This was worth my time this morning because I had never considered that the “communications strategy” from the White House was a good one. But here is another opinion on that:

“On one item we disagree with Podhoretz and most of the conservative commentators we read, however. We endorse the communications strategy that had been chosen by the White House. The MSM have become anti-war to the point of sedition, in our opinion. If the President had given speeches week after week, they would have been countered, each and every week, with even greater MSM coverage of car-bombings, suicide-vests, and portraits of American shortcomings. Much better to wait until the mission is further along, more progress made, more elections held, before rallying the patriotic spirit of most Americans to a new crescendo. This cannot be done weekly or continuously without creating exhaustion; better to save it for the 2006 season, which we have now entered.

We wish it were not so, but our domestic war against the MSM and like thinkers must be fought with the appropriate tactics: giving them a big, fat speech by the President every week to shoot at in the meaningless year of 2005 would not have been smart. Waiting for them to over-reach, as they did once again in the Pelosi / Murtha gambit, shows yet once more that perhaps the biggest asset the GOP has is the leadership of the Democratic Party.”

Point taken.

2 thoughts on “Pelosi-Murtha

  1. IF only the MSM would provide some balanced objective journalism instead of the slanted bunch of hooey we see in the papers/TV. Still think bloggers will take over.

  2. Your quoted part isn’t another opinion — it’s the same opinion — the WH communications strategy makes sense.

Comments are closed.