I reviewed an article featured in the Wall Street Journal by Eliot A. Cohen. I read the article in the Dallas morning News http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/. The article is about the recent discovery of a hidden nuclear processing facility in Iran. The author is a counselor for the U.S. State Department and has immense credibility because the topic that he wrote about is an area directly related to his work at the State Department. This type of editorial carries a lot more weight than from a weekly columnist from employed by the paper itself.

Cohen’s audience is a substantial portion of this country. It includes the men and women currently enlisted in the armed forces, the family members of those serving, taxpayers, and basically anyone who owns a car, motorcycle or uses public transportation. There. I just covered every person currently residing in this country and includes those crossing into our borders as I write. For those of you who have never considered this, the United States is not very concerned about real democracy in the Middle East and never has been. However, because the Good Lord likes to make things interesting, he decided to place the bulk of the world’s oil supply underneath the most barbaric, uncivilized countries that have been at war with each other ever since they have been able to pick up stones and rocks and throw them at each other. Oil is very important to this country because we are dependent on it for just about everything.

Cohen’s declaration is this: Force economic sanctions or military force against Iran. Cohen actually breaks down both options. He declares that economic sanctions won’t work because that requires buy-in from all countries and rightly suggests that the evil empires of Russia and China will provide much lip service to NATO, but will do something else like maybe sell even more uranium to the Iranians.

Military strikes against Iran would also be problematic. If the U.S. allows the Israelis to go into Iran for an airstrike, the rest of the Middle East would explode because Israel has so many enemies nearby who are waiting for any reason to invade them. This would be a great reason for any country who has a grudge with Israel, which is basically every non-Christian country in the region. If the U.S. did its own military strike, there would be backlash from other oil producing countries against the U.S. and then we all get to watch the price of gas shoot up, forcing me to use Light Rail, er……. the Cap Metro Shuttle.

Cohen’s solution is awesome, if not discreet. He suggests the U.S. break from past policy and “Not by invasion, which this administration would not contemplate and could not execute, but through every instrument of U.S. power, soft more than hard.” I believe he is suggesting this government use the C.I.A. or U.S. Special Forces to go in and snuff out Iranian president Ahmadeninejad and do it old school like they used to in the 70’s. If so, I would be like the Russians, shaking my fist in outrage in public but privately saying “good riddance”.

Let's all laugh at the Statesman!

I decided to pick an editorial article from our local paper, the Austin American Statesman. I love to rip on the American Statesman. They’re an easy target mainly because they are such a left leaning liberal paper and they make a perfect compliment to the Peoples Republic of Austin, errrr…City of Austin. While it is somewhat sad that Austin is known as the “San Francisco of Texas”, it is clear that the Statesman fits Austin like a glove. I’ve lived in the Austin area for fifteen years and not much has changed when it comes to the Statesman’s approach to attract readers: write something negative about the Austin Police Department. I’m sure a weekly editors meeting goes something like this:
Editor: OK gang, sales are down AGAIN this week. What stories do we have lined up to get more paying readers?
Reporter: The Lake levels continue to decline
Editor: We’ve run that story to the ground. No good. What else?
Reporter: It’s very hot in Central Texas.
Editor: Thanks. No good. What else?
Reporter: I’ve got a negative story about the Longhorns…
Editor (with hands over ears): LALALALLALALALALALAL…can’t hear you!!!!
Tony Plohetski: Chief, I’ve got a story on how APD’s internal Affairs detectives are feuding with their bosses over the Quintana investigation, except that I’m short on evidence, facts, and my article is mostly opinion based….
Editor: PUT THAT PAGE 1!!!!! TODAY!!!
Plohtetski: But boss, it’s not really…
Editor: I don’t care!!! Print it!! Tony, as usual, you are gold!!
Seriously, the Editorial asks the question: If police complaints are made public, why shouldn’t the results be made public in cases where the Officer was cleared of any wrongdoing? The article goes on to whine about how the public should have access to information about all internal affairs investigations, regardless whether the officer was found guilty of any wrong doing. Although editorials are opinions, it’s a shame the writer doesn’t draw on facts to form his opinion.
The writer rails about how things should be, but doesn’t provide the reader with a plan on how to change the current laws that protect certain aspects of internal police investigations. So the reader is left with yet another griping article written by a bleeding heart liberal. Here’s the link: http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/2009/09/09/0909internal_edit.html.
This editorial is worth reading because it’s an excellent example of biased and opinionated reporting whose thinly based premise is not supported by any facts.