NY Magazine: Top Black General Worthless

Rush Limbaugh .com ^ | 3/27/03 | El Rushbo

[Libloather]

NY Magazine: Top Black General Worthless
March 27, 2003

Brigadier General Vincent Brooks faces some outrageous and stupid questions at his daily Central Command briefings. Some of them deserve to be answered dead on, but because of political correctness and diplomacy and all that, CENTCOM can't always do that. I can, which is why I sometimes answer these questions in a mock briefing. On Thursday, I focused on a question by New York magazine's Michael Wolff.

Wolff said: "I mean no disrespect by this question, but I want to ask about the value proposition of these briefings. We're no longer being briefed by senior-most officers." The press pool applauded the question, which drew a rapier-quick response from Brooks who said, "I've gotten applause already. That's wonderful. I appreciate that."

Can you believe the audacity of complaining that Brigadier General Brooks isn't good enough for the press? If this had been a reporter from a conservative news source, the press would point out the fact that Brooks just happens to be the only African-American general on the scene. Charges of racism would be made, because this question's underlying meaning is clearly that Brooks can't possibly know anything.

This war is not about Michael Wolff's stupid stories in New York magazine. It's about saving lives, including his. This is not a criticism of General Schwarzkopf, but the leader of this Gulf War, General Tommy Franks, isn't going to be out there talking to these people every day. He's busy picking out targets and protecting our soldiers. By the way, Donald Rumsfeld nominated Brooks for appointment to the rank of brigadier general in June 2002. Just another example - like Colin Powell, Clarence Thomas and Condoleezza Rice - of African-Americans advancing more under GOP administrations than Democratic ones.

[bvw]

Is that the "cardio infarction" ear crease I sees on his ears?

[VMI70]

If I were General Brooks, I would have said the following to Wolff:

Mr. Wolff, sorry you think the information you are receiving here is limited or unsatisfactory. I can fix that for you in one minute. I will give you two choices. Following this briefing, I will have my aide, Lt. Smith, arrange for you to be issued the appropriate gear, and then 1/2 hour from now, you will be helicoptered to join a British SAS recon squad, which is operating a little closer to Baghdad than our front lines. I think you will find plenty to write about up there.

Either that, or Lt. Smith will arrange for your immediate transportation back to New York.

Your choice.

Thank you ladies and gentleman.

[Mike Darancette]

Brooks is starting to grow on me - I thought he was a little stiff at first but now I attribute that to the brass (3 and 4 star generals) that was up there with him those first days.

[TADSLOS]

BG Brooks handles each question with dignity and respect and he is pretty careful about how he phrases his answers. I think that General Franks has relegated him to the task of being in front of the camera because Franks eschews the limelight. That is his option.

Nothing against BG Brooks, but I do believe someone with a persona and bite similar to Rumsfeld or Schwartzkopf would help keep these media jackals in line. I think BG Brooks comes across as soft peddling them too much, even if that's not his intent, that's the perception given IMO. I also think that it may have been a mistake to build a multi-million dollar video complex to begin with. It built unrealistic expectations with the media that they would somehow be getting live feeds and other gee whiz effects on current operations in full scope view several times daily.

Personally, if I were king for a day, I'd pull all the press back, take away all their video and satellite gadgets and put a blackout into effect on current operations. I'd let the embedded reporters stay in place, but limit their reporting to print media that would require days to make it into a magazine or newspaper. I would allow newsreel video footage (they're doing this anyway) to be released as operational security conditions would allow. I would also, pre-screen and edit all media outflowing from theater.

Now, I know that would make many of us on this site lapse into a severe case of breaking war news withdrawal and perhaps force us to go back and re-hash over all that Clinton material we've all bookmarked, but it would go a long way in giving commanders in the field the flexibility they need to conduct war without looking over their shoulder wondering how their actions are going to play on the next segment of cable news. It would also definitely curtail the propoganda sieve and leftist slant that we've been bombarded with. Aside from that, and most importantly, our troops live's are at stake. They deserve prime consideration in this matter, not some jackass whiner bellyaching about how he can't spin a juicy story. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to satisfy my fix by watching the war coverage on Fox.

;~)

[bvw]

Seemed to me that the "applause" was very short-winded, like as the folks clapping and such realized as they started that it was for a fool's folly -- and then sputtered out.

[CARDINALRULES]

Re-airing on C-SPAN now.

I like this guy. ;-`)

[bwteim]

The Brigadier General has more class in his fingernail than the reporter who asked the question.

The General had too much class to use Curly's line in City Slickers to Wolff:
"I crap bigger'n you".

[MIgramma]

It's very seldon that these guy actually ask an intelligent, actual question.
For the most part it sounds like they just end smart-ask remarks with question marks.

[anoldafvet]

Did you also catch the reply when he asked why they couldn't have General Franks? He said it was because he was busy running the war!!! LOL The Clymer didn't even realize he had been dissed big time.

[Beck_isright]

It just shows how easy it is to become a reporter. That question was about so damned stupid it was hilarious. The reporter didn't realize the military translation in the trenches equated to "F.O.". But about a week from now when his dope infested brain comes out of it's fog, the reporter will go "damn, I've been insulted" and write another anti-Bush, anti-war article.

V

[livius]

I know General Brooks has too much class to react in such manner, but God, I'd love to see it just once.

Me too! I've been totally impressed by him. I just can't believe the way these jerk reporters have been acting.

[Revolting cat!]

By the way, the Lehrer guy on PBS and his retired military consultants had nothing but praise (repeated several times,) this evening for General Brooks!

[sibb1213]

We were watching it live this morning and I could not believe it either but General Brooks put him in his
place really fast. It was great!

[Antoninus]

As long as we're mad, why not give this far-left crypto-racist toad a piece of our mind.

michael@burnrate.com

[VMI70]

Does anyone here have any idea how to find out how to get General Brooks's email address?

He needs an attaboy!

[wordsofearnest]

What he meant was "Don't let the door hit you in theass"

[kylaka]

Is his brother still in the service today?

[Jhensy]

Michael Wolff is also the rocket scientist who claimed in an "exclusive" a year-and-a-half ago that the New York Post would soon fold. Instead, it's circulation is rocketing (the highest pct. growth in the country, by far) and is poised to overtake the Daily News for the first time in its long history.

Good call, dumbass. Any other tips?

[dancusa]

Wolfe should be nominated for the Helen Thomas Award.

[swheats]

"sheepherders" with GPS equipment could cause much concern if reporters are anti-war and sympathazers with Saddam.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/877363/posts