Feb 02 2007
Forget It Arkin, Just Leave
The Washington Post is definitely trying to dig itself out from under Bill Arkin’s madness, but it is not sufficient. As I mentioned yesterday Arkin did TWO things wrong which the post either stands by through by letting Arkin stay on or rejects by canning the idiot. First, attempt at an apology from Arkin:
I intentionally chose to criticize the military and used the word to incite and call into question their presumption that the public had a duty to support them. The public has duties, but not to the American military.
So I committed blasphemy, and for this seeming lack of respect and appreciation for individuals in uniform, I have been roundly criticized and condemned.
The guys at Powerline must be losing their edge. They claim this was some sort of apology. It wasn’t. There was no ‘seeming’ in his completely insulting commentary about the troops. They are not mercenaries. That is like calling a surgeon a serial killer because his patients die just like a murderer’s victims die. The difference is motive and intent, not results. So Arkin is not apologizing at all. The words that follow were placed their by pressures from above – Arkin doesn’t mean them or else he would not have caveated them with this lame claim about misunderstanding.
The second thing Arkin did, which is not journalistic freedom, is call the readers of the Washington Post who did not agree with him “Arrogant and Intolerant”. The Washington Post has the gaul to remove the insult to its customers, but not the jerk who issued the insult. It should definitely have been the other way around. As I said yesterday, by retaining Arkin the Washington Post is signalling to everyone they stand by him and now embrace his as part of the Washington Post image. And as I said yesterday I have no reason to put my money into companies that insult our troops (my son will be one of these troops very soon) and insult me for taking issue with the insult on the troops. I listed the businesses that advertised in the Sunday Post in my previous posting, and I plan to continue doing that until Arkin is gone. The Washington Post and its advertisers have a choice – Arkin or us “Arrogant and Intolerant” customers. They cannot have both. And that is MY right to free speech and free choice regarding what businesses I plan to spend my money on. Pick one WaPo, Arkin or us.
Addendum: Seems the Washington Post cherishes Arkin over all those hundred and hundreds of “Arrogant and Intolerant” customers:
ALCON, I wrote Caroline Little, WAPO CEO and received a response from
executive editor Jim Brady. See below:Ray,
Thanks for taking the time to write. We’ve obviously gotten a lot of negative response to Bill Arkin’s column over the past two days, and many readers — such as yourself — have written to ask that we fire Bill. But we’re not going to do that. The beauty of democracy is that everyone is not only entitled to their opinion, but is allowed to express it freely, even when others vehemently disagree. On top of that, washingtonpost.com allows readers who disgaree many forums to communicate that anger, i.e. comments on Bill’s blog, letters to the
editor, e-mails like this one and other venues. Because of that, the reaction has now gotten as much attention as the original column, which is terrific. But, to me, firing someone for expressing an opinion — no matter how much others may disagree — is a dangerous road to start down. Obviously, in that same spirit, I respect your right to take whatever actions you deem necessary because of your feelings about the column.Thanks for taking the time to write,
Jim Brady
Executive Editor, washingtonpost.com
Mr. Brady, the beauty of a free and open market is that we customers have the independence to chose who we purchase our products from. And now your Arkington Post and its advertisers will not be partaking in that open market without my money, and quite a number of like minded “Arrogant and Intolerant” customers.
Also, I want to add this comment as to why this boycott is important and right to do. If the Washington Post is going to become the Akrington Post then why mince words with them? But moreover – why spend my money to fund it’s message? This is not a disagreement over policy – this crossed the line of civil debate and minimal respect for our military. It is not wrong to demand people show some minimal respect, and if they drop below that line they are shunned. There are levels of acceptance in this world. From championed, to supported, to tolerated, to shunned, to resisted all these acts are legitimate responses in our society. The Arkington Post is the one moving down into the sewer – not me or anyone else who has decided our money can be better spent elsewhere than those who tear down our militarty.
