Soldier's mom protests near Bush's ranch

[sanchera1978]

you cant say %100 of the soldiers support the war or bush. I have read plenty of letters from soldiers who disagree with the war. But since they signed up to serve this country they dont really have a choice. You guys really need to stop seperating america into different categories thats a good way to start a civil war. An american cizten is an american citizen doesnt matter if he is republican, democrat or liberal. Just becuase you believe different things doesnt make you better or worse then other citizens. You guys make it sound like the only real citizen is a republican. Both sides have good and bad views.

Here is just one of those letters.

I am a 28yr old SSgt in the USAF with about 7 years of service currently serving in the Midwest USA. Watching our brothers and sisters come home horribly maimed, burned and mutilated fills me with rage. And some say they are the lucky ones as opposed to the hundreds killed in an unjust "war."

Having served in the Persian Gulf during the Enduring Freedom campaign and the onset of the current debacle...I have developed great distrust for my commander in chief and in fact, some in the chain of command who unquestionably support his intentions. This conflict (not a war, since Congress never declared so) has no logic or purpose. Joining military service didn't include a lobotomy -- I still retain the right and ability of thought. However, for the most part, I feel that many of those serving (that have not deployed and seen it first hand) have been convinced of this imaginary threat and resent any fellow serviceman who questions it. It is sad that the patriotism bandwagon that most Americans have hopped has perpetuated this notion that Iraq somehow posed a threat and was connected to 9/11 in some way. In fact, I feel that this idea has been imprinted into our psyche and many people would now be convinced that there were Iraqis aboard those planes. If you repeat something enough times, no matter how absurd, people someday will begin to believe it.

Another troubling pattern that has developed in America is in the overuse of the word "terrorist." It has been redefined to describe any person who would oppose the decisions or actions of the USA. If you invade someone's country- do they not have the right or duty to resist? The Iraqis resist our rule and the administration calls them terrorists. I call them patriots. If the situation were reversed and North Korea was attempting to indoctrinate communism into the American way of life, would there not be resistance by Americans? In America we have that right and duty. If you follow their definition of terrorist...it would include our ancestors who opposed British rule in the Revolutionary War- Including General and later President George Washington.

Personally, I am torn between my love for my country and desire to serve to DEFEND America, and my conscience. I try to tell myself that I am distanced from the actual fighting, but it does no good. My grandfather served in WWII and is a great man for what he did (some might say a hero). No matter how many typical Americans say that they are proud of us for defending their freedom...I don't feel that distinguished and I don't think I'm alone.

[Babs]

My father bombed Japan and Germany in WWII. My nephew just got back from Iraq and may be going back. We are very proud. I am very proud of their service to their country.

Edited August 18, 2005 by Babs

[sanchera1978]

WWII was a war we needed to get into Babs.. Hitler needed to be stopped... This war isnt anything like that its more like the vietnam war.. Were sticking our noses were we dont belong... I support the troops they are brave and honorbale men and women. I just dont think this war should have been started. I hope your nephew has a good tour and comes back home safe and sound

I think its a shame that with so many brave men and women fighting for their country the government has been implenting budgets cuts that drastically hurt the soldiers. I think we should be providing the soldiers with the best weapons and protective gear that is available to them no matter the cost. but thats not the case.

Here's another interview from a medic soldier in iraq. Its a very informative article.

http://www.interventionmag.com/cms/modules...modload&sid=668

I just want our soldiers to be fighting for a just cause. What happens if we lose a big part of our army becuase of this war which really doesnt involve the safety of the U.S. and we get attacked by someone else and we need our entire military force to really actually defend this country??? We definately will be in trouble if some country decides to attack..

[Ciraxis]

terrorist don't need to be fought?

[Dr1273]

The whole thing is just sad and sems to have no end in sight. They just sent more airborne over from KY. More men who will die for their country.....wtf, why?

