Thursday, October 1, 2009

I guess Greenwald won't be wearing a "Free Polanski" t-shirt

However, he does make some salient observations about what is wrong with WaPo's editorial folks:

But more broadly, just look at the sort of things that are routinely defended by the Post Op-Ed team -- everything from torture, illegal eavesdropping and imprisonment with no trials to brutal Latin American dictators and unprovoked, devastating American military attacks on countries that haven't attacked us and aren't close to doing so. As Scott Lemieux put it this week when noting that, until Applebaum's second Polanski posting, the competition for most repugnant Polanski defense had been a close call: "Never count Fred Hiatt's crew out of any competition for the most immoral and fact-challenged argument!"

For every brutal, lawless and amoral act, there is a defense of it to be found on the Washington Post Op-Ed page. That's what makes it so unsurprising that two of Polanski's most ardent defenders are employed there. It's nonetheless bizarre to watch their bosses pretend that such views are found only among easily demonized Hollywood celebrities and the European pseudo-intellectual class. The Post Op-Ed page is Ground Zero for defending every corrupt and destructive act that plagues the country. No defense of "basic facts, or even simple decency for that matter" is possible without targeting them first. Washington has the hometown newspaper that perfectly reflects what it is.

Given the above, there's no real surprise when some of the WaPo op-ed columnists come rushing to the defense of an individual celebrity who admitted to drugging, raping, and sodomizing a 13-year-old girl, and then fled the country to escape serious prison time. If there is something indefensible, leave it to a WaPo columnist to defend it (and perhaps a WaPo editorial board to feign outrage on rare occasion).

No comments:

Post a Comment