Sometimes you look at something and think "that won't last long". And then, 20 years later, you look back and say "yup".

Commondreams.org came out of the gate strong with an anti-war stance and seemed to be willing to criticize Democrats who cowtowed to the "hawkish" "brutish" neo-cons.

They boldly reposted articles like this one, calling out conservative talk radio for their part in warmongering.

But boy howdy, that didn't last long.

By just 2009, that article was deleted from commondreams.org. I wonder why. Could it have something to do with President Obama's disastrous drone program?



And just what did commondreams.org have to say about the 2008 election, anyway?

They tried to make Obama out to be the enlightened choice, and McCain the "populist", in a reversal of what you see in front of your own eyes. It's like the old Russian joke goes, "who are you going to believe, comrade? Your lying eyes, or the truthful press?"

And right there, you can see the cracks forming. The insidious force of partisan politics (where your side can do no wrong, and the other side is always eeevil) has breached the gates.

But still, commondreams made the case that Obama was the more worldly, enlightened, post-war candidate, who would bring peace.



So when Obama broke every promise and refused to close guantanamo bay, or end extraordinary rendition and torture, and ramped up his drone program, did commondreams react with outrage?

Hardly.

With playful titles like "Barack Obama, Drone Ranger" the site ever-so-gently asked Obama to make changes, never rising to the level of anger or indignation at being duped. Perhaps a bit of access-based-journalism is at play. Not wanting to be blacklisted by the White House, journalists played softball with the Obama administration. When reporting on Obama's drone strike program, the site chose to go without any hint of criticism, instead merely reporting on the numbers matter-of-factly. These are people's lives, yet they couldn't summon an ounce of editorialization.



Okay, let's fast-forward to the next election. Trump vs Hillary. How did commondreams treat known war hawk Hillary Clinton?

Originally critical of Hillary in 2014, the site seemed to support Bernie Sanders and called Hillary a warmonger at every chance they got (Would a Clinton Win Mean More Wars?, Hillary Is the Candidate of the War Machine, Who Cares if Hillary is Warm? I Care About Her Wars).

But you best believe, that didn't last long.

As soon as it was obvious that it was Hillary vs Trump, the site suddenly shifted to support Hillary (Vote for the Lying Neoliberal Warmonger: It's Important), including dumping a big dose of copium on people with titles like "Hillary Toned Down Her Hawkishness". And then, showing a level of disbelief and righteous indignation that should have been displayed toward Obama, the site ran the article "Those Who Failed to Recognize Trump as the Greater Evil Made Bad Mistake" to chastise those who didn't vote for the warmonger hard enough.



So now we're in to the Trump years. How did commondreams deal with that?? Naturally, by calling him a warmonger at every step, despite Trump historically being strongly against the War in Afghanistan and War in Iraq in 2004, and being much more anti-war than neocons/neolibs. They consistently made the claim that Trump was "unstable" and therefore would accidentally start a war (which I suppose is somehow worse than Neoliberals intentionally starting a senseless war?).

While neocons and neolibs started wars, Trump talked tough and was able to avoid wars. And yet, that didn't stop commondreams from preemptively calling it warmongering and calling him a "War President" (who started no wars).

They got some things right, though. They criticized his pick of John Bolton as National Security Advisor, which Trump currently tries to spin as an intentional move to make it look like he was taking the advice of one of the worst warmongers. But it's just as likely that Trump thought having a neocon in his cadre would keep the neocons off his back, or that he thought John Bolton gave good advice once upon a time. It's impossible to know.



Okay what about 2020? Third verse, same as the first, and second? You should know the answer by now. Despite Trump starting no wars, and Biden being VP for Obama (the "Drone Ranger") and Biden supporting the Iraq War in 2004 and afterwards, who did commondreams say you should vote for? Biden, of course. With an article titled, with zero subtlety, "Dear Fellow Progressives: Please Vote Biden". They also took a quick snipe at Trump to call him a warmonger (who started no wars) once again.

Because of course they did.



In more recent years, commondreams has found it's footing once again, criticizing Russia and Israel for waging war. This must be a big sigh of relief for them because they can be anti-war without risking upsetting their liberal base, who would demand a subtext of the comforting lie that "the Democrats are the lesser of the two evils" in every article.

Of course, they did take a break from that to tell everyone to vote for Kamala, because Trump is a "warmonger" (who didn't start any wars).