[Babs]

WWII was a war we needed to get into Babs.. Hitler needed to be stopped... This war isnt anything like that its more like the vietnam war.. Were sticking our noses were we dont belong... I support the troops they are brave and honorbale men and women. I just dont think this war should have been started.  I hope your nephew has a good tour and comes back home safe and sound   

I think its a shame that with so many brave men and women fighting for their country the government has been implenting budgets cuts that drastically hurt the soldiers. I think we should be providing the soldiers with the best weapons and protective gear that is available to them no matter the cost. but thats not the case.

Here's another interview from a medic soldier in iraq. Its a very informative article.

http://www.interventionmag.com/cms/modules...modload&sid=668

I just want our soldiers to be fighting for a just cause. What happens if we lose a big part of our army becuase of this war which really doesnt involve the safety of the U.S.  and we get attacked by someone else and we need our entire military force to really actually defend this country??? We definately will be in trouble if some country decides to attack..

797452[/snapback]

"What if we lose a big part of our army for a war that doesn't involve the safety of our country?"...you state. The war 'is' in Iraq...the terror 'is' in Iraq. We are fighting the terrorists, there, so we don't have to fight them here. Saddam was a terrorist, he supported terrorists and Iraq was a state of terror. What more do you need?

Thank you for your kind words about my nephew. He is still here waiting to receive orders to be shipped out again. We had a big parade for his battallion when they came back. People were shouting thanks to all of them as they passed by in parade, it was quite moving, many of us had tears. They were all so proud and happy to be here with us again and knew that we backed them 100%.

[Celumnaz]

http://newsbusters.org/node/328

"Don't get me wrong, I think you're probably telling the truth, but there might be a lot of people at home wondering how that could be possible with the conditions you're facing and with the insurgent attacks you're facing. "...

"Well sir, I'd tell you, if I got my news from the newspapers also I'd be pretty depressed as well!"

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007113

'The Terrorists and the Media'

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/15/business/media/15apee.html

Editors Ponder How to Present a Broad Picture of Iraq

Sign In to E-Mail This

Printer-Friendly

Reprints

By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE

Published: August 15, 2005

Rosemary Goudreau, the editorial page editor of The Tampa Tribune, has received the same e-mail message a dozen times over the last year.

"Did you know that 47 countries have re-established their embassies in Iraq?" the anonymous polemic asks, in part. "Did you know that 3,100 schools have been renovated?"

"Of course we didn't know!" the message concludes. "Our media doesn't tell us!"

Ms. Goudreau's newspaper, like most dailies in America, relies largely on The Associated Press for its coverage of the Iraq war. So she finally forwarded the e-mail message to Mike Silverman, managing editor of The A.P., asking if there was a way to check these assertions and to put them into context. Like many other journalists, Mr. Silverman had also received a copy of the message.

Ms. Goudreau's query prompted an unusual discussion last month in New York at a regular meeting of editors whose newspapers are members of The Associated Press. Some editors expressed concern that a kind of bunker mentality was preventing reporters in Iraq from getting out and explaining the bigger picture beyond the daily death tolls.

"The bottom-line question was, people wanted to know if we're making progress in Iraq," Ms. Goudreau said, and the A.P. articles were not helping to answer that question.

"It was uncomfortable questioning The A.P., knowing that Iraq is such a dangerous place," she said. "But there's a perception that we're not telling the whole story."

Mr. Silverman said in an interview that he was aware of that perception. "Other editors said they get calls from readers who are hearing stories from returning troops of the good things they have accomplished while there, and readers find that at odds with the generally gloomy portrayal in the papers of what's going on in Iraq," he said.

Mr. Silverman said the editors were asking for help in making sense of the situation. "I was glad to have that discussion with the editors because they have to deal with the perception that the media is emphasizing the negative," he said.

"We're there to report the good and the bad and we try to give due weight to everything going on," he said. "It is unfortunate that the explosions and shootings and fatalities and injuries on some days seem to dominate the news."

Suki Dardarian, deputy managing editor of The Seattle Times and vice president of the board of the Associated Press Managing Editors, said that the discussion was "a pretty healthy one."

