Misleading Post-Dispatch Article About the War

So far, the idea has not attracted the attention of Democratic leaders. They are under substantial pressure by anti-war groups to consider only legislation that orders troops from Iraq.

Says the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. This, despite the fact that a majority of Americans are wanting an end to the war.
Meanwhile a Republican plan to change the mission of US troops is:

“This is a necessary adjustment in the national debate to reintroduce bipartisanship, to stop the ‘gotcha’ politics that are going on that seem to be driven by fringes on both sides and change the terms of the discussion,” said Rep. Phil English, R-Pa.

So the Democratic Party is characterized as be hostage to the far left (those dirty hippies in the anti-war movement) even though they are responding to the will of a majority of the constituency. Whilst the Republicans, who have been dragged kicking and screaming into the debate and have so far done nothing but be obstructionists are presented as serious people looking for bipartisanship. Because everyone knows the Republicans never listen to their fringe (read base).
Shame on the Post-Dispatch

About these ads

8 Responses

  1. Claiming that ‘anti-war groups’ is being used as a synonym for ‘dirty hippies’ on the ‘far left’ seems to be pushing it a little, and Salazar and McCaskill were given broadly positive coverage in the article. If you think that article was an example of bad journalism, you should try the ignorant tripe we have to put with in the UK. Or not.

  2. “They are under substantial pressure by anti-war groups to consider only legislation that orders troops from Iraq”
    should read:
    “They are under substantial pressure by the majority of the American public to consider only legislation that orders troops from Iraq.”
    Saying “anti-war groups” makes it sound as though they are fringe or ‘special interest’ ‘groups.’
    That English quote is quite entertaining; but I think perhaps we don’t need to listen to Repuglicans for quite a while – they’ve had their chance to do something ‘bipartisan’ and positive for the country and … failed miserably for 6+ years, whilst betraying every virtue they said they stood for.
    I’m so sick of being forced to choose between the lesser of two evils every election. Take out the bribery- er, I mean “lobbying” – and perhaps we’d have a shot …

  3. None of these things are as simple as they sound. Nancy Pelosi takes a lot of heat because “she took impeachment off the table.” Actually, the voters took impeachment off the table because there are not enough votes in the Senate to impeach the Bush/Cheney cartel even if the House had enough votes to “convict” them. Yet Pelosi takes the hit. Reid and Pelosi are blocked at every corner by (1) a President who threatens to veto everything and (2) not being able to win a cloture vote once again because the American public did not see fit to elect ENOUGH Democrats. At the same time Reid and Pelosi have to find a way to take care of business. Myself, I would vote the Defense Budget WITH the stand down provision and let Bush veto it and keep doing that until it became obvious to the American public just WHO was doing the blocking…

  4. If you think that article was an example of bad journalism, you should try the ignorant tripe we have to put with in the UK. Or not.
    Not.
    Really, I’m certain it’s very difficult for non-Americans to grasp just how bad our news media has gotten over the past 20 years. They simply don’t report.
    It’s not just political and war isues. For instance, as one example, there was a shooting a year or so back that made national news for days, Amish schoolkids were shot. The shooter was a fundamentalist Christian who had (obviously) major issues with those with different religious beliefs, like the Amish in this case. I found out he was a fundamentalist in a news report. From Australia. Australia, where they simply reported the news; the facts just got “disappeared” in the US coverage. That is merely one example of many. The political coverage, esp. concerning the war(s), has been far better from Canada, the UK, and even Australian and Asian news sources. If it wasn’t for the internet US citizens would have a devil of a time getting full, accurate info.
    That said, some newspapers, such as Knight-Ridder, have done a pretty good job much of the time… compared to other US news sources. Most US news sources act as toadies to the rightwing nowadays.

  5. Jonathan, in the US anti-war groups are always portrayed as far left and anytime the Dems disagree with the Republicans the Dems get accused of being a hostage to the far left. This despite the fact that most of today’s republicans make Jesse Helms look moderate.

  6. The democrats had a chance to really make some changes.
    Who ya kiddin?
    Nothings going to change. The fool Obama is going announcing today that we should have gone into Pakistan.
    They will all bow to the military industrial complex or they won’t win.
    Quit yanking our chain.

  7. Gotta to agree with Johnathan. Democrats are under pressure from anti-war groups, who, I think, increasingly have the ears of the public and, more importantly, the ears those left-leaning voters who are likely to vote in Democratic primaries. The reporter, who is on the ground in Washington and talking to people there, knows this. And you conveniently left out the paragraph about how the GOP was trying to redefine the debate on the war that ran before the above quote. If you’re going to criticize something, at least put it in context. Don’t fall into the trap of letting your own biases cloud your judgment, which clearly happened in this case. And, by the way, this was primarily an Associated Press story — look at the byline. The only input the Post-Dispatch had was inserting the quotes from the Missouri lawmakers, to localize the story.

  8. Democrats are under pressure from anti-war groups, who, I think, increasingly have the ears of the public and, more importantly, the ears those left-leaning voters who are likely to vote in Democratic primaries

    And yet according to the polls a majority of Americans are against the war. Surely you are not arguing that a majority of Americans are “…left-leaning voters…” And I did include a quote by a republican who says the repubs are trying to be more bipartisian (yet they fillibuster any bill that doesn’t follow the Bush party line) and “…change the terms of the discussion…” if you missed it its the second quote above.

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 57 other followers

%d bloggers like this: