A quarterly magazine of urban affairs, published by the Manhattan Institute, edited by Brian C. Anderson.
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
The Late Bin Laden « Back to Story
Showing 21 Comment(s) Subscribe by RSS
Thanks for sharing so significative article with us. Wonder Know is a comprehensive website that provides all kinds of articles. Just come and have fun!
Perhaps we all should read or reread Obama's book, Memories f r o m my Father.
It is beyond surreal to watch theses events unfold, like a new age "Looking Glass." The President, smug in his Bad Ass pose as Top Gun. Makes one wonder what the next move the Pres will pull out of the Bush play book.
This is why you make the big bucks Victor.
Best analysis of this event that I have seen yet. Outstanding work
To all you liberals out there who can never see anything wrong with this president's policies, ask yourself this question: why was it so important for Eric Holder to attempt to try KSM in federal court in NYC, affording him rights under the constitution, but it was ok for this administration to be judge, jury and executioner with OBL? He could have been captured and brought to justice in GITMO, right? Hypocrisy? Election year politics? Please explain. Mind you, I have no problem with the fact that he was taken out - a just sentence for the crimes he has committed, in my opinion.
I was a democrat for most of my life until 9/11 and then I really started listening to the news. I started with NBC and I found out I do not believe what these people believe, moved onto the CBS, then ABC, and found out they were all biased and all said the same thing. Eventually I found FOX and have stayed with them and I re-registered as a republican (and in my family - who have been democrats forever - you just don't do this without a lot of thought and prayer - some of my family still don't speak with me. But I tried to watch the View and I cannot - they are disgusting especially Joy and Whoopie. They said disgusting and demeaning things about President Bush but you can't say anything about President Obama or you are racist. I am sick of the race card and the main stream media - I don't believe a word they say anymore. The only news I trust is Fox news.
Victor Davis Hanson's work appears regularly in mainstream conservative journals--generally worth the read
Mr. Hanson, the presumptions of your final paragraph, being hailed by FOXNews if you must know, are somewhat ludicrous. If there had been any earthly way to put down Osama during Bush II terms 1 or 2, you better believe he would have done so and he would have been able to follow it with a move to allow Presidents 3 terms. Give us a break that everything conservatives do is viewed as triumphalism. Recall an embatteled Jimmy Carter replaced by Ronald Reagan who then got all credit of a hostage release. Recall the support for Bush I after a successful mission to free Kuwait. Your final paragraph, which will no doubt become a benchmark of truth for the Palin campaign should the quitter decide to run for another office where she'll be put under the microscope and be disallowed from whining as a method to solve her problems or the world's, is simply erroneous hyperbole derived by someone seeking to shift attention away from what's really right and wrong, and it's not right or left it's the actual actions and behaviors themselves.
I predict that Obama will be assassinated before the 2012 elections; possibly by a trigger happy cowboy.
tomorrow i think barry like a master magician will deliver america a knockout blow as it is looking the other way.In a spirit of kiss and make up he will greenlight the construction of the VICTORY mosque when he is at ground zero.The blind will cheer the catastrophe which will seal the country and west`s fate. Hope i`m wrong,we`ll soon know
“Media ownership is way less important than is the fact that 90% of those "qualified" to be and who are employed in the various "news" media are of the 20% Hard Left.”
If you can present any evidence of this, the 90% percent you believe are employed and are biased this way, please do so. Or, I’ll save you some trouble, you can’t, so your argument has been weakened. As the concentration of media, since the Telecommunications Act of 1996, in to so few as five conglomerate super-huge corporations has consolidated control of content to a very few corporate BOD level people, the pro-corporate bias of media has accelerated. Maybe media is still about “the left” and “the right” within myopia of neo-conservative belief irregardless of simple facts and simpler reasoning that any business school sophomore could understand. I am sure politics, likewise is about democrats versus republicans, or whatever gives you something you can fight against as it’s most obviously given your life meaning.
I could give you a little lesson in corporate governance, but leave it enough said that at that BOD level of management, the stock holders, the owners of media determine what is said on news casts, in general, and has been that way for, probably, about ten years at least. The owners tell it the BOD, hope that is simple enough. They are legally bound to maximize shareholder value, etc, and if they won’t enforce that regimen down the organization, toward your 90% of those employed that are hard left (your words), but instead fulfill media’s traditional function, to educate and inform, those managers will get replaced. Hence this has become the reality of the pro-corporate bias. It is the simplest reasoning, and even very simple supporting facts, I could name the five corporations.
Very good comment, as far as I am concerned. Were Bush still the President, OF COURSE very many people would blame him for committing just another brutal act. But now it is o.k. the way it is, at least with most people on both sides of the political spectrum.
Has anyone been paying attention to the reaction of those Americans adhering to the Mohammedan ideology? I am wating for CITY to comment on that issue.
