Remember how I dreamt of more national dialogue on the war from a sane perspective? It seems the Washington Post has the precise opposite hope: They want the antiwar candidates, Ron Paul and Mike Gravel, out of the debates. These debates are “cluttered,” apparently, by too much focus on the evil of US imperialism, which is bankrupting Americans, corrupting our culture, and recruiting more fanatics in anti-American terror groups.
After all, why confuse the American public with off-topic, taboo talk of how the maniacs of the War Party still want to nuke Iran, or talk about how the US shouldn’t be policing the world in the first place? Shouldn’t we instead hear the six or seven respectable candidates from each party, discussing the ins and outs of health care and trade policy that none of them understand, or waxing passionate and empty on who is the real champion of God, country, equality, family, the middle class, safe schools, safe neighborhoods, a clean environment and a strong economy?
Paul and Gravel actually say something important, and thus they are just too fringe. There you have it: The supposedly liberal Washington Post is as much a shill for the establishment, including the warfare state, as any other paper or network. Don’t rock the boat.
Those who know that there’s an alternative to this establishment press, a news source that understands that war should be a mainstream issue, discussed in every debate with more substance than “we should support the troops and win this thing by stopping it from being mismanaged,” can help keep the flame of truth alive by going here.
Thanks to Lew Rockwell for the Wash Post link.