Crowley's Crowings: Sheehan is worth more than 48 Medal of Honor Recipients

Michael Crowley, of The New Republic' blog The Plank, makes his debut on the Gadfly Chronicles with this little bit of media insanity. In a December 19th article, Is The New York Times Against The Troops?, Crowley takes on Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard for Barnes' December 16th article where Barnes objects that the "war in Iraq is a war without heroes."

Among other points, Barnes explains that the Times has run only two articles on Sgt. Paul Ray Smith, "the first and only soldier awarded the Medal of Honor for extraordinary courage in the war in Iraq".

Crowley exclaims and complains that Barnes is crowing politics,

But if you read into the piece you'll see that what really irks Barnes isn't so much coverage of the troops after all: It's coverage of George Bush.

Crowley goes on to refute Barnes objection,

So when the Times runs two different articles about the soldier in question--the first one a 2500-worder that appeared on page one, according to Nexis--it's still not good enough if the paper "only" runs a captioned photo when Bush becomes part of the story. To Barnes and his "official" it's apparently the presidential photo-op that matters most of all. Evidently the way to properly honor our heroic soldiers is not to retell their stories, but to ensure that Bush can thoroughly bask in their heroic glory.

The piece in the NYT, by the way, was entitled, The Struggle for Iraq: Casualties; Medals for His Valor, Ashes for His Wife.

But, let us be fair. Here is how Mr. Barnes and Mr. Crowley respectively describe Sgt. Smith's heroism (after all, the story is about him, isn't it?)

As Barnes tells the story:

Surprised by 100 of Saddam Hussein's Republican Guards, Smith and his men, some of them wounded, were pinned down and in danger of being overrun. Smith manned a 50-caliber machine gun atop a damaged armored vehicle. Exposed to enemy fire, he singlehandedly repelled the attack, allowing his men to scramble to safety. He killed as many as 50 of Saddam's elite soldiers and saved more than 100 American troops. Paul Ray Smith, 33, was killed by a shot to the head.

Mr. Crowley:

Watch (Barnes) zoom in on the case of Sergeant Paul Ray Smith, killed as he reportedly saved 100 of his men when he singlehandedly fended off an Iraqi assault in April 2003.

Well, I could say a lot at this point. I could point out that Crowley could have simply quoted Barnes as he does elsewhere in his rebuttal; I could point out that those 100 men who reportedly were saved are reportedly very grateful; but I won't insult your intelligence the way Crowley enjoys doing.

My guess is Crowley really didn't read Barnes' article. Barnes is clearly criticizing MSM for ignoring what our troops are really doing in Iraq.

Barnes continues (this is something Crowley didn't read or chose to ignore):

Instead of heroes, there are victims. The two most famous soldiers in the war are Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman (in Afghanistan). Lynch was captured by Saddam's troops after her truck crashed. Stories of her heroism in a gun battle with Iraqis turned out to be false. She was rescued later from an Iraqi hospital. Tillman, who gave up a pro football career to join the Army, was killed by friendly fire. "The press made that a negative story, a scandal almost," says a Pentagon official.

It gets worse. In a study of over 1,300 reports broadcast on network news programs from January to September of this year, Rich Noyes of the Media Research Center found only eight stories of heroism or valor by American troops and nine of soldiers helping the Iraqi people. But there were 79 stories, Noyes said, "focused on allegations of combat mistakes or outright misconduct on the part of U.S. military personnel."
[...]
And even when the media take an interest, it isn't always respectful. When CNN took up the medal awarded to Smith the day after the ceremony at the White House, here's how anchor Paula Zahn presented it:

"Time now for all of you to choose your favorite person of the day. Every day, you can vote on our website, cnn.com/paula. Today's choices: the mourners pouring into Rome, spending hours in line to pay their respects to the pope; Medal of Honor winner Sgt. Paul Smith for giving his life to save so many of his fellow soldiers in Iraq. And British prime minister Tony Blair, calling for a new election, even though his party has lost support in the polls."

At least Smith won.

Crowley is supremely guilty of exactly what he charges Barnes of doing, if you read into the piece you'll see that what really irks Crowley isn't so much coverage of the troops after all: It's coverage of George Bush.

Mr. Barnes doesn't need it, but allow me an assist. Go to the NYT. Do a search of their articles since 1981 on the following two phrases,

+"Paul Ray Smith"

and

+"Cindy Sheehan"

(the plus sign and the quotes are required if you don't want every Tom, Dick and Harry Smith or Sean, Ian or Michael Sheehan in your search results)

Crowley is absolutely right. There were 2 articles on the one American soldier in Iraq who was awarded the Highest Military Honor that America awards.

There are 97 articles on Cindy Sheehan.

You do the math.

Then read Barnes' and Crowley's piece and you decide.