Monday, May 15, 2006

Generals

Generals have been in the news lately. I love the contrasting news coverage.

Six retired generals criticize Secretary Rumsfeld and the press fawns over them. I guess I should see it as positive that some in the press now have respect for the viewpoints of military officers! What is amazing to me, however, is that no one has stopped to think about what the press seems to be wanting--our military brass to challenge the civilian leadership. Is there anyone with more than half a brain who really wants that? Isn't there a reason those smart guys in knickers and white wigs made the military subordinate to civilian control?

Then we have the air force general who's been nominated to head the CIA. Oh, we can't have that! He's military!

Consistency has never been a strong suit of the left.

3 comments:

EllenK said...

I think more than that they are mad that he's the former head of NSA. Which means that unlike the political appointees that have filled the CIA spot since the Clinton years, he would actually KNOW what he was doing BEFORE he walks in the door. As compromised as our intelligence has been through the bumbling of self-righteous idealogues, it would be a breath of fresh air to have someone who could not only order a covert operation, but run it as well.

Anonymous said...

Dog bites man. Not a story.
Man bites dog. Now there you have something.

Generals follow orders. Yawn, nothing to report.
Generals speak out. Whoa, stop the presses.

What part of that don't you understand? Why is that indicative of some sort of conspiracy or bias? Simple calculation as to what's a story and what isn't.

Ciao,
Damiano

Darren said...

I understand the news component of man bites dog. What I don't understand is the left's inconsistency and idiocy on the issue.

Actually, I do understand it. Anything that makes this President or this country look bad will be fawned over by the left. When considered in those terms, it's very clear. I just don't like it.