I avoid the news media on the whole. I never watch any of the news outlets on TV and only rarely read a news article. I get more news than I need from just coming on this forum and reading the posts. However, today was one of those rare occasions. I just finished reading a news article about Biden and the Afghanistan situation.
In the beginning of the article the author says Biden (unlike his erratic, self-absorbed predecessor) brought foreign policy seasoning, adults-in-the-room judgment and a surfeit of empathy to the Oval Office. (GOT to get that dig in at President Trump).
He's seemingly making excuses for Biden's actions in this catastrophe (I say
this one since I believe there are more to come on the horizon) and generally making it sound like he's whitewashing all of it and giving Biden a free pass.
Well, okey dokey, that's typical liberal "journalism" for you. But then he turned about face, taking a stronger stance and said that during his speech Biden made assertions seemingly at odds with reality just as he had done all week,
He wrote that Biden largely disavowed any errors but instead pointed the finger at his predecessor, Donald Trump; the now-deposed Afghan government; the vanishing Afghan security forces and even Afghan civilians. Earlier in the article he seemed to be praising Biden for saying the buck stops here. So which is it? I always understood when one says the buck stops with me they mean they are taking full responsibility for the decisions and any consequences that might occur from their actions. Does this writer even recognize the contradiction here? I'm one of those either you do or you don't people, so which the hell is it?
Now that he is on to taking a harsher stance it seems against Biden as he goes on to mention when Biden was asked about pictures of fleeing Afghans packed into planes and some even falling to their death after trying to sneak aboard, that he interrupted, saying “that was four days ago, five days ago.” The writer goes on to say it was in fact two days earlier and hardly made less horrific by the passage of a couple of sunsets. Well, I certainly agree with that. My question is, "What about this empathy you said Biden brought to the Oval Office? Did you forget you said that at the beginning of your article"?
He finally ends the misery of this piece of contradictions by saying the Biden team’s cold political calculation is that the outrage expressed by the Washington political class and the ghastly images shown by the national news media will have little lasting effect on Americans. That they will soon forget the messy departure but remember that the president got the United States out of a failed war. He then comments they might be right since by Friday several large city newspapers had no stories about Afghanistan on their front pages.
The entire article was actually a mess of contradictions. Puts me in mind of that old idiom like rats fleeing a sinking ship. It is almost comical watching the liberal press squirming to crawdad their way out of the mess they have created for all of us. I say comical, but actually not one bit funny. It's tragic.