As loyal readers and others who suffer from insomnia know, we here at CD HQ have been tracking the George Bush Desert Classic’s lingusitic slide into Civil War for some time.
As usual, the Administration is being aided and abetted in its marketing by many in the media, and I’m not talking Fox TV. Last Sunday, the NYT’s Week In Review section lead with an article entitled “What A Civil War Could Look Like” which actually addressed everything but that. The article categorically refused to define “What a civil war does look like.” Instead it fell back on some of the most hair-splitting linguistic efforts to not call an Antietam an Antietam since Bill Clinton’s famous “is.”
And then in July I polled the press:
- USATODAY: As violence mounts, so does evidence of civil war in Iraq
- The Christian Science Monitor: A widening sectarian rift pushes Iraq to the brink of civil war
- NPR: Abizaid Warns That Iraq Could Face Civil War
- MSNBC: PM: Iraq not facing civil war
- Fox News: We Won! We Won!
So now we have NBC declaring it a civil war which indicates Main Stream Media are coming around to using this as the bumper sticker du jure for whatever the hell it is that’s going on over there. Still don’t know how to tell when a war is civil and/or different from an insurgency or a rebellion.
Anyone?
Bueller?
Technorati Tags: Iraq, Civil, War, George, Bush, Desert, Classic, Bull, Run, Bueller
Collateral Damage 