The devil is in the captions: CNN graphics question absence of Dem Iraq plan, but not Bush's postponement
A series of graphics used by CNN on December 14 illustrates the markedly different reception CNN gave to, on one hand, the Bush administration's decision to delay the release of a revised strategy for Iraq until the new year and, on the other, a press conference in which incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) announced the Democrats' agenda for the first 100 legislative hours in the new congressional session. Graphics appearing during CNN's reporting on President Bush's consideration -- and postponement -- of a revised strategy raised no questions about the delay. On the other hand, in coverage of the Democrats' legislative agenda for the "first 100 hours," CNN repeatedly aired graphics questioning the absence in that agenda of a plan for Iraq -- even though the plan for the first 100 legislative hours has remained the same since late October.
As Media Matters for America noted, during a report on the December 13 broadcast of NBC's Today, National Review White House correspondent Byron York suggested that President Bush delayed his announcement of changes to the administration's Iraq war policy -- initially planned to be delivered before Christmas -- until January in part because of "public relations," adding: "[T]he president wants to come out with something new, something fresh, and something that will help change the debate at the same time that the Democratic Congress is taking office and getting a lot of attention in Washington." By contrast, Roger Simon, chief political columnist for The Politico, a political news website to be launched in January 2007, commented on the possible political considerations behind the delay on the December 13 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews, saying: "The trouble is, people are dying and maybe that would be a reason to speed things up a little."
PELOSI & IRAQ
On the December 14 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, on-screen text teased the segment on Pelosi, asking "Where's Iraq?" Other on-screen text about Pelosi and Iraq read: "Pelosi's Agenda: What's Missing?" and "Pelosi Did Not Discuss Iraq in Outlining Agenda."
On the December 14 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight, on-screen text read: "What Iraq Plan?" "Dems Made No Mention of the War in Iraq," and "Dems Deeply Divided Over Their Iraq Policy."
BUSH & IRAQ
On the December 14 edition of CNN's American Morning, on-screen text read: "New Iraq Strategy," "Iraq War Plans," "New Military Strategy?" and "War Plans."
On the December 14 edition of CNN Newsroom, on-screen text read: "The Fight for Iraq," "Pres. Bush Weighing Options for Iraq," "Pres. Bush Met With Former and Current Cmdrs.," and "Pres. Bush Vows No Pullout From Iraq Before Job Is Done."
On Lou Dobbs Tonight, on-screen text read: "War Strategy" "WH [White House] Not Saying if Bush Wants Iraq Reinforcements," "Iraq Study Group Suggested U.S. Pullback in Iraq," "WH: Bush Listening to All Advice About the War," "Bush Due to Announce New Strategy in the New Year," and "Pres. Bush Considering Iraq Strategy Options."
The Dems don't owe us a plan, other than "to get us out of that catastro****". They didn't start this crappy war, they didn't continue to lie to us about why, they didn't continue to lie to us about how it was being prosecuted, and even if they provided construction-grade blue-prints, they cannot execute any plan.
This is Bungle's war, and the shame is that he must wait for someone to publish a plan which can be suitably plagiarized, before he will have any plan at all. Sure wish someone in the so-called media would awaken, and ask the "Decider" WTF?
We've been listening for years now about how Bush had no plan, there's no plan... now the Dem's get control and you say they don't owe America a PLAN??? Are you friggin serious?!?!?! They've had just as much time to create a plan as anyone else and they now have control. The country is waiting.
If the Dems don't provide a plan (Kerry has supposedly had one for months) the American people will think that the Dems are nothing but a bunch oif whiners that would say anything to get into office.
I truly hope they don't do that. Put up or shut up.
The press is pressuring the Democrats to 'produce'.... they aren't even in power yet. They don't the press anything. The slant toward the GOP ('liberal media bias') is so obvious.
'they don't owe the press anything'. Thank you.
