Juan Cole lacerates Jonah Goldberg, CNN's pseudo "expert" on Iraq

[BurtWorm]

http://www.juancole.com/2005/02/goldberg-v.html

Tuesday, February 08, 2005
Goldberg v. Cole Redux

Goldberg seems to like embarrassing himself, so he won't let go.

Let us see what has been established. First, I alleged that Goldberg has never read a book about Iraq, about which he keeps fulminating. I expected him at least to lie in response, the way W. did when similarly challenged on his book-reading. I expected Goldberg to say, "That is not true! I have read Phebe Marr's book on modern Iraq from cover to cover and know all about the 1963 failed Baathist coup!" But Goldberg did not respond in this way. I conclude that I was correct, and he has never read a book on this subject.

I am saying I do not understand why CNN or NPR would hire someone to talk about Iraq policy who has not read a book on the subject under discussion. Actually, of course, it would be desirable that he had read more than one book. Books are nice. They are rectangular and soft and have information in them. They can even be consumed on airplanes. Goldberg should try one.

Goldberg is now saying that he did not challenge my knowledge of the Middle East, but my judgment. I take it he is saying that his judgment is superior to mine. But how would you tell whose judgment is superior? Of course, all this talk of "judgement" is code for "political agreement." Progressives think that other progressives have good judgment, conservatives think that other conservatives have good judgment. This is a tautology in reality. Goldberg believes that I am wrong because I disagree with him about X, and anyone who disagrees with him is wrong, and ipso facto lacks good judgment.

An argument that judgment matters but knowledge does not is profoundly anti-intellectual. It implies that we do not need ever to learn anything in order make mature decisions. We can just proceed off some simple ideological template and apply it to everything. This sort of thinking is part of what is wrong with this country. We wouldn't call a man in to fix our plumbing who knew nothing about plumbing, but we call pundits to address millions of people on subjects about which they know nothing of substance...

[leftchick]

1. I read this , this morning...

it really puts egg on CNN and all of the news shows that put Goldberg on as an "expert". Including Brian Lamb who loves to put him on C-Span. Go Juan!
:)

[Cha]

10. I far as I can see..brian

lamb sucks elephant eggs. Hope he's happy with the way our Country is going cause I sure ain't!

[leftchick]

16. he sure seems to be

a week can't go by without him booking those neo-fascists from AEI and the Heritage foundation as "experts". The only thing they are experts in is spreading the PNAC agenda as mainstream thinking.

[tabasco]

13. I haven't been watching CNN ...

and this post surprised me. Jonah Goldberg - a CNN "Iraq expert?" Give me a break ! This guy is a paid propagandist and nothing else. I would LMAO at anyone presenting Goldberg as an expert on Iraq if it wasn't so sad. What next? Jeff Gannon (alias) as an ethics expert?

Oh well - I guess that's why I don't watch CNN anymore.

[realFedUp]

2. One man's "expert" is another man's tool

We need more Juan Coles, real experts in
their fields, to stand up to the strawmen
posing as experts to take our country back.

Truth is really the only way to fight evil.

[paineinthearse]

3. Books are nice. They are rectangular and soft and have information in them

John Stewart: "Never judge a book by its content."

But do judge a talking head by their lack of content.

[BurtWorm]

5. That was a great line!

:toast:

[Stirk]

4. Jonah Goldberg is one of CNN's "experts"?

Christ, I knew they were coporate shills, but I didn't realize they were that bad. That's literally like having Michael Savage on as an expert on Democrats.

[Swede]

6. What a great essay on these rightwing ass kissers.

They all lack judgement,they werre all wrong,why should anyone listen to them?

[David__77]

7. A note on "ideological templates."

In some ways, I understand the ideological discipline of the neo-conservatives. Since it is a movement essentially spawned from Trotskyism, "socialist" collaborator with fascism against the Soviet Union, this makes sense. They still speak in "party language."

But "party language" is not a bad thing, not at all. It enforces political discipline and helps mold a unified and cohesive worldview among political activists of a movement. From this, progressives should learn. This does not mean to cast aside critical thinking, but it does mean that, above all it is important to fight and win political struggles, and not to endlessly debate one's enemies.

[BurtWorm]

9. Would you be willing to sacrifice critical thought to spew the party line?

I know that's a gross oversimplification of your point, but it seems to me that wingers are only too happy to do it because it makes "thought" easier and they don't have a lot of wattage to begin with.

[David__77]

12. I would be willing to uphold political position I am shaky about, yes.

I would never sacrifice my political thought, but, yes, I certainly would publicly uphold a position if I thought that doing so was in the interest of furthering the unity and empowerment of the political left. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Unity, discipline and sacrifice are the hallmarks of a successful political movement.

[Cha]

8. I can tell him why cnn would "hire

someone to talk about Iraq policy who has not read a book on the subject under discussion."

Because they are greedy fascist and do not care about the truth.

If goldberg is on npr, too..well maybe they are trying to keep up with cnn.

[BurtWorm]

11. Using Goldberg is a way of telegraphing "balance" to winger viewers,

advertisers, and holders of the public funding purse strings.

[Cha]

14. I know..it's just makes me sick that our

country is inundated with the ilk of oxy,hannity,savage, the goldbergs,cnn, msnbc,and faux. And npr has to crap up the airwaves with goldberg shyte.

[KharmaTrain]

15. Ya See, We're Not Librul...Watch Us, Puleeeze

Since when does the truth and balance get in CNNservative's way of spinning the regime's line? Remember, this is the network that employs Rush Limpbaugh's girlfriend, hired Paula Zahn from Faux, replace or "retired" any and all credible journalists and is the home of Robert Novakula (who boasts of how much influence he has in network programming these days). Jonah's just part of the echo chamber...there to make sure the regime's blast fax points are on the air early and often.

I doubt Goldberg has ever had an original thought in his life other than ways to make a better fudge sundae. Without his venomous mommy, he's be installing linoleum and his pals Shaun & Coultergeist and Ingrahatem give him lots of room to show his obnoxiousness that sells the books his sham publisher bulk orders. A nice little racket.

This network goes out its way not only to ignore REAL stories like the pundit payola, the Gannon scam and other journalistic conflicts, but is used to downplay and spin them more. And who do they use to do that? "Experts" or "plain folks (wingnut talk show radio goons)" who have long since sold their souls. There is ZERO credibility on anything CNNservative shows these days. If it has value, it's to see what talking points this regime is trying to feed the sheeple.

[DenverDem]

17. Goldberg's mother was the project manager for the Lewinsky black op.

She was also the mole in the McGovern campaign that destroyed Eagleton because he had had ECT in psychotherapy.

The chips don't fall far from the block.