Up-d-hates

Seems like it's getting increasingly difficult for some reporters to hide their contempt for the military (if they're even trying to hide it anymore).

Take Dana Milbank - (please!). Eric Pfeiffer in NRO's Beltway Buzz reports that Milbank's petty attack on Donald Rumsfeld from the front page of the WaPo is now being echoed by other 'journalists' who share his lack of interest in facts:

The BBC?s Katty Kay echoed Milbank?s sentiment on ?Meet the Press? this weekend, adding, ?look at Donald Rumsfeld this week. If ever we saw Donald Rumsfeld back in fighting form this week and giving everybody up on Capitol Hill, Republicans and Democrats alike, a hard time, this was it: refusing to answer questions about Iraq, refusing even really to be very courteous up on Capitol Hill.?

A lie gets halfway 'round the world while the truth is lacing up it's shoes, as they say. My speculation was that Milbank and his superiors at the Post were motivated by the numerous instances of Rumsfeld making reporters look foolish - Pfeiffer points out that Rummy actually trounced the Post a bit in his testimony:

Could his article have been in response to Rumsfeld?s Washington Post critique during his testimony? For the sake of full disclosure, shouldn?t Milbank have mentioned the criticism in his article? More importantly, his editors should have insisted on such transparency.

Milbank is pretending to be ignorant of the fact that Rumsfeld is the first Secretary of Defense to actually be known and admired by the troops. And one of the reasons for that is the fun of seeing the guy verbally bitch-slap reporters like Dana - just by refusing to give anything but straight answers to stupid questions.

But when it comes to contempt for those who serve, Ariana Huffington makes Milbank look like a piker. Here's what she's huffing this week:

The Bush administration will do just about anything to manipulate public opinion. It paid pundits to say nice things. It created bogus - and, according to the controller general, illegal - video news reports. It gave us Gannon/Guckert-gate.

Now, the Bushies are producing their own news network: the Pentagon Channel, brought to you by the Defense Department.

Started last year as an internal public-relations unit, the network is expanding to the general public. Some cable systems, including Time Warner, already carry it, and the Dish Network will soon be beaming the station to more than 11 million viewers.

Defense Department TV execs say it'll be "a mix between CNN and C-SPAN," with military news and lifestyle shows, live briefings and appearances by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Pentagon Channel programs include "Why I Serve," and "Korea Destinations." Rumsfeld might consider a more realistic lineup. How about: "The Real World: Fallujah"; "Pimp My Humvee" and "Desperate Military Housewives."

"Desperate Military Housewives." heh - that's funny, huh Mrs. G?

The Pentagon Channel may be seen as a threat to the terrorist POV touted by Huffington and her cronies over the past several months, but actually it's a rather harmless collection of brief bits and news stories - and far from being anything new and devious from the "Bushies" it's just the stuff Armed Forces TV has been doing for a while. "Hi mom" shots of the troops at the front, etc. To be honest, it's probably going to elicit more than a few groans from those familiar with AFN work - "they try hard" is a compliment most will agree to. Huffington assumes the ignorant American masses will be brainwashed by this sort of stuff.

Let's try and put some of her fears to rest. "Why I Serve" is simply some brief profiles of individual Soldiers, Sailors, Airman, and Marines who each explain how they ended up in uniform. The reasons run the gauntlet; family tradition, education, escape from home town, etc. Nothing new. "Korea Destinations" gives quick looks at tourist spots in (believe it or not) Korea. Not sure exactly what it is she finds contemptible about all this, but apparently in her mind it must be some sinister Karl Rove plot.

Milbank and Huffington do take feeble steps to hide their anti-military bias. Milbank pretends it's the evil upper echelon of the military that he's attacking, and that the ignorant low level brainwashed minions are people he supports with all his heart. Some day I'd like to hear from Dana and others of his type exactly what rank is the cut off above which troops no longer get their support. Likewise Huffington can pretend President Bush is responsible for the Pentagon Channel and that her contempt is directed at him, not the hard working young GI's who produce the content she dismisses with a sneer but without ever seeing. What she's really calling for is censorship and an end to free speech that isn't my speech - the battle cry of the disconnected left. That attitude has this in common with the Pentagon Channel; there's nothing new there.