Hugh Hewitt interviewed Time correspondant Michael Ware about Ware’s reporting in Iraq. What most interested me in the interview is that Ware is incapable of making any judgements about events unless he has personally witnessed them. And even then, he can’t make judgements because he wasn’t there to see the alternative.
Are Iraqis better off now than under Saddam? Ware doesn’t know because he wasn’t there under Saddam. So Hugh then asked if Russians were better off under Stalin or Krushev. Ware again couldn’t answer because he wasn’t there.
Why is he even a reporter? His facts are useless. He can report but, following to his logic, we can’t make any judgements based on the information he provides. Yet people are making judgements on the information coming from Iraq. Quagmire! Another Vietnam!
The press is useless when reporters have no sense of history. Are Iraqis better off now? I’m reminded of a comment I heard about our search for WMD. Of course we couldn’t find any WMD. Everywhere we dug, we found a mass grave.
Update: Welcome Hugh Hewitt readers. And please vote for my entry “The Thinker” (entry #82) on Painting the Map Red contest. I really want the radio.