How would they have treated the holocaust?
What you have, is not necessarily a liberal problem, but rather one of sensationalism.
We've got a ton of news sources to look at and study for our news.
Each news source that is for-profit, is going to do anything they can to get your eyeballs on their site, story, newspaper, tv show or your ears on their radio station.
If this means running a sensationlistic headline that sounds more shocking and worse than the other news sources, they will do so. They don't care if it pisses you off, if you disagree with it, if you think they are exaggerating, because they are just wanting to count the number of eyeballs or ears. That's how they can sell their advertising space or time.
That's why tabloids running stories about some half-bat, half-boy, creature are still in business after all these years, because they can pull people in. They don't care if you know it's fiction or you know it's exaggerated.
I absolutely disagree. If a "journalist" wanted to merely play up the sensational aspect of this he could certainly do so in either a pro-USA or anti-USA way, but this will be played as a "catastrophic" turn of events, just like Tet was.
The liberals will use this against Bush. Unfortunately for them, however, the most likely outcome is for America to persevere and bring this under control. In a couple of days there will be a lot fewer "insurgents" to contend with.
When the cockroaches run out into the open, they are squashed.