NY Times detected inconsistency between criticizing Bush and supporting troops

Written by Rob Dietz

Published

In a September 3 article about Rep. Tim Mahoney's (D-FL) position on the Iraq war, The New York Times asserted that Mahoney “and other moderates are trying to find a balance between criticizing the Bush administration and supporting the troops,” suggesting that critics of President Bush or the administration's war policy do not also support the troops.

The assertion recalls other instances identified (here, here, here, here, here, and here) by Media Matters for America, in which the media have characterized those who supported the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq or oppose U.S. troop withdrawal as pro-military or “supporting the troops,” suggesting that those who opposed the invasion or now support U.S. withdrawal are somehow “anti-military” or not supportive of the troops.

From the September 3 New York Times article by David Herszenhorn:

Allies of the Bush administration are paying for television advertisements that are running in Mr. Mahoney's district, including one featuring the teary mother of a marine killed in the war saying: “We are starting to see results. The price is being paid. Don't give up.” But Mr. Mahoney says that he and his constituents have made up their minds and that it is time for Congress to force a change.

“There is consensus that it's time to do something different,” said Mr. Mahoney, who won the seat vacated by Representative Mark Foley, who resigned last year after disclosures that he sent sexually explicit e-mail messages to House pages. “America has made a decision that it wants to move out.”

Mr. Mahoney added: “Republicans are probably more vocal in my district than Democrats. Those ads are driven to Republicans -- that's who they are trying to appeal to because they have lost Republican support for this war.”

As lawmakers return to Washington with Democrats set to hold a marathon series of hearings on the Iraq war, Mr. Mahoney and other moderates are trying to find a balance between criticizing the Bush administration and supporting the troops, between helping the Democratic leadership keep pressure on the White House over the war, and addressing constituents' demands on issues closer to home.