editorials. Most of their editorials aren't much good. They have a couple token liberal columns per week and the rest of the page is filled with generally reactionary blather. Today's editorial is really a peculiarly shameful waste of freedom of the press.
When did the function of newspapers become defending every Republican politician who (or which) can breath and benefit corporate cronies? Once upon a time some papers thought their job was to be a watchdog on government. Digging out corruption. Stopping abuse of citizens at the hand of government run amuck. But, apparently not the editorial writers of the RC Journal.
The RNC spin today is that 9-11 is the fault of Al-Qaida and Bin Laden. Well duh... Bush's lying lips Karen Hughes was on NPR today. That was her big spin. Bush didn't do it. Bin Laden did. Today, March 31, 2004, the Rapid City Journal editorial gives about 12 inches of double-column type to attacking Richard Clarke and defending the indefensible Bush Thug administration on that same irrelevant basis..
If the only ways to defend the Bush administration are to construct a very dirty strawman argument or false dichotomy, the crony capitalists are in deep do-do. I just don't remember anybody even slightly responsible and mentally sane saying Bush was to blame for 9-11 in the same way bin Laden and the terrorists in the planes that killed thousands of working Americans and foreigners in the US were guilty and to blame.
The Journal also wastes a bit of its precious freedom of speech and press to gripe and moan that Bush opponents (those evil audacious bastards) are critical of the Bush administration purely for political reasons.
Well, last I heard there was nothing wrong with political reasons for doing anything. Nearly every interaction between humans involves politics of one kind or another. Now, they might attack narrow partisan politics or narrow partisanship. That seems like a fair target. But, Richard Clarke and Former Sec. O'Neill are not partisan Democrats. They are pretty much certifiable Republicans and also loyal Americans. That sort of knocks out the "partisanship" angle. So, slander him with by assigning "political" motives. Well, that really isn't slander or libel, it is just plain ignorance and stupidity. Nothing wrong with political motives as far as I am concerned. Political motives can be the best of motives.
On the other hand, it seems fair to wonder what the motives of the Rapid City editorial writers really are. They should have mental hernias for the heavy pseudo-intellectual work they did on the editorial. A great hefty waste of the freedom of press.
Now, let me suggest a slightly better way of looking at the question of blame. Not the phony blame dichotomy the editorialist writes, the RNC, and Bush's lying lips Karen Hughes spewed, but one involving the odds that 9-11 could have been prevented. We know what the odds of it happening under the Bush administration were-- 100%. 20-20 hindsight is wonderful here. Now lets look at it without benefit of 20-20 hindsight or even without benefit of election fraud in Florida and the assistance of the partisan whores in the US Supreme Court.
Let's just say that Gore had been elected. We know from reports presented to the Bush administration in transistion and after and now also from reports of Richard Clarke that Both Gore and Clinton were very, very concerned about the real danger religious fundamentalist crazies could do as terrorists. They had bin Laden in their sights. The crosshairs were on him. So, lets guess. Compared to the Bush ABC policies (that is Anying But Clinton polices) were bin Laden's and Al-Qaida 's odds of success less or more. I suggest the terrorists would have had much less chance of success. So, without assigning any blame of any kind, we might think that we would have been better off with Gore. After all, Gore could not have done worse than Bush. This also suggests that it would not be very hard for any Democrat to do better than Bush in the future..
Now that we are past that strawman or false dichotomy the RC Journal editorialists used, what else can we say? Well, we can seriously consider Richard Clarke's charges that Bush's drunkard's search of a war (see previous posts here in Dakota Today) with Iraq saps resources from a campaign against real terrorists. It seems hard to avoid that conclusion.
Bush just plain lied about Iraq as a threat to the US. The $180 billion and hundreds or thousands of lives already pissed away on that war for crony oil capitalists has been sucked out of our economy. It hasn't produced any products consumers can buy. It hasn't added teachers to school systems. It hasn't added border police. Etc, etc, etc, etc.
The Rapid City Journal editors (and I assume editors of a few hundred other papers who eagerly await the RNC spin each day) wasted their words. They also destroy their credibility when they will defend any Republican against any charges for egregious behavior, policies, or ideology. and promote any Republican no matter how ignorant or incompetent against any Democrat no matter how intelligent, capable, or truly aligned with the real interests of the Rapid City Journal readers.
American editors better look in a mirror. If all they see there is a smirking face of Bushsub2, they better do more than wash their faces and drink another cup of coffee.
Stay tuned to a weblog near you...even if the blogger is wasting words on stupid editorials. ))))) Doug Wiken
PS: You may find this editorial and the demented columns of Ron "Fishwrapper" Marr at http://www.rapidcityjournal.com.