Another Leftie embarrasses himself (updated)

The Washington Post online (washingtonpost.com) has an opinion column ("Early Warning") by someone called William Arkin.  In his column of January 30, 2007 ("The Troops Also Need ro Support the American People") Mr. Arkin is hilariously clueless:
.......the recent NBC report is just an ugly reminder of the price we pay for a mercenary - oops sorry, volunteer - force that thinks it is doing the dirty work [emphasis added]
This quotation is an excerpt but it is not taken out of context.  It follows from a previous paragraph which is so incoherent as to suggest the author has only the most rudimentary grasp on self-expression.  But this sentence is the bomb-throwing one.  He appears to have "apologized" for making it, but, let's face it, if writing columns is what you do for a living, it is a bit difficult to pretend that a considered product is the same thing as a slip of the tongue and, in any case, might one suggest that it is a Freudian slip?


What does the Washington Post imagine it is doing by sponsoring such a low level of discourse?  Whatever the reason, it simply contributes to the argument that we are in a fight for our lives and the MSM wants us to lose.  I would give a lot to know what an aristocrat like Thomas Ricks thinks of a piece of trash like this column going out under the Washington Post banner. 

Clarice Feldman adds:

William Arkin created a firestorm when he indicated the troops should not be speaking for the war.  Add this to the usual leftist spiel that civilians who support the war are "chicken hawks" with the implication theyshould keep quiet, and what do you get?

Only those who oppose the war--whether in or out of the military--have the right to speak. That is, only they do.

Ed Lasky adds:

Who is Arkin? High Hewitt has an answer, and it tells us a lot.
The Washington Post online (washingtonpost.com) has an opinion column ("Early Warning") by someone called William Arkin.  In his column of January 30, 2007 ("The Troops Also Need ro Support the American People") Mr. Arkin is hilariously clueless:
.......the recent NBC report is just an ugly reminder of the price we pay for a mercenary - oops sorry, volunteer - force that thinks it is doing the dirty work [emphasis added]
This quotation is an excerpt but it is not taken out of context.  It follows from a previous paragraph which is so incoherent as to suggest the author has only the most rudimentary grasp on self-expression.  But this sentence is the bomb-throwing one.  He appears to have "apologized" for making it, but, let's face it, if writing columns is what you do for a living, it is a bit difficult to pretend that a considered product is the same thing as a slip of the tongue and, in any case, might one suggest that it is a Freudian slip?


What does the Washington Post imagine it is doing by sponsoring such a low level of discourse?  Whatever the reason, it simply contributes to the argument that we are in a fight for our lives and the MSM wants us to lose.  I would give a lot to know what an aristocrat like Thomas Ricks thinks of a piece of trash like this column going out under the Washington Post banner. 

Clarice Feldman adds:

William Arkin created a firestorm when he indicated the troops should not be speaking for the war.  Add this to the usual leftist spiel that civilians who support the war are "chicken hawks" with the implication theyshould keep quiet, and what do you get?

Only those who oppose the war--whether in or out of the military--have the right to speak. That is, only they do.

Ed Lasky adds:

Who is Arkin? High Hewitt has an answer, and it tells us a lot.