Iraq Going Poorly? Blame the Media!
Welcome to the mainstream media news:
Audio:
The recent debate, ignited by conservatives and mimicked by dumbfounded, rapidly blinking President Smirky, pertains to media coverage in Iraq and the reporting on the war in general. The theory here is that since the local car bomb in Falluja gets the lead story over the new road we just constructed in Baghdad, there must be some sort of liberal media bias.
This has been a long favorite conservative talking point of mine, specifically because it’s so easy to dispel. But alas, most media outlets ironically covering the story of their own perceived bias coverage are interviewing and quoting the very conservatives who say their issues aren’t being covered enough. Go ahead; I’ll pause while you re-read that.
After all, conservatives don't deal with facts, research or experts in any particular field (see: Global Warming), so I guess it's a lot easier to blame the media for the mess in Iraq than it is to look at the violent, tribal relgious and cultural sects, the lack of an exit strategy, the ill-equipped military vehicles, the non-existent body armor, and the severe underestimating of - well, everything.
But regarding any media bias - I have stated this a million times, but will again reiterate this for your Bush supporting friends who are ready to launch another Anthrax attack on members of the media:
The media, ladies and gentlemen do NOT have a liberal bias - they have a sensationalist bias.
Most complex political debates cannot be dispelled by only one sentence but this issue isn’t complex, nor is this really up for debate. It’s actually proven, every single day, by every single cable and network news outlet, almost without exception. After all if there really were a liberal media bias, headlines like “Is the Iraq War Getting Fair Coverage” wouldn’t even appear around the country as they have this week.
This is a really big deal in this country because conservatives will concede there were no WMD’s in Iraq when we invaded before they’ll ever let go of the liberal media lie. What they don’t understand is that the media isn’t here to necessarily provide the best information. They’re here to make money, lead with big stories, entertain, get ratings, sell papers, and conquer their competitors.
It all goes back to the old journalism adage: If it bleeds, it leads.
This couldn’t be truer in a time of war. The basic cornerstones of war reporting include who fought where, and how many of them died. To think that the media is reporting only bad news from Iraq because they all have a collective and agreed upon agenda to discredit this war is so ridiculous I don’t really know where to start.
Do I really have to explain this? This is like 8th grade “introduction to journalism.” My conservative friends, the media reports on the deaths and destruction because you’re more likely to buy the paper with “52 Dead as Wave of Violence Sweeps Iraq” on the front page than you would be if “Mosque Basra Gets Second Coat of Gold Paint” was the lead story. So if you’re tired of the bad news, blame yourself and the guy next to you, because the consumers drive what is reported, not the reporters themselves.
In fact, their whole game is Capitalism, not necessarily reporting, and there are so many daily illustrations of the media NOT being liberal, I decided to make a small list of examples that I encourage you to forward to friends the next time you even hear a mentioning of the words, “liberal media.”
Liberals have the Daily Show (a comedy skit hosted by a comedian), Real Time (with Republican guests sharing the guest panel, and airing on a subscription cable channel), Democracy Now (which has the same cinematic and broadcasting sophistication as Wayne’s World) and Air America.
That’s it.
So I was checking the latest headlines from the 10 or 12 sources I hit daily (actually one of which is Foxnews.com), when I noticed CNN.com was actively proving the point that progressives make regularly regarding the liberal media, right there on their web site.
Take a look at the screenshot from the aforementioned CNN.com from just the other day, a favorite target of the Right. All in one front page, you have the day's biggest news stories. Cruise ship fires, tour buses going into canyons, missing boys in Milwaukee (the first black kids to ever go missing, according to CNN), the death of a beautiful college student, a big break in another missing beautiful girl case, and on and one....see below:

I rest my case.
Audio:
The recent debate, ignited by conservatives and mimicked by dumbfounded, rapidly blinking President Smirky, pertains to media coverage in Iraq and the reporting on the war in general. The theory here is that since the local car bomb in Falluja gets the lead story over the new road we just constructed in Baghdad, there must be some sort of liberal media bias.