Vince Coit says:
.... we have now five corporations that deliver 90% of all media content and the only news that 95% of Americans ever see ....
Media ownership is way less important than is the fact that 90% of those "qualified" to be and who are employed in the various "news" media are of the 20% Hard Left.
Eighty-five Per Cent of those at even the lunatic Left's most loathed medium, FoxNews, are Leftards.
And, world-wide, the much-loathed-by-the-Left, Rupert Murdoch's NewsCorp, likely employs more Hard Lefties than, combined, do little Vladdy Putin and Peking's pack of predators!
.... The (American Military's) successful operation should also raise the, "if you are going to take Tripoli, take Tripoli," question and may remind .resident Obama to finish -- by achieving, either de facto or de jure, the mission objective of regime change -- his ill-conceived Libyan stunt.
To a united States president worthy of occupying that office and who'd just projected America's might into Saddan Hussayn's boudoir, the gutless transvestite, Khadafi, in a millisecond, surrendered his share of the divided spoils of the traitor, Bill Cli'ton's, $0.0001 Cents on the Dollar sale of America's nuclear weapons secrets to China.
But thumbs his nose at Buraq Hussayn Ubama and at the Frankensteinian Euroweenie bureaucracy that dare calls itself, "nato?"
Let's Roll to January 2013!
Once again, Hanson shows he's some kind of smart. Woof!
"...he media will report a liberal president’s Predator drone attack or commando hit as done with reluctance and without other viable choices. Were a conservative leader to take the same actions, he would be portrayed as a trigger-happy war-monger reveling in the violence."
Yup. That's the facts as seen in recent years.
So, how bout a little recent history regarding the “traditional media”, also known as “corporate media”, and it has gone through some significant structural change since the 1996 Telecommunications Act. This disaster of a law resulted in over consolidation of that industry such that, we have now five mega-conglomerate corporations that deliver 90% of all media content and comprise the only news content that 95% of all U.S. people do ever see. It is some very high fraction of the total and, was not the case prior to implementation of this law.
Subjectively, this law accelerated an already ongoing trend within media toward 1) blurring of actual journalism with product advertising, and 2) a quite underhanded approach to the lacing of pro-corporate interpretations with the strict reporting of fact. Editors supervise this process of manipulation in media organizations, by necessarily catering to the whims of their advertisers and owners (as well as owners who are advertisers as well), just like their jobs depended on it, which they do. This is a pro-corporate bias.
It is naïve to view “traditional media” as having bias, in the way the article sets out. But, the whole matter of Democrat-bias versus Republican-bias, as well as the conflation of Democrat and Republican with liberal and conservative, is tolerated as it distracts viewers, the vast majority of the people, from the facts of history. The fact is the media is corporate biased, the furthest thing imaginable from media’s real traditional function of education and information. I’ll leave it there.
On presidential leadership vis a vis this particular incident and this article; I think it should be corrected to read instead of “It’s also easier to conduct assassinations abroad if the Commander-in-Chief is liberal’, to read “It’s also easier to conduct assassinations abroad if the Commander-in-Chief is competent”, lol. GWB was the most liberal user of military force in my lifetime, and, Obama has yet to deliver on most of his promises, or has plainly abandoned the progressives whom he promised it to in order to win nomination.
"Were a conservative leader to take the same actions, he would be portrayed as a trigger-happy war-monger reveling in the violence."
In the above statement is all the hypocrisy, the double standard, and manipulation of the Democrat media. From William Paley and CBS Radio, to decades and decades of tacit if not overt support by Democrat media for the Jim Crow segregationist policies of the old South, to the creation of a myth of Camelot for a thoroughly inept and thoroughly immoral President, to reversing the people's choice in Nixon for doing no more than any Democrat President had done many times over, to Clinton, the intern abuser - yet another immoral President, and finally under OBAMA the phony patina of objectivity underlying all of it has disappeared in the rush to get this incompetent man elected.
It is amazing that any in the traditional media still deny the existence of a bias in favor of Democrat politicians, a bias that is enough to swing elections, or, in Nixon's case, reverse an election. (with similar tactics tried under Reagan - Iran Contra - and Bush II - Valerie Plame)
Yet no one has ever done a contextual examination of this all extensive pro-Democrat bias - even though it is the single most important factor in 20th and 21st Century politics, more important than the parties themselves. No one has really looked at where and why it started, and how it has been perpetrated. This is as unbelievable as the bias itself - it's the biggest story never told.
It would answer the question as to why would major media embrace one party in view of evidence that such an embrace hurts the bottom line - that view has been conclusively proven by Fox - formed by an Australian who has shown that media geared to the conservative bent in America is a mega money making proposition.
Yet no one has followed this lead - why? Doesn't anyone want answers - I can tell you one thing it isn't - koolade.
Aw, geez, Mr Victor Davis Hanson, I would have thought you would be demanding to see the Death Certificate - long form please.
Would you rather Bin Laden not be killed?