As CNN's Howard Kurtz accurately pointed out on Sunday's "Reliable Sources," few media outlets seemed at all interested in giving much attention to the great news out of Iraq last week regarding September's sharp decline in casualties.
To Kurtz's obvious frustration, his guests - Robin Wright of the Washington Post and Barbara Starr of CNN - both supported the press burying this extremely positive announcement.
I kid you not.
*****Update: Wright responds to reader e-mail message at end of post.
After introducing the subject, Kurtz asked, "Robin Wright, should that decline in Iraq casualties have gotten more media attention?"
This was Wright's amazing answer (video available here):
Not necessarily. The fact is we're at the beginning of a trend -- and it's not even sure that it is a trend yet. There is also an enormous dispute over how to count the numbers. There are different kinds of deaths in Iraq.
There are combat deaths. There are sectarian deaths. And there are the deaths of criminal -- from criminal acts. There are also a lot of numbers that the U.S. frankly is not counting. For example, in southern Iraq, there is Shiite upon Shiite violence, which is not sectarian in the Shiite versus Sunni. And the U.S. also doesn't have much of a capability in the south.
So the numbers themselves are tricky.
Wow. Numbers shouldn't be reported because they're "tricky," "at the beginning of a trend," and there's "enormous dispute over how to count" them?
No such moral conundrum existed last month when media predicted a looming recession after the Labor Department announced a surprising decline in non-farm payrolls that ended up being revised up four weeks later to show an increase.
And, in the middle of a three and a half-year bull run in stocks, such "journalists" have no quandary predicting a bear market every time the Dow Jones Industrial Average falls a few hundred points.
Yet, when good news regarding military casualties comes from the Defense Department, these same people show uncharacteristic restraint in not wanting to report what could end up being an a anomaly.
Isn't that special?
Alas, not seeing the stupidity in this position, Starr, with a straight-face nonetheless, agreed with Wright:
But that's the problem, we don't know whether it is a trend about specifically the decline in the number of U.S. troops being killed in Iraq. This is not enduring progress. This is a very positive step on that potential road to progress.
Hmmm. So, I guess a "very positive step on that potential road to progress" isn't newsworthy, huh Barbara? Even Kurtz recognized the hypocrisy here, which led to the following:
KURTZ: But let's say that the figures had shown that casualties were going up for U.S. soldiers and going up for Iraqi civilians. I think that would have made some front pages.
STARR: Oh, I think inevitably it would have. I mean, that's certainly -- that, by any definition, is news. Look, nobody more than a Pentagon correspondent would like to stop reporting the number of deaths, interviewing grieving families, talking to soldiers who have lost their arms and their legs in the war. But, is this really enduring progress?
We've had five years of the Pentagon telling us there is progress, there is progress. Forgive me for being skeptical, I need to see a little bit more than one month before I get too excited about all of this.
Hmmm. So, a shocking increase in deaths would have "certainly" been newsworthy. However, for a decrease to be reported, skeptical journalists have to be more convinced that it's a lasting improvement.
Sadly, this is what makes today's reporters more like sports fans than real journalists.
After all, it shouldn't be their position to decide when a comeback, rally, or winning streak is real enough for them to jump on the bandwagon and get excited about. News - be it good or bad - is to be reported.
That's their job.
And when folks like this make dissemination decisions to not share information on something as important as American casualties of war due to their own personal skepticism, they have indeed abdicated their solemn responsibility to the public whose interest they regularly claim to serve.
What follows is a partial transcript of this segment.
HOWARD KURTZ, HOST: The news from Iraq has been consistently depressing for several years now, a continuous tableau of death and destruction. But when the administration released more positive casualty figures this week, the media paid little attention. A couple of sentences on the "CBS EVENING NEWS" and NBC "NIGHTLY NEWS," The New York Times ran it on page 10, The Washington Post," page 14, USA Today page 16. The L.A. Times, a couple of paragraphs at the bottom of a page 4 story.
One exception was Charlie Gibson, who made it the lead story on ABC's "WORLD NEWS."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHARLES GIBSON, ABC ANCHOR: The U.S. military reports the fourth straight month of decline in troop deaths, 66 American troops died in September, each a terrible tragedy for a family, but the number far less than those who died in August. And the Iraqi government says civilian deaths across Iraq fell by half last month.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KURTZ: Joining us now to put this into perspective, Robin Wright, who covers national security for The Washington Post. And CNN Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr.
Robin Wright, should that decline in Iraq casualties have gotten more media attention?
ROBIN WRIGHT, THE WASHINGTON POST: Not necessarily. The fact is we're at the beginning of a trend -- and it's not even sure that it is a trend yet. There is also an enormous dispute over how to count the numbers. There are different kinds of deaths in Iraq.
There are combat deaths. There are sectarian deaths. And there are the deaths of criminal -- from criminal acts. There are also a lot of numbers that the U.S. frankly is not counting. For example, in southern Iraq, there is Shiite upon Shiite violence, which is not sectarian in the Shiite versus Sunni. And the U.S. also doesn't have much of a capability in the south.
