White House Declares War On NY Times / Cheney: "David Brooks Will Greet Us As A Liberator"

I figured since this whole NY Times controversy is creating so much buzz, I'd throw in my two or three cents. Given the (predictable) insanity from the right on this- not to mention a) the huge hypocrisy in ignoring that long-time conservative paper Wall Street Journal published the same information, and b) the fact that the basic information revealed in these stories has been discussed by the President and others as far back as 2001 - I think it's clear that much of this controversy is manufactured. Make no mistake, this is a full-scale attack on freedom of the press disguised as a wartime secrecy issue.

Any semblence of a legitimate and honest debate over whether the newspapers should've published these stories has been destroyed by the right's vitriol and insane charges of treason. On this note, I believe Andrew Sullivan has written one of the better and more succint takes on this whole brouhaha that I read yesterday. In full-

I confess to being a little bemused by the hysteria in some parts of the blogosphere about the NYT publishing details of the government's close monitoring of some financial transactions in the war on terror. I should qualify that by saying that the argument against the press is the strongest I've yet read in any of these cases. Unlike the NSA wire-tapping program, or the secret torture prisons in Eastern Europe and elsewhere, this program does not seem to be illegal, or only legal under the doctrine that anything the president does in the war is de facto legal. It seems carefully structured to prevent abuse of privacy, it appears to have been effective (although you and I have no way of knowing for sure). If I were Bill Keller (fat chance, I know), I probably wouldn't publish.

On the other hand, publishing it does not, it seems to me, obviously render the program ineffective. And the Malkinesque charges of treason seem a little, er, excitable. The press publishes stuff that doesn't always help the government in wartime. Duh. In a democracy, in a war which has sharply divided the country, this is hardly a big surprise. If the NYT didn't do it, someone in the government would find a way to leak it in another way. One wonders what would happen in Power Line's perfect world, where the MSM always followed the government's advice in wartime, suppressed news of defeats and setbacks, and avoided any damaging revelations that might encourage the enemy or inform citizens of government errors or abuses. Let's say someone within the administration still wanted to leak the program. Wouldn't they just give the info to an anti-Bush blogger? And would the damage be any less than it is - in today's media universe? In a paradoxical way, some bloggers both want to dismiss the NYT and then describe it as the essential gateway for all important information. It cannot be both. In today's transparent, web-based media, wars are just going to be subject to more scrutiny - especially divisive wars, run by controversial presidents, with as many opponents within the government as outside it. Get used to it. And take a Xanax.

Sounds right. Ms. Malkin will likely respond by calling him a libaloon moonbat, though.

That's the level of these debate on that side.

Meanwhile Sullivan later posts an email he received that shares my cynical suspicion that the White House is actually reveling in this leak... it allows them to a) appear tough on terror in a way that- for once- makes sense, and b) allows the right-wing base to get energized in the latest round of demanding the destruction of the NY Times, one of their favorite scapegoats. Both of those things are especially helpful to the administration as their big bust of a group of Miami-based 'terrorists' turns out to be much ado about nothing.

Don't believe the hype- Bush and Cheney are smiling big right now over all of this.

[Related reading:
-Glenn Greenwald: The Bush lynch mob against the nation's free press
-Robert Scheer: "Disgracefully" Attacking the New York Times
-Editor & Publisher: Tony Snow Tells E&P: 'NYT' Deserves Special Criticism
-Arianna Huffington: The Times Remembers Where Its True Loyalties Lie -- With the Public
-Greg Sargent: White House Assault on Bill Keller and Times Is Just Bluster for the Boneheads

Keith Olbermann also did a good report the other night.]