Dotty Lynch's May 30th editorial on the CBS News web site asks the plaintive question, “Where are all the young people?” who should be protesting this ugly war. The question ought to be, “Where was Dotty Lynch and the rest of corporate-controlled media in 2003?”

Her column ends with the statement that people at CBS News were touched personally when 2 correspondents were killed Monday. The rest of us are sad too, but explain to us why the deaths of 2 correspondents are center headline news when tens of thousands have died before them. Did “we” not care until somebody “we knew” got killed?

Let's take a trip back to when Dotty might have done something about this war other than wish those lazy college students would stir themselves to action. Just check the CBS News archives if you think I'm being unfair.

December 31, 2002: Dotty writes a column with a dove on it and describes how the producers at CBS news got started designing the new sets for the upcoming series “The War in Iraq” on the day after Bush won the election. Dotty looks helplessly on as the “dancers play out their parts”, unable to stop the march to war or, apparently, even say anything about it.

The rest of the column laments the deaths of two old peace activists. The column ends with the rhetorical question, who is left “to try to stop the inexorable death march?” It's a very creative non-threatening, non-wave-making, non-effective non-editorial about hand wringing.

February 5, 2003: Dotty comments on Colin Powell's speech to the UN where he did his best to dress up the lies and diversions of the administration in preparation for its must-have war. Dotty reports that Secretary Powell made a very effective presentation and that he “made a convincing case”.

There is a short paragraph about “skepticism abroad”, then more accolades that Powell was “at the top of his game”.

Democrats were convinced too, says Dotty, except for a wishy-washy Nancy Pelosi who, despite taking the WMD scam hook, line and sinker, thought that maybe we could handle the situation without a war. Nancy's comments are described by Dotty as “the liberal line”, just so we don't think Dotty is siding with a Saddam apologist.

She ends that column with the hope that Powell may yet “reign in” the administration, presumably to save Dotty from actually having to voice an opinion about the rush to war.

March 13, 2003: Finally, there is the column titled “More On the Plate Than Freedom Fries” where she mocks that effort to offend the French but notes that Americans are falling into line behind Bush in his rush to fight the fun-war against Saddam.

She then notes that most anti-war talk is coming from Hollywood actors and retired politicians who are afraid we will be attacked by Saddam's legions of international terrorists if we invade. Dotty mentions that Tom Wicker thinks most journalists are “playing on the administration's team and not asking the right questions.” Dotty goes on to prove his point by describing the Saddam-September 11th linkage as “a fact that has never been substantiated.” One wonders when it ever attained “fact” status?

Dotty ends that column with this: “One wonders what he (Bush) knows that the rest of the world doesn't... it seems he is determined to go forward. We can only pray that he is right.” I guess that explains it. Dotty thought that praying hard was the only thing she could do under the circumstances. Certainly, she could not actually come out and say something like, “We should not start a war if we don't have to.”

We're asking for a big favor here. When the next CBS correspondent dies, we hope they will spare us the hypocrisy of wishing “somebody” will stop this war.