O’Hanlon Gripes About His Waning Influence: I Now Get ‘Less Than One’ Interview Request Per Day
O’Hanlon Gripes About His Waning Influence: I Now Get ‘Less Than One’ Interview Request Per Day
Earlier this month, the National Security Network reported on Brookings analyst Michael O’Hanlon’s disproportionate representation in major papers’ op-ed pages. His pro-Iraq war pieces have appeared in “13 pieces in four of the most influential op-ed pages in the country over the past 7 months.”
O’Hanlon, however, isn’t satisfied with his op-ed presence, complaining today that he is a perfect example of the media’s declining interest in Iraq, as he hardly receives Iraq interview requests anymore:
“I was getting on average three to five calls a day for interviews about the war” in the first years, said Michael E. O’Hanlon, a senior fellow on national security at the Brookings Institution. “Now it’s less than one a day.”
While O’Hanlon blames the press for his decreased interviews, there is another possibility: his authority on Iraq has declined, as he has repeatedly and inextricably linked himself to Bush’s Iraq policies.
So when O’Hanlon does get the occasional interview, what can we expect to see? On the Today Show this morning, O’Hanlon appeared dismissive of the implications of the 4,000 U.S. troop death milestone in Iraq:
It’s not going to be seen as a major symbolic plateau or threshold or new milestone. It’s just going to be another reminder of the grim toll of war.
Watch it:
With comments like this, the media’s declining interest in interviewing O’Hanlon seems more like a positive development.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Get used to it bottom-feeder.
Your pond is about to evaporate completely.
March 24th, 2008 at 2:30 pmWAH, WAH, WAH!
Thank god for small favors! Maybe people in this country actually DO believe in the truth.
March 24th, 2008 at 2:31 pmThe public’s interest in Iraq isn’t waning. What’s waning is its interest in pandering, pro-war, Bu$h-apologists with bad hair.
March 24th, 2008 at 2:33 pmi’ve seen a couple of network reports now on how the american public is uninformed about iraq. curiously, those media magpies fail to note that there’s very little coverage of developments there, and since the majority of ‘muricans get their news from the teevee, you’d think it would be a notable point.
funny how that works.
March 24th, 2008 at 2:34 pmI’m wondering how long, before this guy’s failure to successfully predict foreign policy events begins to do damage to Brookings own foreign policy reputation? His repeated errors must be affecting Brookings contributions, both financially, and intellectually, as who wants to be associated with such a nitwit, even tangentially?
March 24th, 2008 at 2:35 pmWingnut Welfare Queens on Parade!!!
Wonder which spooky old Righty OHandjob allowed to “be his Daddy” to get that cushy Stink-Tank job in the first place??
March 24th, 2008 at 2:36 pmO’Hanlon Gripes About His Waning Influence: I Now Get ‘Less Than One’ Interview Request Per Day
Well then , stop being wrong with every one of your stupid statements/predictions , and that will turn around , jackass………
March 24th, 2008 at 2:36 pmtom Says:
March 24th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
The public’s interest in Iraq isn’t waning. What’s waning is its interest in pandering, pro-war, Bu$h-apologists with bad hair.
I disagree, Tom. I think the public’s interest in pandering, pro-war, pro-Bush apologists is waning, regardless of hair style.
March 24th, 2008 at 2:36 pmand you just gave him another one? this isn’t the type of news to propagate. It will be news when no one has reason to mention it’s name.
March 24th, 2008 at 2:38 pmI think at this point, one can reasonably ask: has O’Hanlon ever made an accurate prediction?
March 24th, 2008 at 2:40 pm“It’s not going to be seen as a major symbolic plateau or threshold or new milestone. It’s just going to be another reminder of the grim toll of war.”
He’s right, in that it isn’t getting the banners the other millenial marks did.
But then he HAS to say that it doesn’t matter that much because it would undermine his own cheerleading of the ’successes’ and ‘benefits’ of this war and occupation.
Perhaps especially sickening his is use of “the grim toll of war”. So sad so unfortunate a real shame,if only all this could have been avoided but such is life, or death.
