More reporter-bashing from Charles Johnson
OK, no more LGF for me. He’s bad enough to make the liberal label for warbloggers – “the 101st fighting keyboarders” – sound way too charitable.
To these people, the death of Yasser Arafat was more important than the death of Ronald Reagan
Of course it was. Reagan’s obituaries had been typed up in 1994, when he announced his illness and left public life. When I got to USA Today, I stumbled across the dummy front page for Reagan’s death – “40th President dead at 89.”
By contrast, Yasser Arafat was a key – perhaps the key – figure in one of the most pressing issues of our time. He was the leader of the Palestinian authority. The would-be peacemakers, Bush and Sharon, were prevented from making peace until the guy was dead or desposed. There was an immediate and momentous effect from his death. There was not for Reagan. He had been effectively dead for years, as even National Review said in its editorial.
Then there’s this shit, about Abu Ghraib.
“the scandal fueled anti-American sentiment in the Muslim world.” Indeed it did. Mission accomplished, AP.
Funny. This is the same Charles Johnson who only yesterday posted in shock! horror! about Daily Kos, when that blogger apparently blamed Bush for the Mosul bombing. He should have blamed the perpetrators, Johnson implied. So does he blame the perpretators for Abu Ghraib? No – he shoots the messenger.
Intellectual consistency aside, the idea that the AP was responsible for hyping Abu Ghraib in the Arab world is fucking lunatic. They have this thing called Al Jazeera, I hear.
Ah, well. Johnson’s an idiot. I’m done with him.