Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Why Did The Washington Post Axe Dan Froomkin and Give Paul Wolfowitz a Column?

Posted by Byard Duncan, AlterNet at 3:36 PM on June 19, 2009.


By eliminating objectivity in the name of objectivity, the Washington Post is shooting itself in the foot.
washingtonpost

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

Just one day after firing Dan Froomkin -- one of only a few voices willing to offer insightful, well-researched criticism of both the Bush and Obama administrations -- the Washington Post did something even more outrageous: It gave Paul Wolfowitz a platform to criticize the president's Iran policy.

Wolfowitz, the former deputy secretary of defense who famously claimed American forces in Iraq would be "welcomed as liberators," urged Obama today to abandon his "almost neutral" approach to Iran in an opinion piece called " 'No Comment' Is Not an Option."

"Coming from America," Wolfowitz writes, "silence is itself a comment -- a comment in support of those holding power and against those protesting the status quo."

Ever eager to disguise his foamy-mouthed imperialism with a candy-coated benevolence, Wolfowitz would be wise to understand the implications of his comments: The assertion that the United States must take a firm stance on the Iran issue carries the paternalistic assumption that the demonstrators somehow "need" our support - that their actions are void without Uncle Sam's wink and thumbs-up. Wolfowitz's position essentially robs Iranians of their agency, and its arrogance reinforces Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's argument that the West is acting behind the scenes.

Wolfowitz also manages some pretty egregious historical blundering. "It would be a cruel irony," he writes, "if, in an effort to avoid imposing democracy, the United States were to tip the scale toward dictators who impose their will on people struggling for freedom." Strange. Isn't that exactly what happened in 1953 when the CIA helped oust a democratically elected leader who wanted to nationalize Iranian oil?

Still, Wolfowitz is only half the problem. What's more disturbing is the Post's erasure of a journalistic voice whose criticisms transcended shallow party affiliations. By axing Froomkin (for dubious reasons), the paper has effectively announced its support for a series of rotten Bush-era policy leftovers. Wolfowitz is simply among the stinkiest of these.

As for Froomkin, he will be fine. The steady failure of the Obama administration to rethink Bush doctrine, coupled with Froomkin's relentless ability to cut through political doublespeak, will make him valuable elsewhere. It's the Post, whose delusions of impartiality are like holes in an already leaky hull, that should be gnawing at its fingernails. By eliminating objectivity in the name of objectivity, it has dealt a serious blow to its own legitimacy.

Digg!

Tagged as: washington post, paul wolfowitz, dan froomkin


Senate Votes to Move Forward on Health-Care Bill: McCain Accuses Reid of Criminal Scheme
In debate leading to vote, McCain compared Reid to Madoff, Hatch invoked socialism, and Lincoln promised trouble ahead
Post by Adele Stan. November 21, 2009.
ACORN: Another Super Villain with Super Powers
For the trembling patriots of the right.
Post by Steve M.. November 21, 2009.
Tiny Michigan Town Tells Liz Cheney to Take her Fearmongering Elsewhere
Someplace where they're all wusses.
Post by BarbinMD. November 21, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
I would have said Codependent rather than Paternalistic
Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com on Jun 19, 2009 9:29 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The assertion that the United States must take a firm stance on the Iran issue carries the paternalistic assumption that the demonstrators somehow "need" our support - that their actions are void without Uncle Sam's wink and thumbs-up.

People in government, the medical field, law enforcement, way too often think they need to make decisions for others for their own good.

In reality they have a desire to be needed and resent the people they try to "take care of" when those people object to their "help".

Codependents will often believe their actions are altruistic in nature (altruism does not exist but that is another discussion).


Obama is taking the right course on this. More than likely we will continue to be dealing with the Khamenei and Ahmadinejad.

The Prime Directive is an important principle, one imperialists, Galactic Empire worshippers, don't respect.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The Prime Directive Posted by: Sister_Lauren
The primary export of the United States is:
Posted by: citizen chump on Jun 20, 2009 1:03 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
well -- military force.

