posted by Winston Smith at
2:34 PM
Sunday, December 10, 2006
Previous Posts
- Our Ignorant Leaders,or: Agnocracy in Action?Drum...
- Re: The Previous PostStatisticasaurus Rex points m...
- Are We Getting Alarmed Yet?Ah, it's that time of t...
- Dick "Scarface" CheneyThis is pretty damn funny. ...
- "I Love Shoes And The Baby Jesus"That's an actual ...
- TDB: Ned the NeocoservativeOne comic is worth a t...
- The Future of Sexual Consent?I found this to be hi...
- Christianity and Violence: A HistoryDavid Nirenbe...
- The Academy and WarAndrew Delbanco, at TNR. Worth...
- Milgram Didn't Know the Half of ItApparently I am ...
Subscribe to
Posts [Atom]
15 Comments:
What are the odds the AP will give fellow murdering bastard Fidel Castro such a bad review when he finally croaks?
Zilch, I make it. He gave them universal health care.
I'm going to go with 'depressingly low' and hope to be surprised.
Someone save the text and we can compare without the bias of memory.
Personally, I think the AP story bends over backward to provide apologia for Pinochet. I seriously doubt that the story of Castro's overdue death will have as many positive statements as Pinochet's.
May they room together in hell, the better to irritate each other.
Is this crap from the Washington Post what you guys were looking for?
Agree or disagree with the content, can we please at least strike the WaPo from the list of alleged liberal media?
[HT: Atrios]
The WaPo's editorial page is not in question, only the opinion its reporters present as news, and things like doing over 100 stories mentioning George Allen and "macaca."
The op-ed pages are where we expect the bias to be. The WaPo's editorial page is roundly ignored, especially by the left, though, as when it http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/31/AR2006083101460_pf.html> finally got around to calling Joe Wilson the liar that he is.
That belonged in the news section.
Interesting. According to the Wiki (and several other sources I checked)
In August of 1973, a constitutional crisis was clearly in the offing: the Supreme Court publicly complained about the government's inability to enforce the law of the land and on August 22 the Chamber of Deputies (with the Christian Democrats now firmly united with the National Party) accused Allende's government of unconstitutional acts and called on the military ministers to enforce constitutional order.
The AP left that part out. An editing mistake, I'm sure...
Yeah, but they also forgot about his Unitary Executive Theory and signing statements.
The WaPo's editorial page is not in question
Yep, neocon all the way, even now.
Don't forget the moderates! A nice, sensible balance between right-wing extremists and middle-of-the-roaders. Fair and balanced, all the way.
Of course, The WaPo endorsing Gore and Kerry means...why, nothing.
Hmmmm. Turns out Allende seized everything in sight and had run inflation to over 300%. Who knew? Certainly no one who depends on the AP for their news.
The remediation continues. Mine, too, I admit. I admit a weakness for believing what I read in the papers, and worse, thinking they deliver the whole story.
"Hmmmm. Turns out Allende seized everything in sight and had run inflation to over 300%. Who knew? Certainly no one who depends on the AP for their news."
Turns out the Weimar Republic's economic policies were highly unsuccessful as well, with triple digit inflation the norm. So the point is....?
All relevant facts. The point. Not defending Pinochet. Castigating the AP. Allende was no mellow democrat victimized by self-serving reactionary forces.
The failure of Weimar and democracy to defend the Jews is a very heavy topic. Somewhat if not vitally relevant today...
But the real POINT is that Allende was elected, legitimately. And democratic legitimacy and the consent of the governed carry far more weight than the paranoia of right-wingers who deign it appropriate to help undo democracy 8000 miles away. Or military takeovers replete with torture and pushing people from helicopters hundreds of feet above the ocean.
If the Chilean people were unhappy with Allende, they could have voted him out. But the Chicago ideologues decided they would have their Goddamned economic laboratory, consequences be damned. You know, eggs, omelets and all...
Funny thing is, though, despite their experiment with massive privatization and fixed exchange rates, Chile still suffered a massive recession and financial collapse in 1982-1983. And they're still trying to come to grips with the immense problems created by their private accounts pension system.
It was only after the return of democracy in the 90s that poverty began to decrease and an investment-led boom arose.
Bet you didn't read that in the AP either, did you?
As a consumer of the mainstream news media, I was aware of the criticisms of the Chicago economic project. The rest, no. That was my point.
As for the complications of the Allende situation, it was indeed a constitutional crisis, which we are not prepared to intelligently discuss. As for the 8000 miles away part, the readers of the link I provided (and you are apparently not one) gives opinions from both left and right that the US was not a significant factor in the coup.
If you think the US was not a significant factor in the coup, you should try listening to the transcripts of Kissinger talking to Nixon about it. Google is your friend.
And my friend's father, who owned a travel agency, was personally enlisted by the CIA many times to assist with the *operation*.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home