I don;t know whih is depressing Mr O’Hanlon more, “the grim toll of war” or the grim toll fo the war on his career. Methinks the latter.
March 24th, 2008 at 2:41 pmMaybe it’s because the media can’t afford stylists talented enough to tame those warring Tribbles on your noggin, O’Hanlon!
March 24th, 2008 at 2:42 pmI disagree, Tom. I think the public’s interest in pandering, pro-war, pro-Bush apologists is waning, regardless of hair style.
You may be right; however, I was thinking about the recent canning of Johnny Gibson and Tucker Carlson when I wrote that.
March 24th, 2008 at 2:42 pmI can’t buy the basic premise, sorry. William Kristol is arguably much more wrong about many more things than O’Hanlon and he continues to offer his “insight” (’scuse me while I choke with laughter) in newspapers, magazines and television. Well, FoxNews.
Although O’Hanlon is making this all about himself, one point is valid: the press does not cover the Iraqi occupation with any depth or even much breadth and the situation has only gotten worse. Obviously, the Republicans love this “Iraq? Huh? What’s that? Look over there! Negroes!” which is probably why it’s happening in the “liberal media.”
March 24th, 2008 at 2:43 pmtom Says:
March 24th, 2008 at 2:42 pm
I disagree, Tom. I think the public’s interest in pandering, pro-war, pro-Bush apologists is waning, regardless of hair style.
You may be right; however, I was thinking about the recent canning of Johnny Gibson and Tucker Carlson when I wrote that.
You make a strong case, I have to admit.
March 24th, 2008 at 2:43 pmbarfly Says:
“I’m wondering how long, before this guy’s failure to successfully predict foreign policy events begins to do damage to Brookings own foreign policy reputation? His repeated errors must be affecting Brookings contributions, both financially, and intellectually, as who wants to be associated with such a nitwit, even tangentially?”
How long? I guess you’ve not noticed that Brookings is 50% full of dimwit poltroons like O’Hanlon and has been for years. If they drop him it won’t be for his rubbish work, ti will be bacuse he isn’t giving Brookings the advertsing they get everytime he’s introduced on TV. I mean, why hasn’t he been canned already? Becaus he still gets face time and thus advertises the company brand.
March 24th, 2008 at 2:48 pmLet’s make it a ‘troop death milestone’…oh that’s too much trouble, hmmmmm. There is going to be some spare time with the upcoming recession adding to the unemployment.
March 24th, 2008 at 2:48 pm“Now it’s less than one a day.”
How lovely.
March 24th, 2008 at 2:48 pmThis is kind of like a losing Jeopardy! contestant complaining because they don’t let him appear on the show anymore.
News flash, O’Hanlon – that’s what happens when you’re wrong about everything.
March 24th, 2008 at 2:49 pmMaybe if you’d comb your hair and sit up straight you’d get 1 and a half requests per day.
March 24th, 2008 at 2:53 pm“O’Hanlon, however, isn’t satisfied with his op-ed presence, complaining today that he is a perfect example of the media’s declining interest in Iraq, as he hardly receives Iraq interview requests anymore”
_________________________________________
Every time TP posts a thread about this clown, I ask why people even pay attention to him at all.
Now I see people are paying less and less attention to him all the time.
Some things in this universe really do work out the way they’re supposed to.
March 24th, 2008 at 2:54 pmOh and in general about pundits…
IMHO its not the oundits should be judged solekly by their predictions, but how they arrive at their predictions too. Of O;hanlon made no predictions at all, he;d still be wrong because his anlayses are so lazy.
March 24th, 2008 at 2:54 pmKristol winzs the prize for intellectual dishonesty and being wrong every single time.
Has someone already called a WAHmbulance?
March 24th, 2008 at 2:55 pmmisshusseinmolly Says:
March 24th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Every time TP posts a thread about this clown, I ask why people even pay attention to him at all.
I’d never heard of him until I saw his picture while scanning ThinkProgress, wondered what Tom Waits had to do with the Iraq surge, and stopped to read the article.
And boy was I disappointed. Tom Waits’ opinions would’ve been much more interesting.
March 24th, 2008 at 2:56 pmIt is always the “medias” fault. Doesn’t matter if no one finds his rhetoric interesting, along with his daddy, “bush”.
March 24th, 2008 at 2:58 pmWhat does O’Hanlon expect?
He always shows up on camera looking like he’s just spent the night in the Green Room camped in his scivvies, so his suit will look fresh.
Bed-head is dead, Mike.
March 24th, 2008 at 3:00 pmFurther proof that after a time people get tired of waiting for the stopped clock to show the correct time. Kristol they keep around strictly for the comic relief.
March 24th, 2008 at 3:01 pmYes, because only ONE interview request a day means you’re on the fringe.
Seriously, does this guy listen to himself?
March 24th, 2008 at 3:05 pmsnark snark snark
March 24th, 2008 at 3:07 pmIf O’Hanlon wants to restore his credibility, John Cole points the way (from Balloonjuice):
[John Cole]I was wrong about the Doctrine of Pre-emptive warfare.
I was wrong about Iraq possessing WMD.
I was wrong about Scott Ritter and the inspections.
I was wrong about the UN involvement in weapons inspections.
I was wrong about the containment sanctions.
I was wrong about the broader impact of the war on the Middle East.
I was wrong about this making us more safe.
I was wrong about the number of troops needed to stabilize Iraq.
I was wrong when I stated this administration had a clear plan for the aftermath.
I was wrong about securing the ammunition dumps.
I was wrong about the ease of bringing democracy to the Middle East.
I was wrong about dissolving the Iraqi army.
I was wrong about the looting being unimportant.
I was wrong that Bush/Cheney were competent.
I was wrong that we would be greeted as liberators.
I was wrong to make fun of the anti-war protestors.
I was wrong not to trust the dirty smelly hippies.
See how easy Mike?
March 24th, 2008 at 3:10 pmO’Hanlon Gripes About His Waning Influence: I Now Get ‘Less Than One’ Truckload Of Bullcrap Request Per Day
March 24th, 2008 at 3:11 pmAnother discontented neocon that needs attention.I wonder if he was ever in the military.Maybe he would like to go to Iraq and have a romantic time with the rest of BUSHCO and his fellow CHIMPS.
March 24th, 2008 at 3:16 pmDunno about y’all, but this says it all for me:
I’m sorry, but shouldn’t there be a law or rule that says
March 24th, 2008 at 3:19 pm“If you f**k things up really badly you can no longer be called an expert”?
– Tim Robbins while sitting next to Tom Friedman…
on “Real Time With Bill Maher” 8/24/2007
barfly Says:
March 24th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
I think at this point, one can reasonably ask: has O’Hanlon ever made an accurate prediction?
Only thing I can figure is, O’Handjob is trying to keep pace with the predictions of Kristol and Cheney. Now that Rumsfeld has dropped out, it’s down to a three way tie at zero apiece.
March 24th, 2008 at 3:20 pmMaybe now nobody cares about this “war critic” from the “liberal-leaning” Brookings Institute.
March 24th, 2008 at 3:22 pmAs Cheney said, “So?”
That’s funny. I’ve been waiting all my life for someone to call me for an interview. I’m still waiting.
Poor pitiful Mike. At this rate, in a few years he will only be getting calls for interviews once every decade or two.
March 24th, 2008 at 3:24 pmRoket Says:
Poor pitiful Mike. At this rate, in a few years he will only be getting calls for interviews once every decade or two.
Maybe, if they bring back the Soupy Sales Show.
March 24th, 2008 at 3:33 pmIt’s just going to be another reminder of the grim toll of Michael O’Hanlon’s tragically horrible judgement.
March 24th, 2008 at 3:36 pmwhat a schmuck.
March 24th, 2008 at 3:38 pmSorry, but until the interviews run 2 to 1 in favor of those who were right and opposed the invasion/occupation of Iraq, instead of panels being continually flooded with those who were wrong about everything, can we assume the “Media” has come to its senses.
