Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (29724)	2/15/2004 12:09:22 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793625

Thoughts on line Blog - Posted 10:20 AM by steve According to the Washington Post's own research, 2/3 of all voters believe questions about Bush's Guard service were "not a legitimate issue." Even a majority of Democrats - 56 percent - think that Bush's Vietnam-era history is relevant, as do 82% of Republicans and 66% of independents. So then what can account for the prominent position given this story by the Washington Post? Today's (Feb 15) front page has Few Can Offer Confirmation Of Bush's Guard Service , followed by another three stories in the main section alone. Yesterday's front page had Many Gaps In Bush's Guard Records , with a handful of additional stories and mentions elsewhere in the paper. Going back even further, the Post has been all over this story. How can the Post editorial team explain putting more coverage (and negative coverage, from Bush's perspective) on the front page and burying the story that reports the lack of interest on page A11? They even buried the survey results halfway through a story about Democrats' views on the wisdom of attacking Bush on this matter! It sure looks like the Post editors are determined to force feed us this (non)story, regardless of the fact that we're not interested. Could this a case of that supposedly non-existent liberal media bias rearing its head?