I am increasingly perplexed by how the liberal media slants every bit of news out of Iraq.  I wonder if they had total control of the outcome of this war, if they would provide us with a victory or defeat.  Why are they so hell bent on us losing over there, don't they realize that it will lead to more terrorism here, which hurts liberals and conservatives.  Even if we were going to cut and run (I don't think we should), wouldn't it be in the countries (and liberals) best interest to declare a massive victory and threaten future military action if things got out of hand.  Why run out of there with our tail between our legs screaming defeat??  It's just ridiculous...

I am pretty sure that Rush has hit this one repeatedly but you must have missed it.  so here it goes.  Liberals in general have invested themselves in defeat and so if any good comes out of Iraq it makes them look like the idiots that they are, they dont care about anyone other than themselves and there own personal agendas.  They have warped minds and there little to no hope for them.  they are "willfully ignorant" In english that means dumb on purpose

I agree with Rush, it's just so hard to comprehend a bunch of politicians working towards a goal which will ultimately cause them and their constituants life threatening danger in the future.

that is what happens when you are brainwashed into the socalistic mindset, you are no longer able tho think correctly, and that is what has happend to those people in washington and in the drive by media

Don't be so quick to condescending, fellas. I've taken journalism courses, and I understand how the media has become as biased as it appears - and it ain't intentional. "If it bleeds, it ledes" is a facet of journalism taught from day one. Hence, the death toll as headline comes as no surprise, though it is a total shame that these journalism practices have inevitably led to slanted coverage.

Yes.

by [url=member224.html]emoryrep[/url] on 08/02/07, 12:26pm                              
"Don't be so quick to be condescending, fellas.  I've taken journalism courses, and I understand how the media has become as biased as it appears - and it ain't intentional. "If it bleeds, it leads" is a facet of journalism taught from day one. Hence, the death toll as headline comes as no surprise, though it is a total shame that these journalism practices have inevitably led to slanted coverage."

We are not talking about "if it bleeds it leads" principle. That is a valid (another one!) criticism of the media, but we are talking about ideological bias. These are two different things, even though both are examples of bad and corrupt journalism. Liberals in general and the Main stream media in particular do indeed want us to lose in Iraq. They view our defeat and humiliation as "progressive". They think we are arrogant and imperialistic. That is why the New York times had abu graib on their front page for so long. The main stream media has gotten way, way too big for its own britches. They love to see themselves as "the watchdog of the government" which is all well and good,  but who is their watchdog?

emoryrep wrote:Don't be so quick to condescending, fellas. I've taken journalism courses, and I understand how the media has become as biased as it appears - and it ain't intentional. "If it bleeds, it ledes" is a facet of journalism taught from day one. Hence, the death toll as headline comes as no surprise, though it is a total shame that these journalism practices have inevitably led to slanted coverage.

IF it bleeds, it leads, unless it is done by a liberal or demoKKKrat.

It's more than just the casualty level.  It is the entire war and those who are running it.  [I give you Gen Petraeus as a prime example.] The drive-byes, together with the Progressive Socialist Democrats have been denegrating the Commander in Chief from the get-go.  The majority of these Socialists voted to send our troops into war and have not supported the troops since the Mission Accomplished statement...maybe even before.  Where the Socialists go, the drive-bys go and not only that, they would leak any National Security Secrets they could get their hands on.  They not only want us to lose the war, they don't see an enemy or a threat.  Afterall, it is just "Bush's War."

Your talking yourself in circles NC. The military leaves out the troops that pass away after injuries. Suicides are up also over there. You want to talk about slants, just don't state things that people don't say. Yes, the liberals, as you say, do want to declare victory to this "True Lies" mess, pull troops to near by bases, and yes to use military action to help them. Not cut and run. Your just saying that cause your a conservative and Bush Jr. said it. Read. Investigate. If you remember NC, Bush Jr. has stated on world wide tv that it will be up to the "next Presidents", with a 's, and the military estimated that we'll be there another 10 years. Nc, so what IS victory and what IS defeat your trying to tell us????????

neocon wrote:I am increasingly perplexed by how the liberal media slants every bit of news out of Iraq.  I wonder if they had total control of the outcome of this war, if they would provide us with a victory or defeat.  Why are they so hell bent on us losing over there, don't they realize that it will lead to more terrorism here, which hurts liberals and conservatives.  Even if we were going to cut and run (I don't think we should), wouldn't it be in the countries (and liberals) best interest to declare a massive victory and threaten future military action if things got out of hand.  Why run out of there with our tail between our legs screaming defeat??  It's just ridiculous...