This has been a long favorite conservative talking point of mine, specifically because it’s so easy to dispel. But alas, most media outlets ironically covering the story of their own perceived bias coverage are interviewing and quoting the very conservatives who say their issues aren’t being covered enough. Go ahead; I’ll pause while you re-read that.
After all, conservatives don't deal with facts, research or experts in any particular field (see: Global Warming), so I guess it's a lot easier to blame the media for the mess in Iraq than it is to look at the violent, tribal relgious and cultural sects, the lack of an exit strategy, the ill-equipped military vehicles, the non-existent body armor, and the severe underestimating of - well, everything.
But regarding any media bias - I have stated this a million times, but will again reiterate this for your Bush supporting friends who are ready to launch another Anthrax attack on members of the media:
The media, ladies and gentlemen do NOT have a liberal bias - they have a sensationalist bias.
Most complex political debates cannot be dispelled by only one sentence but this issue isn’t complex, nor is this really up for debate. It’s actually proven, every single day, by every single cable and network news outlet, almost without exception. After all if there really were a liberal media bias, headlines like “Is the Iraq War Getting Fair Coverage” wouldn’t even appear around the country as they have this week.
This is a really big deal in this country because conservatives will concede there were no WMD’s in Iraq when we invaded before they’ll ever let go of the liberal media lie. What they don’t understand is that the media isn’t here to necessarily provide the best information. They’re here to make money, lead with big stories, entertain, get ratings, sell papers, and conquer their competitors.
It all goes back to the old journalism adage: If it bleeds, it leads.
This couldn’t be truer in a time of war. The basic cornerstones of war reporting include who fought where, and how many of them died. To think that the media is reporting only bad news from Iraq because they all have a collective and agreed upon agenda to discredit this war is so ridiculous I don’t really know where to start.
Do I really have to explain this? This is like 8th grade “introduction to journalism.” My conservative friends, the media reports on the deaths and destruction because you’re more likely to buy the paper with “52 Dead as Wave of Violence Sweeps Iraq” on the front page than you would be if “Mosque Basra Gets Second Coat of Gold Paint” was the lead story. So if you’re tired of the bad news, blame yourself and the guy next to you, because the consumers drive what is reported, not the reporters themselves.
In fact, their whole game is Capitalism, not necessarily reporting, and there are so many daily illustrations of the media NOT being liberal, I decided to make a small list of examples that I encourage you to forward to friends the next time you even hear a mentioning of the words, “liberal media.”
- There are 5 major, white/male/mostly Republican owned corporations who control almost everything you see and hear, and most are not exactly big Democratic donors. The impact of this cannot be stated enough, as this provides the entire backdrop of almost everything you see, hear and read unless you get your media from an independent source.
- Consider the incredible conservative AM radio domination drumming up support for Bush’s policies, on almost every dial, all day long, ever day. According to one recent study of the 45 top-rated AM talk radio stations in the United States, conservative talk accounts for 310 (or 98.4%)hours of airtime each week; liberal talk just 5 hours (1.6%).
- Think of the Republican attack machine via paid advertisements from local
political seats up to the presidential race. Most estimates and studies put the ’04 presidential elections at 75% to around 28%, Bush to Kerry, in terms of negative ads.
- Conservatives with poor memories (mostly due to lack of anti-embryonic stem cell research to combat Alzheimer’s) don’t remember that the New York Times was a strong supporter of both wars in Iraq before their invasions.
- Accusing black Louisiana citizens of “looting” while white citizens are “finding” is not exactly liberal thinking.
- Nor is coverage of missing white teens (do black teens ever get lost, abducted or killed?)
- Have you ever listened to Country Music? That counts as media
- Ever heard of ClearChannel, how much they own, or know what their politics are?
- Do you recall any media attention for the Swift Boat liars before the election or were you able to find the small, back page article about how they'd been dicredited after the election?
- Sinclair broadcasting, an ultra conservative media group, is the largest broadcaster
in the nation.
