Vanishing candidates.

• Author: Rothschild, Matthew
• Position: Editor's Note

I was reading the Sunday New York Times on August 12 and was surprised to find the lead story headlined "Democratic Field Says Leaving Iraq May Take Years."

I knew that several of the leading candidates had bobbed and weaved on this crucial question, but I didn't think the whole field had.

So I read on. The secondary headline said: "With One Exception, Even Critics of War Plan Gradual Exit."

Had I missed a new, hawkish policy statement by Dennis Kucinich? Or by Mike Gravel?

Actually, neither.

The "one exception" The New York Times was referring to was Bill Richardson of New Mexico. The article, which went on for two dozen paragraphs, never even mentioned Gravel's name or Kucinich's name, though they have consistently been the most outspoken advocates of withdrawing our troops.

An uninformed reader who came upon the story wouldn't even have known that Gravel or Kucinich was in the race.

And an otherwise-informed reader would have been forced to assume that Kucinich and Gravel were now in favor of staying in Iraq.

Not only is this a prime case of inaccurate reporting. It's also a perfect exhibit of how the leading media outlets in this country take it upon themselves to narrow the field before the voters ever have a chance to cast their ballots.

That's one way to dispose of peace candidates.

T his month, we offer you an interview with Representative Barbara Lee, whose peace credentials are also unimpeachable. She was the sole member of Congress to vote against the authorization of force after 9/11--an act of great bravery and foresight.

I heard her address a group of progressives at the Take Back America conference in June in Washington, D.C.

She was adamant about getting our rhetoric right on the Iraq War.

We who oppose this war "support the...