O. C. Register on Al Qaeda in Iraq

The O. C. Register agrees with the LAT concerning Bush's comments on Al Qaeda in Iraq. The OCR calls Bush's comments dishonest, which arguably is stronger than the LAT's "tendentious trope," but not as cute.

The OCR argues that Bush has offered no evidence for his argument that if the U.S. leaves Iraq too soon, Al Qaeda in Iraq will have the kind of safe haven that the Taliban had in Afghanistan. But how much evidence is needed to make this argument stick? It seems obvious that a principal aim of Al Qaeda in Iraq is to force out the coalition and take control of Iraq, else why are they killing people? Once they take control, they will be Iraq's government and will have as much power as Saddam Hussein had before the invasion.

The OCR argues that the only argument for staying much longer that has a "shred of intellectual respectability" is that the invasion and subsequent mismanagement "unleashed such dangerous and violent forces that" the U.S. has "a moral responsibility to try to calm things down to a stable situation before" leaving.

That's Colin Powell's "you broke it, you fix it" argument and it requires a narrow understanding and interpretation of U.S. responsibilities in the world, besides which it's focused on the past. It assumes that the U.S. was guilty of wrong doing in getting rid of Saddam Hussein and therefore must do penance. If there was no wrong doing and no guilt and therefore there is no penance then what are the responsibilities of the world's most powerful nation? Apparently, the OCR believes we have none.

The LAT covers the Tour

The LAT's coverage of the Tour de France today consists mostly of stories about doping, some going back a couple of years or more. Apparently, the LAT thinks readers aren't interested in the Tour, only in the doping. Or perhaps they figured that anyone interested in the Tour would have already gotten whatever news they wanted from the terrific TV coverage of the event on Versus.

LAT on Al Qaeda

The LAT, in an editorial today, calls President Bush's message on Al Qaeda "tendentious trope." "Don't believe Bush, believe us," is the editorial's message. Jihadist are like cockroaches, the LAT argues. Killing a few hundred or a few thousand won't matter. Until an American president focuses on the root causes of jihadism and removes them, nothing will change. Until then, we may as well give up, the LAT seems to say.

Iraq's Interior Ministry

The LAT's Ned Parker reports today on the front page that Iraq's Interior Ministry is a mess, made up of conflicting political groups who often settle differences by killing each other. Perhaps, but Parker gives few clues about how he knows this. He repeatedly cites Iraqi and American officials for his story but he doesn't name them or otherwise identify them. He does name two sources whom he quotes but the vast majority of references to sources refer to people who may or may not exist.

Swimming in Baghdad

Inside the LAT today is an article by female reporter Molly Hennessy-Fiske about taking a swim in a women-and-children-only pool in Baghdad. It's well written and interesting and shouldn't be missed.

Doyle McManus and News Analysis

Today's LAT has a piece on the front page by Doyle McManus labeled "News Analysis." The point of the piece is (blank), its based on (blank) and it contains the following new information: (blank). Fill in the blanks. As a suggestion, try "unknown," "unknown" and "none."

McManus included a few quotes, which is better than not including quotes. He said "polls show" without identifying which polls he had in mind. He painted Republicans as lost or losers and Democrats as plausible winners and right on most issues.

McManus and the LAT need to do better. Being in the news business implies you have a duty to report the news -- unbiased and objectively.

The outcast tax

The LAT argues today in an editorial that a 61 cent increase in the federal excise tax on cigarettes won't finance the increased costs in the SCHIP program for long because it will discourage people from smoking. The LAT suggests that once that happens Congress should come up with a fat tax, then a lawyer tax. Pretty funny, but why not a tax on dumb editorials?