I caught Peter Jennings a couple of times in the last week.
The first time, he was 'interviewing' some Iraqi general, in uniform. Pete made a point of referring to "the Bush administration" in his dialog. The general made a point of telling Pete that "they" [the Bush administration] were "the enemy", and that "they" (the armed forces of the Bush administration) would be met with bullets.
Then, last night, I happened to see Pete again. He again referred to "the Bush administration".
Am I the only one who noticed this? Peter Jennings, whom I assume is a citizen of the United States, is referring to the policies of this country as "the Bush administration".
Not "the United States", not "our", but "the Bush administration".
This just blows my mind! I don't recall Pete ever referring to the policies of the United States as "the Clinton administration" or "the Reagan administration" or "the Carter administration". I'm a little vague on this, because I don't watch Pete very often, but it seems to me that most reporters have referred to the policies of the United States as "the United States".
I thought it was supposed to be like an official thing; the policies of the United States are referred to as the policies of the United States. Back up the President and all that.
I do know what happens if a member of the armed forces of the United States is verbally critical of the Commander in Chief of the United States. Maybe Pete doesn't.
I won't call Pete a traitor. That would be cynical. It would also be a cynical attitude to assume that Pete is using his position as an "unbiased reporter" for ABC's World News Tonight for a soapbox in order to distance himself and his network from the official policies of this country and "report" that he is in personal disagreement to the President of the United States.
And if I were really cynical, I might draw the conclusion that Pete is not-so-subtly trying to get anyone that is watching him to cut loose from the leaders of the United States by referring to the official policies of this country not as the policies of "the United States" but as the policies of "the Bush administration".
A senior military official of Iraq, in uniform, who just might possibly have been involved in the rape of Kuwait and the invasion of Saudi Arabia in some small way (yes, Iraq invaded Saudi Arabia a few years back just in case anyone forgot) sits in front of Peter Jennings and says "they" (not "you"; "they") are the enemy and will be met with bullets.
I suspect Peter Jennings thinks I am a moron. In fact, I suspect he knows I am too stupid to understand that the official policies of the United States and the policies of "the Bush administration" are two different things altogether.
I must have missed that day in school, Pete. I was in a different class that day, the one where the professor suggested that if I were sitting and chatting over tea with some criminal who was telling me that the armed forces of my country were the enemy and would be met with bullets from the soldiers he was commanding, that I was not exactly helping my country a whole lot by even being in the same room with the man.
And that maybe possibly this uniformed general might possibly be talking about shooting me, instead of somebody that I didn't have anything to do with and that was acting under direct orders of The Bush Administration of America.
Why, if I were a cynical person, and ever got the chance to be interviewed by Pete, I might say, "Pete, you POS, your role is to report the news, not use junior high school psycology to undermine the President of your own country? Why don't you accept the fact that the President of the United States is your leader, and just stop trying to subvert him and his intention to lead the country? Vote for whomever you wish, but if you want to be buddies with some Iraqi general, just stay in Iraq. The rest of us don't need your bullshit." |
