Scarborough hates journalism, loves torture

Blog ››› ››› JAMISON FOSER

Joe Scarborough, sounding more like the Republican congressman he once was than the journalist he's supposed to be, said this morning that people should "blame Dana Priest" if "planes go into buildings," because the Washington Post reporter exposed waterboarding.

As Atrios noted, Scarborough essentially came out in opposition to journalism. The kind of journalism that has actual value, anyway. Journalism like Dana Priest's is all too rare in a media climate that values empty snark and mindless horse-race obsession over investigation and information. Priest's work should be held up as a goal for journalists to aspire to, not attacked.

Along with the demagoguery of his attack on Priest, Scarborough also assumes that torture works, and works better than the alternatives. There's plenty of evidence to the contrary. And the best "evidence" supporting that assumptions pretty much boils down to the tired statement that "we haven't been attacked since 9/11." Lisa Simpson has explained the flaws in that reasoning:

Homer: Not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol must be working like a charm.

Lisa: That's specious reasoning, Dad.

Homer: Thank you, dear.

Lisa: By your logic I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away.

Homer: Oh, how does it work?

Lisa: It doesn't work.

Homer: Uh-huh.

Lisa: It's just a stupid rock.

Homer: Uh-huh.

Lisa: But I don't see any tigers around, do you?

Homer: Lisa, I want to buy your rock.

UPDATE: For what it's worth, Scarborough has repeatedly said Priest did not first disclose waterboarding. 12 days ago, for example: "Newsweek wrote about waterboarding in 2003 after we captured Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, nobody said a word. Suddenly Dana Priest writes an article, everybody`s stunned. Stunned, this is going on?"

We've changed our commenting system to Disqus.
Instructions for signing up and claiming your comment history are located here.
Updated rules for commenting are here.