Friday, October 9, 2009

MSM View on Afghanistan Depends on Who's President

Subject: txt gwot msm bias =
Is it possible for a sitting president to ignore a war his own country is waging? According to the Boston Globe, it depends on who that president is... [snip]

In January 2006, the Globe wrote that the "administration became so distracted with the Iraq war that it cooled in its efforts to diminish the Afghani drug trade." Later, in August of that same year, the Globe printed an op-ed from Rep. Barney Frank accusing the White House of "ignoring" violence in Afghanistan. Readers were continually told that US forces were "stretched thin" and the budget was too great a burden... [snip]

Yet, with Obama in office, the zeal to 'clean up' the MidEast has cooled. Gone was the need for swift action. In its place: a perpetual whine that Bush had made action impossible.

In August, as General McChrystal submitted a report with dire warnings of failure, the Globe kept playing Blame Bush for Everything and further lamented, "Our peace-promising president inherited a losing hand from his predecessor."

As August drifted into September and Obama still had no plan, the Globe spun this as the prudence of a master diplomat. They printed a quote from former President Clinton that Obama was "wise" to take it slow; there were elections coming up and important decisions to be made, so it was best for Obama to drag his feet.

Then news began to break that contradicted the election excuse - General Stanley McChrystal, Obama's hand picked leader of the Afghan mission, claimed that Obama wasn't talking to him at all.

Was the Globe worried about this? Not really.

On September 30, the Globe ran interference for Obama by printing an AP article that parroted spin from the White House. Suddenly, it was no longer acceptable for lawmakers to criticize a president's war policy; Congress is now just "game playing" for political points.

Apparently to the Globe, failure is in the eye of the beholder, and with their favorite politician in charge, failure is always someone else's fault...

[What bias?]

READ MORE

No comments: