Richard Cohen: Patron Saint of Oxymorons Quick, call Dictionary911

[paineinthearse]

08.05.2005 Larisa Alexandrovna

Richard Cohen: Patron Saint of Oxymorons
Quick, call Dictionary911:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/archive/larisa-alexandrovna/richard-cohen-patron-sai_5197.html



Richard Cohen, liberal-label approved NeoCon crony over at the Washington Post, bent backwards and did a Heimlich-maneuver on himself in order to cough up his latest little gem, aimed at me:

"A somewhat typical blast at Miller comes from someone named Larisa Alexandrovna writing in Arianna Huffington's blog...She then proceeds to fatally oxymoronize herself."
You know, this flaccid attempt at clever wordplay is one thing, but why the attitude dear Richard?

Why all the fuss over a "someone named"? Clearly, not having written for the Washington Post my personhood is irrelevant, and yet there it is, a whole column devoted to someone like me, that "someone"/ woman even, writing over at that other woman's blog. Those liberal women, damn them!

Try using Google, Richard. Blogging at Huff is where I muse, not my day job, although I would blog all day if I could. Loads of fun, really.

So did I hit a nerve with our dear Richard? Or is it that Cohen ran out of ammunition and targets after having so soiled the nice clean sheets of WaPo in defense of his admin pals?

Maybe Cohen ran out of ways to use the term "baseless," having over-used it against Gary Webb, Cohen now conjugates and declines like a pro acrobat, worthy of Cirque de Soleil. Yes, the oxymoronic are afoot.

it gets even better..................

[rwenos]

1. Consider it a Compliment

As a blogger normal-human, you have been brushed with a faint breeze from Mount Olympus.

I'm still chuckling myself about a letter I once got into Salon, sticking a pin into David Horowitz. He responded too, by saying "I don't know what she's talking about." (I'm a guy.)

[lala_rawraw]

2. I think I kicked his ass, darn it:) And I hate that photo

Damn them, bucket head.

[Jack Rabbit]

4. You kicked his ass

And you really ought to give Arianna a better photo.

[Jack Rabbit]

3. I still have mixed feelings about this

I would have more definite ideas if I knew more facts.

First or all, while I am not a journalist, I think Judith Miller's reporting on this story amounts to journalistic malpractice. Correct me if I'm wrong, but as I understand it, she got her information from Ahmed Chalabi and then went to some still-unknown neocon hack at the Pentagon to confirm them. Did her Pentagon source also know that all Chalabi told her was a fact because Chalabi told him the same thing? That doesn't sound like independent verification to me. Of course, we wouldn't have noticed if US troops had gone up the Tigris and Euphrates and found nuclear weapons under construction, but no such thing was found. (You know what, Judy: you were proved fucking wrong. That's what happened. People who disagreed with you were saying, "There she goes again," and they were right and you were proved fucking wrong.)

There are two questions. One is whether Ms. Miller made innocent mistakes (we all make those) or whether she was pushing an agenda that involved plunging this nation into an unnecessary war based on pre-fabricated lies. It's hard to call Ms. Miller's mistakes innocent. First, there is this little matter of using sources who weren't really independent. Then there is also the fact that Ms. Miller continued to present evidence of Saddam's WMD after the invasion in the form of mobile weapons labs that weren't. In addition, she has a very long and poor track record of being overly credulous when presented government information that, it turns out, is disinformation to cover nefarious foreign intrigue; she allowed herself to be used in such a way by Admiral Poindexter and the Reagan White House against Colonel Qaddafi in 1986. Of course, if there is any direct evidence that she was pushing a war with false reporting, then not only should she be dismissed from her position at The New York Times, but she should be hauled before an international war crimes tribunal along with Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney and several of their senior advisers. Nevertheless, it is difficult not to give Ms. Miller the benefit of doubt and assume she is just a naive waif slow to learn her lessons while accumulating Pulitzer Prizes.

The second question is: What does a journalist owe to a source who uses her to plant disinformation and ends up putting a lot of egg on her face? Confidentiality? I'm not talking about a source who gives a reporter erroneous information in good faith, but one who uses the reporter to plant information he knows is not true.

Whether Judy Miller is a naive and sloppy reporter far overrated in her abilities or a deceitful, nefarious propagandist serving the neoconservative cause, she has allowed herself to be used over and over again to enable those in power to spread willful lies and advance agendas that needlessly get innocent people killed. That is enough to give one pause before embracing her as a martyr to the cause of a free press.

[brainshrub]

5. Hmmm

interesting.:smoke: :spray: