Think Progress

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:

Screenshot

With comments like this, the media’s declining interest in interviewing O’Hanlon seems more like a positive development.

53







Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date

51 Responses to “O’Hanlon Gripes About His Waning Influence: I Now Get ‘Less Than One’ Interview Request Per Day”


  1. Ms_Joanne Says:

    WAH, WAH, WAH!

    Thank god for small favors! Maybe people in this country actually DO believe in the truth.


  2. tom Says:

    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.


  3. linda Says:

    i’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.


  4. barfly 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?


  5. tombaker Says:

    Wingnut 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??


  6. MCMetal Says:

    O’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………


  7. ralph the wonder llama Says:

    tom 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.


  8. oldtree Says:

    and 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.


  9. barfly Says:

    I think at this point, one can reasonably ask: has O’Hanlon ever made an accurate prediction?


  10. 5th Estate Says:

    “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.


  11. Red Pill Says:

    Maybe it’s because the media can’t afford stylists talented enough to tame those warring Tribbles on your noggin, O’Hanlon!


  12. tom Says:

    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.


  13. gummitch Says:

    I 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.”


  14. ralph the wonder llama Says:

    tom 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.


  15. 5th Estate Says:

    barfly 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.


  16. henry wallace Says:

    Let’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.


  17. IgnoranceIsNotBliss Says:

    “Now it’s less than one a day.”

    How lovely.


  18. hussein toasterhead Says:

    This 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.


  19. Nevar Says:

    Maybe if you’d comb your hair and sit up straight you’d get 1 and a half requests per day.


  20. misshusseinmolly Says:

    “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.


  21. 5th Estate Says:

    Oh 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.
    Kristol winzs the prize for intellectual dishonesty and being wrong every single time.


  22. --Blue Girl Says:

    Has someone already called a WAHmbulance?


  23. hussein toasterhead Says:

    misshusseinmolly 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.


  24. texaslady Says:

    It is always the “medias” fault. Doesn’t matter if no one finds his rhetoric interesting, along with his daddy, “bush”.


  25. barfly Says:

    What 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.


  26. paleolib Says:

    Further 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.


  27. Kryptik Says:

    Yes, because only ONE interview request a day means you’re on the fringe.

    Seriously, does this guy listen to himself?


  28. caredman Says:

    snark snark snark


  29. barfly Says:

    If 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?


  30. shoeless Says:

    O’Hanlon Gripes About His Waning Influence: I Now Get ‘Less Than One’ Truckload Of Bullcrap Request Per Day


  31. christopher wiwi Says:

    Another 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.


  32. watercarrier4diogenes Says:

    Dunno about y’all, but this says it all for me:

    I’m sorry, but shouldn’t there be a law or rule that says
    “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


  33. shoeless Says:

    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.


  34. robbez_92107 Says:

    Maybe now nobody cares about this “war critic” from the “liberal-leaning” Brookings Institute.
    As Cheney said, “So?”


  35. Roket Says:

    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.


  36. shoeless Says:

    Roket 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.


  37. miasmo Says:

    It’s just going to be another reminder of the grim toll of Michael O’Hanlon’s tragically horrible judgement.



  38. Oilfieldguy Says:

    Sorry, 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?!?!”


  39. Marie Says:

    Poor baby, O’Hanlon.
    His 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.


  40. Keltoi Says:

    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.


  41. thirdparty Says:

    his authority on Iraq has declined, as he has repeatedly and inextricably linked himself to Bush’s Iraq policies.

    Haha, 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?


  42. ralph the wonder llama Says:

    thirdparty 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.


  43. An Outhouse Says:

    Dude 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.


  44. Robt Says:

    With 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?


  45. 1oldlady Says:

    Oh, 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!!!


  46. tarazan Says:

    One interview a year is more than enough for this ‘Know it all’ Iraq expert called O’Hanlon.


  47. AlphaLiberal Says:

    Maybe 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.


  48. thirdparty Says:

    ralph the wonder llama Says:
    March 24th, 2008 at 5:34 pm

    thirdparty 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.

    How is that a straw man argument? It’s absolutely true — just follow TP’s own links on this post!


  49. zuch Says:

    Put 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,


Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.


Jump to Top

About Think Progress | Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy (off-site) | RSS | Donate
© 2005-2008 Center for American Progress Action Fund
image Register imageimageRSSimageimage imageimage
image
image
View Most Popular
image
image
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
image
image image image
What We're About
image
image
Featured
image
image
Subscribe to the Progress Report



image
image
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.

Name:
Email:
Tip:
(required)



image
Reports
image
image
imageTopic Cloud
image

image
imageArchives
image

image
imageBlog Roll
image

imageAbout Think ProgressimageimageContact UsimageimageDonateimage