When I was at MoveOn, media reform was one of my main issues. I had substantial dialogues with the folks at ABC's This Week about the right-wing skew of some of their Sunday roundtables.
To his credit, George Stephanopoulous had Paul Krugman on the roundtable this weekend to discuss the economy. If you want a treat, watch this 5 minute segment from the show. As you watch, ask yourself, "What would this segment be like if Krugman wasn't there?"
Aside from Krugman, what other progressive voices are "ready for prime time" and should be on Sunday roundtables? (I nominate David Sirota, Cenk Uyger, Christy Harvey, and Ari Melber, to name a few...your turn. Include YouTube links if you have them.)
Thanks to those who read and contributed to this morning's liveblogging of ABC's This Week - where George Stephanopoulos interviewed John McCain, and then a ridiculous roundtable discussion ensued.
Below are 3 top outrages from the show - from YouTube (the third one's my favorite). If you want to hold ABC accountable, please sign MoveOn's petition to ABC here. Over a quarter million have signed so far, and the final number will be in an ad this week...so if you've already signed, tell a friend.
Straight Talking McCain on Hagee (and Jews and gays)
McCain on Iraq: "Eliminate" Casualties or "Keep Them Down"?
This is a Catch 22 for McCain, which reporters should ask about. If his standard for staying in Iraq for 100 years is to "keep casualties down" during those years, that's still a whole lot of casualties. If his condition for staying 100 years is zero violence, how many years is he willing to stay in Iraq before achieving zero violence? (100 years?)
Since Cokie Roberts brought it up, I've always wondered what, exactly, there is for us to "win" in Iraq. Seriously-what is our national Iraq prize? It is not even clear to me what those people who cheerlead for the war are seeking for us to win. I know the permanent bases in southern Iraq serve numerous purposes for the architects of the war (influence over southern oil fields, a forward position against Iraq, redeploying out of Saudi Arabia, control over a puppet Iraqi government), and were actually listed as the rationale for war in a September 2000 Bush campaign document. However, no one ever publicly defends the war on those grounds.
Is our national prize for "winning" the Iraq war a free and stable Iraq? Really? That's what we have to gain from all this? That is why we severely damaged our economy, our reputation in the world, why 5% of all Iraqis are dead and another 16% are refugees, and why over 5,000 Americas are dead? There aren't many Americans who think that this is worth that. When CBS and CNN polled that exact question in March, only 29% and 36% of the country thought the costs of the war were worth the results so far.
It is all well and good to say that the American people want to win. After all, in general, people want to win things, at least as opposed to losing things. However, no one wants to win regardless of the cost, and Americans decided a long time ago that whatever "victory" in Iraq might look like, it was not been worth what has happened there. When people decide that "victory" isn't worth the cost, they want a way to end the entire project, and that is what the Responsible Plan offers.
