Posted on 09/21/2004 10:13:33 AM PDT by Pikamax
Kerry Iraq speech galvanises press There has been a strong and very mixed reaction in the US press to Democratic presidential hopeful John Kerry's speech on the war in Iraq. The fallout from US TV network CBS' admission of doubt over documents it used in a report about President George Bush's military service is also closely examined.
In his speech given on Monday, Democratic hopeful John Kerry "seems to have found his voice" on Iraq, which "ought to be the central issue of this year's election", the liberal New York Times says.
The paper says Mr Kerry's critique of Mr Bush's record in Iraq was "well-grounded, intellectually straightforward and powerful".
"Perhaps the presidential campaign is finally under way," it suggests.
USA Today agrees that Mr Kerry's criticisms are "an accurate indictment" of Mr Bush's decision to go to war "under mistaken reasons".
Much will hinge on whether voters believe that, after 9/11, America must address threats before they become imminent - or wait until it's too late New York Post
But having voted in 2002 to authorise the war, Mr Kerry looks as though he has shifted his position for political expediency.
Holding back until this late in the campaign has aided his political rivals by "reinforcing charges that he is a flip-flopper", USA Today said.
Mr Kerry's arguments for a change of position in Iraq have framed the debate voters need to be having, writes Robert Scheer in the Los Angeles Times .
The current situation is a "festering disaster" and "in their hearts, responsible Republicans and independents must now realise that Kerry is right", the paper said.
In the Washington Post , columnist George F Will is less enthusiastic, highlighting what he calls Mr Kerry's "Jackson Pollock canvas of positions on the war".
The conservative New York Post does not mince its words either.
In an editorial headlined "Iraq: Bush's vision, Kerry's void", it says Mr Kerry's speech was "defeatist, intemperate, despicable".
By claiming that the US rushed to war when Iraq was not an imminent threat, the paper says, Mr Kerry has shown that "much of the election will hinge on whether voters believe that, after 9/11, America must address threats before they become imminent - or wait until it's too late".
'Stunning reversal'
Much of the press has also been debating the repercussion of CBS news anchor Dan Rather's on-air apology over its report which questioned President Bush's National Guard service record.
The move was a "stunning reversal" which threatens the network's credibility, the Houston Chronicle writes.
It only served to "reinforce his many critics' view of Rather as the poster boy for the liberal mainstream media", it adds.
The paper goes on to speculate on Mr Rather's future at the network.
The Oregonian says CBS has inflicted great harm "to its own reputation, to journalism and to the quality of American political discussion".
Leonard Pitts Jr in the Miami Herald suggests CBS has dealt a body blow to journalistic credibility when it "was blinded by a predisposition to believe".
"Frankly, you and I deserve better," he writes.
The Washington Post highlights claims that the man who handed over the disputed documents to the network was a disgruntled former National Guard officer who had called Mr Bush a liar "with demonic personality shortcomings".
Story from BBC NEWS: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/americas/3676880.stm
Kerry is just another critic. His proposals for Nato are already in the works.
He is just reliving his Viet Nam protest glory. He'll probably be meeting in Paris with Bin Laden and Arafat next week.
And of course the MSM will do everything in its power to gloss over the fact that Kerry was for the war before he was against it. This is why he's been reluctant to be too vocal in his opposition, as it emphasizes his biggest 'flip-flop'.
How come the Brits get it, and our media do not?
No no no -- repeat after me! THERE IS NO MEDIA BIAS!
If I were President Bush and his PR team, I'd preface all of my remarks re: John Kerry (and his views on the war on terrorism) with the following statement from a real American hero:
"Dear John (Kerry),
Like you, I have a Silver Star and a Bronze Star. I only have two Purple Hearts, though. I turned down the others so that I could stay with the Marines in my rifle platoon."
-- Oliver North
Ace
What is 'disputed' about the documents. 300,000,000 Americans know the memos are fake. I guess there is still Dan Rather out there disputing them, but he is mentally ill.
The current situation is a "festering disaster" and "in their hearts, responsible Republicans and independents must now realise that Kerry is right", the paper said.
Hard to know what kerry is right about. What is the current status on his opinions about the war?
As for a festering disaster, the LAslimes was one of the papers saying the war in Irag would go on ofr decades at a cost of 100,000's of American lives. From their point of view, Iraq is going great.
Why not complain about our troops pinned down in Yugoslavia? Or Germany and Japan? Or Haiti? Or Cuba?
Galvanizes the press? Considering that mainstream media is like Dan Blather, pro-demoncRAT and socialist in outlook, I'm not surprised.
He also galvanizes the American public, against him.
And btw, welcome to FR 9/21/04
1. The CBS/Bush documents are: (a)disputed (b)forged
I think that already happened. Remember kerry's statement about all the "foreign leaders" who support his election to the WH? Al Jazeera's coverage of our election is like one long kerry ad spot.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.