Katie Distinquishes Herself

If you're a big Katie Couric fan like I am, you'll appreciate this article. She had a few things to say at a National Press Club seminar on "Democracy and the Press" Thursday night.

"Everyone in this room would agree that people in this country were misled in terms of the rationale for this war," Couric said, according to a report in the San Francisco Examiner.

That should tell you something. Everyone in that press club room is assumed to have the same opinion on Iraq.

"I've never understood why [invading Iraq] was so high on the administration's agenda when terrorism was going on in Afghanistan and Pakistan - and that [Iraq] had no true connection with al Qaeda," she said.

Actually, she may have noticed that Iraq came in second to Afghanistan on the hit list. And we cut a deal with Pakistan, for better or for worse, which required, with some success, Pakistan's cooperation.

Prior to going to war with Iraq, Bush laid out his rational and agenda and convinced Congress and the majority of the nation that it was a good idea. It was based on the best information available at the time and was consistent with other intelligence from other countries.

If she wasn't listening to the evidence and rational put forth by the administration in 2002 and 2003, shame on her. The basis of Bush's argument was not that there was a connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda. This is something that Ms. Couric and her buddies in New York and DC are interested in promoting, but it is sloppy journalism. If you want to refute the decision to invade Iraq, go ahead. There are good arguments. But make them and quit relying on how easily fooled you were.

"The whole culture of wearing flags on our lapel and saying 'we' when referring to the United States and, even the 'shock and awe' of the initial stages, it was just too jubilant and just a little uncomfortable."

This sums up my problem with Katie Couric and may other liberal journalist - the "flags on the lapel" and the "we" when referring to the US was and is a sign of unity in the face of attack by a foreign enemy. What would Ms. Couric and her colleagues have us do under these circumstance? Examine the root causes of the murder of 3000 Americans by a bunch of wealthy Muslim terrorists who were pretty clear about their goals from the outset?

Couric, 50, also accused the Bush Administration of "disbanding the Iraq military, and leaving 100,000 Sunni men feeling marginalized and angry" - and said she'd "feel totally comfortable saying any of that at some point, if required, on television."

If she means the Republican Guard, I believe that was the point. Since then, our armed forces have done their best to train and equip a new army that we hope will be loyal to the country and capable of its defense. I don't remember Couric complaining about Clinton or Carter disbanding our CIA or our millitary and marginalizing them, a complaint that would be better placed.

She also said her former network, NBC, tried to muzzle her after she conducted a combative interview with Condoleezza Rice on the "Today" show.

"I think there was a lot of undercurrent of pressure not to rock the boat for a variety of reasons . . . " she said, without elaborating.

Yes, it's called ratings. The vast unwashed masses don't appreciate a mindless know-it-all ineffectively berating an intelligent accomplished woman.

Couric, whose newscast is mired in third place, also slammed Rather for his "60 Minutes II" report questioning George W. Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard in the 1970s.

The report, which aired just before Bush sought reelection in 2004, was discredited - and led to Rather's eventual ouster from CBS News.

"There were things in there that were quite egregious in terms of how it was reported," Couric said of the report.

"And sloppy work is sloppy work."

I trust her to know it when she sees it.