April 11, 2003
It's Clear & Present
I don't like this Limbo rant one bit. If you're not listening, Rush
has spent his show today on a NY TIMES article, by CNN's Eason Jordan, in which he admits to knowledge about the political
reality in Iraq over the past twelve years. We're talking torture,
murder, etc., on a scale that boggled Jordan's mind to a degree that he failed
to tell anyone about it. Okay, Jordan should have, at the least,
kept CNN's on-air talent from being such a Saddam cheerleader. What
a surprise. CNN is doing the same thing in Cuba. They did the
same thing during the Clinton administration. CNN is not a news organization,
it is a leftist activist enabler. Raise your hands if this is news
to you. ... I thought so. But we do not, or should not, invade
countries because they have nasty leadership. And that's not why
we're there now.
We invaded Iraq because ... you know this, so scream it out with me, it presented a clear and present danger to the United States of America (and the rest of the world, for that matter). With this rant - and I know he knows better - Limbaugh seems to give his imprimatur to Clintonian style nation building. Tsk Tsk. |
Rush doesn't always just preach to the choir. He has many liberal and undecided listeners who need to hear this. To ignore such blatant proof of CNN bias would be silly when you are trying to persuade listeners to your viewpoint. Iraq "is a clear and present danger" was the main justification for this war, but, I believe, another was to drive a wedge into the minds of Arabs, held in bondage to their media and their mullas, to allow fresh ideas to creep in. What better way than a show of US military power? a show of a society based in freedom? a modern Arab democracy ran by prosperous Arabs who like the USA? Nation building was not something Bush approved of, but sometimes your viewpoint is changed by events and necessities. Minds are not only changing in the middle east but also at home. You say Dems are liars. I think Rush does what you do-expose the lies. I think your view is that your readers are people who share many of your ideas. Rush is playing for the widest audience he can get, skeptics as well as fans. Such are my disjointed ideas. Thanks for your great blog. I visit every chance I get.
Posted by: Linda on April 11, 2003 03:09 PMI see nothing wrong with Rush pointing out that the Crescent News Network remained in Baghdad despite knowing what that regime was doing, at the expense of saying so to the American people. Not only that, they didn't give their on-air talent a nudge in coverage of the entire Iraq situation, when they knew full well that President Bush was right about the nature of the regime all along. Instead, they continued (and continue) to push the France-Germany-Russia-Amanpour line.
So, what else does CNN know elsewhere in the world where it has a bureau that it feels it needs to keep but would lose if it spills the beans?
Posted by: Skoonj on April 11, 2003 03:51 PMNicely done Linda
Posted by: Rodger Schultz on April 11, 2003 10:14 PM