If you own any stock in the New York Times, you’d
better dump it before the election because the Times —
like the rest of the 527 Media — will be the biggest loser of the
2006 election regardless of the other results. At about this time
in 2004, I predicted that if Bush won, the media (especially Dan
Rather) would lose. Two years later, Mr. Bush is still in the White
House and Mr. Rather’s chair is now occupied by the excavatrix of
the Couric Crater. Katie’s cuddly claptrap is running behind reruns
of “Millionaire” in the Los Angeles market, and the only people who
are surprised are the other occupants of the 527 Media cocoon.
Yesterday, it became official: there’s no difference between the
Kos Kidz and the NYT editorial board. In a Sunday
editorial the Times endorsed Nutroots Ned Lamont over Joe
Lieberman (and whatshisname, the Republican nonentity in the
Connecticut Senate race). My theory that the media are leading the
Dems rather than the other way around thus requires a corollary:
liberals are so blinded by rage at President Bush that they’re
willing to follow the media’s anti-Bush anti-war lead, even if it
takes them over a cliff.
Bush Derangement Syndrome manifests itself differently among its
sufferers. In the New York Times’ case, it erupts
consistently in its eagerness to toss its long-time pals over the
side for any measure of deviation from the Nutroots fringe.
Christopher Shays — Connecticut Republican and recipient of
several previous NYT endorsements — suffered the
Times’ endorsement of his opponent last week for the same
reason the paper is now tossing Ol’ Joe to the sharks: he didn’t
oppose the Iraq war sufficiently or agree that the president should
be impeached for it. The endorsement of Lamont closes the BDS loop.
Inside the 527 Media loop, no candidate can be supported who ever
had a thought that varied from the BDS chant voiced by Lamontocrats
the night of his primary victory: “bring them home, bring them
home…” The sad part is that the Republicans can’t seem to grasp
that this presents an opportunity for them. Well, not all
Republicans suffer from that inability. At least two don’t and
they’re both named “Cheney.”
It’s comforting to know that someone in the White House still
understands what we’re up against. When radio interviewer Scott
Hennen talked to the Veep about treatment of terrorist prisoners
one question was, “Would you agree a dunk in the water is a
no-brainer if it can save lives?” Mr. Cheney replied, “Well, it’s a
no-brainer for me,” which led to a Chernobyl-like meltdown among
the 527 Media. At the White House briefing the next morning, Tony
Snow withstood a hilarious onslaught of righteous indignation as
calm and well stated as Clouseau’s accusation that a suspect killed
“in a writ of fealous jage.” Some smiling smartass girl ranted on
for at least three minutes insisting that Snow explain what “a dunk
in the water” meant if it didn’t mean “water-boarding.” (By the
way, “water-boarding” is a means of breaking down a prisoner’s
resistance to interrogation that makes the suspect believe he’s
drowning.) The rest of the media munchkins were too busy jumping to
conclusions to even listen to the answers to their own questions.
Which proves a point and poses an essential question.
The media, at least the surrogate Lamontocrats among them,
insist that terrorist prisoners should be treated the same way the
Supreme Court requires a beat cop to treat a purse-snatcher caught
on Rodeo Drive. Mr. Cheney made a point that resonates with every
sensible American. If you want people to interrogate terrorist
prisoners effectively, you’re going to have to use techniques that
aren’t permitted in civilian law enforcement. Cheney didn’t agree
with the idea of waterboarding, but so what? Was Khalid Sheik
Mohammed “water boarded”? Possibly. And if so, that’s just fine by
me. Whatever was done to KSM, the record shows that it succeeded in
extracting information that led to the capture of other
high-ranking al Qaeda terrorists and leaders, certainly saving an
untold number of lives. This is one of the choices on November 7:
Do you want terrorist prisoners treated — lawfully — in rough and
innovative ways that work? If so, don’t vote for any Democrats.
And while the Veep was out there dispensing common sense, his
better half was taking on the media in the way the Republicans
should have been doing all year. On CNN with Wolf Blitzer, Lynn
Cheney asked a pertinent question and made a couple of telling
points.
CNN has been on an anti-Bush rampage unseen in its political
activism since Rathergate put the phony Texas Air National Guard
documents on the air. Its “Broken Government” special and
anti-Rumsfeld rants dominate its pre-election “coverage”. Which
didn’t escape Mrs. Cheney. Here’s the money quote from October 27,
CNN last Friday night:
MRS. CHENEY: Well, you know, right there, Wolf, “Broken
Government.” Now, what kind of stance is that? Here we are. We’re a
country where we have been mightily challenged over the past six
years. We’ve been through 9/11. We’ve been through Katrina.
The president and the vice president inherited a recession.
We’re a country where the economy is healthy. That’s not broken.
This government has acted very well. We’ve had tax cuts that are
responsible for our healthy economy. We’re a country that was
attacked five years ago. We haven’t been attacked since. What this
government has done is effective. That’s not broken
government…
BLITZER: You worked …
L. CHENEY: I watched your program last night and I was
troubled.
BLITZER: All right. Well, that was probably the purpose, to get
people to think, to get people to discuss these issues because a
lot of conservatives and …
L. CHENEY: Well, all right, Wolf. I’m here to talk about my
book, but if you want to talk about distortion…
BLITZER: We’ll talk about your book.
L. CHENEY: Well, right, but what is CNN doing running terrorist
tape of terrorists shooting Americans? I mean, I thought Duncan
Hunter asked you a very good question and you didn’t answer it. Do
you want us to win?
BLITZER: The answer, of course, is we want the United States to
win. We are Americans. There’s no doubt about that. Do you think we
want terrorists to win?
L. CHENEY: Then why are you running terrorist propaganda?
BLITZER: With all due respect — with all due respect, this is
not terrorist propaganda.
Oh, c’mon, Wolf. You’re caught, and you know it. Media bias is a
thing of the past. You, and the others like you in the 527 Media,
are producing campaign commercials for the Democrats and trying to
pass them off as news. Thus the ever-deepening Couric Crater, the
falling stock price of the
NYT (down almost 60% in the
past few years) and so forth. (I know, I know. Internet competition
is driving newspaper stocks down, but liberal activism accelerates
their decline.)
A week from tomorrow Americans will decide between saddling
George W. Bush with a hostile Democratic Congress or with a
Republican-controlled Senate dominated by presidential wannabes.
Sigh. Vote Republican anyhow, if only to annoy the media.
TAS contributing editor Jed Babbin is the author
of Inside the Asylum: Why the UN and Old Europe Are
Worse Than You Think (Regnery, 2004) and, with Edward
Timperlake, Showdown: Why China Wants War With the United
States (Regnery, 2006).
