liberal media - send email complaints
-
Chris Losinger wrote: even NPR runs plenty of stories about the good stuff. Glad to hear that, I wasn't aware of it - I tuned them out some time back. on a slightly different issue, the Blues Series being hosted by PBS is awesome if the entire 7 segment series is on a par with the British segment I saw the other nught. Chris Losinger wrote: who exactly is this "far left leadership" ? 1. Kennedy 2. Byrd 3. Clinton 4. Shumer 5. Daschle 1. Pelosi 2. Waters 3. Black Caucus in total The entire slate of Democrat Candidates, save Lieberman (who is a lost sole in this pact of hyenas), and, Clark who is an independent and thus can't be included. Mike
Mike Gaskey wrote: the Blues Series being hosted by PBS is awesome yeah, i saw a few of them. good stuff. ImgSource | CheeseWeasle
-
yes, yes. all good Americans should stick their fingers in their ears and whistle a happy tune. Terry O`Nolley wrote: trumpeting the successes of terrorists terrorists? where? Terry O`Nolley wrote: you are causing danger to the troops stationed in Iraq to help transition that country to democracy bullshit. the intent of pointing out mistakes made by the people in charge is to get them to stop making those mistakes. maybe (well, no maybe about it, you've proven it many times here) you think the people at the top are infallible, but i don't accept that. i think they are a less-than-stellar bunch of idealogues who have put this country into not one, but two difficult nation-building situations. and, as they continue to make mistakes, i'm going to call them on it. again Terry - this is America we're talking about. if i want to criticize our Dear Leader, it's my muthafukkin right to do so, Free Speech Zones be damned. if you or Mike want a country where criticism is a punishable offense, then there are plenty of other countries out there that might suit you better. ImgSource | CheeseWeasle
Chris Losinger wrote: if you or Mike want a country where criticism is a punishable offense So it is bad to criticize those who criticize? I see, it can only go one way. I'm cool now that I understand. Let me recap: I can criticize, rant and foam about the people who are running the country, but I can't be criticized by those who think I'm wrong. Mike
-
Chris Losinger wrote: if you or Mike want a country where criticism is a punishable offense So it is bad to criticize those who criticize? I see, it can only go one way. I'm cool now that I understand. Let me recap: I can criticize, rant and foam about the people who are running the country, but I can't be criticized by those who think I'm wrong. Mike
Mike Gaskey wrote: So it is bad to criticize those who criticize? no. it's bad to criticize in a way that makes no sense at all. "If you criticize our Dear Leader, the terrorists will kill all our troops" is a nonsensical statement. And to me, it implies that the speaker is simply uncomfortable with any criticism (valid or not) of the Leader's policies. And, if that's the case... well, I hear they're hiring in China. ImgSource | CheeseWeasle
-
Mike Gaskey wrote: So it is bad to criticize those who criticize? no. it's bad to criticize in a way that makes no sense at all. "If you criticize our Dear Leader, the terrorists will kill all our troops" is a nonsensical statement. And to me, it implies that the speaker is simply uncomfortable with any criticism (valid or not) of the Leader's policies. And, if that's the case... well, I hear they're hiring in China. ImgSource | CheeseWeasle
I think you're reading things that simply aren't there. :~ I've read and re-read Mike's posts and I'm just not seeing anything like that. I think it's safe to say that a left leaning media outlet wants the current administration to look as bad as possible. So they tend to concentrate on the negative aspects of the current situation in Iraq. Likewise, a right leaning media outlet wants to show the administration in the best possible light so they tend to concentrate on the positive aspects. It's not rocket science. Whether or not constantly reporting negative news motivates the people attacking US troops is a whole other issue. I seriously doubt it has much effect. Mike Mullikin O.E.I. Beauty is only a lightswitch away.
-
I think you're reading things that simply aren't there. :~ I've read and re-read Mike's posts and I'm just not seeing anything like that. I think it's safe to say that a left leaning media outlet wants the current administration to look as bad as possible. So they tend to concentrate on the negative aspects of the current situation in Iraq. Likewise, a right leaning media outlet wants to show the administration in the best possible light so they tend to concentrate on the positive aspects. It's not rocket science. Whether or not constantly reporting negative news motivates the people attacking US troops is a whole other issue. I seriously doubt it has much effect. Mike Mullikin O.E.I. Beauty is only a lightswitch away.