"One of the things the editors felt was that as much context as you can bring, the better," Ms. Dardarian said. "They wanted them to get beyond the breaking news to 'What does this mean?' "

She also said that as Mr. Silverman and Kathleen Carroll, The A.P.'s executive editor, responded to the concerns, the editors realized that some questions were impossible to answer. For example, she said, the editors understood that it was much easier to add up the number of dead than to determine how many hospitals received power on a particular day or how many schools were built.

Mr. Silverman said the wire service was covering Iraq "as accurately as we can" while "also trying to keep our people out of harm's way."

"The main obstacle we face," he said, "is the severe limitation on our movement and our ability to get out and report. It's very confining for our staff to go into Baghdad and have to spend most of their time on the fifth floor of the Palestine Hotel," which is home to most of the press corps. The hotel was struck by a tank shell in 2003, killing two journalists.

Iraq remains the most dangerous place in the world to work as a journalist, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists. At least 13 media workers have been killed in Iraq so far this year, bringing the total to 50 since the war began in 2003.

"Postwar Iraq is fraught with risks for reporters: Banditry, gunfire and bombings are common," the committee's Web site says. "Insurgents have added a new threat by systematically targeting foreigners, including journalists, and Iraqis who work for them."

Mr. Silverman said The A.P. had already decided before the meeting that it would have Robert H. Reid, an A.P. correspondent at large who has reported frequently from Iraq, write an overview every 10 days.

Mr. Silverman also said the wire service would make more effort to flag articles that look beyond the breaking news. As it turned out, he said, most of the information in the anonymous e-mail message had been reported by The A.P., but the details had been buried in articles or the articles had been overlooked.

Before the meeting, The A.P. collected three articles by reporters for other news organizations who were embedded with American troops and sent them out over the wire to provide "more voice." Mr. Silverman said he wanted to do more of that but the opportunities were limited because there are only three dozen embedded journalists now, compared with 700 when the war began more than two years ago.

Ms. Goudreau, for one, found the discussion useful. By the end, she said, editors were acknowledging that even in their own hometowns, "we're more likely to focus on people who are killed than on the positive news out of a school."

[jeceris]

I am so sick of our media playing to the left. There is something wrong with our MEDIA! Eighty percent of our troops back our president and they are proud of what they do. The country backs the president and we are proud of our troops. But to hear it from the media we are on the brink of 'a

MARCH'.    

796317[/snapback]

you sound like oreilly there babs, quoting made up numbers and statistics,

where does it say 80% of the troops there support this hostile takover in iraq.

remember, this is not a war, so don't call it one.

797250[/snapback]

It is a war, a world war. I have been reading your dispute with Nxt. .... You aren't even from this country. You have no idea what's going on here. Nxt. is right. You are a liberal come runnin' around here with that democratic 'hype,' and here it goes... it doesn't mean a thing_ it's political crap.

Tryin' to get in the White House, aren't you, liberal?

797407[/snapback]

a big whiff and a miss again babs.

IT IS NOT A WAR. and it is definately not a world war. (the ridiculousness of that statement isn't worth arguing)

so what if i'm not from america, you think i don't know what's going on, and therefore have no right to criticize your so called leader???!!!

every time he makes one of his self centred decisions, it's effects ripple out and **** us all up.

i am not a liberal as you like to categorize, your kind always do, it makes things simple and understandable for smooth brain.

and i don't care who's in the whitehouse, but it would appear i do care more for the safety of your soldiers than you ever will!

[sanchera1978]

I'm sorry babs but the war on terror isnt just located in Iraq... I wasnt talking about some terrorist attacking us. I'm talking about a country and their army attacking us.. Terrorism is a very difficult thing to control. Terrorist are nothing new... Terrorism didnt start on 9/11 that was just when the USA took more notice about it. There other countries that support terrorism alot more then Saddam did. Saudia Arabia, Libya, Pakistan to name a few...