Finallty, if I can work to support the military and do what I can to help them, then why would I let my money go to organizations that undo all my work? I wouldn’t of course.
“The public has duties, but not to the American military.”
As I said in a previous post, this is the opening round of the denigration of American servicemen and women. The public owes no duties to the American military, according to Arkin. I don’t recall anyone in the NBC report saying that the American public had a duty to support them.
I think Arkin is paranoid. I think he believes people in the services are latent fascists.
Our troops (I am formerly one of them myself) are “told” what to do, not asked. They are placed in harms way and given a mantra I told my booters (fresh-out-of-bootcamp sailors): Yours is not to question why, yours is to do or die.
The mission of my ship was simple: Missile-Sponge. Get between the missile and the Aircraft Carrier.
Arkin misses the simple point that the troops, at the absolute very least, deserve our support for them AND the mission to protect our way of life.
If you cannot do that, you may place the crown of ignorance atop your head, and find your new cubicle at the New York Times. Apparently this is what you need to do to get ahead in journalism.
I pray that at some point there is such a thing as bad publicity. The liberal rags like the WP and the NYT are on the main stage of the liberal media carnival. They just happen to provide the sideshow shock that was once held by the bearded lady and the elastic man tents.
It’s like a time warp. Am I dreaming? Did I really see Sheehan take Jon Carry’s previous moral authority role? Was that the same ole Jon insisting he tell those poor slob recruits how dumb they are to support their mission? Tell me I am not still looking at the pond escapee, Ted Kennedy. Did I dream I watched Hanoi Jane recreating her role?
The MSM? That bunch of socialist, bias against anything military or George Bush (even if it kills them) decides that this is what passes for “free speech”.
This old crew from Arkin to Fonda decide the opportunity is just perfect to rehabilitate themselves. Ah ha! It really is just like Vietnam! We told them at the time Vietnam was wrong, wrong, wrong. Ya see? This is what we were up against.
No, you old fools. This is a different war even if you convince the MSM to forget that a Kennedy and Johnson lost the 58,000. Just because Jon and MSM call it Nixon’s war does not make it any truer today than it was then. Just the same old fools making themselves into the same old lying fools. This Arkin just joined your ranks.
Good job AJ. They deserve it.
So much for objective and unbiased reporting. They can keep this idiot on if they want, but we all know what his attitudes are…so who will believe anything he prints about the military.
And the soldiers just gave an answer to a question a reporter asked them. That is all. They were a good deal more respectful of people who did not agree with them than Arkin was.
I kept wondering for a while if this column of Arkin’s was going to start doing for publicly expressed hatred of the military what Jonathan Chait’s original “I hate George W. Bush” article did for publicly expressed hatred of George W. Bush. If it does, we’re in trouble. So I’m very glad to see the public venting a little outrage at Arkin.
What a despicable column. He clearly implies that the public is starting to get fed up with the military after having their patience sorely tested in the wake of things like Abu Ghraib. We apparently already have people spitting on returning soldiers; I heard something about some people spitting on a soldier who lost limbs in Iraq and he spat back at them. I almost feel like finding a newspaper columnist and spitting on him.
“their patience sorely tested in the wake of things like Abu Ghraib”
Who does Arkin think punished the people responsible for Abu Ghraib? This man is unjustly anti-military.
Check out O’Reilly from FoxNews over at LGF – (Its a YouTube link). A nice piece exposing Arkin for the traitor that he is, and some biting words about the direction NBC has taken — also indicting General Electric. The pansy (Arkin) won’t even defend his comments in the piece. Talk about lack of morals and ethics. Arkin – If you believe it, stand up for it you spineless, jellyfish, commie-pinko, liberal. This little weasel wanted a business card. Yea…that establishes identity and credibility. Now boarding all rows for our flight to Havana, with continued service to Caracas.
I think you really got the ball rolling on this one AJ — these fools need to understand that just because they have an outlet for their anti-war rhetoric, it does not mean that they represent the majority opinion in this country.