Prosecute the torture.

June 12, 2006

A Subtle Admission from Ruth Ann Dailey

Take a look at her column today.

Let's assume for a moment that her main point is accurate that the "left is mostly mum" on Zarqawi's death (I don't think it is and I'll be blogging more on it tonight - she's wrong about the dailykos for instance). But then she states:
The biggest story in the United States and in much of the rest of the world Thursday was the air strike taking out the leader of al Qaida in Iraq. The deaths of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and seven of his lieutenants have fascinating implications for both the war in Iraq and the sure-to-be-longer "worldwide war on terror," as CBS anchor Bob Schieffer termed it.

It was a tremendous victory for American intelligence-gathering and American troops, and for the overwhelming millions of Iraqis who want to live free. The network news divisions devoted much of their half-hour evening broadcasts to Zarqawi's death, the anchors even dropping their usual we're-not-rooting-for-either-side demeanor to communicate actual satisfaction.

On Friday it was still, appropriately, the lead story on their Web sites and those of some major American newspapers -- even before the posting of updates revealing that Zarqawi was still alive and mumbling when our troops found him. [emphasis added]
But wait - her first sentence is about the silence of the "American left." But then she goes on to say about how each network's evening news broadcasts devoted almost all of their time to his death.

But aren't the networks news divisions a big part of the mainstream media?

And isn't it "common knowledge" (at least among our friends on the Right) that mainstream media leans way left?

And didn't Ruth Ann Dailey write this:
Liberal bias pervades both broadcast and print media.
Only 18 months ago?

So how can she say that the left is "mostly mum" when she admits that the network news covered the story bigtime?

Unless of course the network news doesn't have a media bias.

But one tidbit. Ruth Ann writes:
On DailyKos.com, just one blogger had anything to say on the matter.[emphasis added]
But thanks to the Other Poltical Junkie's nimble fingered research, we see that there this posting at the dailykos at "Thu Jun 08, 2006 at 01:32:59 PM PDT". It begins:
Zarqawi the inhuman monster is dead. May Iraq have peace.
And then there's this from a differnet blogger (posted "Thu Jun 08, 2006 at 12:21:49 PM PDT"). It begins:
You remember that little scene from the Wizard of Of when the curtain is finally pulled back on the Wizard?

That's what Zarqawi's death reminds me of today. I believe that Zarqawi's death will actually turn out to be final nail in the coffin of public support for Bush's War in Iraq.
There's more, but I lack the time (or the patience) to go through the list.

The point is that if Ruth Ann Dailey is so wrong about something as simple as how many bloggers posted stuff about the death of al-Zarqawi at the dailykos, then how can we trust anything else in this column?

More later.

5 comments:

Sherry P said...

i've read a lot of her stuff and i've seen her on channel 13. she speaks well and has a good vocabulary and somehow she seems to think that those 2 traits will win her every argument and make every column the "gospel" truth.
but if you sit and take time, as you did and really pay attention to what she's written(much easier to do than when she's speaking) you can see that a lot of her arguments really don't make sense especially when put next to other statements she's put forth over and over again such as the leftist leanings and hidden agendas of the mainstream media. i'm glad you caught this one.

Anonymous said...

Here are some references I found on some of the top liberal blogsites in about 5 minutes of research:

Eschaton (Atrios)
http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_06_04_atrios_archive.html#114977545828045718

Daily Kos:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/6/8/75854/67368
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/6/8/124842/0184

Political Animal (Kevin Drum)
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_06/008971.php
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_04/008718.php

Firedoglake (Jame Hamsher)
http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/06/08/abu-musab-al-zarqawi-killed/

Think Progress
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/06/08/breaking-8/

TAPPED (American Prospect Blog)
http://www.prospect.org/weblog/2006/06/post_550.html

Hullaballoo (Digby)
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_06_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114978637185348257

Remember, I found all of these references in about 5 minutes! This begs two questions:

1. Exactly how much research did Ruth Ann Dailey do prior to submitting her piece?

2. How carefully did the editors at P-G look at Ms Dailey's "facts" prior to publishing it?

Maria said...

Actually, on KOS alone for Thursday I found about three "front page" posts that mentioned it and a good dozen or so diaries.

And, let's not forget that that was the day that most of the big guys at KOS were either traveling to or in Vegas for their convention.

Maybe Lil Ruth Ann is too dim to understand that stories scroll off the page there or maybe she'll just say anything to make her point...

Sherry P said...

i think it's the latter! most right wing talkers/writers just want to "prove" their point and sound important.

Justin said...

I admit it! I didn't blog about Zarqawi's death. Why? Because I really don't think it'll have any substantial impact whatsoever, that's why. I could have typed up that much and posted it just so that I could say that I blogged about Zarqawi, but frankly it didn't seem worth my time.