If You Can't Talk the Talk…

|

The WaPo won't be sponsoring the Pentagon's "Freedom Walk" after all. Says the paper:

"It is The Post's practice to avoid activities that might lead readers to question the objectivity of The Post's news coverage."

Whole freedom about-face here.

Freedom Walk registration requirements and prohibited items list here.

NEXT: Iraq's Constitutional Crisis

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. This is idiotic. Though I think the typical flag-waving and apple pie is a bit hollow, I don’t see anything really that offensive about this particular event.

    The only thing the Post is doing is caving in to its leftist newsroom. Either they should’ve never signed on in the first place, or go through with it. To quit halfway is plain stupid.

  2. If Bush says we should do it then we have no choice.

  3. He is our president and messiah and it is treason not to obey.

  4. Bush = Jesus

  5. Woman, it’s time to come back to the tree and feed the chimp..

  6. Seriously, how is it that people can still buy into shmaltzy, empty gestures like a “FREEDOM WALK” in this day and age?

    I have to think that the people who go to something like this are probably the same demographic who consider Lawrence Welk to be a cultural high point.

  7. Nice to see the Post responding to its customers wishes. Good result. All is forgiven, afaiac.

  8. Yeah, it really sucks to see the word “freedom” touted in a high-profile way by America’s citizenry and via its government.

  9. I suppose I could get behind it if the government didn’t regularly wipe it’s nether regions all over the Bill of Rights.

  10. Yes, the government does wipe its ass all over the Bill of Rights. But why would that be a reason to spurn the “Freedom Walk”?

  11. Perhaps because it gives tacit approval to the very entity that is endeavoring to curtail freedom while at the same time trumpeting how good freedom is?

    I mean, you do see the inherent “Democratic People’s Republic of…” vibe in that, right?

  12. SP, by that logic, also believes that the PATRIOT Act was a congressional effort to promote patriotism and the Ministry of Love is where we go for ecstasy orgies.

  13. Personally, I find it kind of creepy that the Pentagon, of all bureaucratic agencies, is now appropriating the tactics and culture of the leftist civil rights establishment. I can see holding a positive event for troops and their families, sort of like the White House Easter Egg roll for kids, but the idea of the DoD sponsoring a Farrakhan-esque “March” or “Walk” is just too Soviet May-Day-Eventish for my tastes.

    Unfortunately, since the ridiculous Million Man March and the subsequent copycat events it spawned, I just pretty much just roll my eyes feverishly whenever some “aggrieved” group (and apparently, now the DoD has taken to appropriating the whiny-ness of the left-liberal “victimhood” establishment) feels the need to hold an MLK-style “march” or “walk”.

    This just smacks too much of partisan politics on the part of military leadership, which I find disgusting. I joined to defend the U.S. Constitution and my fellow citizen’s rights thereof, not the partisan careers of Bush or Clinton lackeys.

  14. “It is The Post’s practice to avoid activities that might lead readers to question the objectivity of The Post’s news coverage.”

    …except when we write editorials about the Iraq War. Then we just totally blow the administration.

  15. We’ll need to do a warrantless Freedom Search to see if you’ve been hiding income to reduce your Freedom Contribution. Now get out of the way before we send you to the Freedom Camps. What, you have a problem with freedom?

  16. Sure, that must be it — I’m simply confused by semantics. Thanks for setting me straight. God knows we wouldn’t want to attach the word “freedom” to anything Sept. 11-related. Obviously we were attacked by Islamic fundamentalists because of partisan political factors, not because of the society and culture we’ve developed atop the foundation of liberty.

  17. SP,

    I don’t think it’s really that awful, it just smacks of “Victory Gin.” Just a little bit too propagandistic (is that a word?).

  18. “propagandistic (is that a word?)”

    It is a word, yes indeed.

    But I don’t understand why use of the word “freedom” — when it’s really, truly intended to mean freedom, and when it really, truly does mean freedom — is propagandistic.

  19. We’re from the DOD and we’re here to bring you freedom ….

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.