But as discerning observers have observed:
A Democratic administration will go to war despite the rhetoric from the Right. This is why the Right hopes the current administration will fail --- they won't -- for as has been noted in other places such as Truthdigg, what else does the United States have to back up the dollar other than war --- been that way in the current context since 1945, and of course there were earlier contexts/justifications for a dollop of the bellicose -- with a lot of public relations to dress it up --- from Manifest Destiny to Axis of Evil -- it's all
"shoes for industry"
--- A US dollar today is similar to a cupon cut from the Sunday paper -- good only at "participating dealerships" around the globe. At least we know where the Post stands -

---OK -- gotta go, my favorite radio program is on in 15 minutes: Andy Hardy in the 21st Century -- Sponsored by Major General Electric, Lt General Dynamics and Brigadier Emeritus, General Motors. Tonight's episode: Fascist's For Freedom, with guest appearances by Fred von Hayek and Leo Strauss.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nothing Succeeds Like Failure
Posted by: DrBrian on Jun 20, 2009 2:15 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One would think that the neocons would be thoroughly discredited, disgraced and discarded by now. But no, their record of failures and atrocities has so impressed the editors of our leading newspapers and our new administration that their advice is disseminated and followed. Many people crowed after the election that neoconservatism was dead, but it's undead.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Nothing Succeeds Like Failure Posted by: Sister_Lauren
observer
Posted by: davy on Jun 20, 2009 2:32 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And we wonder why newspapers are going under. Talk about recycling yesterdays rubbish. Whom, with any degree of clarity would have any interest in what Paul has to say.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: observer Posted by: Sister_Lauren
Ginning Up the War Machine Again, ah Wolfie?
Posted by: Purple Girl on Jun 20, 2009 5:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Of course the War mongers want Pres Obama to 'come out strong and denounce the Iranian leadership'- They have been trying to get a war going with Iran for Decades, and they don't give a shit how it starts.
These are the same people who painted All Iranians as Terrorist, never admitted there was a Liberal or even Moderate faction in Iran. They proclaimed that all Iranians were supportive of the 'destroy Israel' doctrine and training the insurgence in Iraq.Why do you think McCain had no qualms about singing 'bomb,bomb bomb Iran'- many of those people in the streets Now would have been bombed Too!
The rightwingers WANT a Civil War, so then they can finally get their foot in that Oil rich nations door- "We're off to Free and Liberate the People"..sound familiar?
If ever there was clear Evidence the Right wing Work exclusively for the MIlitary Industrial Complex it is found in their new 'empathies' and 'compassion' for the Protesters. These Rightwingers have been chomping at the bit to find ANY reason to ginn up the War machine, and it's not to protect the Rights of protesters, or even Israel...It's for the Oil Corps and the War profiteers.
The Rightwing's newfound Championist attitude towards the people of Iran is as disingenous as Rush's new found sympathies for the Young Sudanese Black "Kids" who stormed the Cargo ship. Please!
Let's not forget Mr Wolfies Career- both in Military Postions (deputy Sec of Defense,et al) and Finance (Pres of the World Bank)- the Two Pillars of the MIC. The #3 Current 'Godfather' of the organized Crime Syndicate called the MIC which has been carrying out War crimes, Crimes against Humantiy and Treason for Decades. Looking to put another Shah on the throne Boys?
By the Way did the Iranian Gov't involve itself in our Election controvesy in '00?
Nope because it was an American issue, not an Iranian issue- We should extend them the same respect and courtesy. Let's be Honest these same Rigthwingers are the same ones who supported (and worked for) the illegal election of Bush in '00 and would have been screaming blood murder if Iran dared utter a decenting credo.
I admire the Iranian people for taking to the Streets to protest their Fraudulant Election- It would have behooved US to have done the same in '00.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Where is Einstein
Posted by: sawdust on Jun 20, 2009 5:46 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When we need him? Everything is relative and today's dilemma is which entity rates higher in stupidity and a lack of common sense, the dim-wit newspaper or Wolfie?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yes The Very Thing To Kill
Posted by: JSquercia on Jun 20, 2009 9:54 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes Wolfie the absolutely perfect thing to KILL the reform movement HAVE the US Back them
and IMMEDIATELY prove Khamenie and Ahmadinejad RIGHT .
The Iranians do not want us messing in their Internal Affairs and nothing could cause more HARM than support for the Demonstrators .
The man is despicable after his disastrous talk about being greeted as liberators he also
showed his total lack of concern for the troops when he was unable to tell Congress how many Americans were killed in Iran . He couldn't be concerned with things like that