Mike Mullikin wrote: I think you're reading things that simply aren't there. unpossible! ImgSource | CheeseWeasle
-
send email to complain about liberal media this US national editors association trying to pressure US legislators ************************************************** www.asne.org[^] ************************************************** emails to send complaints: asne@asne.org - general sbosley@asne.org - Scott Bosley executive director cbranson@asne.org - Craig Branson online director kwilcox@asne.org - Kevin Wilcox communications director ************************************************** part of US congresspersons letter published in Atlanta newspaper ************************************************** Media's Dark Cloud a Danger: Falsely bleak reports reduce our chances of success in Iraq On Sept. 14, I flew from Baghdad to Kuwait with Sgt. Trevor A. Blumberg from Dearborn, Mich. He was in a body bag. He'd been ambushed and killed that afternoon. Sitting in the cargo bay of a C 130E, I found myself wondering whether the news media were somehow complicit in his death. News media reports about our progress in Iraq have been bleak since shortly after the president's premature declaration of victory. These reports contrast sharply with reports of hope and progress presented to Congress by Department of Defense representatives -- a real disconnect, Vietnam déja vu. So I went to Iraq with six other members of Congress to see for myself. The Iraq war has predictably evolved into a guerrilla conflict similar to Vietnam. Our currently stated objectives are to establish reasonable security and foster the creation of a secular, representative government with a stable market economy that provides broad opportunity throughout Iraqi society. Attaining these objectives in Iraq would inevitably transform the Arab world and immeasurably increase our future national security. .... We may need a few credible Baghdad Bobs to undo the harm done by our media. I'm afraid it is killing our troops. ************************************************** **************************************************
My main point of this rant post was that this ASNE association is a national association of newspaper editors. Presumably with a name like that, they would also adhere to the editor job description of being neutral ? But no this group has to inject itself into politics.... This is a group of people who work at newspaper medias & buy ink in 55 gallon drums. It's already bad enough that the major media monkeys are already infested with liberals, but they also have to spread their anti-USA blather via the newspapers !!! I'm so glad FOXNEWS is showing the rest of them that there actually are conservatives who can read !!! I don't mind people ranting their (erroneous) viewpoints whatever, but these clowns have too much power to get involved with this crap. Why not let ordinary citizens vent & rant and then vote ??? Which is why I posted this article at some forums hoping that other conversative minded lemmings like myself will send them email complaints !!!!!!!!! Clearly even the dumbest demos should realize that the media actually does influence people, that tired refrain about "free speech" protecting violent movies is finally being shown for the verbal narcotics lie that it is, hopefully more people will get irritated enough to tell these editors to keep their pointy little heads focused on syntax, structure & punctuation and leave politics to the voters blah blah blah
-
yes, yes. all good Americans should stick their fingers in their ears and whistle a happy tune. Terry O`Nolley wrote: trumpeting the successes of terrorists terrorists? where? Terry O`Nolley wrote: you are causing danger to the troops stationed in Iraq to help transition that country to democracy bullshit. the intent of pointing out mistakes made by the people in charge is to get them to stop making those mistakes. maybe (well, no maybe about it, you've proven it many times here) you think the people at the top are infallible, but i don't accept that. i think they are a less-than-stellar bunch of idealogues who have put this country into not one, but two difficult nation-building situations. and, as they continue to make mistakes, i'm going to call them on it. again Terry - this is America we're talking about. if i want to criticize our Dear Leader, it's my muthafukkin right to do so, Free Speech Zones be damned. if you or Mike want a country where criticism is a punishable offense, then there are plenty of other countries out there that might suit you better. ImgSource | CheeseWeasle
Chris Losinger wrote: yes, yes. all good Americans should stick their fingers in their ears and whistle a happy tune. I never said that. You sound guilty. Chris Losinger wrote: terrorists? where? There are hundreds of terrorists moving from iran and Syria into Iraq to.... oh never mind. I forgot - you call them "freedom fighters" not terrorists. Chris Losinger wrote: again Terry - this is America we're talking about. if i want to criticize our Dear Leader, it's my muthafukkin right to do so, Again Chris, all I did was present a choice - you either believe that propaganda works or it doesn't. I would never tell you what to do with that information. I didn't say that the news should or shouldn't air what their editorial staff wants to air. My *personal belief* is nothing more than that. If I owned a TV station and our nation was at war, I would make sure I aired things that didn't tend to glorify our enemies. And for the millionth time - don't get all huffy by whining about "freedom of speech". I am not telling you what to think, I am not telling you what to say, I didn't do anything except list 2 mutually exclusive possibilities.
