Posted on 08/01/2007 9:45:33 AM PDT by IrishMike
Brookings scholars Michael E. O’Hanlon and Kenneth M. Pollack used the most established of platforms, the Op-Ed page of The New York Times, to offer the most politically incorrect of arguments on Monday: “We are finally getting somewhere in Iraq, at least in military terms.”
Their 1,343-word piece, “A War We Just Might Win,” instantly provoked a more furious ideological shootout than has been sparked by any recent development on the battleground or action by the Bush administration.
O'Hanlon told The Politico in an e-mail that he and his co-author were espousing "just temporary optimism," but their article was treated by the left and right as if it were etched on golden tablets.
“Often Wrong, But Never In Doubt” was the headline on the progressive Think Progress blog of the Center for American Progress Action Fund. The posting, which asserted O’Hanlon and Pollack were “embarking on a public relations tour calling for stay the course,” drew 228 comments. A printout runs 56 pages. Elsewhere, the site accused the two of “shilling.”
In his Interesting Times blog for The New Yorker, George Packer encapsulated the reaction of liberal former war supporters with a piece that suggests the O’Hanlon/Pollack article lacks “a necessary humility.”
On the right, these liberal hawks were hailed as returning heroes. The Web site of the conservative Weekly Standard called the piece “Required Reading,” saying it “conforms well with much of the reporting that has come out of Iraq recently.”
The rhetorical ruckus ignited by O’Hanlon and Pollack was partly a matter of timing, coming as the White House and military commanders argue that they need several more months to prove their latest strategy is working, while Democrats and even some Republicans in Congress say time will be up in September.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
The demonrats hate anything that even sounds like good news froom Iraq. Freak’en losers.
This illustrates why the New York Times would have a very hard time moving toward the center to broaden their readership. They have pretty well driven away all of their readers but limousine liberals, leftist intellectuals, and assorted moonbats.
Anyone left, who can still stomach reading the NYT in its current form, is unlikely to put up with any sort of political sanity in its editorials or news presentations.
If they moved right, more likely they would start shedding subscribers rather than gaining them. They’ve really painted themselves into a corner.
I love it. Take that defeat mantra and run with it, kooks.
Ping, esp to USS Alaska’s post.
Ya knew that was gonna happen!
The only reason the NY Times exists today is because libs think it makes them look intellectual while reading it at Starbucks.
And when James Clyburn (D-SC) says "it would be a big problem for us" when asked about things going well in Iraq for the US, you really can't deny that is the position they have put themselves in.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.