Fred Hiatt has a sad this morning. In his editorial in the Washington Post, he provides his prescription for what ails the US effort in Afghanistan. Not surprisingly, he wants a more violent, less lawful approach modeled after Stanley McChrystal’s efforts in Iraq.
|By: Jim White Thursday June 17, 2010 6:58 am|
|By: Jim White Tuesday April 13, 2010 7:24 am|
In an editorial in Tuesday’s Washington Post, Fred Hiatt joins in on Harold Koh’s attempted whitewashing of drone strikes in Pakistan and Afghanistan. It’s too bad he’s helping to spread lies.
|By: letsgetitdone Saturday April 3, 2010 10:01 pm|
In my last post I discussed the Washington Post’s Hooverite anti-deficit campaign and Fred Hiatt’s recent piece in the deficit hysteria genre. Now, let’s look at the latest effort of Robert Samuelson, a well-known WaPo columnist to frighten us some more.
Like Fred Hiatt, Samuelson wants President Obama to pivot from health care reform and do something serious about “deficit control,” regardless of whether this will hurt economic recovery and leave us with high unemployment rates for a long time.
|By: letsgetitdone Saturday April 3, 2010 12:16 pm|
Last weekend that so-called epitome of liberal media bias called The Washington Post continued its on-going war on economic recovery and the American people with two salvos on the “crisis” in Government finances created by our “unsustainable” deficits, written by Fred Hiatt and Robert Samuelson. Hiatt and Samuelson are not the only deficit warriors in the WP army. Others of note include David Broder, Dana Milbank, Steven Pearlstein, and Lori Montgomery. Together, and along with the absence of any writers who write about deficits from a positive point of view, the WaPo reflects a determined Hooverite position on deficits, advocating that the Administration now “pivot” toward deficit reduction, even though their writing recognizes that such a pivot can only come at the cost of a delayed or a denied economic recovery, and even at the cost of a renewed plunge into deeper recession or even depression.
This position is not liberal or “progressive.” Some may call it neo-liberal. I’d prefer to call it Hooverite, because it is a renewed application of the economic philosophy of Herbert Hoover to the 21st century American economy. But, in any case, whatever the label used to characterize it, any Newspaper or other publication taking such a position cannot be characterized as liberal, or progressive, or “left.” But in our modern context must, be seen as “right,” corporatist, “neo-liberal” and globalist, because it demonstrates that it cares nothing for working people and their well-being, but only cares about defending the interests of the already well-off, the financial institutions, and the predatory economic globalists. Let’s take a look at the latest efforts of Hiatt and Samuelson to frighten us over the deficit, beginning with Hiatt’s in this blog post, and then following with Samuelson in my next one.
|By: Jim White Wednesday March 3, 2010 7:02 am|
Today, Fred Hiatt called on Blue Dog Democrats to raise taxes. Really. I’m not kidding.
|By: Scarecrow Saturday November 21, 2009 7:24 am|
Fred Hiatt’s column today wonders if there’s something wrong with American Democracy. His commenters answer: “Yes, Fred, and you’re it.”
|By: Teddy Partridge Tuesday April 21, 2009 12:48 pm|
Fact-Free Fred Hiatt, Editorial Page Editor at such newspapers as The Washington Post, appears to have invented a new attribution construction for DFH bloggers like Emptywheel: “First reported online by such blogs as Emptywheel, the section takes its information from a confidential report issued by the CIA’s inspector general.”