[Peace-discuss] Lies of liberal pundits

[C. G. Estabrook]

	Cokie Roberts speaks out on the war on behalf of the American people

The single most dishonest and propagandistic tactic of establishment journalists 
is to take their own opinion and assert as a fact that "most Americans" agree 
with them, even when that assertion is indisputably false. David Brooks is 
probably the single most frequent purveryor of this deceit, but the bulk of 
establishment pundits regularly deploy the same method -- simultaneously holding 
themselves out as Spokesmen for the Regular People while showing complete 
contempt for what they actually think by lying about their views.

Yesterday, Cokie Roberts -- while expressing scorn for the "Responsible Plan for 
Withdrawal" advocated by 42 Democratic Congressional candidates and numerous 
military experts, and described by fellow panelist Katerina Vanden Heuvel of The 
Nation -- said this:

VANDEN HEUVEL: It is not, but you know what, the responsible thing to do is 
withdraw.
[you hear Cokie odiously chuckling at this point]
VANDEN HEUVEL: If we withdraw responsibly, the region would be more stable in 
the long term, America will be restored as a responsible global leader, and 
there are 42 challengers, you are absolutely right Cokie, who have a responsible 
plan to withdraw.
ROBERTS: Convincing the electorate of that I think would be very difficult, and 
I also agree that the notion that Sen. McCain and Sen. Graham you heard this 
morning putting forward, that Americans would prefer to win, is--
VANDEN HEUVEL: But what is winning? This war is unwinnable, there are no 
military solutions.

The video is also here. Roberts' claim -- that Americans agree with McCain, 
Graham and her that withdrawal is a bad idea and that they want to stay until we 
win -- is just a lie. There's no other way to put that. Poll after poll after 
poll demonstrates that exactly the opposite is true. It's fine for Roberts to 
say that McCain is right and that we should stay in Iraq indefinitely and 
continue to occupy that country until we "win." That's an opinion. But to claim 
that public opinion is consistent with that view is just false.

Is there any limit on the willingness of establishment spokespeople like Cokie 
Roberts to lie about the state of public opinion on the war? How much more 
conclusively can their dishonesty be demonstrated? Here is a post I wrote just a 
couple of weeks ago documenting how false the claim is, after The Politico 
announced that the Iraq War was going to be a great asset for McCain because 
Americans are starting to love the war again. Just compare the statement Cokie 
Roberts has the audacity to make with a straight face to all of that, or to this:

 From USA Today/Gallup over the past six months or so:


And from the latest CNN poll in mid-March:


Compare what Roberts said to these facts. What she did is just outright lying. 
It would be no different than if these journalists went on TV and insisted that 
most Americans approve of the job Bush is doing, or that they don't want health 
care reform, or that they want to attack Iran, or that they favored Clinton's 
impeachment. Public opinion is ascertainable by polling data.

Public opinion on the question of whether we should withdraw from Iraq is 
unambiguous and it has been for a long time. Large majorities of the public 
favor withdrawal regardless of whether we're "winning." To say otherwise -- as 
establishment journalists like Roberts continuously do -- is just rank deceit. 
How else can one phrase that? And why shouldn't ABC News make that clear, 
retract that statement the way they would any other factually false claim made 
by one of their journalists?

What these journalists actually do -- as they prance around as Spokespeople for 
the Regular Americans -- is attempt to render public opinion completely 
inconsequential. When it comports with what the political establishment wants, 
they tout it as democracy in action, as the establishment speaking for The 
American People. When public opinion rejects what they're doing, they just lie 
about it and pretend that people agree with them. The more honest establishment 
mavens just ignore public opinion altogether and insist that they know what's 
best for the People.

The snide dismissal of public opinion as irrelevant by people like The 
Washington Post's Shailagh Murray -- and most recently by Dick Cheney -- is far 
preferable to the dishonest distortions of Cokie Roberts:

WASHINGTON, D.C.: I am somewhat surprised at the debate about the surge. In 
October, The Post's own polling showed that 19% of voters favored an immediate 
withdrawal. Yesterday, CNN reported that more than 50% want an immediate or by 
year's end withdrawal. Still, the politicians debate more or less, not sooner or 
later. Why won't the politicians follow the polls when it comes to leaving Iraq?

SHAILAGH MURRAY: Would you want a department store manager or orthodontist 
running the Pentagon? I don't think so. . . . A withdrawal by year's end carries 
enormous, very serious implications.

At least they're honest enough to admit that most Americans disagree with them, 
but since most Americans are too stupid and unserious to understand how Serious 
withdrawal would be, it's necessary that they be ignored. That's the same thing 
people like Cokie Roberts, David Brooks and most of their establishment comrades 
believe, but they prefer to lie about public opinion rather than admit that they 
think it's irrelevant.

--Glenn Greenwald
MONDAY APRIL 7, 2008 07:49 EDT

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/04/07/roberts/index.html