Why I can't stand Counterpunch

[cali]

If there's something that's nearly a sure bet prediction, it's that Cockburn and Counterpunch will go after Obama relentlessly and viciously. After all, this is the rag that went relentlessly after Clinton and Gore and just about every other dem you've ever heard of- aside from Dennis Kucinich. Now, I am NOT NOT NOT saying that Obama shouldn't be vigorously criticized. You bet he should be. But he should also be commended when he does good things. And you can bet your ass you'll rarely if ever see the crowd at Counterpunch doing that.

Now a lot of folks around here think highly of Counterpunch. I think they lie and smear as much as any right wing source. And like the shitrag it is, the Counterpunchies are busy as bees drawing as many comparisons between Obama and bushco as they possibly can.

Panning for Pyrite on a Cold Day at the Mall
By RICHARD RHAMES

“The American way of life is not negotiable.”
GHW Bush, 1992

“The American way of life is non-negotiable.”
RB (“Dick”) Cheney, 2001

“We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense...”
BH Obama, 1/20/09



Barack Obama went to the mall in Washington, D.C. to give a speech. He brought his family. Powerful people sat behind him as he addressed his powerless fans. He wore a flag pin. He often invoked a certain jealous sky-god and directed “Him” to “bless America”: His first act as commander-in-chief.

The “soaring rhetoric” he deployed was then endlessly parsed by the chattering classes for hints of what it all might mean. Like ragged miners, sifting though gravely stream beds questing for shiny flecks of precious metals, they bent doggedly to their task.

But mostly Number 44 continued his announced strategy of being toweringly vague and allowing political consumers to project their dreams onto his “blank screen” (Audacity of Hope).

Typically, he demeaned much historical struggle and ideology as so many “petty grievances, false promises, ... recriminations and worn-out dogmas.” He pledged to “set aside (these) childish things.” He never said which grievances he considered “petty” or which dogmas were “worn-out,” though he was very clear that the organized slaughter of ferocious military adventures past and present, and “freedom”- expanding “markets” were praiseworthy and very grown-up keepers indeed.'

<snip>

http://www.counterpunch.org/rhames01232009.html\

[Warren Stupidity]

1. counterpunch is quite clear that it is left wing radical muckraking

"CounterPunch is the bi-weekly muckraking newsletter edited by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair. Twice a month we bring our readers the stories that the corporate press never prints. We aren't side-line journalists here at CounterPunch. Ours is muckraking with a radical attitude and nothing makes us happier than when CounterPunch readers write in to say how useful they've found our newsletter in their battles against the war machine, big business and the rapers of nature."

They are not pretending to be anything other than exactly what they are.

Obama, like Clinton, is a center-right Democrat. Consequently an actual left wing publication is going to find much to disagree with about the Obama administration. Good for them. We have been drifting right for 40 years - since Nixon ended the liberal era in Washington - and we need more Counterpunch-like voices on the left not fewer.

[cali]

4. The pretend to be honest. I've found many, many times that they are anything

but. And they're malicious fuckers as well. They're the worldnut daily of the left. fuck them.

[Warren Stupidity]

16. Unlike: -insert your media outlet here-

Counterpunch just happens to upfront about its ax-grinding, unlike say The New York Times, which grinds its axes while hiding behind a veneer of authoritative respectability. See for example the run up to the Iraq War, or anything involving Israel.

That said, there have been many essay from Counterpunch, particularly from Cockburn, that completely piss me off. Generally the result of my being pissed off is to go investigate their claims and learn why they are or are not bullshit.

We need more leftwing gadflies and muckrakers, not fewer.

[Odin2005]

2. Counterpunch hates Obama because they are the type of moron ideologues he criticizes

They are a much of stupid Marxist clowns who can't think outside their stuffy ideological boxes.

[laststeamtrain]

3. I like Counterpunch.

They publish lots of different writers & offer many varying, lively viewpoints.

It's not for everyone. That's for sure.

It doesn't exist to validate mainstream opinion. I think that's why they call it Counterpunch.

If a reader wants warm & fuzzy agreement it's probably best to stay away from Counterpunch.

[cali]

5. I don't want warm and fuzzy. I want intelligent and insightful

I also want a degree of honesty and not shit stirring for the sake of shit stirring. Counterpunch fails on those requirements.