So the numbers themselves are tricky. Long-term, General Odierno, who was in town this week, said he is looking for irreversible momentum, and that, after two months, has not yet been reached.
KURTZ: Barbara Starr, CNN did mostly quick reads by anchors of these numbers. There was a taped report on "LOU DOBBS TONIGHT." Do you think this story deserved more attention? We don't know whether it is a trend or not but those are intriguing numbers.
BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: But that's the problem, we don't know whether it is a trend about specifically the decline in the number of U.S. troops being killed in Iraq. This is not enduring progress. This is a very positive step on that potential road to progress.
KURTZ: But let's say that the figures had shown that casualties were going up for U.S. soldiers and going up for Iraqi civilians. I think that would have made some front pages.
STARR: Oh, I think inevitably it would have. I mean, that's certainly -- that, by any definition, is news. Look, nobody more than a Pentagon correspondent would like to stop reporting the number of deaths, interviewing grieving families, talking to soldiers who have lost their arms and their legs in the war. But, is this really enduring progress?
We've had five years of the Pentagon telling us there is progress, there is progress. Forgive me for being skeptical, I need to see a little bit more than one month before I get too excited about all of this.
*****Update: Susan Duclos of Wake up America sent an e-mail message to Robin Wright concerning this matter. Here was Wright's response:
Susan wasn't pleased with Wright's answer; neither am I.Ms. Duclos -
Thanks for your comments. The point I was trying to make on CNN is that two months do not make a permanent trend. As Gen. Odierno said last week, when he came to the Post, the numbers have been good the last couple of months but the US military has not yet reached the point of "irreversible momentum." When they do, it will certainly mean a different kind of reporting about the war in general. Unfortunately, all it will take is one or two really bad incidents and the numbers will start going up again. The numbers aren't the whole story either. The progress in Anbar has been widely covered in the US media -- and that in many ways tells us far more about both the war and the future than the death tolls.
I also think we're all a little nervous about declaring victories before we're fully confident that they represent a long-term and enduring trend and are not just a favorable blip on the screen.
With regards,
Robin Wright
Diplomatic Correspondent
The Washington Post
Telephone: 202 334-7443
Email: wrightr@washpost.com
Fax: 202 496-3883
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Thanks, Noel
October 7, 2007 - 13:44 ET by Cape Conservativefor watching this garbage and letting me know about it without having to endure hearing it!
It's bad enough to read the mindless claims of supposedly educated people, but having to actually listen to these people continually knocking our troops and our country makes my stomach churn!
Comparing Iraq coverage to economic coverage..
October 7, 2007 - 13:57 ET by Gary HallComparing Iraq coverage to economic coverage..
Seems to me that the MSM got pretty darn "excited" when the preliminary negative number (and soon to be revised upward) on employment came out last month.
One might ask if all along to our record 49 straight months of job growth was ever "enduring progress" [a "trend"]?
Why weren't the numbers
October 7, 2007 - 14:09 ET by motherbeltWhy weren't the numbers "tricky" when there was an increase in the number of deaths???
They were
October 7, 2007 - 14:45 ET by rgoldMB, I totally agree. Unfortunately they were tricky then too. Like in August when 14 Soldiers died in a non-combat related helicopter crash in Iraq. MSM reported that US casualties for August were "way up" while choosing to ignore any mention of the 14 that died in the helicopter crash.
I'm sure we can all guess
October 8, 2007 - 10:45 ET by TruthMongerI'm sure we can all guess why the differences:)
I just love this: Lest
October 7, 2007 - 20:42 ET by motherbeltI just love this:
Lest anyone get all excited about "progress":
This is not progress. It's not even the road to progress. It's only a step on what might possibly be the road to progress (or not).
"We've had five years of
October 7, 2007 - 20:49 ET by Chris Norman"We've had five years of the Pentagon telling us there is progress, there is progress."
And we've had five years of the media telling us it's a disaster, it's a disaster. Right from the get-go, actually.
and they will never stop -
October 8, 2007 - 10:46 ET by TruthMongerand they will never stop - anything to prevent their pro-terror/Hussein legacy from seeing the light of day
A service of the new NB respect police
Why do Starr and Wright
October 7, 2007 - 14:33 ET by SMGalbraithWhy do Starr and Wright insist that it has to be "either-or"?
They can report the decline in casualties along with the caveat or qualifer that this may not be indicative of any long term trend. It's a rough snapshot of the conditions.
But the decline is still news. Whether the decline is short-lived or not is not the determining issue as to whether that decrease is reported.
Walter Lippmann once distinguished between facts and the truth. Facts are things like GDP growth or unemployment numbers or a baseball score or a car accident.
The truth, however, is the underlying cause for those facts and is more difficult to ascertain. Why did GDP grow? Why did the car accident happen? Why did New York lose that game? Et cetera.
On this issue, as Starr and Wright are correct in pointing out, the "why" is a more complex idea to determine.