- Think about the “war rooms” all the networks set up at the start of the last few wars, and who their guests are. Most guests are ex-military generals and other high ranking officials of intelligence and the armed forces.
- Consider the amount of reporters and anchors embedded in war zones and traveling with our troops. Reports coming back from embedded reporters aren’t exactly liberal – they’re factual, and they provide a great perspective of war from a soldier’s point of view (as much as we can get via tv). They just don’t usually embed terrorist-supporting liberals with the infantries, including those who have risked and lost their lives to cover the story.
- Back in the 90’s, there was an affair between the President and an intern that produced some headlines. Perhaps you’ve heard of it.
- Did you hear who made Time’s Person of the Year in 2004?
- Studies have shown the more 9/11 and terrorism is mentioned, the more people rally around the President, mostly out of fear. Have you seen any terror or 9/11 coverage in the past few years?
- Have you ever noticed the American flag animations flapping right near the network icon during cable news broadcasts? Hyper flag waving isn't exactly a liberal
characteristic.
- By the same token, have you ever seen the scrolling terror alert level status on the cable news shows?
- Ever read the PIPA study on media bias?
- Have you seen the recent study regarding Meet the Press and who most of their guests are? Or the one conducted on the conservative guests versus liberal guests on the Sunday talk shows?
- Since liberals are all Saddam/dictatorship supporters, have you ever noticed the amount of anti-Saddam coverage on all of the Discovery channels? Brutal, human rights-raping dictators are a favorite of liberals throughout history, and the Discovery channel is clearly against us.
- Discovery Military, the Pentagon Channel, and CSPAN1, 2 and 3 are all government affiliated cable channels, controlled by Republican influence.
- Have you ever looked at what is broadcast over government-sponsored Armed Forces Radio?
- Gay rights marches, as many as 500,000 strong include a makeup of about .00001% drag queens. Guess who gets on camera.
- Ever hear "liberal" Hardball host Chris Matthews draw comparisons between liberals and Al-Zarqarwi?
- The Bush administration has spent more on PR firm contracting than any other president in history. It has produced: Fake news stories, fake journalists, fake town hall meetings, fake Q&A’s with the troops, fake members of the White House press corps, and fake photography.
- Remember the network news magazines that used to cover news? Dateline on NBC now covers who-done-it murders and cruise ship stories, 48 Hours on CBS now does unsolved crimes (and even changed it’s name to “48 Hours Mystery”), Primetime promotes whatever ABC airs on weekdays (i.e. Dancing with the Stars appears on this channel, so Primetime has done several series on ballroom dancing), and 20/20 features the trashing of anything public by John Stossel. 60 Minutes is the only news magazine covering the news, and when you cover the news you’re considered liberal (I call it informed).
- Mostly because they have more money and there are more of them, conservative think tanks are overquoted in the media by a ratio of 2 to 1 over their liberal counterparts. What’s worse, this is often done without identifying the think tank getting quoted has a conservative slant.
Liberals have the Daily Show (a comedy skit hosted by a comedian), Real Time (with Republican guests sharing the guest panel, and airing on a subscription cable channel), Democracy Now (which has the same cinematic and broadcasting sophistication as Wayne’s World) and Air America.
That’s it.
So I was checking the latest headlines from the 10 or 12 sources I hit daily (actually one of which is Foxnews.com), when I noticed CNN.com was actively proving the point that progressives make regularly regarding the liberal media, right there on their web site.
Take a look at the screenshot from the aforementioned CNN.com from just the other day, a favorite target of the Right. All in one front page, you have the day's biggest news stories. Cruise ship fires, tour buses going into canyons, missing boys in Milwaukee (the first black kids to ever go missing, according to CNN), the death of a beautiful college student, a big break in another missing beautiful girl case, and on and one....see below:

I rest my case.

28 Comments:
Peace to you and yours.
Very well done!
Nice post. I like the CNN page.
I definitely did not know that about CSPAN, but it obviously makes sense.
I still need to listen to the Charlie Sheen on the 9/11 interview... maybe I'll do that now.
AWUP! AWUP! BLOGGER ALERT! Howard Kaloogian on of the thugs from Move America Forward who is running for Congress is a big fat liar. Go here me boys -
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x776401
Peace
bwahahahahahahaahahahaaa.
You guys crack me up.
I've been hearing Charlie's comments more and more. At least people are talking about it. We can torture people because their Muslim and don't like us, but we can't investigate 9/11? B-Sh*t. Forty million on Clinton and 600K on 9/11... now that's Neocon Republican strategy alright.
Human, thanks for the link. I read that earlier and find it really interesting, but whether it's fake or not, I don't really care, because here's my angle:
Some of the outrage toward Michael Moore's film from those who backed the Iraq war was the footage Moore showed of Iraq before the bombing. Birds were chirping, kites were flying, etc.
They said, "to paint a picture of a nation ruled by a dictator is disingenuous at best." Was it real footage from Iraq? Absolutely. But does a 10 second clip of happiness somehere in a nation the size of Texas really say much? Not at all.
So I would say to anyone who feels this picture isn't a fake: So what? It doesn't mean shit. There could be a car bomb exploding in 5 minutes after the picture was taken, or 5 minutes before only miles away. There are areas of Iraq that are in complete chaos, with Muslim factions fighting, militias running the streets, and dozens of deaths...DAILY. The picture doesn't mean a thing to me.
The daily accounts coming out of Iraq from people and reporters on the ground, however, do.
Blake/KC...I haven't heard Sheen's statements yet, but I'm waiting for anonymous or some other Right winger to pull out the Hollywood card - because of course if you've acted in film, your politics are worthless.
Am I Right, Ronnie Reagan, Charlton Heston and Mel Gibson?
Or perhaps if you're wealthy, you aren't allowed to have an opinion on economics. Right W.?
Please.
Your politics aren't worthless if you've acted in a film or you're a Hollywood elitist.
You can have an opinion on anything you want if you are rich, a Hollywood actor or both.
You progressives are funny to think that any of that matters. You actually believe conservatives think that don't you ?
People that are conservative can also have an opinion on those peoples politics.Whats the matter with you Jeremy ? You're like a walking talking point ? MY goodness.
Can you at least admit that Hollywood is mostly "progressive" and pumps out billions of dollars of movies,TV shows that agree with you and your cause ? Can you at least recognize that most people in the US watch Entertainment tonight and not the news and listen to what all their Icons have to say and folow them to a T. Just admit it, it's common knowledge for crying out loud. More people your age watch the Daily Show and Saturday night live to get their news.
Don't you have other things to worry about ? Jesus man, this whole topic is laughable. You can find bias all over the place, it's Drive By Media, it's sensationalism, they are making money. Bias towards the left on some places, bias towards the right in others. It's been proven on both sides of the coin. Yet, you're really not going to find many conservative Directors swaying people in Hollywood. You don't get many Conservatives reading the weekend update on SNL, until they get over that show that is and grow up anyway. You're not going to see many people saying how much they LIKE Bush while accepting an award at the Grammys,Emmys,Oscars are you ? Not that there is anything wrong with that, but you've got to call it like it is at least, can I get an Amen ?
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/29/politics/29dobbs.html?ei=5065&en=1450c7e3e7f905cd&ex=1144299600&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print
Theres a NYT link that shows CNN having a "news broadcaster" with an opinion that he divulges.
Yo, Jer... I would love an anti-W magnet. MY email is crallspace@hotmail.com
Send me an email and I'll reply with the address.
You got it CS.
Anonymous, sidestep all you want. The "real" news sources as they are thoughr to be, are owned by Republican whores.
Is it just me, or is there not one Republican out there who can have a debate without shifting blame, ignoring the main point and/or changing the subject. No wonder more than half the country hates the Republicans' guts.
Of course it doesn't matter, that's exactly what I'm saying anon. Are you seriously telling me that the Right doesn't push a "liberal hollywood" or elitist Hollywood stereotype? Are you kidding me man? And you really think liberals get their news from SNL? Holy shit.
Anon, ET isn't exactly a liberal show. When I think infotainment, I think fox. When I think serious news, I think PBS. You tell me which conservatives are more likely to watch.
When you say that Hollywood agrees with liberals and their causes, I'd have to say for the most part I agree with you.
Hollywood had black actors in "good guy" roles while much of America was making them drink front different fountains.
Hollywood was dealing with AIDS while at the same time President Reagan couldn't even pronounce the acronym.
Hollywood has made movies dealing with civil rights struggles, cultural differences and diversity - shit you conservatives hate - long before society was willing to address it as a whole.
So yes in that sense, Hollywood has advocated for the progressive causes conservatives have always been against.
At the same time, Hollywood also advocates for conservatives in terms of reinforcing stereotypes. Think of how many Communists or Russians you saw play the bad guy during the 70’s and 80’s, as a perfect example.
Hollywood by and large is a mirror of society. They’re going to write and film what sells, and what the American public is going to advocate through their willing to pay money to go see it.
Other than that yes, Hollywood is liberal, meaning people in Hollywood might know a gay person or two, which means they’re less afraid of them.
crawl, because it’s the only way repubs participate in discussions. if they argued on merit or facts, they’d be creamed. talk to one about global warming sometime and youll see what i mean.
Jeremy - I agree taht a pic or a 10 second clip does not say much. Others do however, and just like I have to talk to my 19 mo. old a certain way, I think we have to use what ever tools we(within propiety) can to convince others of the truth.
A for instance- I had a homemade sign I put on my work van. Just three lines.
"$(the # at the time) our treasure spent"
#(at the time) Humans Killed
"0 WMD found."
Short. To the point.
We can also use their lies such as this pic in question to discredit the "other side".
The path to an informed democracy doesn't have to be "my way" or anyone elses. A "swarm" effect is needed. So all in all we can cover many bases with different approaches.
Peace.
Human, I was JUST about to come on here and say "good find, man!"
I just read the update on KOS that basically proves this picture is from Istanbul, not in Iraq. Again, we both agree that it matters little, but it does continue to prove the lying, and that's important.
Very good find Human, and I appreciate you sharing.
CJ, it’s because you’re talking to a group that thinks WMD’s were found in Iraq, Terri Schiavo was aware of her surroundings and begged to be kept alive, all politicians are as corrupt as Tom Delay, Karl Rove, and Bob Taft, that gay people should get the child molester label because the child molesting Catholic Priests say so, that Jesus’ philosophy was one of enriching those with money and not caring about the welfare of those without it, that a blowjob in the oval office is a bigger crime than what you see in Iraq and New Orleans, that Clinton was out of control because he was using a secret court to wiretap, while Bush isn’t even though he's bypassing that same court, that outing CIA agents working for our national security or hiring a firm from the UAE to watch our ports doesn’t say as much about your national security policy as an American flag lapel pin, that fuckups like Condi, Tenet, Wolfowitz, Bolton and Brownie should get rewarded rather than imprisoned, that guys like Kerry and Cleeland who actually served our nation and were wounded doing so should have less military credibility than guys like Cheney and his 5 defferments from Vietnam...and on and on and on.
I mean think about what these people stand for, then ask yourself what kind of reason you can apply to anything that they think. Ever.
Read that paragraph anon, and tell me you don’t think you’re insane, and I’m the guy that's perhaps a little more reality based. Seriously.
According to Bush today, things are going poorly in Iraq... because of Saddam. The only positive thing that one can take away from this is that Busg is at least acknowledging that something is fucked up in Iraq. The thing is, he couldn't find a way to blame Bill Clinton for it so he went after the guy who's been incarcerated for close to 2 1/2 years.
Calm down - I only said that Hollywood was talking about issues well before they were being discussed in our society, then I gave you examples of how Hollywood pushes stereotypes of minorities...which is absolutely a conservative value.
As for conservatives being racists? Not all conservatives are racist, but nearly all racists are conservative.
Conservatives, not Republicans, but conservatives...again, you don't seem to understand that...have been on the wrong side of almost every civil rights issue, ever, in this country's history and in world history.
To define one as conservative means to say you're resistant to change, want to keep the status quo, are typically in the elite or in the majority (whether it be white, male, of privilege, heterosexual, etc). Why do you think you get around or less than 10% of the black vote in the past several elections, less than 3% of the gay vote, more men supporting conservative Republicans than women, and most of the women who do support them are baking cookies watching the Guiding Light right now, debating who they’re going to vote for on American Idol. Which btw is fine, it’s just never a philosophy I’ll ever subscribe to.
As for Americans not watching the news…that’s my whole point, so you and I totally agree. There is hardly any news left to watch, it’s all info-tainment. Now, I have no clue who watches SNL to get their news, but I can say that I find more newsworthy underreported items on the daily show than on NBC Nightly news. And that’s a sad statement…a news parody, hosted by a comedian/actor, on the comedy channel gives me more information than Brian Williams on NBC.
So my point is – there is no liberal media. That is a joke. I also agree that there isn’t necessarily a conservative media. I’m saying there is a lazy media, a “get it first” bias in the media, a sensationalist media, a corporately owned media, and a non-as-free-as-we-think press.
Most Americans could tell you who was kicked off Survivor last week than participate in any of the conversations we have on this site.
The Bush royalists blame the media for the war because they have multiple personalities and can't seem to remember what they've done.
Their's is the Homer Simpon doctrine: It's everyone's fault but mine.
thats hilarious james, and I'm sure some peolpe believe you. Thats unfortunate.
Whats a Bush Royalist anyway ? And can you link us to one of them blaming the media for the war ? I don't blame NE1 for the war. I'm a Bush supporter. It was inevitable. I was for this war for the past 15 years.I support PNAC. Oh well. Keep spewing out those lies though dudes. Usefull idiots make my job that much easier.
Hey Tighty-Righty.
I applaud your support for the war for the past 15 years. In fact, give me the town you live in, and I'll give you the phone number and address for the recruitment office nearest you.
If you have already served, I'm sure you know where to find it. It's not too late to do a second tour of duty. Maybe you can find the WMD's in Syria.
To have someone who supports a president that's been lying to you from day 1 - about so many things that are important to this country and to the world - point the finger at us and say we're naive for believing lies...well, you've got to be fucking kidding me.
The Bush supporter Black=White Up=Down world used to blow my mind, but now I'm used to it.
However, I see people like you every single day who are so lost in believing the opposite of reality and it makes me wonder how you have the life skills to balance a checkbook, or place a call to order pizza.
And if you're wondering who the Bush Royalists are, perhaps you ought to poll this country's board of directors, CEO's, and white suburban males making more than $500,000 in the year on the stock market and ask them who they voted for. You can then delete your own comment by pressing the trash can icon.
so in order to support Bush and the War , you need to be in the military ?
No one is lying , I've been supporting the same facts to go to war for 15 years. When did they change ? The format is the same.
I'm not kidding you, you're just passing the propaganda around.It's funny how much of a double negative has ensued over Iraq over the past 15 years. If this topic, and war for that matter, were any more politicized John McCain- and Fiengold would have to make bill to censure it.It's pure hilarity.
Now, use all the Ad Hominem you want.I understand. Attack , attack , attack !!!!Thats what you do best.
Now for the Class war nonsense. You believe that crap ? How does that "map" of the blue US add up with that arguement ? You are argueing both sides ? What is it gonna be ? Ask the Tides Foundation,George Soros, Ted Turner Hollywood , Howie Raines and the myriad of other Liberal billionaires along with Teresa Hinse Kerry who they voted for . How many years are you dolts going to be using this "Rich white guy" arguement ? I can read your site, see your pictures and see you are not some poor fool. You most likely come from money and have no idea what it's like to miss a meal, or not have oil in your furnace. So save that garbage.
Tighty - no, I'm telling you that if you support this war so fervently, why don't you go help fight it?
And while you're at it, let me know why we're over there. Let me know the threat Saddam really posed, how he was ready to attack our nation, or working with Al Qaeda on 9/11 or any other projects up the sleeves of two philosophies that hate each other (Saddam's secular dictatorship vs the incredibly fundamentalist Islamic movement in the Middle East).
The evidence is thin, scarce, and totally misleading or missing in most cases. Personally, I need more to feel ok about my friend nearly getting his head blown off during chow outside of Baghdad.
So if you're going to get all ra-ra about this war, why aren't you there?
As for the class stuff, you can certainly find isolated millionaires for vote Democratic. But for the most part, this is corporate sponsored, CEO-getting-richer government who doesn't do jack shit for the poor.
They cut funding, cut programs and leave single parents, low income families and others behind. Why don't you go flip through some Time Magazine photos of the people affected most by Katrina, and tell me what color they are, or what socioeconomic status they are.
Stick your American flag pendant on that if it makes you feel better.
As for money, I do not come from it. I rent, have some more student loans I'm preparing for, and am a single bachelor that orders from Dominos on Saturday nights.
I didn't see any real tax breaks from Bush. My millionaire cousin in California however, couldn't be happier.
If you want more rich white guy proof, why don’t you poll the people from more affluent parts of Greenwich, CT and find out who they voted for…then go further up rt 84 into the projects near Asylum Street in Hartford and get their election returns. Let me know what you find.
SO , I support the war so I should be fighting it ? And Rich conservartives are responsible for Katrina vitims ?
and Rich Democrats are "isolated". And All Corporations are owned by Republican Conservatives.And the Tax breaks affected the people who pay the most taxes, go figure.I'm sure those people you speak of down on Asylum street pay alot of taxes.
Keep the class warfare thing alive my brother. People depend on it to get further in politics. People whom you would rather see running this place.
Anyway. Keep the hype alive.
P.S.
I would actually join the military, that is if I wasn't a 43 year old dude with health problems.I think the Men and Women who did join voluntarily are doing a great job. And I will support them AND their mission. Not like you and your ilk, who give them lip service and actually feel like Richard Belzer does on your Bill Mahers show. You saw it I bet. At least he is consistent. Not like some who support the troops, but not the mission. Thats like supporting local musicians, but not supporting the MUSIC. Have a good one.
Right - that's why 90% of the troops returning from home are running as Democrats when they choose to run.
That's why the veterans I know are against Bush and this war. Lot's of self loating going on.
In fact, I've been working on a post I'll publish later today, that really shows how much my ilk hate the troops, and you can talk to me after you read it.
Those who want them in harms way ONLY when necessarily, and those who want them to have all the body armor and other supplies they need hate the troops, while those in the administration who have never served a day in their life use them for political game, and its my ilk that doesn't support them.
Listen to how incredibly stupid you sound. We went to war without a plan, without a way to gain the peace, we didn't provide the equipment, an exit strategy or a clear motive, tens of thousands are dead, and those speaking up about it are the ones who don't support the troops.
I can't say it enough. Black = White, Up = Down in your world, and I can't even let that make sense for me.
And if you have health problems, my sympathies go to you in this Republican administration. If you're disabled or have high medical bills, it's not the Bush team that's going to bail you out my friend. Take a look at the pharmacudical companies, the Americans with disabilities act, the healthcare reform, stem cell research, drug company liability, refusal to import drugs from canada, medicaid, medicare, etc, and let me know what you think of the Bush administration then.
I feel sorry for people like you who not only don't vote for their est interest but speak out against those who actually are, but it doesn't mean I won't continue to argue against you.
