This is from yesterday's Washington Post editorial:

The Iraqi Upturn
Don't look now, but the U.S.-backed government and army may be winning the war.

Sunday, June 1, 2008; Page B06

THERE'S BEEN a relative lull in news coverage and debate about Iraq in recent weeks -- which is odd, because May could turn out to have been one of the most important months of the war. While Washington's attention has been fixed elsewhere, military analysts have watched with astonishment as the Iraqi government and army have gained control for the first time of the port city of Basra and the sprawling Baghdad neighborhood of Sadr City, routing the Shiite militias that have ruled them for years and sending key militants scurrying to Iran. At the same time, Iraqi and U.S. forces have pushed forward with a long-promised offensive in Mosul, the last urban refuge of al-Qaeda. So many of its leaders have now been captured or killed that U.S. Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker, renowned for his cautious assessments, said that the terrorists have "never been closer to defeat than they are now."

How odd that Washington Post editorial writers say the lull in news coverage is odd.  Good news from Iraq does not help their party of preference, therefore they don't report it.  Nothing odd about that.  Maybe a generation ago that might be considered odd -- or perhaps recognized as the unethical practice that it is.  But today we are blessed with higher truths, divined and published as news by the likes of the Washington Post and the New York Times.  Victory in Iraq is not one of those higher truths, certainly not after the Democratic party leadership has already proclaimed defeat. 

Events on the ground have become most inconvenient.  The Post now finds itself advising Washington Post Democratic candidate of choice, Barack Obama:

If the positive trends continue, proponents of withdrawing most U.S. troops, such as Mr. Obama, might be able to responsibly carry out further pullouts next year. Still, the likely Democratic nominee needs a plan for Iraq based on sustaining an improving situation, rather than abandoning a failed enterprise. That will mean tying withdrawals to the evolution of the Iraqi army and government, rather than an arbitrary timetable; Iraq's 2009 elections will be crucial. It also should mean providing enough troops and air power to continue backing up Iraqi army operations such as those in Basra and Sadr City. When Mr. Obama floated his strategy for Iraq last year, the United States appeared doomed to defeat. Now he needs a plan for success.

Odd that it doesn't occur to anybody at the Post to say, "Gee whiz, Obama had it all wrong.  Can we trust his judgment?"  No.  There is a higher truth involved here.  No matter how much it vacillates, Democratic judgment is always correct in the Post world view.

One Response to “News worthy of front page coverage — on B06”

1. JVStrangle on June 2nd, 2008 10:30 am

   I learned not to ever expect too much from the MSM.

Leave a Reply