Revolt in the Senate, or common sense?

| August 24, 2007

Today’s lesson in media bias – two very different takes on Senator Warner’s revelation yesterday after returning from Iraq. The first from the Washington Post entitled “Warner calls for pullouts by Christmas“;

Sen. John W. Warner, one of the most influential Republican voices in Congress on national security, called on President Bush yesterday to begin withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq in time for Christmas as a new intelligence report concluded that political leaders in Baghdad are “unable to govern effectively.” Warner’s declaration — after the Virginia senator’s recent four-day trip to the Middle East — roiled the political environment ahead of a much-anticipated progress report to be delivered Sept. 11 by Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq. Although Warner had already broken with Bush’s strategy, this was the first time he endorsed pulling troops out by a specific date.

Hmm, no direct quotes, just a reporter’s interpretation of what Warner said – and it sounds like he was pretty firm about withdrawing troops doesn’t it? Now from the Washington Examiner, a story entitled US General Wary of Withdrawal;

Warner, R-Va., former chairman of the Armed Services Committee and Navy secretary during the Vietnam War, said Thursday that Bush would be sending a powerful message to Iraq’s government that the U.S. commitment there is not open-ended. Warner says the president should get to decide when and how many troops should leave. He also did not mention any places where he thought reductions were possible in Iraq, where some regions are worse than others.

Sounds like two different speeches doesn’t it? And an even more different approach from the Washington Times;

The updated National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), a consensus view of the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency and other services, says “measurable” security improvements were made in war-torn Iraq since January and will expand modestly in the next 12 months with continued military pressure on insurgents.

Within hours of the report”s release, Sen. John W. Warner of Virginia called on President Bush to bring some U.S. troops home by Christmas, and Army Secretary Pete Geren ruled out extending troop deployments beyond the current 15 months.

So despite the fact that the Post wants us to believe there’s a revolt against the President in the Senate led by Senator Warner, the real truth is that Warner actually concurs with the anticipated proposal by General Petareus that we begin drawing down the troops – and the President.

Category: Media, Politics, Terror War

3 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Kathy

Stunning to see the WaPoo spin. I read it almost everyday – and without fail it is replete with agenda journalism. From global warming which isn’t global to the global war on terror which is but they don’t believe it… one wonders if the fumes from sitting in traffic in DC aren’t sources of brain damage.

Jonn Lilyea wrote: It can’t be the fumes, Kathy – I sit in the DC fumes everyday, too. I think it has more to do with half-witted morons that are being molded in J-school these days. 

Kathy

Jonn,
I disagree – you just happen to have copious brain cells, so you are able to afford losing a few. Others aren’t so lucky. 😀

 

Jonn Lilyea wrote: Kathy you’re probably the first person to recognize my enormous brain power. That makes you pretty smart, too. 🙂

Curteous Curt

Dexter’s Delight What you did not know and should have known is that Lucy did not die a peaceful natural death. To understand why you need to know some background information. Lucy’s business had not been doing well. The decline in international travel had seen to that. She had turned to some New York Bankers for credit. As she was behind on her payments her life insurance policy was worth more than she was. Luckily for Lucy these bankers were not only a problem for her they were also a problem for Tony Sopprano. Now you the reader might think that you know a thing or two about Tony Sopprano as his life story was made in to an HBO series. The thing is that series was full of disinformation and emissions. You might think that I am implying that it was really Lucy who was the psychologist that Tony visited. No that it not exactly correct. But Lucy it was Lucy who Tony’s psychologist confided in not some old white guy as the series portrays. To protect her clients mental health Lucy had to on more than one occasion visit Tony. The Two got along like Shias and Sunnis but Tony still wanted to get in to Lucy’s pants. That part of the HBO series is accurate. Lucy came up with the idea of fixing her problem. She figureed that she could manipulate Tony in to taking care of her problem for her. On the pretext of meeting with him to discuss his financial support for a PAC that was gearing up to push for medical marijuanna in Maryland, Delware and New Jersey she met with Tony in Northern New Jersey. During their dinner she happened to bring up the fact that these New York bankers were a pain in the ass for both of them. As they went for a walk back to their cars Lucy sprung her plan. She said in a joking manner than Tony could have the Bankers whacked any time and make it look like Lucy did it. Since she would not have been… Read more »