-
Mike Gaskey wrote: So it is bad to criticize those who criticize? no. it's bad to criticize in a way that makes no sense at all. "If you criticize our Dear Leader, the terrorists will kill all our troops" is a nonsensical statement. And to me, it implies that the speaker is simply uncomfortable with any criticism (valid or not) of the Leader's policies. And, if that's the case... well, I hear they're hiring in China. ImgSource | CheeseWeasle
Chris Losinger wrote: If you criticize our Dear Leader, the terrorists will kill all our troops" is a nonsensical statement. And to me, it implies that the speaker is simply uncomfortable with any criticism (valid or not) of the Leader's policies That isn't what I said or implied. I said that you either believe propaganda works or it doesn't. If it works, then you must believe that by constantly highlighting percieved failures of US policy you are emboldening those with anti-US leanings. Take that as you may. Perhaps you don't believe that media influences peoples opinions and thus their actions. I happen to believe it does. You chose to twist that into my trying to stifle your free speech. It is the given right of every American to say things that embolden our enemies and can lead to the deaths of our soldiers. If you don't think that statement is true, then you can't believe that media influences peoples behaviour.
-
Chris Losinger wrote: yes, yes. all good Americans should stick their fingers in their ears and whistle a happy tune. I never said that. You sound guilty. Chris Losinger wrote: terrorists? where? There are hundreds of terrorists moving from iran and Syria into Iraq to.... oh never mind. I forgot - you call them "freedom fighters" not terrorists. Chris Losinger wrote: again Terry - this is America we're talking about. if i want to criticize our Dear Leader, it's my muthafukkin right to do so, Again Chris, all I did was present a choice - you either believe that propaganda works or it doesn't. I would never tell you what to do with that information. I didn't say that the news should or shouldn't air what their editorial staff wants to air. My *personal belief* is nothing more than that. If I owned a TV station and our nation was at war, I would make sure I aired things that didn't tend to glorify our enemies. And for the millionth time - don't get all huffy by whining about "freedom of speech". I am not telling you what to think, I am not telling you what to say, I didn't do anything except list 2 mutually exclusive possibilities.
Terry O`Nolley wrote: There are hundreds of terrorists moving from iran and Syria into Iraq to define "terrorist", please. Terry O`Nolley wrote: My *personal belief* is nothing more than that. If I owned a TV station and our nation was at war, I would make sure I aired things that didn't tend to glorify our enemies. well, there ya go. just like i said: you'd prefer it if people just whistled a happy song. no bad news, cause that encourages the bad people. no matter how bad the citizens of this representative republic think their leaders are fucking up, they should STFU until The Leader gives the "all-clear!" sign. Terry O`Nolley wrote: I am not telling you what to think, I am not telling you what to say, I didn't do anything except list 2 mutually exclusive possibilities. nah. that's not what you did. you gave two choices: one was the obviously incorrect one, and the other was nearly correct but was saddled with an invalid conclusion. nice try, but we're onto your little tricks. ImgSource | CheeseWeasle
-
I think you're reading things that simply aren't there. :~ I've read and re-read Mike's posts and I'm just not seeing anything like that. I think it's safe to say that a left leaning media outlet wants the current administration to look as bad as possible. So they tend to concentrate on the negative aspects of the current situation in Iraq. Likewise, a right leaning media outlet wants to show the administration in the best possible light so they tend to concentrate on the positive aspects. It's not rocket science. Whether or not constantly reporting negative news motivates the people attacking US troops is a whole other issue. I seriously doubt it has much effect. Mike Mullikin O.E.I. Beauty is only a lightswitch away.
Mike Mullikin wrote: Whether or not constantly reporting negative news motivates the people attacking US troops is a whole other issue. You are correct that they are 2 different issues. I still haven't figured out why he tends to begin shrieking "Freedom of speech violation!!!!!" when that issue wasn't even raised. Mike Mullikin wrote: I seriously doubt it has much effect. "much" is the key here. A Syrian youth who is smart enough to not believe Al Jazeera might be swayed by constant CNN pieces. The less weaselly thing for him to say would be "I believe in a free press. I am not ferfish enough to think that the US media has no influence on borderline fanatics. I don't care if a US soldier is killed by a terrorist who was emboldened by anti-US stories being run by CNN. That is the price we pay for a free press. Oh, and I don't plan on ever going in harms way myself."