But the fundamental role of the press is still to deliver those facts. The truth can come later. Without those facts, an educated public cannot determine for themselves what that difficult "truth" is. If the press must wait until the truth is determined before publishing any facts, half the newspapers would be blank pages. That wouldn't be good (depending on the newspaper, of course).
Give us the facts, Ms. Starr and Ms. Wright. We can determine the truth without you holding our hands.
SMG
Bringin' a knife to aGUNFIGHT
October 7, 2007 - 15:19 ET by Keith"THERE YOU GO AGAIN", To quote Ronaldus Magnus! You people seem intent on "bringing short knives to a GUNFIGHT"! What part of "they HATE you" is difficult for you to grasp? Are you still laboring under the false notion that any of this is about "journalism"? Journalists are little more than liberal activists and mouthpieces. They DO NOT go to work every day to tell YOUR SIDE of the story! Get off your butts and start your own MEDIA! If Al Gore can start a network, why can't supposedly rich Republicans? The problem is that YOU don't understand the fight you're in, leaving you almost as clueless as that idiot George Bush, who thinks Jesus and "allah" are synonyms! Talk about missing the forest for the trees! Here's hoping that you haven't thrown out your bibles. There are only TWO groups of people on the earth according to Jesus Christ. People that HE placed here and people that the ENEMY placed here. I realize that most of you go to half baked new agy nothing kind of churches, that teach you LESS than nothing, but try to keep up would you? When faced with not UNDERSTANDING the insane actions of other supposedly rational human beings the Apostles of our Lord asked for clarification. This is the explanation that they were given....
Matt 13:24-30
24Jesus told them another parable: "The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. 25But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. 26When the wheat sprouted and formed heads, then the weeds also appeared.
27"The owner's servants came to him and said, 'Sir, didn't you sow good seed in your field? Where then did the weeds come from?'
28" 'An enemy did this,' he replied.
"The servants asked him, 'Do you want us to go and pull them up?'
29" 'No,' he answered, 'because while you are pulling the weeds, you may root up the wheat with them.30Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.' "
Now many people read these same passages of scripture and fail to comprehend the significance. Fortunately Jesus provided a detailed explanation a little while later. The Apostles suffered from "pollyana" syndrome like some of you do! They found it difficult to believe that there are people who "couldn't be reached", they also found it difficult to believe that there were people here who are BEYOND REDEMPTION. Pay careful attention to the explanation of this parable given by the Maker of Worlds...
Matt 13:36-42
36Then he left the crowd and went into the house. His disciples came to him and said, "Explain to us the parable of the weeds in the field."
37He answered, "The one who sowed the good seed is the Son of Man. 38The field is the world, and the good seed stands for the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the SONS OF THE EVIL ONE, 39and the ENEMY who sows them is the DEVIL. The harvest is the end of the age, and the harvesters are angels.
40"As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age. 41The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. 42They will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
See, this is how Hillary Clinton can claim to be a "christian" and yet advocate FOR everything that her supposed savior is AGAINST. This is how Barack Abomination Obama, can CLAIM to be Christian and yet vote NO on a bill that would save the lives of Children who survive botched ABORTIONS. This is how he could advocate the slaughter of undoubtedly BORN babies! This is how they can look at two nasty abominable men and think "Why SHOULDN'T they get MARRIED"? It is because they are evil. Sown by one who is NOT God. And it is their fathers work that they are here to do and it is the REASON WHY THEY HATE anyone, with any semblance of "morality". It's why they have NO HONOR and can even THINK of "re-deployment to OKINAWA" in the face of the enemy. The rock solid moral messages you learned as a child, like, "Only Cowards run away from fights" or, "Only DOUBLE COWARDS run away from a fight THEY started!" ,or "babies are human beings who were in the mind of God BEFORE being formed in their mothers belly (Jer 1:5)", didn't stick with them. In their heart was something evil and sluglike. It allows them to walk, talk, pay taxes and LOOK like normal people, in fact, they THINK they ARE normal but INSIDE where it counts, they are something else altogether. Wake up. Stop bringin' a knife to a gunfight.
Keith... I agree. Thank
October 7, 2007 - 15:33 ET by bigtimerKeith...
I agree.
Thank you.
Noel...All I can say is
October 7, 2007 - 14:00 ET by bigtimerNoel...
All I can say is thank you for posting about this all.
We watched this early this morning, I was making breakfast and about threw the skillet through he television screen at Robin Wright...
I have really had my fill of these elitist leftist enemies who all sit on their duffs so prim and proper attempting to tell us out here why this good news should not get reported....Robins diatribe was beyond any comprehension whatsoever although I have heard this exact twisted logic used in the last few weeks by others.
My anger really goes to/for the military and their families who must get beyond furious when they hear filthy reports like this...and they do hear this all.
I am used to Starr being the way she is...I have never ever liked Wright but she really attempted to do a despicable smear job this morning.
I hope someday somehow these people that want us to lose this war because of political power and agenda's have to end up paying for their treasonous acts.
Of course this is my opinion...but it makes me sick that soldiers past and present have fought and died for these leftists to make statements like they do with absolutely no regard or thankfulness for their so-called right to spew this filthy BS.
