In These Times is not immune to the Great Recession. Please donate now!
PrintDiscuss
Culture » June 26, 2008 » Web Only

Reading The Onion Seriously (cont’d)

Page 2 of 2« Previous
A news brief reported,"Dead Iraqi Would Have Loved Democracy," which in just six words refuted most arguments for the war.

But for its part, The Onion generally steered clear of that question, and instead frequently pointed out how the war enabled Bush to shift the nation’s attention from other problems. In “Bush on Economy: ‘Saddam Must Be Overthrown,’” for example, the war solved problems ranging from a weak manufacturing sector to the ongoing corporate scandals, which at the time involved WorldCom and Enron. Similarly, W.’s answer to the problem of North Korea was, of course, to invade Iraq; later, he tried to help sell his tax cuts by offering another $300 on top of his initial tax rebate, provided that the United States went to war. Brushing aside the WMD issue, The Onion consistently put forth a satirical but convincing case that the United States was going to war simply because the Bush administration wanted it.

When the war finally began in March 2003, the paper continued to mock both the Bush administration’s theatrics and its claims to an easy victory. One memorable lead story again foretold Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” moment with remarkable accuracy. Beside a photo of W. leading an invading squad of soldiers through desert combat, the paper’s top story explained how “Bush Bravely Leads 3rd Infantry into Battle.” In that same issue, a news brief reported,”Dead Iraqi Would Have Loved Democracy,” which in just six words refuted most arguments for the war. With notable foresight, the lead in the following week’s top story then stated,”Following a 12th consecutive day of fighting, a puzzled and frustrated President Bush confided to military advisors Monday that he ‘really figured the war would be over by now.’”

In that story, and in many others, Bush came across as juvenile and incompetent, a front man for Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and the other neo-cons. In the fall of 2002, Beltway media mainstay Bob Woodward had, in Bush at War, legitimized the notion that W. really was in charge of his administration’s war plans; four years and two books later,Woodward’s analysis mirrored that found in The Onion.

The Onion Stays the Course

As the overthrow of Saddam became the occupation of Iraq, the paper stayed on the attack. It fired back at Bush shortly after he gave his spurious speech aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln declaring victory; here was the Hollywood moment that the paper had sagely predicted, with Bush effectively combining two Tom Cruise films (Top Gun and Mission: Impossible).

But in The Onion’s account, instead of stating that the mission was over, the sign behind Bush read “screw you, vets,”and the story detailed a ribbon-cutting ceremony at which Bush cut veterans benefits. The piece also featured what was by The Onion standards an unusually earnest photo, of a homeless African American vet dejectedly panhandling. Such sentimentality was short-lived, however, as the next week’s lead story returned to form: “Gen. Tommy Franks Quits Army to Pursue Solo Bombing Projects.” “The years I’ve spent with the Army have been amazing, and we did some fantastic bombing,” Franks stated. “But at this point, I feel like I’ve taken it as far as I can. It’s time for me to move on and see what I can destroy on my own.”

Amid the chaotic aftermath of the invasion, many media observers, as well as Democratic Party officials, began to turn against the Bush administration, attacking its incompetent handling of the occupation. The Onion, however, continued its relentless assault on both the design and the execution of the war.

© 2008 by Theodore Hamm. This piece was adapted from Theodore Hamm’s The New Blue Media: How Michael Moore, MoveOn.org, Jon Stewart and Company Are Transforming Progressive Politics (The New Press). Published with the permission of The New Press and available now at good book stores everywhere.

Page 2 of 2« Previous
  • Help In These Times publish more articles like this. Donate today!
  • Subscribe today and save 40% off the newsstand price!
Theodore Hamm is the founding editor of the Brooklyn Rail and an associate professor of urban studies at Metropolitan College of New York. He has written for the Los Angeles Times, The Nation, and Truthdig, among other publications.

More information about Theodore Hamm
  • subscribe to print magazine

  • Reader Comments

    The Onion’s finest moment:

    God Angrily Clarifies ‘Don’t Kill’ Rule
    http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28151

    Posted by monkyhead on Jun 26, 2008 at 4:14 PM

    As for the poignant 9/11 reference, ask the terrorist in Blair House about not activating NORAD.

    He’ll be power-behind-the-Oval-Office for another few months. Officially. Maybe longer unofficially. Bastard.

    Posted by Galt on Sep 3, 2008 at 2:31 AM
  • extended discussion >>>Continued...

    Discussions with more than 5 comments are continued on our special discussion page to encourage continuity and ease of use. There are currently 10 posts.

    IN THESE TIMES COMMUNITY MEMBERS