Hey tighty - Just to demonstrate to you the level of hypocrisy at which you speak, I'd like to show you some things your President and his Right wing buddies said regarding the war in the Balkans. Before I do, I'd like to recap your quote, as I believe it will provide a nice backdrop for what you'll find below...
"Not like some who support the troops, but not the mission. Thats like supporting local musicians, but not supporting the MUSIC. Have a good one"
Here we go, ready?
"President Clinton is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy."
-Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA)
"No goal, no objective, not until we have those things and a compelling case is made, then I say, back out of it, because innocent people are going to die for nothing. That's why I'm against it."
-Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/5/99
"American foreign policy is now one huge big mystery. Simply put, the administration is trying to lead the world with a feel-good foreign policy."
-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)
"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy."
-Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of presidential candidate George W. Bush
"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning...I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area."
-Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)
"You think Vietnam was bad? Vietnam is nothing next to Kosovo."
-Tony Snow, Fox News 3/24/99
"Well, I just think it's a bad idea. What's going to happen is they're going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years"
-Joe Scarborough (R-FL)
...and my favorite:
"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our overextended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today"
-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)
So again...lets just be honest for a second here. You're not really about supporting the troops at all, are you. You're about supporting Bush, and the fake bullshit nationalism that comes with it.
I'm sure you're same kind of Republican who was OUTRAGED at Clinton wiretapping via a secret court, yet supportive of Bush when he bypasses that legal hurdle doing the same thing.
So I guess my statement to you is, "stop supporting corrupt politicians over your country." There, now you realize how rediculous you sound when you tell people they're hurting our troops when they want them out of harm's way.
That to me, is a disgrace, but then again nothing from your side EVER surprises me these days. This fits in lock step with everyone who supports your president. Just as long as you realize we're all pointing and laughing at you.
Tighty Righty:
The war with Iraq was in no way inevitable. We had him caged in with the northern and southern no-fly zones.
We had our satellites looking up his ass and somehow we still couldn't find those now infamous WMN's?? I wonder why? Maybe because they were never there in the first place. We now know thanks to the Downing street memos that the Bushies fixed the facts and their weak intelligence to fit their policy of wanting to invade a country that didn't attack us on 9/11 or up until we invaded their country.
Now the most recent memo leaked shows that Bush was set on a war path even if the weapons inspectors didn't find WMD's. And don't forget Richard Clarke's (who isn't exactly a dolt) testimony that within days of the 9/11 attacks Bush asked if Saddam had a hand in them. When told that no, al-Qaeda was behind them Bush testily responded saying, "Look into Iraq, Saddam."
Then Bob Woodward said in his book that by Thanksgiving 2001 he [Bush]had already informed Rumsfeld to make up a plan to invade Iraq.
However, the inspectors WERE indeed working because they didn't find anything and had they been allowed to keep going we know that they wouldn't have found anything in the end as we now know there were indeed NO WMD's IN IRAQ. Had we followed that path we wouldn't be in the situation that we now find ourselves in over there.
We heard all of this rhetoric about how dangerous Saddam's army would be. The Republican Guard and the Fedayeen were supposed to fight us tooth and nail. Yet once again our intelligence was wrong. Then we were told that because of all these WMD's our brave troops would be greeted by chemical belts of toxins around Baghdad. Again, our intelligence failed. All of this despite George "Medal of Honor" Tenet saying the intelligence was solid, a "slam dunk."
So during the invasion we got to Baghdad and over-threw the government in no time at all. They weren't planning on an insurgency and yet from history we know that vicious insurgancies arise when their countries are invaded and occupied (i.e. Vietnam). Bush failed to learn from history and the theory of not fighting the last war.
And even if we DID find WMD's why couldn't we have just bombed the hell out of those facilities as the Israels did in blowing up the Iraq nuke reactor in 1981? Our bombing capabilities were and are amazingly accurate and could have blown up Saddam's toilet had there been WMD's hiding in it.
I would advise you to stop drinking the Neo-Conjob kool-aid, face the truth and check into Republican rehab. It's not to late my friend.
Post a Comment
<< Home