Btw...I do thank Kurtz for his attempt for some truth and bringing attention that abc was the only network that gave this great news any kind of decent coverage..it is so pathetic.
Done with my rant..now going to take a cool shower...dang it all I was trying to forget about this all from earlier....lol.
Noel & NB'ers...
October 7, 2007 - 14:18 ET by MrShyThx for posting this. I also really feel that the Iraq reporting -- or the lack thereof in the past 3-4 months, for obvious and despicable reasons -- needs to be covered more by NB.
THIS is where the MSM's propaganda (and choosing what to report and what not to report) is most glaring, and the most dangerous. I mean, WE'RE AT WAR and the war is finally being WON, and they are all going utterly SILENT on reporting the clear-as-day, summer-long, and now into fall, trend (that's right, Barbara Bullsh*t Starr, TREND) of amazing improvement in Iraq !!!! It's been making my blood boil each day, increasingly, as I never see a peep out of any of the major outlets.
THIS is where the MSM needs to be held accountable, more than any other manipulation (of which the list is loooooong...)
So I say, post something at least once a day that exposes the way they are framing the Iraq war (please :))
I love NB, btw :)
oh, and let me quote her again:
"we don't know whether it is a trend about specifically the decline in the number of U.S. troops being killed in Iraq."
"we don't know whether it is a trend".... how completely disgusting is that? (of course, one bad day in Iraq and it's plastered all over CNN, BSNBC, you name it... even FOX, cuz they report it all, so we can decide.) Actually, even they don't seem to report enough good news, which is a bit baffling :(
Enemies
October 7, 2007 - 14:19 ET by ThisnThatWhy aren't these two people fired, on the spot? How DARE they decide what's newsworthy and what's not, based upon their own biased filters?
"We ain't going to report this, and no one can make us. We are the powerful, the elite, the decision-makers -- and not only are we going to make this decision, but we are going to tell you that only we are going to make this decision, and still there's nothing you can do about it".
I repeat -- why aren't they fired, on the spot, and immediately replaced with responsible journalists?
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
TnT... Because there is
October 7, 2007 - 14:25 ET by bigtimerTnT...
Because there is zilch for accountability with the press...
Zilch.
We are at war and nothing has happened to the NYT's or the WaPo....they did their best to hurt us, most likely did, we will not know until later, the justice Dept. has done nothing at all..instead Dana Priest from WaPo gets an award for releasing info on the Secret prisons in other countries that are or were aiding us!
I have been furious for months and months.
...these treasonous creatures will continue on...after-all this is their agenda....DEFEAT.
Victory for them is the enemy.
On the f-ing SPOT!
October 7, 2007 - 14:32 ET by MrShyTnT, exactly!!
Take Starr and Wright into some CNN office, and tell them to gather there things -- and do it fast -- and escort them to the building exit immediately.
I don't think anyone is planning on doing this.
Bias
October 7, 2007 - 14:42 ET by Jerry MackAnyone that watched this program or read this report can not deny that there is left wing bias being exhibited. The only excuses for not believing it would be if the person is as biased or does not know what the word means.
JM... BULLS-EYE!
October 7, 2007 - 14:46 ET by bigtimerJM...
BULLS-EYE!
It's ALMOST
October 7, 2007 - 14:48 ET by heldmywI repeat: ALMOST and oxymoron..."Responsible Journalist".
Like "unbiased reporter'.
or "Quality MSNBC Show".
"Rational Liberal".
...help me out here.
Just a Guess
October 7, 2007 - 21:11 ET by pbthinkerMy guess would be that these people won't be fired because they're not responsible for what gets printed in the paper. They were expressing an opinion which, if nothing else, shows how their minds work. We should be thankful for their honesty.
Democrats: Specializing in "high tech lynching" since 1987.
Great work
October 7, 2007 - 14:27 ET by Vivian LeeThe really scary thing about this is that all these MSM "pundits" and "journalists" truly believe their skewed logic is infallible. They see no flaws in this slanted point point of view. Scarier yet is that so many Americans aren't capable of recognizing these egregious oversights.
ConservativeBelle
Remember Gen Betray Us?
October 7, 2007 - 14:40 ET by JDWWhy isn't 'phony soldiers' an attempt to divert public attention from lack of lib military support?
JDW
Sen Clinton: Founder of Media Matters
Why isn't what Rush said(no
October 7, 2007 - 14:43 ET by robert108Why isn't what Rush said(no matter what you think it was) not a "free speech" issue? Why isn't Hillary shrieking about Rush's "right to dissent"?
And...
October 7, 2007 - 14:49 ET by JDWWhy isn't what Rush said(no matter what you think it was) not a "free speech" issue?
What?
JDW
Sen Clinton: Founder of Media Matters
ROFL...
October 7, 2007 - 14:58 ET by bigtimerROFL...
I don't know why this is any
October 7, 2007 - 14:41 ET by robert108I don't know why this is any sort of surprise; the MSM has been ignoring the good news out of Iraq since the beginning of the war. They have to be the Ministry of Propaganda for the Dems/lefties, after all.
