[rightinthemiddle]

The media is out of control. The public needs to face the fact that these people are either liars or idiots. Bush never said troops would not leave before the end of his term. He said he would not provide a timetable.

Yet, all the headlines today seem to be about this topic.

Here's what Bush said, in context:

QUESTION: Sir, you said earlier today that you believe there's a plan for success. If you did not, you would pull the troops out.

And so my question is, one, is there a point at which having the American forces in Iraq becomes more a part of the problem than a part of the solution? Can you say that you will not keep American troops in there is they're caught in a crossfire and a civil war? And can you say to the American people -- assure them that there will come a day when there will be no more American forces in Iraq?

The decisions about our troop levels will be made by General Casey and the commanders on the ground. They're the ones who can best judge whether or not the presence of coalition troops create more of a problem than a solution -- than be a part of the solution.

Secondly, I've answered the question on civil war -- our job is to make sure that civil war doesn't happen, but there will be -- but if there is sectarian violence, that's the job of the Iraqi forces, with coalition help, to separate those sectarian forces.

Third part of your question?

QUESTION: It was: Will there come a day -- and I'm not asking you when; I'm not asking for a timetable -- will there come a day when there will be no more American forces in Iraq?

BUSH: That, of course, is an objective. And that will be decided by future presidents and future governments of Iraq.

QUESTION: So it won't happen on your watch?

BUSH: You mean a complete withdrawal? That's a timetable.

I can only tell you that I will make decisions on force levels based upon what the commanders on the ground say.

[Mo1]

The transcripts will catch the media in the lies every time

You'd think they'd learn by now .. but noooooooooo

[rightinthemiddle]

"Thanks for your help" ping

[libertarianPA]

You mean a complete withdrawal? That's a timetable.

Two things come out of this. 1. We're not going to tip our hand to the enemy. 2. We're going to get a lot of our troops out over the next few years, but we'll always have a presence there.

The media spins it like Bush said we're going to keep 140K troops there forever and ever.

[Chewie84]

Some people may disagree with Bush's policies, but at least with Bush, you know where he stands on pretty much all the issues. He doesn't change his views to fit polls or please the media, you have to respect him for that. Plus, it's true that Bush never actually said that the troops would be removed from Iraq during his presidency.

[Dr. Frank fan]

I always knew our troops would be in Iraq for years. It already has been years, and it will be a few - maybe many - more.

Who on earth didn't know this? Come on now.

What I also can't figure out is how the left gets away with spinning in both directions. If there's a troop drawdown or a rumor of plans to withdraw in a few months, the left gleefully jumps up and down with a "ha ha! we're leaving! you suck Bush!" attitude. In other words, the left starts from the premise that drawing down is bad news. On the other hand, if - as happened here - there's a quote indicating we'll be there for a long time, the left spins it like "oh woe is us, he's saying the troops will be there for a long time". In other words, the left starts from the premise that leaving troops there is bad news.

But which is it? Is it good or is it bad, by the left's lights, to keep a presence in Iraq?

The only real answer is, "if Bush wants it, it's bad", of course.

[Williams]

In order to understand their headline, you have to come from the kook left wing perspective that no US troops should be in Iraq. The Middle East is loaded with US military presence and thank God. Iraq is an extremely strategic country and we should want to be there and keep them as an ally for a long, long time.

Iraq is a step forward. The country that is the media's template for what we should do is Iran - an enormous step backward.

Instead of debating when we will "leave" Iraq, we ought to be asking when we will project our power from Iraq and Afghanistan into Iran. That is the question IF you care about America. (which they don't).

[stuartcr]

Perhaps the news reports what it reads between the lines? Don't we all read between the lines sometimes?

[rightinthemiddle]

The Socialists and the MSM sound the same:

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2006/mar2006/bush-m22.shtml

[Explorer24]

It's gotten beyond out of control. This is a grave threat to America. Something serious has to be done. This election cycle has to involve some serious commercials illustrating bias - "of course you're feeling doubtful, of course you're worried, this is all you see and hear, but there is more to the story...." Soldiers telling that story. A campaign saying, "we're not crazy and neither are you, it's just that we're seeing the whole picture and it's being kept from you." Show the media unhinged, (eg. Laura Ing. double team this week; the L&O actor attacking the troops, etc.) Highlight the worst offenders. Show the shared talking points between our enemies and Demorats. Juxtapose the talking points against soldier's perspective, reality, stats. I'm talking documentaries, video clips, etc. Massive campaign.

The only industry I know of where you can distort, lie and harm by your products and yet not be accountable. Where are the lawyers and legal reformers?

Check this out
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1600897/posts

BTW: over at capitalnews.org, the left is dummying up the poll re: is the news coverage showing too much Iraq violence. Freep it!

I am very passionate about this and dying to help reverse this course and counter the distortions and DNC supporting MSM. I don't have the techie skills, but I have ideas and research. Any activists who still care about Bush and Iraq and winning elections, contact me - I'm ready to roll. I'm sorry for the long post, but frankly this has gone on unabated for years now, enough is enough. I know some of you have high level contacts and can make waves, please do not sit back and let what's been built slip away. We cannot afford another Vietnam, our enemy cannot beat us through the nightly news and in the streets of Berkley.

[rightinthemiddle]

Topic of the day ping

[Txsleuth]

bttt

[Just A Nobody]

Rush just mentioned this.

[FlyVet]

Christopher Hitchens was on Hewitt's show today and made a very interesting comment. He said he had talked to a very prominent news person at one of the major networks (wouldn't say who it was). The person expressed concern that all the negative reporting on Iraq could affect the outcome of the war. Duh. Took the genius four years to figure out what any Freeper has known all along, that they lust for a self-fulfilling prophesy?