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

swof
Posted by: on Jun 20, 2009 10:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Objectivity?
Oh, right.
Asking that of The Post is quite like
asking FOX to fairly repair their "balance" scales & quickly
turn O'Reilly into the nearest Snakepit
and/or Soft Room.
Ain't gonna happen.
However, the image of Paul W. spitting on his
pocket comb to adjust his pompador will
always endear him to me.
Will these Birds ever disappear, or maybe
just go into hiding?
Whew. And: Gak.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

'POLITICAL CRIMINALS COMMENT/OPINION" Section and DISCLAIMER
Posted by: AlwaysAskWhy on Jun 20, 2009 12:25 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"WHY?" Obviously, for the same reasons the NY TIMES gave Karl Rove a voice and platform... because their editors/owners are either idiots, cowards, corrupt or bought out..(all in the same category). Why else would these publications allow people like Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld or Dick Cheney to be treated as if they have some sort of moral, political or legal status? - or that they have something valid or important to say, albeit for submissions to the Department of Justice??

If they really feel they need to give these crooks/murderers/liars/thieves a page to vent their insanity, then the The NY Times and the Washington Post should create a 'POLITICAL CRIMINALS COMMENT/OPINION" Section, where they could print the insane fantasies, lamentations and ego maniacal mental masturbation of DICK CHENEY, George W. Bush, Karl Rove, Alberto Gonzales, Paul Wolfowitz, Ollie North, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleeza Rice, Richard Meyers, William Kristol, Jeb Bush, Richard Pearle, Ken Blackwell, Katherine Harris, etc.

AT THE VERY LEAST: To be fair to the reader, and adhering to the highest journalistic standards of investigative truth/facts, these people's writings should also include a "DISCLAIMER" that (author's name)is a member of, architect of, involvement with, has been suspected of, under investigation for, subpoenaed, indicted, or convicted of (whatever). At least that should make it more clear to the reader, huh?

Karl Rove's 'disclaimer' would be as long as anything he would write!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

andyi99
Posted by: andyi99 on Jun 20, 2009 12:59 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Along with Dan Froomkin went my last reason to read the WP...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wolfowitz should be in jail...
Posted by: jimmyaj on Jun 20, 2009 1:26 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
along with all the other bush criminals who should be in jail.

WaPo started making a "right turn" a year or so ago and maybe that's why I quit reading it. Froomkin was one of the few writers it really had going for it. Reminds me of the day the LA Times dumped Robert Sheer. They just dropped themselves a peg

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Is Wolfowitz
Posted by: Aquinas on Jun 20, 2009 5:38 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Spanish or Scandinavian?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The GOP can never learn to shut its mouth
Posted by: drfun on Jun 20, 2009 7:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
when it comes to what the USA has done in Iran in the past. Seems they can't recall, just like their demi-god wife and political party swapping Ronald Reagan.

So Paul, just how much do you think an Iranian occupation would cost? This mentally challenged dipstick seems to forget how much he underestimated the illegal foray into Iraq would cost. But $'s never matter to these crooks who see their pockets lined from the unaccounted for billions of $'s of the wasted trillions already blown. No pun intended

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wolfie must be flying high!
Posted by: Quannah on Jun 21, 2009 10:34 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
WaPo gives him an outlet to spew his hateful anti-Iranian, Zionist sabre-rattling! "War! We Want War!" That will be coming soon. But in the meantime, Wolfie doesn't "support the demonstrators." He may be a lot of things, but stupid isn't one of them. He knows the "opposition" in Iran is part of the theocratic structure, just a different wing. He certainly wouldn't be saying this had Ahmadinejad lost the election and the opposition was declared the victors! He would be warning of the DANGERS of the "new regime," and he would simply be sabre-rattling against them.

Just another case of feigned indignation for a "lack of democracy." It's all the same old bullshit from Wolfie. Regardless of who is in power in Iran, Wolfie would support war with them. Because that's what Israel wants.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Giving Wolfowitz a soap-box is down right scary.
Posted by: saywhat on Jun 22, 2009 10:46 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
WaPo is scary. Glad I stopped reading the Post.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

disturbing news...
Posted by: Bearzerker on Jun 22, 2009 2:42 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
coming from a one time respected news source...

how far the mighty have fallen...
or maybe its their readers and subscriber base?

an out of work neo-con criminal back to commenting on how a real government works?...

this is a bad idea wapo...
your readership IQ just fell another 2 points on this as did your subscriber base

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]