To be blunt, this is not news. And to be diplomatic, the resulting allegations of shifting goalposts don't just approach ridiculous - they careen wildly towards ridiculous, crash through the roadblock and then its on to Mexico and freedom, sweet freedom!
Arianna Huffington had this to say:
"Now the surge was apparently implemented so "American officials" could focus on "pragmatic goals like helping the Iraqi government spend the money in its budget."
"That's right: our new definition of success in Iraq is helping the Iraqi government spend money."
Interesting evaluation, considering that Iraqi budget matters in general have been regarded as a benchmark since January 2007, and originated from al-Maliki's comments, not the Bush Administration. The proof is in the GAO Benchmark report, page 5 in the required reading section (which has been updated to the PDF version). If this is news to Arianna, she's been living in a hole for the past 11 months. And if she really believes that a budget isn't political, that hole must have been abnormally well insulated for her to not hear this:
"Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, said this week that if Congress cannot pass legislation that ties war money to troop withdrawals, they would not send Bush a bill this year."
On a more minor note, Arianna also misses this part of the article, but then I'm not sure how she can allege bar-lowering if she acknowledges it:
"Bush administration officials have not abandoned their larger goals and emphasize the importance of reaching them eventually. They say that even modest steps, taken soon, could set the stage for more progress, in the same manner that this year’s troop “surge” opened the way, unexpectedly, for drawing Sunni tribesmen to the American side."
Also at HuffPo is Ilan Goldberg, selectively parroting things that sound bad at a glance but then turn out to be good if considered critically, like this:
"...and passing legislation to allow thousands of Baath Party members from Saddam Hussein's era to rejoin the government. A senior Bush administration official described that goal as largely symbolic since rehirings have been quietly taking place already."
First, that's not news. Legislation on Baath reconciliation has been a benchmark since June of 2006; this isn't a new focus. This is also on page 5 of the GAO report already mentioned. Second, the fact that these rehirings have been occuring ahead of legislation is evidence of reconciliation efforts happening faster at the ground level than at the political level. This isn't uncommon at all (see the gay rights movement for a domestic reference), and it also happens to be a good thing. Put it this way; in 1954, what would have been better? Legislation forcing schools to integrate, or the people just doing it themselves long before the government got around to telling them to?
Adding to the asininity of the situation is the fact that the GAO report I've cited was championed very loudly by the left back in September when it was announced that only three of the eighteen benchmarks had been completed. Apparently in September, these benchmarks were very important to them and they were angry that only three had been completed. Now, those same benchmarks mean nothing to them. Suddenly, I'm reminded of raquetball again.
Not to get too preachy, but this is exactly this type of journalism that turns people away from intelligent debate and hinders progress as a result. Intentional dishonesty and such transparent game-playing are some of the more major reasons behind the polarization of American society, and part of the reason why self-righteous snark has replaced open discussion.
No comments:
Post a Comment