At first I thought you were serious. You'd better place some tags in your post next time. Once I read "They've had just as much time to create a plan as anyone else and they now have control. The country is waiting." I knew I had been had.
First, as we all know, the Dems have been proposing plan after plan, and they were all rejected by the Reps.
Second, since the Dems have had some control for approximately -1 month (yes, negative one month... they convene on Jan 4) it would be hard to have a plan without Einstein helping.
Third, it is interesting that no plan besides "Stay the illegal course" has been given by the Reps that suddenly the Dems are being targeted for a solution. Why not use any of the several detailed plans given by the Dems in the past few years? Maybe because the cluster**** has gotten worse and Dems will want to rethink strategy like all intelligent people would. Unintelligent thinkers stay the course as it worsens, and fail to listen to the majority.
>>"now the Dem's get control"<<
Democrats have the House and-by a whisker-the Senate. But don't forget who the self-proclaimed Decider(tm) is, as He reminds us of in his hissy-fittyish manner almost daily. Dear Leader owes the country a way out of the major fiasco he led us into. Perhaps when he's finished his "listening" (there's a novelty for him) tour, he'll come up with a plan (with a fancy, alliterative name, no doubt). More than likely though, it will in reality be a way for Bush to run out the clock a couple of more years and pass his untidy mess on to someone else.
Even though prosecuting a war is an EXECUTIVE branch responsibility NOT a congressional one. Since Bush dug himself a hole it is obviously DEMS responsibility to GET HIM OUT OF THE HOLE. Of course the GOP doesnt want a solution, not that there is a good one now that Bush has rushed headlong into this fiasco, Murtha had a plan. NO the GOP wants the Dems to cough up a plan for them to demonize. The Dems just arent giving them enough material for them to smear them with on this issue.
Hey, Einstein, if you start driving the wrong way down a one-way street I don't need to provide detailed directions to the destination before I tell you to turn the flipping car around.
But you want a plan? Here's a Readers' Digest version of mine:
1. Withdraw all troops on a six-month timetable. 2. Stand ready with large-scale humanitarian aid and reconstruction assistance - the latter to employ, to the greatest extent possible, Iraqis rather than foreign contractors - to any area where sufficient security can be promised by the locals or the government.
Well, implementing the Democratic plan for Iraq hit two minor snags. The first being the Dem Congressional majority hasn't even been sworn in yet. The second being the fact that Bush remains the President and Commander in Chief of US military forces.
The only thing the Democratic-controlled Congress can really do to stop the war is to withdraw funding. That seems unlikely, seeing as how it would put our soldiers who are there at risk. Bush and Republicans would play on that politically, and accuse the Democrats of abandoning our troops while they're in a war zone. The other problem with withdrawing funding is the Bush admin has linked funding for the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars. Withdrawing funds for Iraq would mean withdrawing funds for our necessary war in Afghanistan.
Dems have presented various plans/recommendations; Jack Murtha's for example. For presenting this plan, Murtha was labelled a traitor. The Iraq Study Group essentially agreed with Murtha's plan by the way.
The Dems also plan oversight on Iraq, to make sure we weren't lied into war with false evidence, and to get control of the massive fraud taking place with Iraq War funds.
Any Democratic military plan will still need Bush's approval, and that highly is unlikely. Like I said, Bush remains the Commander in Chief.
While Bush and his croneys are busy slinging gasoline everywhere, Democrats should be held responsible for putting out the fire. Riiight.
If you really want to get this catastrophe under control, step one is to slap some handcuffs on the arsonists.
FIRE! in the theatre? That would include most Dems other than Kucinich.
Bungle had and has no plan. When a project (or a war) is launched, those who launch it owe a plan. Moreover, the Dems are in the somewhat problematic position of having no "Executive Authority", unlike der Bungle. Of what consequence is the finest Dem plan (and there ARE several, different plans) if one cannot execute anything? So, the fact of acting without planning is a permanent and indelible indictment of Bungle and the "Cons" who backed him; taken together with the numerous and hideous lies used to sell the act-without-a-plan program to the public, certainly worth complaining about.
Or, are you actually making the case that before anything beneficial can be done about Bungle's war, the Dems must first remove him and every trace of his administration to Gitmo or The Hague? If so, I would certainly applaud, even though that might take a little longer for the Dems to finish.
...if the press did (had done) their job... they'd have pressured Bush from the beginning about his plan. Does Bush have a plan? Other than 'victory'? Not what I've heard... why is the onus now upon the Dems to show the world their plan?
The plan is, get the hell out of Iraq...in whatever form you like (immediate, slow, whatever...) Bush claims he'll enlighten us with a 'new' plan...tomorrow...oh, wait...two weeks...oh wait...never. If any apologist on this site can tell me how Bush 'plans' on attaining victory... I'll give 'em a dollar.
If I hear the term "liberal media" one more time I'm gonna vomit right on Rupert Murdock's desk!
Bungle appears to be shipping MORE US troops to Iraq; just goes to highlight the real relevance of media heat on the Dems to produce a plan, eh? The "Decider" intends to do (as kings usually do) whatever the **** he wants to do, plans and consequences be damned.
Maybe after that fails, impeachment and imprisonment for the entire Admin will start to resonate?
The flip-flop on when the Decider will proclaim the decision, appears to have been required to FIND 25,000 more US troops to send - rumor has it that readiness is no longer a consideration.
A couple years ago when the war was more popular, pundits were bending over backwards to call Bush Commander in Chief. Bush himself has called himself a decider. Now that a decision must be made, the pundits and neocons are looking for others to make the decision. To change the course in his Stay the Course failed strategy, the Decider first decided not to make a new strategy decision before the election (eg Rumsfeld), now he has decided not to make a major decisions before Christmas, and possible before the State of the Union address (mid-January). If he changes strategy then, how long will it take to implement the strategy? How many people more will die while the Decider makes up his mind? Curly, Moe or Larry could do better than this.
Great job MMFA, a thread that even vocabulary challenged right-wingers can understand. If a comparison of the CNN graphics contrasting the network's approach in covering the Republicans and the Democrats doesn't open some eyes about conservative bias, nothing will. The difference in the captions beneath these reports can be nothing else than a conscious attempt to slant public opinion against the Democrats. That the network tries to get away with this while Bush has offered nothing and continues to dither is Orwellian in the extreme. Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia...
The funny thing is, this is the "Communist News Network" according to the far right. They think CNN is blatantly liberal in their reporting, yet this is as clear an example of right-wing bias as you'll find.
Great job on this piece MMFA.
You have to be able to translate from wingnutese. In Wingnut, blatantly liberal means not in total conformity to the rightwing viewpoint.
You know, the stalling tactic we see the administration employing right now (as if they were trying to beat a bill collector), and the "media" hack's efforts too, they're all just a waste of words and a waste of time on the American People...
The American People are no more going to forget about their Sons and Daughters in Iraq, and are no more going to forget that they are in that place for no reasons of U.S. National Security whatsoever...
...no more than they, the American People, forgot these things at election time, just a little over a month ago.
"Pres. Bush weighing options for Iraq"... stalling on the matter of Iraq.
"Dems made no mention of the war in Iraq"... evading the issue of who it is who has the responsibility of Iraq: the one who's presently stalling on the matter of Iraq.
This crap isn't having any affect at all on the American People... it didn't before the election (isn't that obvious?), and it isn't now.
But then I'm not so sure that this crap is intended for the benefit of the American People (who have already proven they won't be put off on the matter of Iraq, as if they were simply bill collectors)...
It seems that this crap about the Democratic Congressional Caucus ("Dems deeply divided over their Iraq policy") is meant mostly for them, for the Democratic Congressional Caucus...
...especially the newer members, yet to be seated.
