Sunday Talk Review-Meet the Press (NBC)-Russert and the Red Herring

Russert opened the show by asking the new CIA director, Admiral Mike McConnell, to identify the greatest threat to the United States. McConnell answered with certainty that a terror unit getting nukes or dirty bombs or other mass explosions in the US. remains the most serious and immediate threat we face. Russert asked if sleeper cells remain in the United States. McConnell indicated that there are such cells in the US, or at least the possibility “worries” him. That falls in to the "no s***" categories of answers.

Russert asked McConnell to explain why last year’s NIE report said al Qaeda was being smashed and this summer’s report that says that al Qaeda is regrouping. McConnell laid the blame squarely on Pakistan’s attempt to find a political rather than a military solution to the problems in Waziristan. McConnell then discussed the newest attempts by Pakistan to attack al Qaeda, the Taliban and their affiliates in Waziristan. Ultimately, McConnell repeated that al Qaeda lacks the operatives in the United States to carry out their plans.

McConnell emphasized the importance of President Musharraf to the United States. The fall of Musharraf was described as a great setback in the American efforts by McConnell and one that we must avoid. So, Democrats, tell us again how you will invade Pakistan to get at al Qaeda without causing the fall of the Musharraf government and its replacement by a more radicalized anti-Western regime, one that has nukes.

Russert then raised that old liberal red herring about Iraq serving as a recruiting tool for al Qaeda. McConnell agreed, but then provided the real world context to that statement. Russert quoted the NIE statements that support that proposition but also indicated that the war with al Qaeda predated the Iraq campaign and al Qaeda has simply now found a way to bring the various groups together.

I wonder why Russert and the other anti-war libs never broadcast the parts of the NIE and other intelligence reports that always conclude that victory over the US in Iraq would serve as an even greater recruiting and propaganda tool than does the existence of conflict there. Needless to say, the libs also fail to quote the intelligence conclusions that US victory in Iraq would also provide a devastating blow to al Qaeda’s propaganda and recruiting efforts. One should ask why such important information is so blithely overlooked by the liberal press.

Russert returned hard to the even older liberal argument that somehow Bush and Cheney manipulated intelligence to make it seem like Iraq had WMD knowing that they did not. McConnell simply slapped this down on the basis of fact-always an ugly word for liberals-and said he saw no sign of that in his interaction with the President and Vice President.

Russert asked Russ Feingold to address the possibility of ‘cataclysmic violence in Iraq” if the US leaves. Feingold’s answer both denied that Iraq would deteriorate if the US left (although how this makes any sense is something that neither Feingold nor other liberals can explain) and indicated a willingness to accept that result if it did happen. So, if Iraq becomes the new Afghanistan or an Iranian client state, or a Saudi Iranian Turkish battleground, or something even worse, that works for Russ because the American soldiers won’t be fighting. That readers, is the definition of peace at any price, and history proves it never, ever works.

Feingold says that he is introducing a resolution to censure President Bush, Vice President Cheney, the Attorney General and potentially others. Feingold just bleats the extreme left wing lines about the Bush Administration; it is the most dangerous, criminal, and deceptive in American history, it spies on Americans; it lied about the war, etc….. Feingold is working with other Senators, including possibly Harry Reid, to bring the issue to the floor. My God, I hope they do bring up such divisive proposal.

The panel discussion was interesting, although Bob Woodward returned hard to his Vietnam era roots by emphasizing the brutal nature of the war and the unwillingness of the American people to accept 120 causalities. Of course, the Woodwards, Russerts and John Burns of the world never acknowledge their responsibility for undermining the public’s willingness to support war with casualties. By spreading every enemy lie, agonizing over every mistake, exaggerating every enemy success and minimizing every American victory the media figures grind down public morale.

Stephen Hayes discussed his recent biography about Dick Cheney. The panel content was highly critical of the Vice President, again not surprising. One enormous disconnection between the press figures and the President and Vice President did become apparent. The reporters on the panel thought it strange that President Bush and Vice President Cheney would not throw themselves in some deep introspection and conclude that victory in Iraq was always unattainable because everything hasn’t gone as planned an the campaign there is now unpopular. I know it is a rare commodity in American politics, but that is called leadership fellas.