-
Terry O`Nolley wrote: There are hundreds of terrorists moving from iran and Syria into Iraq to define "terrorist", please. Terry O`Nolley wrote: My *personal belief* is nothing more than that. If I owned a TV station and our nation was at war, I would make sure I aired things that didn't tend to glorify our enemies. well, there ya go. just like i said: you'd prefer it if people just whistled a happy song. no bad news, cause that encourages the bad people. no matter how bad the citizens of this representative republic think their leaders are fucking up, they should STFU until The Leader gives the "all-clear!" sign. Terry O`Nolley wrote: I am not telling you what to think, I am not telling you what to say, I didn't do anything except list 2 mutually exclusive possibilities. nah. that's not what you did. you gave two choices: one was the obviously incorrect one, and the other was nearly correct but was saddled with an invalid conclusion. nice try, but we're onto your little tricks. ImgSource | CheeseWeasle
Chris Losinger wrote: define "terrorist", please. Come off of it. if you don't know by now then any definition I give won't help you. Chris Losinger wrote: nah. that's not what you did. you gave two choices: one was the obviously incorrect one, and the other was nearly correct but was saddled with an invalid conclusion I think you know this isn't true. I'll list the choices again without any conclusions. 1) The media influences peoples thoughts and actions 2) The media doesn't influence peoples thoughts and actions Now, I understand your all getting upset because you are being presented with a belief-system conflict. You can't say truthfully that the media doesn't influence peoples actions, but you do not want to admit that constantly airing reports showing the US involvement in Iraq is wrong could embolden people to take up arms and drive across the border into Iraq. So you rail against my percieved attempt at subverting the first amendment when even you know that I have made no such suggestion. Chris Losinger wrote: nice try, but we're onto your little tricks You'll sleep better if you just admit it: You know the media has influence with middle-eastern people who are sitting on the fence between killing Americans or waiting to see how this whole Iraq thing shakes out, but your political leanings cause you to ignore the fact Americans could die because of the stories that media chooses to air. You value a "fair-and-balanced" reporting of the news more than American lives.
-
Chris Losinger wrote: define "terrorist", please. Come off of it. if you don't know by now then any definition I give won't help you. Chris Losinger wrote: nah. that's not what you did. you gave two choices: one was the obviously incorrect one, and the other was nearly correct but was saddled with an invalid conclusion I think you know this isn't true. I'll list the choices again without any conclusions. 1) The media influences peoples thoughts and actions 2) The media doesn't influence peoples thoughts and actions Now, I understand your all getting upset because you are being presented with a belief-system conflict. You can't say truthfully that the media doesn't influence peoples actions, but you do not want to admit that constantly airing reports showing the US involvement in Iraq is wrong could embolden people to take up arms and drive across the border into Iraq. So you rail against my percieved attempt at subverting the first amendment when even you know that I have made no such suggestion. Chris Losinger wrote: nice try, but we're onto your little tricks You'll sleep better if you just admit it: You know the media has influence with middle-eastern people who are sitting on the fence between killing Americans or waiting to see how this whole Iraq thing shakes out, but your political leanings cause you to ignore the fact Americans could die because of the stories that media chooses to air. You value a "fair-and-balanced" reporting of the news more than American lives.
Terry O`Nolley wrote: My *personal belief* is nothing more than that. If I owned a TV station and our nation was at war, I would make sure I aired things that didn't tend to glorify our enemies. well, there ya go. just like i said: you'd prefer it if people just whistled a happy song. no bad news, cause that encourages the bad people. no matter how bad the citizens of this representative republic think their leaders are fucking up, they should STFU until The Leader gives the "all-clear!" sign. ImgSource | CheeseWeasle
-
Terry O`Nolley wrote: There are hundreds of terrorists moving from iran and Syria into Iraq to define "terrorist", please. Terry O`Nolley wrote: My *personal belief* is nothing more than that. If I owned a TV station and our nation was at war, I would make sure I aired things that didn't tend to glorify our enemies. well, there ya go. just like i said: you'd prefer it if people just whistled a happy song. no bad news, cause that encourages the bad people. no matter how bad the citizens of this representative republic think their leaders are fucking up, they should STFU until The Leader gives the "all-clear!" sign. Terry O`Nolley wrote: I am not telling you what to think, I am not telling you what to say, I didn't do anything except list 2 mutually exclusive possibilities. nah. that's not what you did. you gave two choices: one was the obviously incorrect one, and the other was nearly correct but was saddled with an invalid conclusion. nice try, but we're onto your little tricks. ImgSource | CheeseWeasle
Chris Losinger wrote: but we're onto your little tricks. I was wondering when someone other then me would notice them. But, I do think that when a country is at war, they shouldn't air locations of troops and whatnot. That's just bad planning.