[laststeamtrain]

6. I think it's pretty clear what authoritarians require.

Agreement.

Or else they begin a spew of foul mouthed nonsense.

I've never associated honesty, insight or intelligence with your posts; more like foul mouthed belligerence for belligerence's sake.

Excuse me if I bail out of your ridiculous thread. I need to go stick a sharp pencil in my eye.

[cali]

7. you're one to talk

can't handle anyone who doesn't buy into your lame CT stuff. I express my opinion about Counterpunch and YOU personally attack me. Have fun with the pencil in the eye hobby.

[laststeamtrain]

9. What's CT? Critical Theory? Or is it some fan boy gibberish?

If it's Critical Theory, by all means, buy in.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_theory

[Mr Rabble]

13. You are actually asking for warm and fuzzy Cali.

Literally. If people disagree with the Obama administration I would hope they have a clear command of the facts, and are able to articulate them.

Like it or not, Counterpunch has very valid points.

Were we to discuss the issues without including a politician, I imagine that you would agree with Counterpunch 100% of the time.

It is the Obama administration- and all other administrations- that are out of step with what the majority of citizens want.

[Dogmudgeon]

8. Putting the "eek!" in Radical Chic

Okay, that's "Radical Sheesh!"

Counterpunch is also trying to position itself as an authority on (of all things) blues music.

What comes next -- discount mail-order Indian smokes?

Wanna spend an interesting hour or two with the Google? Pair "Alexander Cockburn" with the following words in the search box:

Scientology (pro)
Global Warming ("skeptic")
Al Gore ("... is a mass-murderer!")
Virginia Tech (arm the students)
JFK (position depends on the day, the weather, and whether Saturn is retrograde)
Conspiracy (they don't exist, except ...)
(then read)
Anti-Semitism (... when he's accused of this)

Cockburn, like Hitchens and LaRouche, are more interested in building "thinking man's cults" based on their "quirky, yet carefully nuanced" disinformation, than practicing anything as dreary and commonplace as journalism or history. And there are literally thousands of websites that mention their "brands", usually critically.

In a Marketplace Of Ideas that rewards click-through rather than accuracy, they win.

--p!

[laststeamtrain]

10. Radical Chic? I haven't heard that since the '70s/early'80s.

Culture war much?

Is there a 'Reagan Democrat' revival on the horizon?

[Dogmudgeon]

14. Yes. I'm a secret agent from R.I.G.H.T.

We've infiltrated all lefty websites to sow disobedience to your rightful leaders and convert you to Conservatism so that you'll watch more Fox News and buy more Oreck vacuum cleaners.

"_____ much?" Is that Fearless Leader's new format for secret messages? My secret code is: "The ham-smoking gray wren writes a bawdy poem on the door of the DLC in Esperanto."

Pass it on, Comrade.

--p!

[depakid]

18. Kinda like the Art Bell of progressive publishing

[anonymous171]

11. Obama should have just said "FUCK AMERICA"

I'm sure that would have gone over well with the audience.

[Marr]

12. This is identical to the Republicans' complaints that the media "never tells you the good news".

I'm amazed at how casually people can adopt the arguments they claim to despise.

[CreekDog]

15. I was thinking the same thing along these lines

They have to convince liberals like you and me if they want to see their plans come to fruition.

And what they are doing and saying: not convincing.

[LeftishBrit]

17. I've disliked Counterpunch for a while. I don't really consider it left-wing

(1) Some of the writers are frankly RW, though anti-war. E.g. Paul Craig Roberts (an architect of Reaganomics!) and William Lind.

(2) Related to the above, it has included articles which include McCarthyite xenophobic accusations against 'Zionists', implying that their loyalties to America are suspect. (Note: I am not here discussing whether Zionism is right or wrong; merely whether it is appropriate to bring disloyalty accusations into such an issue.)

(3) It has been quite vile about Bosnian Muslims, and very dismissive of the Srebrenica massacre.

(4) Alexander Cockburn is a strong global-warning denier, and sneers at Al Gore on the subject.


Some of its writers and articles are good, but it should not be regarded, or regard itself, as consistently progressive.