Chuck Todd explains his theory about Chick-fil-A and Starbucks instead of talking about climate change.
Not talking about the largest climate march in history (Action Alert, 9/22/14) left Chuck Todd with some time to fill up on NBC‘s Meet the Press. Some of it he spent explaining his theory that the 2014 midterms are really a battle between Chick-fil-A and Starbucks. (Republicans like the chicken franchise, apparently, whereas Democrats prefer the coffee chain.)
But Todd also had some questions about Libya policy for UN Ambassador Samantha Power. They’re worth quoting, because they typify a worldview that underlies a lot of our foreign policy debates:
There’s a big headline in the Washington Post this morning about basically more chaos in Libya, some assassins in Benghazi, the back and forth that’s been going back there, the fight to sort of control Libya. What’s the lesson learned on the United States intervention in Libya in hindsight now for you, when you are applying to, sort of, how we’re dealing in Syria?
We left a vacuum in Libya and now there’s chaos in Libya. How do you prevent that from happening in Syria once the US is successful in getting rid of ISIS? The goal of getting rid of Gadhafi, you did it. Then there was a chaotic vacuum. You’re going to get rid of ISIS in Syria; how do you prevent a similar chaotic vacuum?
Note the presumption that the US will be able to wave a magic wand and eliminate the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS): “You’re going to get rid of ISIS in Syria,” Todd flat out says; it’s a matter of “once the US is successful” rather than “if.” Never mind that the US has not eliminated the Taliban in Afghanistan after 12 years of war with as many as 100,000 troops on the ground, to cite just one example of the US military’s lack of omnipotence; in the case of ISIS, a few rounds of bombing are going to do the trick.
The only problem that Todd foresees is that we left a “vacuum” in Libya, and we might leave a similar “chaotic vacuum” in Syria. It’s not the presence of violent movements that Washington trained, or that sprang up in reaction to US violence, and the weapons that these countries were flooded with as part of US strategy that are the problem–oh no. The problem, as defined by US pundits, is always a lack of intervention–“we” won’t be there enough, and without enough us, who knows what will happen?
Eventually one comes to the realization that one must stop sharing the delusion that corporate mass media have about themselves–that they are authentic sources of news and that they provide relevant facts to the sovereign citizens of our Constitutional republic. They’re not.
The internet with its access to alternative news sources and social media carry the day.
The corporate chains merely carry entertainment, nothing more. To seek anything else there is a fools errand, a complete waste of time. But for Free Speech TV and LinkTV, what else is there on 500 channels that can actually help me decide whom to empower as my representative in Washington?
Be well.
Is it dishonesty or ignorance that dominates the modern media? As an octogenarian who was a journalist back when journalists cared, I’m inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. They’re ignorant, poor babies.
We have both climate problems and media problems. Ask a farmer about the quality of his water and seed supply and ask the media “why only minimal coverage of the People’s Climate March — perhaps the largest ever climate change protest.”
Chuck Todd would just be annoying if he weren’t so damned irritating and smug. I can’t for the life of me figure out why NBC chose him to head Meet the Press. Don’t they want people to watch the show?
I second what socrates2 says, adding Counterpunch, Real News Network, DemocracyNow! of course, RT News, and any organization for which Andre Vltchek works.
Late comment I know but my first one here. A trial one if you will. I just had this conversation today. At lunch I asked, “How can you have a government of the people and by the people if the people don’t know what their government is up to. That’s why the First Amendment is the first one.”
“I don’t think we should know everything the government does. How else can they keep us safe?” She contributes to PBS, goes to a Unitarian church, and supports community agriculture. How do you combat this?
Chuck Todd has lost the little respect I had for any of his opinions.