A Good Weekend For Post Editorials
January 28, 2007 at 2:11 am
Advocates of the worldwide spread of freedom and democratic capitalism are having a good weekend from the normally unlikeliest of sources — the Washington Post editorial page.
Here’s Saturday’s editorial:
At 61, Mr. Ortega may understand something that Mr. Chávez, 52, and his would-be followers have yet to learn: Socialist economics are a recipe for impoverishment, while political power grabs tend to boomerang. The mini-bloc of Latin outliers poses little threat to the United States or the region’s overall stability. But even as their neighbors consolidate democratic institutions and unprecedented prosperity, the people of Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and Cuba may be headed for a miserable year.
And here’s what the editorial page offers Sunday:
The Bush administration’s recent steps against Iran, which have included the dispatch of a second aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf and the arrest of Iranian agents in Iraq, have worried a lot of people in Washington, who fear that the White House may be gearing up for another war. Fortunately, some influential people in Tehran appear to be getting nervous, as well. The stock market is dropping, and capital flight is accelerating. Some influential voices have begun publicly suggesting that flexibility as well as toughness is needed in dealing with the West. Pressure is growing on radical President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has been rebuked by voters in recent elections, by parliamentary resolutions and by editorials in newspapers that reflect the views of the country’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. All this suggests that the U.S. measures, compounded by a U.N. sanctions resolution, may be having an effect on the mullahs.
Even with the predictable qualifiers, these editorials are worthy of posting on freedom-lovers bulletin boards everywhere.
Jack is Back said,
January 28, 2007 @ 10:34 am
Is it April 1st already?
stavr0s said,
January 28, 2007 @ 1:05 pm
The sobering thing about the Washington Post and the New York Times is that they’re mostly read in their respective communities and read for the advertisements and they’re not really read across America. They are lionized by the American media and the foreign media but their opinions don’t mean squat in Omaha, Houston, Tucson, or Nashville. Readers want meaningful local news. I live just outside the beltway, fairly close to the “journalists” at the Washington Post, but they might as will be on Mars for all I care. Media people write for other media people much as women dress for other women.,
Horatio said,
January 28, 2007 @ 1:13 pm
How anyone can write the sentence “Even with the predictable qualifiers, these editorials are worthy of posting on freedom-lovers bulletin boards everywhere,” unironically is beyond me.
ronbo said,
January 28, 2007 @ 5:49 pm
It always bugs me to see the WaPo lumped together with the NYT. The Post has a left-center point of view that usually does not obscure the facts, and usually treats the “other side” with respect. The Times, not so much. The bottom line difference is that the Post ed board seems genuinely to be on the side of freedom, even if there are disagreements as to strategy and tactics. The Times cheers on our enemies, because they’d rather be right than free.
Chris Abraham said,
January 29, 2007 @ 7:54 am
Talking about, “How anyone can write … unironically is beyond me,” I can’t believe that someone can say, “The Times cheers on our enemies, because they’d rather be right than free,” earnestly. What folks who consider the New York Times to be Treasonous need to remember that this is neither Stalinist Russia nor Maoist China… the US is doing its best to be a democracy with a free press. A democracy with a free press, ideally, is always going to make it impossible for the gang in the Pentagon, in Langley, and in the White House. That’s their job, and the New York Times is the world’s best at it. The Post is a “company paper” and is far from world class, much more Yellow Lab than Pit Bull. When the Times stops being perceived as a gadfly by Fascistic enemies of freedom and democracy — the sort of people who say “the Times cheers on our enemies, because they’d rather be right than free” — is the moment when America and Americans will surely lose our freedom.
Andrew Hamilton said,
January 29, 2007 @ 11:09 pm
“A democracy with a free press, ideally, is always going to make it impossible for the gang in the Pentagon, in Langley, and in the White House.”
The “gang” was elected ( and confirmed by other elected officials), and isn’t an “oppressive” group. They have responsibilities they are trying to carry out that relate to their assessment of what’s good for all Americans, not just those who voted for them. The free press isn’t obliged to agree with their assessments, of course, but neither is it obligated to disagree with them. Its basic job is to report the facts, and offer informed commentary on them. The press falls down when it is overly selective with the facts it uses to butress its opinions. I can cite many instances of the Times distorting the facts, both in its news columns and on the editorial page, to make point, and many of these instances are aimed at the Bush administraton. There are fewer instances — but still some — in the Washington Post. One of the more fascinating developments at the Post is the greater respect for facts shown on the editorial pages than in some of the news columns.