http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-boehlert/the-press-derides-dems-on_b_23546.htmlIt's been a head-scratching spectacle this week to watch Democrats in the Senate debate war resolutions that would press the administration to begin bringing troops home--to force the White House to "submit to Congress its plan for continued redeployment beyond 2006"--and then be depicted in the press as the likely losers in the unfolding political battle. Losers because Democrats are "divided" (New York Times), "struggling for consensus" (Washington Post), and "squabbling among themselves" (Knight Ridder), as opposed to Republicans who appear unified behind Bush's 'stay the course' Iraq policy. (Democrats weak and confused, Republicans strong and resolute. Does the press ever got tired of that manufactured storyline?)
What's so odd is despite the fact poll after poll shows Americans, completely fed up with the Iraq failure, agree with the Democratic initiative to start bringing the troops home,
it's Republicans who are being portrayed by clubby Beltway insiders as having the winning hand. Hell, the smart boys over at ABC's The Note, all but announced Democrats had just thrown the 2006 elections thanks to their botched handling of the Iraq war debate. i.e. They were, "on the precipice of making Iraq a 2006 political winner for the Republican Party."
That's certainly the GOP spin. (And really, is there any place better to read undiluted GOP spin passed off as analysis than in the cozy confines of The Note?)
Apparently if Karl Rove signs off on a political strategy (hit the Dems hard over Iraq), the press assumes it's a work of genius and shows little interest in dwelling on the pertinent questions, such as isn't there an obvious risk Republicans run in making the hugely unpopular war in Iraq, and specifically the notion that U.S. troops should pretty much stay there indefinitely, the centerpiece for their 2006 campaign? That angle has received a fraction of the attention the press has showered on whether Democrats will pay the price for Iraq.
In other words, Republicans in the White House hatched the war and were strongly supported by Republicans in the House and Senate and other key government posts.
Now three years later after the war has produced disastrous consequences both home and abroad, the press is pre-occupied with how the botched battle plan might negatively impact Democrats? Is there any precedent for that kind of political coverage, or did I miss all the articles and columns from the early `90s speculating on how the Clintons' health care reform failure might hurt Republicans at the ballot box?
As Media Matters noted this week,
the relevant polling data has often been left out of reports on the Iraq debate, most likely because it obliterates the phony narrative that it's the Democrats who are caught in a box. (Even today when the Times finally addressed the GOP's confident, few-found embrace of an unpopular war, the paper carefully avoided including any specific polling results about Iraq.)
In fact, Media Matters reported, "A CNN poll conducted June 14-15 found that 53 percent of respondents favored a timetable for withdrawal, while 41 percent opposed such a measure. Similarly, an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll conducted June 9-12 showed that 57 percent of respondents supported reducing troop levels now, compared with 35 percent who favored maintaining the current deployment."
more...
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