News, whether it fits your
October 7, 2007 - 14:44 ET by wiwfNews, whether it fits your agenda or not, is news, and should be reported.
The Rocky Mountain Collegian: Illustrating Idiocy
CNN will decide if there's good news coming out of Iraq
October 7, 2007 - 15:18 ET by Not AmusedSo Barbara Starr of CNN will decide if the news coming out of Iraq is a "trend" or something more. She will use her deep and intellectual analytical skills to determine if good news should be reported, all the while saying that ALL bad news is news and should be reported. I would like to know what her credentials are that qualify her for such analysis. I'm going to assume, however, she has the only credential she believes she needs: she is a Democrat.
She was always her usual
October 7, 2007 - 15:29 ET by bigtimerShe was always her usual witchy self at Rummy's news conferences...always thinking she is really gonna' trip him up, Rummy always making an arse out of her...easily, she is/was just to dense to know it.
I have detested her from day one of her first appearance that I ever saw on CNN.
She really thinks she is self-important.
She is definitely NO Brenda Starr...for any of those who remember her? LOL
NeoPRAVDAettes, you ignorant sluts ...
October 7, 2007 - 16:33 ET by drillanwrThese are the same people who have absolutely NOOOOO trouble reporting (leaking, handing-over, giving) news that the enemy can use for propaganda purposes ...
Yet, if it just happens to be news that would demoralize the enemy they shove it aside.
Has it completely gone over the news media's head(s) that they have fallen below lawyers on the pariah scale?
I can't describe how deeply angry this makes me.
October 7, 2007 - 15:41 ET by RJThis is a vivid example of how the media has been "managing" the war coverage to the benefit of the enemy, who is encouraged.
As a result, these bastards have been the direct cause of additional American soldiers being killed and wounded. They have also been the direct cause of additional Iraqi civilians being killed and wounded.
They have American and Iraqi blood on their hands....and it's a shame that we no longer try and punish traitors.
Yup Agree
October 7, 2007 - 18:41 ET by well99"They have American and Iraqi blood on their hands....and it's a shame that we no longer try and punish traitors."
They hits the nail on the head.How they are able to live with that I have no idea.
Barbara Starr alleges:
October 7, 2007 - 16:14 ET by TEBarbara Starr alleges: "Look, nobody more than a Pentagon correspondent would like to stop reporting the number of deaths, interviewing grieving families, talking to soldiers who have lost their arms and their legs in the war."
ROTFLMAO! Starr, the rest of the Pentagon press corps and virtually the entire Washington press corps have multiple orgasms "reporting the number of deaths, interviewing grieving families, talking to soldiers who have lost their arms and their legs in the war."
biased or dummies?
October 7, 2007 - 16:43 ET by BacchusThose two don't understand Iraq at all. That's the problem. If they understood it better then they might know what they're talking about. They think they know but they don't. ... Or their reporting is heavily biased.
The trend began in January with the change of tactics with the troop surge. The bomb-a-day news reports are gone. Have these keen news people not noticed?
Even during the Viet
October 7, 2007 - 16:42 ET by MidAmericaEven during the Viet Nam War the media coverage was more balanced. The coverage was often leaning left but pro American/troops articles were presented. But.... the news cycle back then was determined by WWII and Korean era folks. They knew what it meant to be a loyal American and what the troops were going through. Todays 'journalists' are products of the spoiled boomer generation. Too many of them have gone to college courtesy of their parents and then straight into 'journalism'. They've never had an honest job and wouldn't know how to produce anything but opinions and yet they try to pass themselves off as experts on any subject.
"Why do Starr and Wright
October 7, 2007 - 16:59 ET by ckc1227"Why do Starr and Wright insist that it has to be "either-or"?
They can report the decline in casualties along with the caveat or qualifer that this may not be indicative of any long term trend. It's a rough snapshot of the conditions."
Why say anything about a trend at all? Just report the numbers and the facts, which is soldier deaths declined for the fourth straight month. Anything else is opinion, which should have no place in news reporting.
These People
October 7, 2007 - 17:00 ET by dwillmoreThe thing that disgusts me most is that these reporters are so mired in their ideology that they do not recognize how blatantly biased they are.
news media
October 7, 2007 - 17:46 ET by JDWJournalists enter news media with the belief that they can change the world for the better.
JDW
Sen Clinton: Founder of Media Matters
JDW...Happy birthday
October 7, 2007 - 17:52 ET by bigtimerJDW....
When you mentioned two years here at NB back in a thread I got to thinkin' (spooky huh?) that heck have I been here two years now...hmmmm...let me check that out....
I did, so Happy Belated NB's birthday to me and to YOU, I beat you by two days!
This goes for anyone else too...RJ? I'll have to check...lol.
