Fareed Zakaria definitely had his delicate fee-fees hurt by the harsh criticism he received from the Left after he characterized Trump's missile launch into Syria as a presidentially-defining moment. Perhaps when Jeremy Scahill stated that if he could have sex with this missile attack, he would have, it was too much for him to let it go.
Or maybe it was the Pod Saves America crew, hosted by several of Obama's close advisers and speechwriters, that definitely got his goat, as evidenced by this statement:
A gaggle of speechwriters said how my comments were the stupidest of any on the planet. White House speechwriters must have written the lines Barack Obama spoke on September 27, 2013, announcing the U.N. deal, in which the Syrian regime agreed to give up its chemical weapons stockpile.
It's not entirely clear how that fact negates the stupidity of saying that bombing another country makes one the president, but logic is not the currency of the offended. Fareed perhaps forgot that Assad does nothing without their puppet master, Vladimir Putin. Someone of Zakaria's intellect should know that there's a very real possibility the Russian autocrat supplied the leader with some new chemical weapons, but he elides over that completely.
It's ironic that confronted with negative attention for a ridiculous statement, Zakaria turns to the exact same tactics of Donald Trump: attacking the messenger and gaslighting those who disagree with him. His both-siderist attempt to normalize this dangerous man stirs up unpleasant memories of the media's sick affinity for war porn. How could we forget Tweety's adulation for Bush 43 when he landed the jet on the aircraft carrier? Normalizing a lying, war-mongering administration is the last thing we need now from our media. We need context. We need facts. We need reality. Which we got from one of those Obama speechwriters far better than Zakaria today:
10 days after the Syria strike. Any evidence it was effective, changed anything on the ground, or was part of a larger strategy? https://t.co/y7ygK8h9yl
— Jon Favreau (@jonfavs) April 16, 2017
Because Trump is so motivated by approval, the mainstream media encouraging his unconstitutional, unpresidential conduct will only result in more costly unethical, military action absent any real strategy. For someone who labeled Trump a "cancer on democracy," Zakaria really made a 180° turn when he admonished liberals today:
The strikes were discreet, measured, intended to convey a signal and designed to ensure the U.S. into the Syrian Civil War.
...Instead we have Trump giving us the third Clinton term. Liberals have to be careful to avoid Trump Derangement Syndrome. If Trump uses a policy, it cannot be wrong, evil and dangerous. In my case, I have been tough on Donald Trump I attacked almost every policy he proposed during the campaign. a week before the election, I called him a cancer on American policy and urged voters to reject him, but they didn't (Russian interference notwithstanding). He is now 'president.' I believe my job is to evaluate his policies and explain why, in my view, they are wise or not. Many of Trump's campaign promises and policies are idiotic and unworkable.
Those of us who oppose him face a challenge. We have to ask ourselves, would we rather see Trump reversing himself or relentlessly pursuing his agenda?
Thus begins the gaslighting. If you think that an ineffectual bombing--warned in advance to allies of Assad--that didn't even shut down the airbase for 24 hours as an impulsive response to being shown pictures of children suffering from a sarin attack and without any apparent coherence to a larger foreign policy is not a presidential action, then you are suffering from "Trump Derangement." Nice.
It should be pointed out to Zakaria that the accusations of "XXX Derangement Syndrome" originated with people hating on Bill and Hillary Clinton for NON-FACTUAL reasons (like the Vince Foster suicide, Whitewater, etc.). Charles Krauthammer appropriated it to dismiss any criticism of the Bush II policies, but the origins were very much of a deranged, non-factual rage of the Clintons. To now appropriate the very much fact-based criticism of Trump as a "derangement" is Zakaria flailing around wildly to justify his own journalistic failings.
Shouldn't every American be a bit apprehensive and suspicious of Donald Trump, a man who might very well be working for a foreign entity? How could that real possibility be forgotten in any commentary? Those who oppose him do so with good reason, and these investigations should be expedited before we all pay even more dearly than we have already.
Fareed, stop acting like a both-sides-do-it shill and take a stand for the truth. Money isn't everything, and it won't save you from nuclear radiation.