-
Chris Losinger wrote: define "terrorist", please. Come off of it. if you don't know by now then any definition I give won't help you. Chris Losinger wrote: nah. that's not what you did. you gave two choices: one was the obviously incorrect one, and the other was nearly correct but was saddled with an invalid conclusion I think you know this isn't true. I'll list the choices again without any conclusions. 1) The media influences peoples thoughts and actions 2) The media doesn't influence peoples thoughts and actions Now, I understand your all getting upset because you are being presented with a belief-system conflict. You can't say truthfully that the media doesn't influence peoples actions, but you do not want to admit that constantly airing reports showing the US involvement in Iraq is wrong could embolden people to take up arms and drive across the border into Iraq. So you rail against my percieved attempt at subverting the first amendment when even you know that I have made no such suggestion. Chris Losinger wrote: nice try, but we're onto your little tricks You'll sleep better if you just admit it: You know the media has influence with middle-eastern people who are sitting on the fence between killing Americans or waiting to see how this whole Iraq thing shakes out, but your political leanings cause you to ignore the fact Americans could die because of the stories that media chooses to air. You value a "fair-and-balanced" reporting of the news more than American lives.
Terry O`Nolley wrote: Come off of it. if you don't know by now then any definition I give won't help you. i'm asking for your definition. is it "anyone who takes up arms against the US military ?" cause, in every other war, that's something that the term "enemy combatant" would cover pretty well. Terry O`Nolley wrote: You can't say truthfully that the media doesn't influence peoples actions, i never even tried to say that. Terry O`Nolley wrote: but you do not want to admit that constantly airing reports showing the US involvement in Iraq is wrong could embolden people to take up arms and drive across the border into Iraq. i never said that either. but thanks for putting words in my mouth. a huge number of people in this country think the US involvment as executed was a long string of bad ideas. yet you say that everyone who dares speak those words is encouraging The Enemy. that's utterly wrong. by criticizing Bush and his gang, we're saying "look, we think you're doing it wrong. there could be a better way that gets this whole thing over with in a way that's better for everyone involved than what you're doing." and by "everyone involved" we definetly include the troops. ie. their safety is at the core of our complaints. ImgSource | CheeseWeasle
-
Terry O`Nolley wrote: My *personal belief* is nothing more than that. If I owned a TV station and our nation was at war, I would make sure I aired things that didn't tend to glorify our enemies. well, there ya go. just like i said: you'd prefer it if people just whistled a happy song. no bad news, cause that encourages the bad people. no matter how bad the citizens of this representative republic think their leaders are fucking up, they should STFU until The Leader gives the "all-clear!" sign. ImgSource | CheeseWeasle
Chris Losinger wrote: no matter how bad the citizens of this representative republic think their leaders are f***ing up, they should STFU until The Leader gives the "all-clear!" sign. I think there is some area between the two positions. In the west, we have free speech, but it's still not legal to yell "Fire" in a crowded theater if no fire exists. Just because someone thinks the "liberal" media glorifies the actions of those killing US soldiers, doesn't mean they are against any and all criticism of the administration. I think you're seeing this a black and white issue when in fact there is mostly grey. Mike Mullikin O.E.I. Beauty is only a lightswitch away.
-
Chris Losinger wrote: no matter how bad the citizens of this representative republic think their leaders are f***ing up, they should STFU until The Leader gives the "all-clear!" sign. I think there is some area between the two positions. In the west, we have free speech, but it's still not legal to yell "Fire" in a crowded theater if no fire exists. Just because someone thinks the "liberal" media glorifies the actions of those killing US soldiers, doesn't mean they are against any and all criticism of the administration. I think you're seeing this a black and white issue when in fact there is mostly grey. Mike Mullikin O.E.I. Beauty is only a lightswitch away.
