Post-Gazette Editorial – 11/10/06

This page was last updated on November 11, 2006.

Fresh perspective: Gates can only do better than Rumsfeld; Editorial; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; November 10, 2006.

Rather than do a point-by-point critique of this editorial, I’ll address only a few paragraphs.

“The Iraq Study Group has been on the job for six months, and it may be the last, best hope for coming up with a reasonable exit strategy from Iraq, where none has previously existed -- that is, none beyond the simplistic and unrealistic notion of ‘staying the course,’ phrasing that even the White House has abandoned.”

[RWC] I checked PG editorial for the last couple of years, and in none of those editorials did the PG define what it means by “exit strategy.” Does anyone care to guess why?

The only time I saw a description of “exit strategy” was in reference to Afghanistan. Lest we forget, back on February 8, 2002, the PG called for us to leave Afghanistan.

In the PG’s mind, we were done in Afghanistan in early 2002. How, then, does the PG justify claiming “Afghanistan remains for the United States the unfinished task it became when the Bush administration decided to attack Iraq.” This quote came from the September 7, 2006, editorial entitled “Losing control / The United States has not subdued Afghanistan.” It never ceases to amaze me what people will say to further an agenda.

“The only odd aspect of this appointment was its timing. By his own account, Mr. Bush had a switch in mind before Tuesday and misled reporters into thinking otherwise because he didn't want to affect the election.

“Too bad. With his lie, the president further eroded his credibility. If he had earlier hinted that accountability is not dead in the White House, some voters might have voted differently.”

[RWC] How stupid does the PG believe we are?

Had President Bush announced the resignation anytime before Election Day, everyone knows folks like the PG would have savaged him for removing Sec. Rumsfeld in an attempt to sway the election.

“If he had earlier hinted that accountability is not dead in the White House?” Who thought it was? In case you didn’t notice, the PG uses “accountability” in this context to mean anyone the PG doesn’t like should be fired.

“With his lie, the president further eroded his credibility?” First, given the timing, everyone – except apparently the PG – realizes why President Bush didn’t disclose his intent two days before an election. Second, since the PG believes everything President Bush says is a lie anyway, how could this “further erode his credibility?”