As if they can be made to forget, what bill it was they came to Washington D.C. to collect, on behalf of the American People.
Yeah, the guys I keep in touch with in the Guard, as well as Regular Army (several left over from when my son did his extended tours) tell me the rumor train is running, on piecing together 25,000 troops from several units, and trying to con the public that it was required to get the right mix for the assignment. Note the BBC (not US mainstream media) is informing us of the "Decider" 's efforts to find troops to send, from the Army Bungle broke.
If this doesn't work as a link, I guess you may copy-and-paste: [link to news.bbc.co.uk]
some errant combination of what I thought was HTML for the link, and perhaps other errors - the comment box is defunct.
I am trying another post, in hopes of fixing what I broke (unlike Bungle).
Fix it
vs /li (no brackets, in case that is what broke the box?
Its not up to the democrats to decide anything other than funding this disaster, cannonfodder: Bush is Commander-in Chief, I know its hard to believe but its true....
anything the democrats propose that isn't essentially "stay the course" will be jumped on by the republicans and their media poodles as cut and run surrendering to the terrorists, you name it....
Bush's new song: Everbody's talking at me I don't hear a word they're saying Only the echoes of my mind I can't see their faces, Only the shadows of their eyes....
Helmsman, steer course 090 to Victory...
"strategic redeployment"
many people have suggested plans, but Bush keeps rejecting them outright... that does not mean no plans exist, only those Bush is too stubborn or proud or stupid to implement... stop spreading misinformation, folks...
Think about the degree to which citizens such as you and I are put, to somehow develop a plan to micro-manage a successful exit strategy (a strategic redeployment) of U.S. Troops from the nation of Iraq:
"What would you do, to solve the problem of U.S. Troops in Iraq..."
...that's what the paid idiots in the "media" rhetorically ask the American People (and ask Congressional Democrats, not rhetorically but actually, right to their faces).
Let's see... the first thing I'll do as a U.S. Citizen (intensely interested in the matter of Iraq)...
...is quit my job, and somehow relinquish all the responsibilities of family and home, in order to invest the full-time attention that is necessary, to this matter of a strategic redeployment of U.S. Troops from Iraq.
You know, join the ranks of those hundreds (thousands even) of PROFESSIONAL IDIOTS already employed specifically by the American People, for such a thing.
You know, those who work for the...
1. U.S. Department of State
2. Department of Defense
3. Central Intelligence Agency
4. The Bush administration in general
I mean, we don't already have anybody on the job (do we?)...
I mean, where are the American People on this matter...
I mean, how dare they (the American People) trust to the administration of their Government, to bring Home (alive!) their Sons and Daughters from Iraq...
I mean, where is the Democratic Congressional Caucus (not even officially a majority in Congress yet!) on this matter of a strategic redeployment from Iraq...
Certainly the responsibility of the death and destruction in Iraq belongs with U.S. Citizens, such as you and I...
I have two things I wish as a U.S. Citizen (intensely interested in the matter of Iraq):
1. The power to bring Home the Sons and Daughters (alive!) of the American People from Iraq.
2. The power to turn back the clock.
I'll settle for nothing so little (or so great), as to work tirelessly toward any and all things, that might suffice, in my want of power, to effect the first thing wished for...
...any and all things available, to Citizens such as you and I.
But I can not turn back the clock... nor bring the dead back to life.
So I'll settle for a proper accounting of the death and destruction that our administration of Government has worked (so maliciously) for in Iraq...
...an accounting which is the work of the 110th Congress...
...they being the agents of the American People.
I'd like very much not to quit my job over this matter (this intensely interesting matter of Iraq)... nor to relinquish my familiar obligations, nor those of my Home.
I'm pretty sure my Government (specifically, the agents thereof) shall effect the strategic redeployment of the American People's Sons and Daughters (alive!) from Iraq...
I'm pretty sure we can all keep our jobs...
...or at least do our jobs.
