The point is that we should neither defer to one man, nor pretend one man (or woman) can be the arbiter of Iraq information. This should be obvious. But in the bizzarro-world of 2007, it isn't. Worse, the media is now so derelict, the government so secretive, that we can hardly get the information we need as citizens in a supposedly free country. Oh, yeh, I forgot in Bushworld being "free" means "free to submit."
Despite our beliefs that we have a free press, we have a history in the US of being spoon fed propaganda, especially, though not exclusively, during this administration. In an effort to deceive us, the government produces propaganda "news" segments aired on (our) airwaves. Dana Perino reaches new heights of spin and renders press conferences a sad joke. (And we thought Ari Fleisher was the master.) Where unfettered, objective information is concerned, we've gone from bad to worse. Caskets cannot be photographed. Reporting the numbers of Iraqi casualties is a no-no. It might upset Americans to know the real parameters of this war. What little bad news (it's "supposed" to be all good) gets through doesn't without the freepers unleashing a torrent of antipathy. They (freepers) want to kill the messenger. Serving as a conduit for news failing to highlight our government favorably sets off a cast of FAUX News malcontents. Wound tighter than a spring, they go from angry to rabid in a millisecond. Don't dare to speak truth to power, or we'll pay, the FAUX brown shirts want us to believe. They'll bully, even stalk, those who say things they don't like. You gotta drink their Kool Aid, or else.
And so, the so-called MSM is only too willing to dummy up and fall in line over the let-General- Petraeus-tell us mantra. Besides, drumbeating war is easier. They can produce that material in the studio. Meanwhile, the enablers of war (and of the so-called "surge"--aka escalation) control much of the feeds, the networks, talk radio, cable news stations, and most of the newspapers.
Given that we've gone from tainted imbed reporting to zero independent media coverage of the Iraq violence, we are in no position to know anything for sure. Since when do we let a president push one top military leader after another into retirement and then expect us to take the word of his final choice? Oh, yeh. Since 2007. This is wrong. It's the principle of the thing.
Forget for the moment whether you admire the general or not. It is not anti-military or anti- Petraues to think Congress's abrogation of duty (let Petraeus decide) is inappropriate and not in the national interest. There is no single person on earth, however he or she is admired, who should be the sole messenger. Not even the much loved, apparently, Petraeus. He cannot be objective. He's only human. Yet we have come to depend on only one man, who needs to please his Commander-in-Chief. It's just rotten policy. We are supposed to have oversight, checks and balances, real media. Look where we are!
It's not just the media. In their deferring to Petraeus, pols of both parties have shamelessly abrogated their responsibilities for information gathering and oversight. They let Bush get away with this unitary conduit for information. Just who is supposed to be in charge of writing law? (Duh!)
We listen to congressional representatives and senators, some of whom (such as Sen. James Webb) we greatly admire and trust, who travel to Iraq. They tell us what they saw. But not all the trips to Iraq by Congress members inform. Many of the would-be travelers saw gilded, guided tours of the Green zone. Remember John McCain? This is no way to run a supposedly free country, purporting to bring freedom to Iraq.
We have landed in uncharted territory before during this administration, but in deferring to the general, we have now embarked on more treacherous terrain. Now we have the following equation: : Bush=the unitary executive=the judiciary=congress=the military=the media=message. That's it. I don't know what you call that, but I call it unconstitutional.
Leaving it to the generals is done in many parts of the world. But there's a word for what those countries are. I don't think that's where Americans want to take themselves and their country. At least, I hope not. Reform the media (and media access): A dis- or uninformed public is every "Decider's" dream.