same old story

Over at Hit & Run, Nick Gillespie points to an op-ed in the Washington Times by Terry Michael, a former Democratic National Committee press flack. Michael writes:

Arguably, in the run-up to the war, the press could be given a pass for not allowing the case against attacking Iraq to be vigorously presented. Timid congressional Democrats held their fingers to the wind and engaged no real debate. It's hard to cover a conversation not taking place.

This is just nuts. For all his criticism of the Democrats, Michael is just pushing the notion that there are only two possible sides, the GOP and the Dems. But there were plenty of people writing critiques of the pro-war position in the run-up to the invasion. Columnists Justin Raimondo, Alan Bock, Ivan Eland, Ted Galen Carpenter, Robert Higgs and more were making the principled case against war, but who in the mainstream media wanted to report that? No one does, for the simple reason that none of those writers "fit" into the story that reporters inevitably want to tell, that it's Republicans vs. Democrats and other voices are irrelevant, especially ones that make a strong case against war and the State.