I was here shortly after NB opened their doors, BT,
October 7, 2007 - 17:56 ET by RJ..but I didn't register until they made it a requirement....sometime in November, if I remember correctly.
well BT 2 years
October 7, 2007 - 18:00 ET bywell BT 2 years 1 week
bloody good show
Support our Troops
BT, you young NB'er you, 2
October 7, 2007 - 18:05 ET by bassndudeBT, you young NB'er you, 2 years 6 weeks. Newbe...:-)
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
RJ, I know you were here
October 7, 2007 - 18:20 ET by bigtimerRJ, I know you were here before me if I recall so I was wondering about that date...botg and bass along with acumen, JAB, RtS, sarc and all others, Ct, nofate and of course Jack Bauer and MM, Queen Mum, Kathleenirish ect...
It has been great...has it not...trolls and all and man there have been some!
BT, I'm not so sure I was here before you,
October 7, 2007 - 18:25 ET by RJI honestly don't remember when I started..but I do remember that it was as a result of NewsBusters being mentioned in the Washington Times online. So, whenever that happened is when I started.
But remember all the "anonymous" posters? That's how hater started....and then he began using various names before he came up with "hater."
RJ...Yep sure do
October 7, 2007 - 18:36 ET by bigtimerRJ...
Yep sure do remember all the anonymous names he used...a lot of them, hater was perfect (leon) plus his side-kick Saint James too ...I called him little Jimmy...then there was yellerdawg, Chicken of the Sea(as I named it)...the night they burned old dixie down....on and on..too funny, lots more we went through...it truly was the wild wild west, nothing like today whatsoever....lol.
Btw...I do not remember if I had to register either or not, I heard about NB's one day listening to Rush and have never looked back!
So many people here helped me learn so much about blogs and how to use the PC (still are)...I am forever grateful.
I have had a blast, more than anything you learn so much from others here from all walks of life from all over that it is all priceless for me.
Hey BT and RJ, What
October 7, 2007 - 18:43 ET by Chris NormanHey BT and RJ,
What happened to the pompous (and short lived) Dave High, who was coming on here, a few months ago, to scold us and set us straight?
Howdy Chris... He got
October 7, 2007 - 18:45 ET by bigtimerHowdy Chris...
He got bounced last I saw.
Regards, bigtimer
That man was full of
October 7, 2007 - 18:46 ET by Chris NormanThat man was full of himself. Too bad that "himself" was manure.
Dave High
October 7, 2007 - 18:56 ET byhas reincarnated, he was 'outed' about two weeks ago though i don't remember his new name just now. It will come to me.
Support our Troops
They usually always get
October 7, 2007 - 18:58 ET by bigtimerThey usually always get back in and they usually always get found out.
ROFLMAO!
Still waiting for tumbles....
BT
October 7, 2007 - 18:59 ET byand i know you have 'baited breath' for Deb
Support our Troops
Oh yes..the narcisstic
October 7, 2007 - 19:02 ET by bigtimerOh yes..the narcisstic one...her way or the highway.
The Church Lady as RJ called her.
I miss her so.
"Oh yes..the narcisstic
October 7, 2007 - 19:35 ET by Chris Norman"Oh yes..the narcisstic one...her way or the highway"
Now, what made you say that about her, BT? Was it someone living inside of you? Who could it be? Who could it be? Oh, I don't know, perhaps SATAN???!!!! :)
"regards"
October 7, 2007 - 18:57 ET by RJlol, BT
But, Chris and BT, there have been a LOT of pompous libs, haven't there?
RJ...YES!
October 7, 2007 - 18:59 ET by bigtimerRJ...
YES!
Btw...Glad you caught the 'Regards' part...hope Chris did as well...lol.
My brain is still suffering
October 7, 2007 - 19:32 ET by Chris NormanMy brain is still suffering from the high altitude and oxygen deprivation from "my hike from hell" of yesterday. Did High use "regards" or something?
Chris, If you went back
October 7, 2007 - 20:01 ET by bigtimerChris,
If you went back and forth with him... plus making points and such he would get upset and sign off to you with each post...especially Noel, but others including me with a ...
Regards, Dave High
Can't beleive you missed that all, of course if memory serves me right, he was here mostly week-ends doing this. (I could be wrong, been known to happen...lol)
BT, Now that you mention it,
October 7, 2007 - 20:06 ET by Chris NormanBT, Now that you mention it, I can picture those words on his closing line. Like everything else about him, that came off as pretentious, too...
Very pretentious.
October 7, 2007 - 20:18 ET by bigtimerVery pretentious.
Chris, BT, RJ
October 7, 2007 - 20:25 ET by BlondeWow, I get back on here & you all are tripping down troll lane again.....First JoZeF (the vast majority of right-thinking Americans...yada yada) a couple of days ago...now our old pal Dave High (f.k.a. known as Nightnoise).
FYI, he got booted after being postively obscene to me one night. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
Too funny.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
The ever so correct Mr. High
October 7, 2007 - 20:28 ET by Chris NormanThe ever so correct Mr. High got obscene? Where am I when this stuff happens? :)
Blonde
October 7, 2007 - 20:31 ET bybut now he's back and i don't remember as who (one of the pigs?)
Support our Troops
No, B.
