Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

WP's Walter Pincus "pointedly" observes that those who were right about Iraq are given little credit

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
DeepModem Mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-05-06 03:01 AM
Original message
WP's Walter Pincus "pointedly" observes that those who were right about Iraq are given little credit
Editor&Publisher: Pincus Tweaks 'Post' on War Resolution -- How Did Others Respond?
By Greg Mitchell
Published: December 04, 2006

NEW YORK -- In the Washington Post today, longtime national security reporter Walter Pincus observes that several Democrats who voted in 2002 against giving President Bush authority to attack Iraq are now about to play key roles in the upcoming Congress. He pointedly observes that they were "given little public credit at the time, or since," even though they have "turned out to be correct in their warnings about the problems a war would create."

Pincus was one of the few top people at the paper to push for more skeptical coverage of the run up to the war. Now he points out, "The day after the House vote, The Washington Post recorded that 126 House Democrats voted against the final resolution. None was quoted giving a reason for his or her vote except for Rep. Joe Baca (Calif.), who said a military briefing had disclosed that U.S. soldiers did not have adequate protection against biological weapons."

Pincus noted that no other reason given to oppose the resolution by others "was reported in the two Post stories about passage of the resolution that day." A search of the Washington Post archives finds that the main story was co-authored by Jim VanDeHei, who is now leaving the paper....

***

But how did newspapers, on their editorial pages, feel about the vote then?

The Washington Post was typical in backing Congress' decision to give Bush "broad authority ... to move against Iraq." The editorial suggested that it was not a "declaration of war" and "the course of U.S. policy is not yet set." Of course, Bush would later act as if it were equivalent to a declaration of war, and there is much evidence that U.S. plans for an invasion were indeed pretty well "set" at that time....

At the other end of the spectrum, the Los Angeles Times forthrightly declared that the resolution "gives too much power to this and, potentially, future presidents to attack nations unilaterally based on mere suspicions. This could fundamentally change the nation's approach to foreign policy. ... Now that the resolution has passed, Congress and the American people should urge the president to interpret his mandate narrowly."...

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003467825
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Trajan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-05-06 03:12 AM
Response to Original message
1. Pincus had my vote ....
for the most honest 'inside' journalist from mid 2002 onward ....

He won my praise weekly here ....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-05-06 04:27 AM
Response to Original message
2. Senator Byrd made his objection clear
His Senate speech got coverage at the time. There's lots of people who are wishing they had paid more attention to what he said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynnTheDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-05-06 04:45 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. And Ron Paul.
And a shitload of US military top brass.

And a shitload of US experts from the DoD to the CIA and all points between.

And the Republic Party's top foreign policy expert, Brent Scowcroft.

And former President Bush.

And the overwhelmingly vast majority of the entire world.

And even the majority of US citizens.

But hey, who coulda known. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-05-06 05:02 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. I expect we will be reminded of these things in Congressional hearings
And I hope the first thing on the menu is boiled Rice. I'm gonna be real upset if Democrats give these criminals a pass, thinking there is an advantage to appearing all bipartisan and whatever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-05-06 09:02 AM
Response to Original message
5. And, as Pincus reported yesterday, Barbara Lee in the House tried to
get an Amendment to IWR that would restrict Bush's power. 122 House Dems voted for it led by John Spratt of SC but it wasn't enough to overcome the Repugs who managed to get Dem crossovers.

The Senates fault was that three Dems were planning to run for President at the time...Lieberman and Edwards who sponsored Iraq War Resolution and Kerry who says that he thought it didn't give the P-Resident the power he took.

Senator Byrd's magnificent speeches against giving Bush power with IRW went unreported except here on DU and a few other places. The Blogosphere wasn't up and powerful at that time.

It's sad that now it's reported what the WaPo and other newspapers did after so much death and destruction but these papers need to learn that "blood" drips from their hands in supporting Bush. "We didn't think the P-Resident would use the power" is a lame excuse for everyone since he had stolen an election and allowed "9/11" to happen. How did we know and they didn't? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Oct 31st 2024, 05:52 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC