#2 Safire's wrong. At least half-wrong. He absolves the media, but the media did in fact grossly distort the plain meaning of the staff report in relation to administration claims. By choosing, indefensibly, to to interpret "collaborative relationship" to include all contacts and possible cooperation, of whatever kind and supported by whatever level of evidence, and failing to point out that this contradicted not high-profile arguments for the Iraq war but the Tenet letter of Oct. '02, the media committed inexcusable distortion. All of Safire's points are well taken, but they stand IN ADDITION to the observation that the press tried to just make up the story line. Does Safire have to hold his tongue because of his relationships at the NYT? Look at the way he delicately handles the editorial page folks, who have put on one of their greatest displays of arrogant incompetence in this matter, with their ludicrous slander of the administration over justifications for the Iraq war, and demand for "apologies" for same.
He's a master of the language and specifically the column format, but sad to say Safire has dealt HIMSELF a major blow here. Too bad. One less voice to note the emperor's naked condition as the elite press spins off into a more distant orbit of distortion and unreality. |