October 7, 2007 - 20:34 ET by BlondeConjecture is Leon, but I don't think so.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
If he's back, he must have
October 7, 2007 - 20:35 ET by Chris NormanIf he's back, he must have changed his style from insufferably pretentious to merely irritatingly troll style.
Welcome back Dave
October 7, 2007 - 20:38 ET byWelcome back Dave High
programs.........get your programs......
Wow. I didn't see this.
October 7, 2007 - 20:42 ET by Chris NormanWow. I didn't see this. This guy does write some important manifestos. He uses a lot of words, but...
botg, that bust was way too easy.
October 7, 2007 - 20:57 ET by Dave RRegards. LOL.
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
a good one
October 7, 2007 - 21:00 ET bynone-the-less
Support our Troops
Spot On, Bruce
October 7, 2007 - 21:06 ET by BlondeSOD...I missed that one.
Too funny. Eye & now Blindsight.
Okay...I'll say it again,
We need a better class of troll, here.
(May have to change my tagline...what do you think?)
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
I vote yes, change the
October 7, 2007 - 21:11 ET byI vote yes, change the tagline, as long as i can use it when needed. Then again i keep a plethora of tags at my 'about me' and trade them out as appropo
Support our Troops
Help yourself, B.
October 7, 2007 - 21:15 ET by BlondeFree's already asked to use the "better class of troll" line....all my friends are welcome to it, of course.
The David Gregory one is only the second one I've ever had...I'm kinda fond of it.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Thanks B
October 7, 2007 - 21:19 ET bysee you later
"Television is where you watch people in your living room that you would not want near your house." Groucho
Blonde,
October 7, 2007 - 21:00 ET by Dave RLOL-Dave High committed bloggercide that night. One of the most bizzarre troll meltdowns that I have ever witnessed here at NB.
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
Oh, yeah. However, I
October 7, 2007 - 19:48 ET by Chris NormanOh, yeah. However, I thought Mr. High surpassed others in the condescenscion department. His lofty attitude was unintentionally comical. He'd puff himself up like a pouter pigeon...
Chris
October 7, 2007 - 19:56 ET byor a betta fish
Support our Troops
Just remove his glands
October 7, 2007 - 19:59 ET by Chris NormanJust remove his glands carefully, or you'll kill some businessman in Japan... :)
Ooooh Chris
October 7, 2007 - 20:33 ET by BlondeThat brings to mind another screen nic of Hater's...Owl Pellets.
That guy was seriously twisted with his SN's. Burlysacknpumps? What was up with that? Closet cross dresser maybe?
Remember when Matthew busted on the Stern site? Oh good grief..."help me, I need some back up".
Choke!
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Blonde, Funny you should
October 7, 2007 - 20:38 ET by Chris NormanBlonde,
Funny you should mention this. I almost commented on the same thing earlier, then scratched it in favor of something else. I started typing, "Where do these trolls get their screen names?". I once called ol' Burlapsacknpumps - "Burlaphackysack".
Close, Chris
October 7, 2007 - 21:08 ET by BlondeThat's real close to getting sent to your room. :D
Although it sounds like you had a tough day yesterday with the lib SIL....poor guy!
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
I do wonder...
October 7, 2007 - 18:00 ET by ajacksonianOk, when is, exactly, something a 'trend'?
Well, if you don't report on it for four straight months and refuse to report on it and don't do any reporting on it... then you will never know if it IS a trend.
Reporters are supposed to do this thing known as 'report'. A factual accounting of events will do just fine. If I want to hear syllogistic pontification I will go to one of these splendiferous 'pundits' who seem not to know what they are talking about because they get no facts from 'reporters'. Instead we get the 'reporters' trying to be 'analysts' and they end up being 'pundits' and the actual 'pundits' are just working on hearsay heard from 'reporters'.
The first news channel that clearly segregates actual news reporting from analysis and pontificating punditry and SAYS SO will take down all of the rest of them, including Fox. Stop asking 'reporters' their opinions and just have them deliver the actual facts of a situation and leave it up to the citizenry to figure out what it means.
I am still waiting for that first news channel that will do this. When it arrives and people slap their foreheads and say 'why didn't I think of that?' So simple, yet way too complex for the 'news' channels.
No news is good news
October 7, 2007 - 18:01 ET by TjexciteWith all the lack of news from Iraq since David Petraeus's report one would think that Iraq fell into the black void until there is a car bomb.
Honest answer would have
October 7, 2007 - 20:49 ET by MikeBHonest answer would have been: "No, Howard. We have an agenda, and reporting that news or any other good news out of Iraq would not advance that agenda. In fact, reporting good news in Iraq or any other front on the war on terror would set our agenda back, and we can't have that. So, we will continue with reports from people like Scott Beauchamp and Jesse McBeth who have been repeatedly exposed as complete liars and frauds, because they advance our agenda."
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
I read this
October 7, 2007 - 21:07 ET by pbthinkerThere was an article on this, in the Palm Beach Rag, and one of the comments was that, (and I'm not exactly sure of the number but, let's say it was 79) if we have 79 more deaths we'll have lost more soldiers this year than last.
