If the Russians had waited a few more days they could have launched their incursion into the Ukraine on the seventy-fifth anniversary of Hitler's invasion of Poland, which might have gotten them better (and more sympathetic?) play in the world's media.
We've seen news reports that state that the beheading of an American reporter has produced a wipeout for America's reluctance to send troops back to the Middle East. A news report that cites a source for that conclusion (such as "according to a poll conducted by the New York Times") is a news story. A vague conclusion (such as "most Americans now think") is pro-war propaganda.
Has Obama offered to ignore the Russian incursion into the Ukraine in return for being given a free hand for dealing with ISIS forces inside Syria?
Walter Cronkite went to Vietnam to report on the Tet Offensive in early 1968, after his special was broadcast LBJ was reported to have said: "If we've lost Cronkite, we've lost the war."
A Viet Cong representative commenting on the conflict said: "It has already lasted for more than twenty years. We can hold out much longer. Eventually the American people will tire of the war, and will turn against it. Then the war will end."
Can George Bush's "Forever War" refute that logic or will a new American President have his Cronkite moment?
In the last week of August of 2014, America's TV audience saw a mother's emotional plea to spare the life of her child. America's network pundits predicted that the plea will convince American mothers to be stoical if troops go back to Iraq. Nothing is said on American TV about what a similar affect the thousands of collateral damage deaths of women and children in Iraq and Afghanistan might have on the citizens in those countries.
Is it possible that the American mother's plea might have an unintended consequence on the ISIS leadership and accelerate their rush to punish the next journalist?
Could America's lack of bipartisanship eventually disintegrate into a permanent perpetual state of mutual distrust and animosity that will eventually become as fully entrenched in American society as is the Sunni vs. Shiite division is in most countries in the Middle East (or to use a newly revive trendy old word: the Levant)?
In an effort to take the pulse of the USA, we have recently availed our self of an opportunity to watch some cable TV news. When Megan Kelly talked about Obama going to Rhode Island for some fund-raising, she did a moue and rolled her eyes. It was so adorable but it made us wonder: "If Obama has lost Megan Kelly is the war lost?" and also: What happened to the "fair and balanced" style that ignored any criticism of Dubya when he took more and longer vacations?
If she gets all hot under the collar about that perhaps she needs to take the ice bucket challenge on air?
That, in turn, reminded us that we have been waiting to see next month's Playmate of the Month dousing some member of management (Hef himself?) as part of this summer's publicity fad, which would also illustrate the concept of the high school coach's advice to "take a cold shower!" We fired off an e-mail to a fellow on the Playboy masthead asking how long we were going to have to wait to see photo evidence that that magazine is hip to the bucket challenge.
Our efforts to recall which columnist had used the "clear the desk top" shtick had caused us to do a roll call of the great columnists who had at one time or another called San Francisco their hometown. That list, in turn, convinced us that if the National Society of Newspaper Columnists ever decided to establish a brick and mortar Columnists' Hall of Fame, it would have to be located in Fog City.
Hunter S. Thompson and Ambrose Bierce are perhaps the best known of a long list of writers who churned out columns while being residents of the San Francisco Bay Area.
Some naysayers might want to nominate the Big Apple as the appropriate location for a hypothetical Columnists' Hall of Fame and we would reply: "Other than Walter Winchell and Pete Hamill who else has been a famous Manhattan columnist?"