Jonathan Chait wrote a column in tnr where he remarks
The fact that Iraq's prime Minister has endorsed, by name, Barack Obama's plan to withdraw most U.S. troops from his country in 16 months is a huge, huge deal. Most commentary has focused on the political repercussions -- as a GOP strategist succinctly put it to Marc Ambinder, "We're fucked" -- and that certainly seems to be the case. How can John McCain paint Obama's plan as wildly naive or irresponsible when the Iraqi government favors it too
But Mr. Chait then ask the larger question:
Meanwhile, the paucity of coverage of these remarks is inexplicable. The big newspapers have given this story a paragraph at most. Unbelievably, The Page gave this headline to Maliki's walkback: "Maliki Clarifies Seemingly Pro-Obama Remarks."
There "my friends" is one of the greatest examples of a media narrative and it's toxic effect on a campaign. The media has decided that one of the "big themes" for this campaign is the republican talking point "the surge is working". They have decided that John McCain and the republicans are "more trusted on national security" and they will not let this up easily.
Malaki's comments (made here: Der Spiegel english translation) have thrown cold water on this narrative. Just look at what happens when you pull up his name under search at the "liberal" New York Times Nuri Kamal al-Maliki. I did this at 12:15 pm July 21st 2008., I was actually looking for a link to the Der Spiegel story. Notice they all link to neagtive headline from him in the past. Where were these themes before now?
You get these headline (THE GREAT MALAKI PUSH BACK):
- Bush Takes a Step Away From Maliki (August 22, 2007)
- Iraq Chief Says His Forces Are Able to Secure Country (July 15th, 2008)
- Bush Adviser’s Memo Cites Doubts About Iraqi Leader (Nov 29, 2006)
- Iraqi Assails U.S. for Strikes on Civilians (June 2, 2006)
- Jawad al-Maliki: A Novice, but Outspoken (April 23, 2006)
The great push back has begone and history will be revised quickly. Deadlines will be renamed horizons most of the media will complacently take this renaming and double speak, all without asking tough questions. Bush will never have trusted Malaki, McCain will say he isn't basing US security on foreign leaders, etc. The narrative will change to "the surge allowed a pull out" and the traditional media will try and let the GOP spin machine keep the strong national defense narrative.
I have been shocked at how poorly democrats have been to leap on this. Every dem should have flooded the sunday talk show, talk radio, and writen letters to newspapaers aking why they are burying this story.
The Bush administration and the McCain campaign have replied by suggesting that Maliki doesn't really want an American withdrawal, he's just saying it for domestic political purposes. Maybe so. But that just underscores the point. If Maliki has to publicly favor American withdrawal, this shows that the Iraqi polity is not going to stand for an extended occupation. President Bush may not have been sincere either when he came out for a prescription drug benefit and campaign finance reform, but he signed those measures because he had to. That's the nature of democracy. If Iraq is going to be a democracy, then we're not going to stay there forever. So the bigger story, beyond the presidential ramifications, is that we know how the Iraq occupation is going to end.
We need to get jumping on this. Yes in the blogosphere this is a big story, but it's fading in the traditional media. I have been rather sad that the big guns, Kos, TPM, etc haven't made this a call to arms. Where are the tough questions to John McCain on this.
The one card McCain has to play on Iraq is to say "he supported the surge and it's working". If you take that away and point out that even the Iraq government wants to see US troops withdrawl McCain's house of card will crumble. We in the progressive blogosphere need to push this story hard. Destroy this narrative people!
For those of you who doubt the strength with which the media clings to a narrative simply look at how often the following B@llshit still gets brought up. Obama has problems with Latinos (He is leading 2 to 1 to McCain), Women (he has a lead), Jewish voters (he has a 30% lead), working class whites (he has a large lead in union house holds which is the key demographic for dems to hold), ect. The FACTS when examined, directly contradict everyone of these story lines, yet since the media developed these narratives so they still get brought up!
The media will not let a thing like facts get in the way of a narrative. Facts will change quicker then a narrative will change.
Look at how little coverage is given to the divided GOP? Major GOP figures say they won't endorse McCain, the media looks the other way. A lack of enthusiasm for McCain from conservatives, the media looks the other way. Polls show a large number of republicans want to vote for Obama they just never get quoted, only "dems who think he is a muslim" get quoted.
That is why simply knowing that this story has been reported isn't enough. Destroying a narrative takes some hard work. We need to destroy this narrative people! McCain and the surge is working should be attacked, and attacked hard with this P.M. Malaki comment.