Readers Comment

Right about now the editors at the Washington Post must be wondering why the hell they ever decided to have blogs on their site. This blog post regarding the NBC news clip I linked to below is taking the beating of all beatings in its comments section. I mean it just goes on and on. And some of the comments are classic.

I got about a quarter of the way through and hadn't read a supportive thought by anyone. And now other bloggers are stepping in. Here are posts from Powerline and Blackfive.

I'm sure the Washington Post blogger, William Arkin, was just letting loose with things that he says to his fellow journalists every day. But it must be quite a shock for him to see how reviled these kinds of feelings are.

He may just put it off to a bunch of rubes out in the hinterland. But I think that would be distinctly unwise. The rubes all have DSL connections now and can do some damage (ask Eason Jordan).

And one other thought. This guy Arkin is a terrible writer. Some of his thoughts don't even really make sense. I thought one of the key skills of journalism was the ability to write. Apparently not.

Update: Best comment so far...

The opinions of an overachieving third rate mind are uniquely grostesque. Thanks for the illustration.

2 comments:

Terry

2:34 PM

Wow. There must be hundreds of comments there.

I've often thought it was a tough rhetorical dance to say you support the troops but not their mission. So I guess since I don't support the war, my support for the troops is lacking. I'll have to live with that.

But that having been said, Arkin's post is indeed emblematic of the kind of elitist, sneering liberals who purport to be for the little guy but who can barely disguise their contempt for them (can you say Wal-Mart?).

Arkin deserves the treatment he is receiving.

Jake

3:44 PM

As long as you don't wish the troops poor health, I don't see anything wrong with not supporting their efforts if you don't support their mission. The hypocrisy is in claiming to support their efforts while not supporting their mission. It just doesn't work.

I'd add that that the political problem for the left is that they know that the military is very popular across the country, and are trying to walk a kind of rhetorical tight rope. It's pretty obvious their political calculation doesn't work with the troops and I suspect it doesn't work with most Americans.

I heard a radio interview with Arkin and although he is a contemptible ass, he did say one thing that doesn't get enough attention. And that is that the senior military leadership hasn't taken enough responsibility for various shortcomings in this effort, including demanding more troops from Rumsfeld earlier on. A lot of the generals have simply let the failures of the mission get played out in the political and public sphere, when a good deal more action should have been forthcoming from their side of things.