Mike Mullikin wrote: I think you're seeing this a black and white issue when in fact there is mostly grey. the thread started with a black and white conclusion: "We may need a few credible Baghdad Bobs to undo the harm done by our media. I'm afraid it is killing our troops." i'm opposed to that viewpoint. -c ImgSource | CheeseWeasle
-
Terry O`Nolley wrote: My *personal belief* is nothing more than that. If I owned a TV station and our nation was at war, I would make sure I aired things that didn't tend to glorify our enemies. well, there ya go. just like i said: you'd prefer it if people just whistled a happy song. no bad news, cause that encourages the bad people. no matter how bad the citizens of this representative republic think their leaders are fucking up, they should STFU until The Leader gives the "all-clear!" sign. ImgSource | CheeseWeasle
Chris Losinger wrote: Terry O`Nolley wrote: My *personal belief* is nothing more than that. If I owned a TV station and our nation was at war, I would make sure I aired things that didn't tend to glorify our enemies. well, there ya go. just like i said: you'd prefer it if people just whistled a happy song. no bad news, cause that encourages the bad people. no matter how bad the citizens of this representative republic think their leaders are f***ing up, they should STFU until The Leader gives the "all-clear!" sign. If I offer an opinion of what I, personally, would do and you say that I am telling people they should STFU until their leader gives them the all clear sign. Don't you see how those two things are unrelated?
-
Terry O`Nolley wrote: 2) propaganda does affect the will of people to fight Terry O`Nolley wrote: If you believe #2, then you should understand that by trumpeting the successes of terrorists and playing up the failures of the USA you are causing danger to the troops stationed in Iraq to help transition that country to democracy. That is only true if the propaganda is directed at those troops. In this situation the propaganda is being directed at the US Congress. How does that have an effect on the servicemen stationed in Iraq? PS. Neat looking medal. :) Chris Meech If you spin a Chinese person around, do they become dis-oriented? Why do people in this time period worry so much about time traveler's destroying their worldline when they have no problem doing it themselves every day? John Titor.
Chris Meech wrote: That is only true if the propaganda is directed at those troops. In this situation the propaganda is being directed at the US Congress. How does that have an effect on the servicemen stationed in Iraq? It isn't so much a morale issue with the troops - no troop I was ever stationed with would want to desert just because CNN aired anti-war propaganda. But CNN is carried in the arab world and some 18 year old kid with a chip on his soldier might just get the idea that even America is against this "unjust" war and so might feel emboldened enough to go down to his friendly neighborhood mosque and sign up to kill Americans. To discount that possibility is to discount media having an influence on people's actions. Chris Meech wrote: PS. Neat looking medal. Thanks! I earned-ed it all by myself!
-
Chris Losinger wrote: Terry O`Nolley wrote: My *personal belief* is nothing more than that. If I owned a TV station and our nation was at war, I would make sure I aired things that didn't tend to glorify our enemies. well, there ya go. just like i said: you'd prefer it if people just whistled a happy song. no bad news, cause that encourages the bad people. no matter how bad the citizens of this representative republic think their leaders are f***ing up, they should STFU until The Leader gives the "all-clear!" sign. If I offer an opinion of what I, personally, would do and you say that I am telling people they should STFU until their leader gives them the all clear sign. Don't you see how those two things are unrelated?
Terry O`Nolley wrote: I am telling people i think my words were : "you'd prefer it if..." ImgSource | CheeseWeasle
-
Terry O`Nolley wrote: Come off of it. if you don't know by now then any definition I give won't help you. i'm asking for your definition. is it "anyone who takes up arms against the US military ?" cause, in every other war, that's something that the term "enemy combatant" would cover pretty well. Terry O`Nolley wrote: You can't say truthfully that the media doesn't influence peoples actions, i never even tried to say that. Terry O`Nolley wrote: but you do not want to admit that constantly airing reports showing the US involvement in Iraq is wrong could embolden people to take up arms and drive across the border into Iraq. i never said that either. but thanks for putting words in my mouth. a huge number of people in this country think the US involvment as executed was a long string of bad ideas. yet you say that everyone who dares speak those words is encouraging The Enemy. that's utterly wrong. by criticizing Bush and his gang, we're saying "look, we think you're doing it wrong. there could be a better way that gets this whole thing over with in a way that's better for everyone involved than what you're doing." and by "everyone involved" we definetly include the troops. ie. their safety is at the core of our complaints. ImgSource | CheeseWeasle
Chris Losinger wrote: we're saying "look, we think you're doing it wrong. there could be a better way that gets this whole thing over with in a way that's better for everyone involved than what you're doing." Cool. I'll agree that nobody's perfect and there will always be room for improvement.