What's missing, with a comment like that, was we expected to lost more than last year, because of the surge. We were actually going to go after al Qaeda and the insurgents which would put our soldiers more in the line of fire than they were.
Does anyone get the idea the left is really afraid that things will go well, in Iraq, and get reported, in such a way, that they will look bad for not giving the troops more support?
Democrats: Specializing in "high tech lynching" since 1987.
pb
October 7, 2007 - 21:11 ET by BlondeDoes anyone get the idea the left is really afraid that things will go well, in Iraq, and get reported, in such a way, that they will look bad for not giving the troops more support?
Absolutely! They're scared to death it will be reported so that they look like the defeatist scum they are. I can't wait!
Out, damn spot!
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
And like many, if you asked
October 7, 2007 - 22:19 ET by GregEAnd like many, if you asked Ms. Wright if she wants America to win in Iraq, her answer will be like I've gotten many times......."what is considered a win?".........They dance and never say yes. She's doing the same.
And as someone posted earlier, when deaths are up it's not at all "tricky" to count, according to how hard the story is reported.
Starr & Wright
October 7, 2007 - 22:27 ET by Dave RI'm guessing that even if this trend continues unchanged for six months (and I hope that it does), these two "journalists" will still refuse to report it, and there will be no end to the littany of excuses they will offer up as to why.
I bet they will say, "Well, it is old news now. We have moved on." Or something similar.
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
Good news not spoken here
October 7, 2007 - 22:49 ET by pocomocoI believe I am peering through Wonderland’s looking glass watching the MSM’s tea party of Mad Haters, a.k.a. journalists, decide for themselves what is news and what is not – and the public be damned.
The public has, for some time suspicioned it, but now the MSM have confirmed it to everybody. Thank you Howard Kurtz.
Noel, thank you so much for
October 7, 2007 - 23:12 ET by daveinbocaNoel, thank you so much for pointing out the obvious bias of the MSM. I knew Robin Wright way back when and she is an ardent apologist for Iran and Barbara Starr is of the Eason Jordan school of CNN hatred of the military.
Charlie Gibson is the only network newsperson with a shred of integrity on reporting Iraq---a fellow named Terry McCarthy gives both sides frequently on ABC-Evening News. Unlike the oppressively negative types for NBC & CBS---I forget the names of these types, though one is named Engel, I think. Consistently negative and I believe inaccurate----Engel was caught recently saying that all the members of a unit were against the war and several blogged that he had not asked them. Typical shoddy or even treasonous "journaism" by Columbia School of Journalism ethics exam cheaters!!! [Sorry for the exaggeration]
Back in the day, Howie Kurtz investigated the Hatfield dust-up in '84 if you remember the problem of his being bribed through his wife Antoinette, and Kurtz came to our home and was the only real journalist whom we encountered through that whole brouhaha [too long to explain, but trust me].
ABC & Fox are the only two outlets willing to investigate both sides of the war---the ideologues in the rest are rooting for a US defeat.
Restraint
October 8, 2007 - 04:07 ET by AgnosticI applaud the restraint these "journalist" show on not jumping on rumors and unverified data to create a story. Just like they did to the soldiers in Haditha. They showed restraint and assumed innoncence until... Nevermind. Well they at least verify every story about flushing the Koran so there is no backlash from the enemy... Nevermind. They research all the reasons stated for going into Iraq before declaring it a failure due to no WMD or a predetermined date for cease fire... Nevermind.
I give up!
lol
October 8, 2007 - 04:15 ET by well99Yup that is pretty much it.Verify is not in their dictionary unless it goes against their agenda.Then they twist the facts or dont report them.
Here's my take on this, its
October 8, 2007 - 06:10 ET by WhichWingHere's my take on this, its news, but not really news you're writing home to mom about. While its good that casualties are dropping, the real good news would be a report that told us of no casualties. It's similar to this administration telling us every year that the budget deficit is smaller than the previous year. Lets get rid of the deficit and casualties altogether and then we can cheer.
Got another one. It's like a man who is balding bragging that he's not losing as much hair as he used to. You just don't have the heart to tell him that it's because he's already lost most of it.
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw
An observation...
October 8, 2007 - 08:09 ET by c5thenUnfortunately, these "sports fan reporters" are rooting for the terrorists.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Fred08.com
Try 4 months of a Trend.
October 8, 2007 - 10:38 ET by erik6408I love how they ignore the actual trend. It has been 4 months of
decline and a major decline trend for hostile deaths as shown here
http://icasualties.o... . They are amazing at showing their
bias. Show some patriotism and be proud to be an American.
Traitors
October 8, 2007 - 10:47 ET by Sergeant ROCKForgive me for being skeptical, I need to see a little bit more than one month before I get too excited about all of this.
Of course! Because it doesn't fit your agenda! Now, when the story supports their agenda, skepticism be damned! And what's the current count on ficticious stories from the MSM right now??
Traitors!... $^%&#%@ TRAITORS!
Indoctrinate-U
Our Education. Their Politics.