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 : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cogito who wrote (77678)	6/26/2006 10:18:09 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 81568

The press did a great job of helping them get elected. Unless you're referring to Fox News, any help was strictly unintentional. What, do you mean 60 Minutes and the NYT running stories on how Bush was AWOL from his TANG service in September of an election year, based on forgeries so ludicrous that they shouldn't have fooled a ten year old?

To: Cogito who wrote (77678)	6/26/2006 10:47:16 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 81568

Actually, the morphing of the insurgency is not from one thing into another, but from a few things into more things. The people who are all referred to as "insurgents" are really many different groups of people motivated by different things. Not all of these people would attack Americans if they could. They are attacking Shiites because the Shia are their preferred targets. They don't bomb mosques to hurt Americans. I agree, and this is precisely why the press is doing such a lousy job. To get some sense of the forest, you can't have reporters who just say, "oh, here's a tree!", "oh, here's another tree! This is a different one!" You need an overview, and we haven't been getting one. Some of the reporters are lazy, some are following the herd; others have their biases - either against Bush, or blaming everything that happens for good or ill on the Americans, or simply looking desperately for the next story they can turn into the Iraqi My Lai and win a Pulitzer with. Very few seem to wish the American troops well in battle, unless they embed and stay with them a while. But those who 'go native' (ironic application of the expression, isn't it?) are quickly corrected by their editors back home. For example, I have read that the Time Magazine story sent in by the reporter who covered 101st Airborne in Tal Afar, which was a big story, lots of photographs, was eviscerated by the editors on the grounds that it was "too heroic." Now, the milblogs are telling me that Col MacMaster's campaign at Tal Afar is a new case study for how to do counter-insurgency the right way, without alienating the civilian population, who in this case were being severely intimidated (as in blown up) by the insurgents. Do you wonder that the military loathes the press?