What about media complicity?
by
argexpat
05/29/2008, 11:53 AM
I like how Dickerson relegates McClellen's equally scathing critique of the "deferential" press corps to a parenthetical aside, and instead focuses on the Bush bashing, which is how the rest of the media is responding, that is when they're not laughably defending themselves for the great job they did.
Here's McClellen on the collapse of the Fourth Estate:
"If anything, the national press corps was probably too deferential to the White House and to the administration in regard to the most important decision facing the nation during my years in Washington, the choice over whether to go to war in Iraq.
The collapse of the administration's rationales for war, which became apparent months after our invasion, should never have come as such a surprise. . . . In this case, the "liberal media" didn't live up to its reputation. If it had, the country would have been better served."
Let's recap: Here you have the press secretary of one of the most secretive and corrupt administrations in history, who's job it is to toe the company lie, complaining that the supposed "liberal media" was too easy on him, and basically let him spread the administration's BS.
Straight from the horse’s mouth. It’s no wonder this isn’t getting much play in the media.