So, imagine my surprise when I came accross this gem of a transcript. Codeleeza and some dude called Chris Wallace.
Now in another thread we've been arguing about 'quality' of journalism. And someone (cant remember who) asked for a specific instance of inferior journalism.
Heres a fine example.
Quote:
WALLACE: Let's turn to Iraq talking now about rewriting the 2002 congressional authorization for the use of force in Iraq.
Given that our mission there has changed so dramatically over the last four years, don't they have a point?
RICE: We don't need to do anything but to allow the commanders on the ground — General Petraeus, who's gone out there as the new commander — to pursue the course that he and other commanders have put together and have recommended to the president. That's what we need to concentrate on as a country.
I know it's extremely difficult. And yes, as the president has said, we've now overthrown Saddam Hussein. We are in a different situation, even, some would say, a different war. But the consolidation of a stable and democratic Iraq after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein is a part of what America owes to the Iraqi people, owes to the region and owes to ourselves so that our own security is there.
Chris, it would be like saying that after Adolf Hitler was overthrown, we needed to change, then, the resolution that allowed the United States to do that so that we could deal with creating a stable environment in Europe after he was overthrown. It's a part of a continuum of what we're trying to do in Iraq.
Given that our mission there has changed so dramatically over the last four years, don't they have a point?
RICE: We don't need to do anything but to allow the commanders on the ground — General Petraeus, who's gone out there as the new commander — to pursue the course that he and other commanders have put together and have recommended to the president. That's what we need to concentrate on as a country.
I know it's extremely difficult. And yes, as the president has said, we've now overthrown Saddam Hussein. We are in a different situation, even, some would say, a different war. But the consolidation of a stable and democratic Iraq after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein is a part of what America owes to the Iraqi people, owes to the region and owes to ourselves so that our own security is there.
Chris, it would be like saying that after Adolf Hitler was overthrown, we needed to change, then, the resolution that allowed the United States to do that so that we could deal with creating a stable environment in Europe after he was overthrown. It's a part of a continuum of what we're trying to do in Iraq.
Wallace didn't even blink!
Here we have the Secratary of State of the USA comparing the **** and Sadaam Hussein (who was strangely unconnected to the terrorist attacks of 9/11. At least she didn't try to pin Pearl Harbour on Adolf) to WWII and Adolf Hitler.
Did the USA 'overthrow' Adolf Hitler? what 'resolution' to overthrow AH is she on about? I thought ya'll went to 'war' with **** Germany.
WTF is she talking about?
Why the f'ck didn't this Wallace fella say...
"hang on a moment Madame Secratary! Do you know what you are saying. Did you actually study history? or political science? like it says on your resume? Are you trying to compare the 2nd World War with this sordid mess in the ME? Are you saying that, as we occupied Germany after WWII, so we are
in fact, occupying Iraq? In short Madame Secratary, what the f'ck are you talking about?"
Instead, Mr Wallace said
Quote:
WALLACE: Now, Senate Democrats say that they want to modify the authorizing of the U.S. combat role within a year. If that goes through, would the president feel bound by such a measure?
Did he notice? Did he notice, but not care? Did he notice and agree?
Who knows? But if that is supposed to be quality news casting, then I'm against it!
Its not just sh1tty journalism, its dangerously sh1tty journalism.