The political decision to end the war came with the 2006 elections, and those politicians who continue to gnaw the ends of their rotted warmongering goals do so at great peril. We should adapt a new battle cry for 2008:
“CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?!?!”
March 24th, 2008 at 4:32 pmPoor baby, O’Hanlon.
March 24th, 2008 at 5:04 pmHis ginormous ego won’t let him fact the fact that he has practically no credibility left any more due to his own errors, not the least of which is his support of the war and George Bush.
Serioulsy – why does this guy ALWAYS look like he has his hair styled by angry weasals? Is it like Tucker’s bowtie? Even Tucker let that beaut go eventually.
March 24th, 2008 at 5:15 pmHaha, right. That explains why he’s still on the Today show, on the NY Times Op-Ed page, etc. How can you cite the National Security Network findings, and then suggest that his waning “authority” is hurting him? Either O’Hanlon is disproportionately represented or he’s not – choose one!
Also, there’s no denying that media coverage on the war is down.
TP slams O’Hanlon partly for his comments on the Debaathification law. That law’s promise or peril will be determined by how it is implemented. But the simple fact of passing it is progress. Of course, I’m sure that if the implementation goes well, ThinkProgress will find some way to slam it, right?
March 24th, 2008 at 5:16 pmthirdparty Says:
TP slams O’Hanlon partly for his comments on the Debaathification law.
Nice try at hiding that straw man in the cornfield, troll, but you should have taken off the funny hat first.
March 24th, 2008 at 5:34 pmDude should comb is hair. He wouldn’t look like he lives in his Mom’s basement and maybe the T.V. would call him more.
March 24th, 2008 at 5:47 pmWith a track record like O Hanlon from such an esteemed institute as Brookings. I just can’t believe Hannity, O Rielly, Briney Hume, and the rest of the FOX characters not calling on him every night.
He is such a war (occupation) specialist. He knows just how to reinforce Cheney’s “SO” to America. That is why the State Dept and Dept of Defense has been knocking down his door to work for them. I had thought O Hanlon would of replaced Rumsfeld, but NOOOOO!…, Bush went with Gates.
O Hanlon could be useful to McCain. He could help John sound like he sort of understands the difference between Shia, Sunni, Al Qaida and Iraqi insurgents. maybe?
March 24th, 2008 at 6:46 pmOh, should I feel bad for someone with only book knowledge and little life knowledge on the subject of WARWARWAR!
These organizations that hire fresh meat and then hire old out-dated meat can only rely on the same old meal, meat!
Granted, this is why there are SCHOLARS in the subject, which have researched the topic as their profession!
I think Scholars have more and better creditability than any of these Bookings Institution and their want-a-be’s!
So, who taught these guys who work at the Booking’s Ins? SCHOLARS!!!
March 24th, 2008 at 7:26 pmOne interview a year is more than enough for this ‘Know it all’ Iraq expert called O’Hanlon.
March 24th, 2008 at 7:46 pmMaybe they’re seeing the blood on your hands a bit more clearly, Michael.
This is about people killing, dying and being maimed. Terrible human trauma was caused by this unjust war and these guys sit there and pat each other on the back. What a circlejerk.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:09 pmHow is that a straw man argument? It’s absolutely true — just follow TP’s own links on this post!
March 24th, 2008 at 10:12 pmPut out solicitations, not for interviews, but rather kicks in the a$$, and I’ll be glad to oblige. Hell, if you’re really in to it, Mike, we can do the two together….
Cheers,
March 25th, 2008 at 1:15 amHaha, right. That explains why he’s still on the Today show, on the NY Times Op-Ed page, etc. How can you cite the National Security Network findings, and then suggest that his waning “authority” is hurting him? Either O’Hanlon is disproportionately represented or he’s not – choose one!
Also, there’s no denying that media coverage on the war is down.
TP slams O’Hanlon partly for his comments on the Debaathification law. That law’s promise or peril will be determined by how it is implemented. But the simple fact of passing it is progress. Of course, I’m sure that if the implementation goes well, ThinkProgress compaq ze4000 battery,compaq nc4000 battery will find some way to slam it, right?
October 15th, 2008 at 4:31 am