I do support the troops i think that the government should be doing alot more then they are right now to make sure they come back home safely. I wouldnt mind paying a little more in taxes as long as it went towards providing the troops with the supplies they need. I just wouldnt want that extra money going to Halliburton like it does now. I believe its their divison of Kellog brown that is supplying the troops with their meals an uniforms..and being that they already overcharged the US govt 10's of millions of dollars for gas and other stuff i dont trust them to be providing stuff for out troops. They can be pocketing alot of money for them when they should be using it for the troops.

I'll get back on topic though... The one thing I dont like about this Sheehan issue is that it's really dividing the country. Half the people think she has the right to free speech and the other half doesnt. Last I knew free speech was one of the most important things in our consitution.... it doesnt matter what she does or say she has the right as a citzen to do it as long as its peacefully.

[Kabutarian]

At the moment his ratings are low??

Actually, his ratings on the war in Iraq have been low for quite a while now, what with the Downing Street Memos and all that.

You are going by polls?? DEMCRATIC HYPE.

You have no evidence that the polls are biased in any way, shape or form. Just because you don't agree with something doesn't mean that it's incorrect.

Our media is liberal on most of tv

So then, you can name a Liberal channel besides CNN? I'm waiting.

the only conservative voice is radio.

Pfft. What's Fox, then? Are they evil Dems, too? :3

Now the liberals are starting up liberal radio stations

Ohs noes, a single station that I can't even get where I live >> it's a force to be reckoned with!

and the people here are tired of hearing this. 

Are you the official spokesperson of UM? No? Yeah, didn't think so

People around the world are reading too much into the democratic hype

Or could it be that the rest of the world is *gasp* Seeing through the White House's smokescreen? I THINK IT IS!

and then you 'bunch of liberals' come on here and pretend that this is how our country is (of course, pointing to the democratic hype).

We all know America's not a liberal nation. It's a closely divided country with a few powerful Conservatives at the top.

All this hype, all this goings-on with this poor mom, who lost her son, is a push for the White House.

Prove it. I somehow doubt that this woman has presidential aspirations.

The Dems want to get back into the White House.

this woman is disgracing everything her son stood for, she needs to show respect for what her son believed in and died for

You have no idea what he believed in. Stop putting words in a dead man's mouth.

If I had lost a brother/sister/mom/dad/child ... for serving MY country.. I would be proud of them... I wouldn't disgrace them by acting like a fool! 

There you go. He wasn't serving his country (Although I have no doubt that he thought he was), he was just more cannon fodder for an invasion with the sole purpose of helping out Bush's oil industry backers.

Seems to me... all of his family except HER.. say that he was proud to be serving in the military! 

And what makes you so sure that they're any less biased then she is? Because you happen to disagree with her? Please, go take a cold shower, wake up, and then come back to the arguement.

And yeah there's a huge cover up by the left about the 9/11 commission

Tell me... who was PUSHING for the commision? The Left. And who was doing their best to keep it from forming, and when it did eventually form, keep it from getting the info it needed? Hate to break it to ya pal, but it was Bush and Co.

and the left's failure to protect us,

WHO the hell was in power when it happened? Clinton wasn't the one reading with schoolchildren when the planes were smashing into towers.

because they were too busy trying to implement socialism

Let me see... you say that, during the early Bush regime, there was some "shadow government" full of Liberals, who failed to act on 9/11, because it was trying to turn the States into Russia? Well, that's a new one

which again in the long term only spreads misery equally.

Socialism (I'm using it as a synonym to Communism in this context) is great in theory, it just can't work in reality.

It is a war, a world war.

A war has to be against a tangible enemy. This conflict isn't.

I have been reading your dispute with Nxt. .... You aren't even from this country.   You have no idea what's going on here.

I think he has a better idea than most Americans do, actually.

Nxt. is right. You are a liberal come runnin' around here with that democratic 'hype,' and here it goes... it doesn't mean a thing_ it's political crap.

Guess what, hun? EVERYone employs "political crap". The left, the right, the center. It's as universal a weapon as an AK-47 is in Iraq right now.

