Comments on: The MSM Helps The Republican War

By: Frank_D

Frank_D — Sun, 25 Jun 2006 21:06:56 +0000

I ll wait and see, thank you

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) – Iraq’s prime minister unveiled a 24-point national reconciliation initiative Sunday, offering amnesty to insurgents who renounce violence and have not committed terror attacks on American soldiers or Iraqis.

Nouri al-Maliki’s much-anticipated plan lacked important details, but issued specific instructions to Iraqi security forces to rapidly take control of the country so U.S. and other foreign troops can leave eventually. It didn’t include a deadline for their withdrawal.

By: Frank_D

Frank_D — Sun, 25 Jun 2006 15:06:18 +0000

Let's see how long it takes for this story to reach the MSM.

By: Frank_D

Frank_D — Sun, 25 Jun 2006 05:06:19 +0000

But they’re also key clauses of a national reconciliation plan drafted by new Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who will unveil it Sunday.
I’ll wait and see, thank you, rather than presume that he now “agrees” with Rep. Jack “Sgt. Fury” Murtha, and Sen. John “Got me my three scratches, and I’m heading for home to turn on my comrades” Kerry.

By: Bushwacked

Bushwacked — Sat, 24 Jun 2006 23:06:07 +0000

OK, Now, rather than a diatribe of the same old talking points as to why the war in Iraq is losing the backing of Americans because of the MSM not telling the "good news" how about this:

June 24, 2006 - A timetable for withdrawal of occupation troops from Iraq. Amnesty for all insurgents who attacked U.S. and Iraqi military targets. Release of all security detainees from U.S. and Iraqi prisons. Compensation for victims of coalition military operations.

Could this guy be colluding with the democrats?

By: Frank_D

Frank_D — Sat, 24 Jun 2006 19:06:45 +0000

Read this, rinse and repeat.

By: Bushwacked

Bushwacked — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 20:06:55 +0000

Interesting. Further evidence that this thread is in it’ “Last Throes”.

By: Bushwacked

Bushwacked — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 20:06:33 +0000

On a more serious note, I find this very disturbing for and a reason for all of us to be concerned for the safety of our troops.

By: Frank_D

Frank_D — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 17:06:38 +0000

Apropos of nothing, I read this this morning:

Had the Supreme Court ruled the other way in Bush v. Gore, the outcome would have been identical. SCOTUS did not pick a president; it merely ruled on the constitutionality of the Florida high court s recount order. Had that order been upheld, the recount would have been finished. And, absent malfeasance, Gore-Lieberman would still have finished a handful of votes behind Bush-Cheney in Florida. The recounts conducted by the major media outlets, including Kurtz employer, all had that outcome.

Why won t this canard die?

By: Bushwacked

Bushwacked — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 13:06:07 +0000

Not because it s true, but because they re so gullible? Either way, that s not the type of leader I want in office.
The only thing worse is type of “leader” that is in office now.

By: JWG

JWG — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:06:19 +0000

The sad part is many democrats have came to believe the spin.

Not because it’s true, but because they’re so gullible? Either way, that’s not the type of leader I want in office.

By: Bushwacked

Bushwacked — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 03:06:05 +0000

Of course, in the most important poll& the 2004 election& a clear majority (over 50%) of voters chose the Republican course in Iraq. Keep quoting your media polls& the one that counts is coming up in 2006 and we ll see how the voters support an immediate pullout plan.

If the republicans are so sure of themselves on Iraq, then why are they trying to “hedge their bet” by proposing a constitutional amendent that has no chance of passing, much less being ratified?
Why are they opposing their own leader on immigration policy?
The answer is simple. They dont have a clue, no more than the MSM. If the democrats are to have any chance of regaining power, they must offer the voters a clear choice between the status quo, which the republicans support that clearly isn’t working and a plan to turn Iraq over to the rightful owners. But as long as they offer fuzzy plans that seem to suggest yea maybe we’ll get the troops home sooner but we dont want to commit to a specific timetable the republicans will have the over a barrel.

Especially when the so-called “liberal” media is continually repeating the same thing over again and again. You hear it on CNN from Wolf Blitzer, Chris Matthews on MSNBC and on the Sunday morning talk shows.
“The democrats have no clear message.”
“The democrats will be labeled as wanting to cut and run”
The sad part is many democrats have came to believe the spin.

By: JWG

JWG — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 21:06:31 +0000

Ah, yes…the same Greg Mitchell who wrote that the newspapers should use their editorial pages as platforms to help get us out of the Iraq war. In other words, if the media is not pushing Mitchell’s agenda, then they are pro-war.
I’ll even agree that most Americans favor a timetable according to media polling results. Of course, in the most important poll…the 2004 election…a clear majority (over 50%) of voters chose the Republican course in Iraq. Keep quoting your media polls…the one that counts is coming up in 2006 and we’ll see how the voters support an immediate pullout plan.
One last point: If a majority of Americans support a withdrawal from Iraq, then shouldn’t the Democrats (and Republicans) be seeing that in their internal polling? Why won’t they support legislation that their constituents supposedly want?
Oh, and I almost forgot…even Oliver doesn’t support a complete withdrawal until 2008 — remember your “Strategic Redeployment” recommendation for the Democrats? Why is Oliver so out of step with so many Americans?