Alive and Well - Liberal Media Bias & Congressional Pork Barrel Spending
Sunday, November 18, 2007 at 08:53AM by Marshall Cobleigh
The Project for Excellence in Journalism reports for the first time since the surge in Iraq started that coverage of the US war policy in Iraq has dropped to 3% less than half of the 2007 average. It does not rank anymore in the top 10 news stories. Unless you believe in the Easter Bunny and the tooth fairy, you probably do not believe that those results have anything to do with the fact that the news today out of Iraq is universally good: US troop casualties are at their lowest levels since 2004; rocket, mortar and suicide bombs are at two year lows; Iraq civilian casualties are down two thirds; and MOST IMPORTANT OF ALL THE US IS REMOVING 3000 TROOPS.
Why isn't the liberal media and the network news covering the good news? Do they hate President Bush that much?
Why do we not hear from Jeanne Shaheen, Paul Hodes, Carol Shea Porter on the good news happening in Iraq? Why are Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi still trying to cut funding for our valiant troops?
The Democrat party that complained so loud and long about the Bush-Chaney no bid contracts for Haliburton is now doing exactly the same thing. The leading Democrat big spenders include New Hampshire primary nemesis Carl Levin of Michigan, Hillary Clinton (Why does she get asked about this by the liberal press debate moderators) and Democrat campaign Chairman Chuck Schumer, Ted Kennedy and Chris Dodd.
The New York Times of all place list $1.8 billion dollars in earmark expenditures that the Pentagon did not request in the pork laden military budget. Who led the way in this budget breaking spending that they pledged to end? The Times says Jack Murtha the war's leading critic led all House earmarks with $166 Million in pork barrel spending, followed Nancy Pelosi with $32 million and Democrat leader Steny Hoyer with $26 million.
John McCain told about Hillary Clinton and Chuck Schumer's proposed $1million dollar Woodstock Museum boondoggle, but USA Today has now disclosed that the Woodstock Museum's sponsors donated $9200 to Hillary's campaign and $20,000. After the Woodstock earmark was filed. That used to known as bribery and corruption. Why isn't the national network news telling the American taxpayers about it? Why aren't the debate moderators questioning Hillary about it?
Finally Mitt Romney is telling us he is the true republican conservative running for President. If that is true why did he donate $250 to gun hating democrat Dick Swett's Congressional campaign and also why did true republican Mitt Romney vote for Paul Tsongas for President?
Reader Comments (5)
seems like you missed the latest my misinformed friend
The Bush Administration is touting the drop in terrorist bombings in Iraq and declining U.S. casualties as proof that the surge is working, but the lack of political progress by the Maliki government in reconciling the warring parties is a stark reminder that the surge has failed and the surge is now over. We learned this week that the U.S. is starting to draw down its forces in Iraq and has ordered a brigade based at Fort Hood, Texas to head home. So, if the surge is working we are going to reverse the surge because we want the violence to increase? What is happening?
Let’s be clear about the situation on the ground–the sectarian rift between Sunnis and Shias continues and there is no sign of reconciliation on the horizon. In Baghdad the Shias continue to progress in purging Sunnis from mixed neighborhoods. Moreover, most of the U.S. casualties are concentrated in and around Baghdad. And we are not able to stop the ethnic cleansing that is underway.
Out west the U.S. commanders have finally paid attention to the intelligence and are paying former bombers to take up arms to defend their communities. As the Washington Post reported on Monday:
More than 67,000 people across 12 of Iraq’s 18 provinces are registered under the military designation Concerned Local Citizens, and 51,000 of those have been screened and had their names, fingerprints and other biometric data recorded by the U.S. military, Newton said. Such information is entered into a vast database that soldiers can use to help identify past criminal behavior, such as by matching fingerprints on a roadside bomb component. Eighty-two percent of the volunteers are Sunni and 18 percent are Shiite, he said. About 37,000 are being paid about $300 a month through contracts funded by the U.S.-led military coalition.
The Beatles were wrong. Not only can money buy you love but it can buy you some peace. A large portion of the bombings carried out thru June of this year were the work of people who admitted they were planting bombs for cash. They needed money. Now that the U.S. is paying out almost $12 million a month we have seen a dramatic decline in bombings.
so who do I send this bill of 20 k per family that this suppose war is costing us for we are pissing millions for support of bush and his oil buddys
This much I think is certain–U.S. influence in Iraq will shrink, not expand. It is simple economics. The United States cannot afford to continue to spend billions a month in Iraq while simultaneously trying to cut funding for child healthcare and education in the United States. It does not work politically. This means that Iraq will increasingly chart its own course forward. Over the mid-term–the next six to twenty four months–the defacto partitioning of Iraq will continue. Battles among sectarian factions will continue to rage sporadically. As the United States disengages the pragmatists on both sides of the sectarian divide in Iraq are likely to look for a common ground and will push for a truce that will allow some measure of normalcy to return to the blood soaked streets of Iraq. But the restoration of mixed neighborhoods, Shia-sunni marriage, and the return of the educated refugees appears to be a bridge too far.
AND THAT'S THE TRUTH BOO BOO
As you know, the purpose of the surge was to give the al-Maliki government time and breathing space to form a government of national unity, bringing together Sunni, Shia, and Kurds, settling outstanding questions about how oil money is divvied up, fixing the status of Mosul and Kirkuk, and finalizing the role of ex-Baathists in the government. It was always understood that by spring the surge needed to end because there would be no troops available to continue it.
After 10 months of surge, the Maliki government has not made the first step towards reconciliation, and is actively or passively resisting US efforts to include Sunnis in deciding their nation's future. Unless something happens in the next 3 months, the surge will have been a military success and a political failure.
I hope like hell that Maliki gets off the dime and gets moving, but I wouldn't bet on it.
Read the article yourself. The surge had nothing to do with the change in violence.
***********
Will 'armloads' of US cash buy tribal loyalty?
The US policy of paying Sunni Arab sheikhs for their allegiance could be risky.
By Sam Dagher | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
from the November 8, 2007 edition
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=christian+science+monitor,+paying+shieks&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1180688732250