...i dial up at this hour the thing known as "msnbc", so as to see a rerun of whatever it was they were re-broadcasting as "meet the press"...
but all i get is a bunch of (apparently all-important to the nation) stuff about about several frozen guys not smart enuff to hike big mountains safe enuff...
....was there something terribly embarrsassing to the administration said on "meet the press"?
...or are several reckless climbers worth knocking out "meet the press"?
You haven't lost until you say you've lost. Bungle doesn't intend to lose, ever.
That is why the US casualty reports don't include deaths in hospitals outside Iraq, no matter how directly resultant from enemy action. That is why his fury ignites whenever realistic estimates of Iraqi civilian casualties due to the illegal war, are presented to him for comment. That is why with one breath he denies that we torture, yet in the next breath signs an executive order authorizing blatant torture. (I'm sure that statement will get a rise from some of the neolithic nay-sayers, but it was true in 2003, and it is still true.)
No way is Bungle ever going to admit that he lost, the US lost, the entire world lost, due to his arrogant ignorance and greed. When his God tells him "repent, and be saved", I'm relying on Bungle to prefer the company of Lucifer to such an admission.
And, I'm sure history will be kind to him.
Bush and his like believe that no matter how badly you screw up, or how many deaths can be lain on your doorstep, the Beloved Lord Jesus® will forgive all your sins if you accept him into your drunk-driving, coke-snorting heart. No personal accountability equals no concern for the consequences of one's actions. I say we elect a Dell computer with Core 2 quad processors for the next president, as, like the decider, it will still do what it's owner tells it to do, it will still be inadequate for the task, it will still have no independent thought (only rudimentary AI), and will still be able to look and sound snazzy and important, even though it's just a tool. It will, however, likely come with a money back guarantee.
Last I heard, the plan was for more troops to be sent to Iraq and to keep killing Iraqis for resisting our puppet Iraqi government and it's death squads.
The "pull them out now" faction went down in flames when the pro-War Dems faction got their man in as majority leader in the House. The new Dem head of the Intel Committee is calling for escalation, as did Kerry. And Wrangel is talking draft.
I told everyone weeks ago that the Dem Party was pro-war and would not bring the troops home. Looks like they're proving me right.
P.S. I've noticed that not one major Democrat has stepped up to demand that the illegal prison camp and torture chambers at Guantanamo be closed.
Maybe some of these democrats are pro-war. The Hillary Clinton-type DLC democrats certainly don't object to militarism as foreign policy.
Is the draft as Wrangle proposes it an endorsement of war?
Or does Wrangle and a certain faction of democrats desire to hasten an end to the war that would flow from the public discontent and protest that comes with a draft?
A draft would just send more of our young men to Iraq to kill and to die. It would open the flood gates to massive escalation and probable ground attacks on Iran. Our government, both Dem and Repub, have proven they cannot be trusted not to abuse the volunteer army. Giving them even more men is not the answer.
Do we want 500,000 men in a vicious war in Iraq and Iran or do we want them home? Conscription opens the floodgates for those who demand more war.
more misconceptions. rangel has been proposing a draft for years. but what he talks about is offering an alternative chance to work on projects in this country. and the other democrats have said no deal on a draft.
your own Dem congressmen who have inspected Gitmo. They saw no "torture chambers".
I fully expect them to continue torture right in plain site of visiting Congressmen being given a guided tour. I BELIEVE the FBI agent who described what HE saw there as torture techniques I KNOW that an AMERICAN serviceman posing as a prisoner got a brain injury from his treatment at Guantanamo. We may not know it is still going on but this kind of abuse should not be treated lightly or dismissed. It should be loudly criticised and should NOT go on.
(1)Pull out immediately; let them kill each other until somebody wins or until Iran or Syria or Turkey or Saudi Arabia step in. (2)Stay there and continue to provide extra targets for both sides. (3)Return to the mother ship and nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.