Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Cal  Thomas :: Townhall.com Columnist
"No News" Is Bad News?
by Cal Thomas
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Last week, ABC’s Charles Gibson introduced a segment about Iraq on “World News Tonight” with this curious remark: “The news is (pause for effect) that there is no news. The police told us today that, to their knowledge, there were no major acts of violence. Attacks are down in Baghdad and today no bombings or roadside explosions were reported.”

In a war that has consumed more than 4,100 coalition partner lives (more than 3,800 of them Americans) and additional thousands of Iraqi lives and that has as its stated objective a lessening of the shootings, bombings and killings, an average person might rejoice at such news. The big media and their auxiliary in the left wing of the Democratic Party do not regard “no news” as good news, but as the worst possible news, because it threatens to undermine their political objective: the defeat of Republicans in the next election, even at the cost of losing a war.

Not all Democrats feel this way, of course, but their congressional leaders do. They have invested their political capital in defeat. So many Democrats (again, not all) are counting on a U.S. loss in this war — and have made outrageous statements about America’s inability to succeed — that success will give the national security issue completely to the Republicans, even as Republicans have lost sole ownership of the less spending and smaller government issue.

Democrats know that national security and the ability to successfully wage war against America’s enemies trumps everything else. If the war is won, Democrats’ prospects for victory next year are greatly diminished.

The evidence of improvement in Iraq is coming with greater frequency and credibility. A trickle of good news is becoming a stream. It’s too early to predict a tide, but things are at least — and at last — beginning to flow in the right direction. On the heels of improvements in the once-chaotic Anbar province comes Fallujah, a region that once resembled our Wild West with lawlessness and disorder everywhere. While one still wouldn’t want to plan a family vacation in Fallujah just yet, U.S. Marines are now getting cooperation from the previously uncooperative Sunni sheikhs in driving out al-Qaida.

Writing in The Wall Street Journal (Oct. 20), Michael Ledeen, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, quotes a Marine officer friend as saying he has been told by enlisted Marines, “There’s nobody to shoot (in Fallujah), sir. If it’s just going to be building schools and hospitals, that’s what the Army is for, isn’t it?” Basra, too, where British soldiers are pulling out, was said to be on the verge of exploding since Shiite militias backed by Iran supposedly were poised to impose a fundamentalist regime on the city. It isn’t happening. Violence in Basra has declined significantly in recent weeks.

This is not to excuse the Bush administration from its serious mistakes and bad judgment in the early going in Iraq, but as Dorothy Fields and Cy Coleman wrote in the Broadway musical, “Seesaw,” “It’s not where you start, but where you finish.” The last part of that lyric is: “and you’re gonna finish on top.”

If the United States and its coalition forces finish on top by achieving most, if not all, of their objectives in Iraq, what can the Democrats say? “We were secretly in support of the war all the way”? Not even Hillary Clinton could get away with such a whopper. The Republican campaign commercials would pound away with the hundreds (thousands?) of quotes from people they will label as “defeatist Democrats.” As this week’s lead editorial in The Weekly Standard asks, “Are the American people likely to elect the candidate of a party that has tried its best to lose a winnable war?”

The answer is no. And the answer to Charles Gibson’s assertion that no news is not news is that no violence is news and, indeed, is very good news for Iraq and for America. It is very bad news, however, for the leadership of the Democratic Party, because their investment in defeat may be about to prove itself the political equivalent of the dot-com bubble burst earlier this decade.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Cal Thomas is co-author (with Bob Beckel) of the book, "Common Ground: How to Stop the Partisan War That is Destroying America".
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Cal Thomas' column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
He Must Feel Really Dumb!
After all this time of growing fat on his presentations of Evil America, Gibson must have felt really stupid having to admit that things were going pretty well... and rightfully so. Republican "blood lust", as Lilly spews about in her enraged vexation, is saving the people of the oldest civilized land on Earth from even more centuries of savage repression and the world from full-scale murder on an unprecedented scale.

For Shame
This article is a shameful misrepresentation of what Charles Gibson said. I saw the program. I watch ABC national evening news every evening. He said that the news that day was that there was no news since no attacks had been reported. This is very different from saying that this was bad news. Nothing in Gibson's manner suggested that he was delivering bad news. If anything, he was acknowledging the success of the Surge.

Cal Thomas, in his usual mocking, smirking style---he is one of the slimiest of the right-wing propagandists---says that the Democratic Party is invested in the failure of war. Let's look at the mirror image of that idea. Thomas does not say what is obvious, that the Republican Party is invested in making and sustaining war because it derives political dominance and enormous profit from doing so. He does not mention the staggering corruption that has accompanied this war with the blessing of the Bush II administration. He does not mention that the "Surge", a word chosen to connote a temporary state, is taking place in a country where we have just built ourselves an embassy that is ten times the average size of our embassies abroad, will provide a self-contained fortified town to house 1000 employees, and will cost American taxpayers more than $1 billion a year to run. Something around there is not temporary, it seems.

If the Democratic Party is politically invested in the failure of the war, perhaps that's because it doesn't share the Republican Party's appetite for blood, a diet on which the GOP grows fat.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.