Tryin' to get in the White House, aren't you, liberal?

You say "liberal" like it's a bad thing

oh, sorry about my post everyone, i forgot that america is evil, and all they care about is oil.

It's about as evil as a hijacked SUV that's being used to run children down in the streets. Is the SUV itself evil? No, it's the driver.

i am so sorry to all the terrorists out there, you poor things.

Great for you. I'm afraid you're not going to find much support on either side of the spectrum.

all of our soldiers are fools and were tricked into volenteering.

You don't need to be a fool to be tricked, pal

so sorry. lets just pull out of iraq and i'm sure the terrorists will just leave us alone.

I don't believe that any serious politcians, right or left, are advocating that.

terrorist don't need to be fought?

Of course they do. But you don't win that fight be helping them recruit more terrorists

"What if we lose a big part of our army for a war that doesn't involve the safety of our country?"...you state. The war 'is' in Iraq...the terror 'is' in Iraq. We are fighting the terrorists, there, so we don't have to fight them here.

There were no terrorists in Iraq at the time of our invasion. The only reason they're there now is because we invaded their homeland.

Saddam was a terrorist, he supported terrorists and Iraq was a state of terror. What more do you need?

Saddam was not a terrorist (Just a fat, greedy ********), and did not support terrorist groups. The Iraqis were actually quite safe back then compared to now. What more do YOU need?

[Nxt2Hvn]

At the moment his ratings are low??

Actually, his ratings on the war in Iraq have been low for quite a while now, what with the Downing Street Memos and all that.

You are going by polls?? DEMCRATIC HYPE.

You have no evidence that the polls are biased in any way, shape or form. Just because you don't agree with something doesn't mean that it's incorrect.

Our media is liberal on most of tv

So then, you can name a Liberal channel besides CNN? I'm waiting.

the only conservative voice is radio.

Pfft. What's Fox, then? Are they evil Dems, too? :3

Now the liberals are starting up liberal radio stations

Ohs noes, a single station that I can't even get where I live >> it's a force to be reckoned with!

and the people here are tired of hearing this. 

Are you the official spokesperson of UM? No? Yeah, didn't think so

People around the world are reading too much into the democratic hype

Or could it be that the rest of the world is *gasp* Seeing through the White House's smokescreen? I THINK IT IS!

and then you 'bunch of liberals' come on here and pretend that this is how our country is (of course, pointing to the democratic hype).

We all know America's not a liberal nation. It's a closely divided country with a few powerful Conservatives at the top.

All this hype, all this goings-on with this poor mom, who lost her son, is a push for the White House.

Prove it. I somehow doubt that this woman has presidential aspirations.

The Dems want to get back into the White House.

this woman is disgracing everything her son stood for, she needs to show respect for what her son believed in and died for

You have no idea what he believed in. Stop putting words in a dead man's mouth.

If I had lost a brother/sister/mom/dad/child ... for serving MY country.. I would be proud of them... I wouldn't disgrace them by acting like a fool! 

There you go. He wasn't serving his country (Although I have no doubt that he thought he was), he was just more cannon fodder for an invasion with the sole purpose of helping out Bush's oil industry backers.

Seems to me... all of his family except HER.. say that he was proud to be serving in the military! 

And what makes you so sure that they're any less biased then she is? Because you happen to disagree with her? Please, go take a cold shower, wake up, and then come back to the arguement.

And yeah there's a huge cover up by the left about the 9/11 commission

Tell me... who was PUSHING for the commision? The Left. And who was doing their best to keep it from forming, and when it did eventually form, keep it from getting the info it needed? Hate to break it to ya pal, but it was Bush and Co.

and the left's failure to protect us,

WHO the hell was in power when it happened? Clinton wasn't the one reading with schoolchildren when the planes were smashing into towers.

because they were too busy trying to implement socialism

Let me see... you say that, during the early Bush regime, there was some "shadow government" full of Liberals, who failed to act on 9/11, because it was trying to turn the States into Russia? Well, that's a new one

which again in the long term only spreads misery equally.

