Pravda On The Potomac Strikes Again

2:37 am EST September 25th, 2006 | Media | 12 Comments

In its ongoing mission to show us the upside of George W. Bush, the Washington Post again has enlisted its scribes to shove another story (on page A1, of course) that reads as if Karl Rove wrote it himself. It’s a stunning piece of election year propaganda designed to neutralize Bush’s major achilles heel, the Iraq War. Because you see, according to Pravda On The Potomac, George Bush isn’t a swaggering simpleton who told insurgents to “bring it on” against our troops, nor is he the slack-jawed used-car salesman who dressed up in a flight suit to declare “mission accomplished” 3 years and counting too early. No, George Bush… CARES

The two sides of Bush as commander in chief can be hard to reconcile. His public persona gives little sense that he dwells on the costs of war. He does not seem to agonize as Johnson did, or even as his father, George H.W. Bush, did before the Persian Gulf War. While he pays tribute to those who have fallen, the president strives to show resolve and avoid displays that might be seen as weak or doubting. His refusal to attend military funerals, while taking long Texas vacations and extended bicycle rides, strikes some critics as callous indifference.

That’s right, Bush’s refusal to honor the fallen by attending even one military funeral isn’t the cold heart of a smirking loon, no, the Post wants us to know that this is just a shell in order for Dear Leader to Reassure The Masses During Times Of Change.

Are they serious? Why are they doing this? What kind of pictures does Bush have of the Post editors? Because that’s about all that can describe this repeated malarkey.

You should also reconcile The Post’s hagiography with Bush’s own words where he recently relegated the deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan to being “just a comma”.

>> The WaPo’s Love Note To Shrub

No Related Post

« George Allen Is Toast
The Plot To Stop The President »

12 Responses to “Pravda On The Potomac Strikes Again”

barbara friedland says:

September 25, 2006 at 4:43 am

Thank you. Maybe Baker is one of the many “journalists” on this administrations payroll.
Dana says:

September 25, 2006 at 10:07 am

Oh, good grief: because The Washington Post doesn’t print exclusively negative things about President Bush, it’s now ghosted by Karl Rove.

It’s not exactly like the editors aren’t going to endorse Democrats, and it’s not like the Post didn’t endorse and support Mr Bush’s past two opponents.

Are they serious? Why are they doing this? What kind of pictures does Bush have of the Post editors? Because that’s about all that can describe this repeated malarkey.

Ahhh, what was their motive, our host asks. Has it not occurred to you that not every story has to have a motive other than to present the news? (Funny: in journalism class, that’s what they told me a newspaper was supposed to do.)
dean moriarty says:

September 25, 2006 at 1:57 pm

I had the same sense of nausea
when reading once again about
that private man, the president,
of whom we supposedly know so little,
especially his hidden depths.
A man of deep feeling
Hides behind the Texas swagger…
It isn’t “news” at all,
just pens of hogwash.
Even if he does feel deeply,
what does that have to do with
his policies?
We’re told that what we see,
the cold leader,
is really not the man.
We are notto believe,
in other words,
the evidence before our eyes.
A wonderful sophistry,
yes, making the weaker
argument the stronger.
Stale beer.
Marty says:

September 25, 2006 at 2:52 pm

You’re reaching Oliver. (But that’s a common theme with you lately.

(Did I say “lately?”)
Jody says:

September 25, 2006 at 3:10 pm

Indeed. Describing the fawning way a national paper covers, and continues to cover, a president who has been a failure at every level for his entire tenure as president now qualifies as ‘reaching’.

Keep ‘reaching’, Oliver. Low-hanging fruit tho it may be.
Ian says:

September 25, 2006 at 3:14 pm

This is classic Oliver. Only taking out a piece of the article and hoping his readers are too dumb to click and read the rest of the piece. If you clicked through and read it, the article was about an anti-war liberal activist who lost her husband in war due to a heart attack. Of course, she blames Bush .. and the article spends a long time lamenting how horrible Bush is.

But will Oliver note that?? Nope.
Jody says:

September 25, 2006 at 7:21 pm

Yeah, the nerve of her, getting all riled up because thanks to Bush, her husband died thousands of miles away from her, and Bush doesn’t even have the decency to attend a military funeral.

Thank goodness the Post is able to see thru Bush’s noble facade, from ignorant frat-boy emperor wanna-be to a president who cares, and is racked with concern over all the death and stuff he lied us in to.

Gah.
Bill L. says:

September 26, 2006 at 6:20 am

Ian, ever full of it and not to proud to show it. The first three paragraphs of a two page, twenty eight paragraph article are about a meeting between Bush and the activist you mention. How does the liberal activist see Bush after her encounter with him?

But Hildi Halley, a self-described liberal antiwar activist who met with President Bush in Maine last month, said she believes he felt her grief. “It wasn’t just a crocodile tear,” she said in an interview at her home. “I felt like I moved him.”

He CARES! Why, unless I’m mistaken, that’s the point of OW’s post, to show how hard the Post is stretching to make Bush look sympathetic despite a dearth of evidence to the contrary. The article spends exactly NO time lamenting how horrible Bush is.

The trolls are really reaching lately.

Did I say lately?

If anyone wants a darkly amusing look into how vapid and distorted the American view of reality is courtesy of our media, check this out.
medicis says:

September 26, 2006 at 1:50 pm

I simply wish the pretzel had worked. Nothing quite so ignominious and in keeping with Dear Leader’s persona as to die choking on a pretzel while drunk. Anybody who defends this war criminal psychopath/grandiose delusion-disordered piece of crap deserves the same ultimate fate I hope the great Emperor meets.
Quaker in a Basement says:

September 26, 2006 at 4:15 pm

Nothing quite so ignominious and in keeping with Dear Leader’s persona as to die choking on a pretzel while drunk.

Oh, no, no, medicis. I wish for a long, long life for Mr. Bush.

I hope he has many years remaining to bear his legacy. History will not be kind.
medicis says:

September 26, 2006 at 5:13 pm

I would agree with you Quaker if it were not for all the mothers and children about to die in Iran. I would much rather see him suffer for many years – although, he is delusional-disordered and probably wouldn’t notice as much as a sane man. In addition, His family and the elitists will protect him, unfortunately. I would rather he end up at the Hague if the pretzel doesn’t get him first.
Dugger says:

September 27, 2006 at 9:48 am

How can somebody like medicis spew hate and venom like that and no one take him or her to task.

Thats despicable, medicis.

On a site that searches intently for instances of non-progressive transgressions, you spew the most obnoxious, hate laden crap imaginable and it passes without comment (except Quakers very mild dodge).