Socialism (I'm using it as a synonym to Communism in this context) is great in theory, it just can't work in reality.

It is a war, a world war.

A war has to be against a tangible enemy. This conflict isn't.

I have been reading your dispute with Nxt. .... You aren't even from this country.   You have no idea what's going on here.

I think he has a better idea than most Americans do, actually.

Nxt. is right. You are a liberal come runnin' around here with that democratic 'hype,' and here it goes... it doesn't mean a thing_ it's political crap.

Guess what, hun? EVERYone employs "political crap". The left, the right, the center. It's as universal a weapon as an AK-47 is in Iraq right now.

Tryin' to get in the White House, aren't you, liberal?

You say "liberal" like it's a bad thing

oh, sorry about my post everyone, i forgot that america is evil, and all they care about is oil.

It's about as evil as a hijacked SUV that's being used to run children down in the streets. Is the SUV itself evil? No, it's the driver.

i am so sorry to all the terrorists out there, you poor things.

Great for you. I'm afraid you're not going to find much support on either side of the spectrum.

all of our soldiers are fools and were tricked into volenteering.

You don't need to be a fool to be tricked, pal

so sorry. lets just pull out of iraq and i'm sure the terrorists will just leave us alone.

I don't believe that any serious politcians, right or left, are advocating that.

terrorist don't need to be fought?

Of course they do. But you don't win that fight be helping them recruit more terrorists

"What if we lose a big part of our army for a war that doesn't involve the safety of our country?"...you state. The war 'is' in Iraq...the terror 'is' in Iraq. We are fighting the terrorists, there, so we don't have to fight them here.

There were no terrorists in Iraq at the time of our invasion. The only reason they're there now is because we invaded their homeland.

Saddam was a terrorist, he supported terrorists and Iraq was a state of terror. What more do you need?

Saddam was not a terrorist (Just a fat, greedy ********), and did not support terrorist groups. The Iraqis were actually quite safe back then compared to now. What more do YOU need?

797778[/snapback]

WOW... now that clears everything up!!!

[jeceris]

FINALLY!!!!!

all right.

it's about time nxt, but thank god you've seen the light.

[Nxt2Hvn]

FINALLY!!!!!

all right.

it's about time nxt, but thank god you've seen the light.

797825[/snapback]

You don't catch on to sarcasm easily ... do you

Oh well... that explains a lot! ... from what I can tell.. you don't catch on to much!

[jeceris]

it would appear YOUR sarcasm censor is non existant.

c'mon, laugh it off nxt.

we're never going to agree and that's what makes these debates so lively.

[Nxt2Hvn]

it would appear YOUR sarcasm censor is non existant.

c'mon, laugh it off nxt.

we're never going to agree and that's what makes these debates so lively.

797881[/snapback]

I am laughing... every time I read one of your posts..

Edited August 18, 2005 by Nxt2Hvn

[sanchera1978]

Some of you guys are way too uptight. Relax and enjoy life. Just because someone doesnt agree with your views doesnt make them stupid. Everybody has their own thoughts and opinions and we are all allowed to express those thoughts however we wish as long as we dont harm anyone else or infringe on their rights. Thats what makes this country so great but it looks like people are starting to lose all sense of reason. Obviously this country is divided right now half support bush and his war and the other half dont.. We need to respect each others views before there ends up being a civil war. I know alot of you dont think this could happen but if enough people believe in their cause anything is possible.

[Babs]

I am so sick of our media playing to the left. There is something wrong with our MEDIA! Eighty percent of our troops back our president and they are proud of what they do. The country backs the president and we are proud of our troops. But to hear it from the media we are on the brink of 'a

MARCH'.    

796317[/snapback]

you sound like oreilly there babs, quoting made up numbers and statistics,

where does it say 80% of the troops there support this hostile takover in iraq.

remember, this is not a war, so don't call it one.

797250[/snapback]

It is a war, a world war. I have been reading your dispute with Nxt. .... You aren't even from this country. You have no idea what's going on here. Nxt. is right. You are a liberal come runnin' around here with that democratic 'hype,' and here it goes... it doesn't mean a thing_ it's political crap.

Tryin' to get in the White House, aren't you, liberal?

797407[/snapback]

a big whiff and a miss again babs.

IT IS NOT A WAR. and it is definately not a world war. (the ridiculousness of that statement isn't worth arguing)

so what if i'm not from america, you think i don't know what's going on, and therefore have no right to criticize your so called leader???!!!

every time he makes one of his self centred decisions, it's effects ripple out and **** us all up.

i am not a liberal as you like to categorize, your kind always do, it makes things simple and understandable for smooth brain.

and i don't care who's in the whitehouse, but it would appear i do care more for the safety of your soldiers than you ever will!

797735[/snapback]

Whoa!...what a joke. You don't care about anything but your own butt, and 'your' country. ....... AND whether or not this war grows.

You don't know anything about the US, except what you get from the media. The liberal media!....CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC....need I go on?? Your media gets it from our media.

It 'is' a war. Your brain just doesn't want to except that because you may have to get off your butt and do something.

[Kabutarian]

Sorry, but CBS, NBC and ABC are all mainstream networks. Nothing biased about them. And please, stop insulting people and making personal shots. How about using *gasp* Logic and proof to support your arguement! Now there's a thought :-O

[Babs]

The media is liberal. Most everyone knows that. I thought I was using good sense, better than logic.

[Mekorig]

Babs, please , bring proffs of your statements.

Your statemets whitout proff will be taken has you take a statement from anyone else that says "the USa media is right wing".

[Babs]

The media is liberal, left. Everyone knows that. It portrays America as if we are all fed up with Bush and want the war to stop. This couldn't be further from the truth. I said George Bush would be re-elected and you guys said, no, he wouldn't. George Bush was re-elected. Does that tell you anything??

Okay, I will scurry around and find some proof of the liberal media 'bias' in our nation. How can you find proof of that? Do you think the media will come out and say, "We are lefties and we want you to follow the left agenda? I don't know has anybody done that?

Look at our latenight talk shows...look at all of Hollywood. CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN... all are Hollywood run.

[morpheas]

-Post removed-

[Babs]

I agree morpheas. I thought that too when I read your article. First her husband, leaving her, now her mother. Her family doesn't agree with her and it is causing much grief.

Edited August 19, 2005 by Babs

[Kabutarian]

The media is liberal, left. Everyone knows that.

Tell me... Where was this omnipotent "Liberal Media" during the build up to the invasion, and during the invasion itself?

It portrays America as if we are all fed up with Bush and want the war to stop.

We've been there for what, two or three years now? Bush keeps delivering empty promises about how peace is right around the corner, and casualties are still piling up. Open your ears, America DOES want the war to stop (Of course, we can't pull out until Iraq is stable, but the sentiment is still there).

This couldn't be further from the truth. I said George Bush would be re-elected and you guys said, no, he wouldn't.  George Bush was re-elected. Does that tell you anything??

What does that have to do with an imaginary Liberal media?

Okay, I will scurry around and find some proof of the liberal media 'bias' in our nation. How can you find proof of that?

Oh, I dunno, see how many Conservative shows a channel's done, and compare it to the number of Liberal ones it's done? This isn't rocket science.

Do you think the media will come out and say, "We are lefties and we want you to follow the left agenda? I don't know has anybody done that?

No, I don't believe they would, because they don't pander to the left.

Look at our latenight talk shows...look at all of Hollywood. CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN... all are Hollywood run.

o_O what's your point? Whether Hollywood runs them or not is a moot point.

The media is liberal. Most everyone knows that. I thought I was using good sense, better than logic.

I think you just lost. Something's more effective than logic? Buh-bye now. Don't come back until you learn the basic rules of Debate.

798406[/snapback]

Edited August 19, 2005 by Kabutarian

[Babs]

Kabutarian....Kabu, you have a lot to learn.