Jude 2

Are we still in Iraq????

I would love to see a study of the media coverage of Iraq up to and after the election.

Except for the occasional suicide bomber, which would be covered anywhere, where did all the negative coverage go?

My wife (who is not a news junkie) ask me the same question this morning. She wanted to know where all of the media coverage was not that Obama is president. She said it was all you heard/saw when Bush was in.

Can you say double-standard?

maybe the tides are turning?

A good friend of mine who is a Marine sargent, was deployed for his 3rd tour back to Fallujah last year. He and his men are coming home 3 months ahead of schedule.

Paully_44 wrote:maybe the tides are turning?

A good friend of mine who is a Marine sargent, was deployed for his 3rd tour back to Fallujah last year. He and his men are coming home 3 months ahead of schedule.

You are correct in that the tide is turning and if you can believe this, friends I know who are over there now say the election has actually helped matters. Many over there see Obama as a sympathizer to the Muslim and Arabic world as a whole and as a result are seeing America as a much friendlier country to them.

I don't know whether that's a good thing or not.

Paully_44 wrote:maybe the tides are turning?

A good friend of mine who is a Marine sargent, was deployed for his 3rd tour back to Fallujah last year. He and his men are coming home 3 months ahead of schedule.

Dude, the tide turned years ago during "the surge" (which Obama opposed and said wouldn't work, BTW).

Scooter's point is that the negative media coverage of the war continued up until Bush left office, even after the surge began winning the war. It only stopped when Obama came in. Therein lies the media double standard.

DaJudge wrote:Scooter's point is that the negative media coverage of the war continued up until Bush left office, even after the surge began winning the war. It only stopped when Obama came in. Therein lies the media double standard.

They were covering the turning of the tide well before Bush left office. This before/after change of media coverage is the typically exaggerated fiction of the radically conservative imagination.

Tim Elston wrote:
They were covering the turning of the tide well before Bush left office. This before/after change of media coverage is the typically exaggerated fiction of the radically conservative imagination.

Response: Or the denial of the truth by the so liberal left they have no idea that they past center by a mile in 1990.

Tim Elston wrote:They were covering the turning of the tide well before Bush left office. This before/after change of media coverage is the typically exaggerated fiction of the radically conservative imagination.

Bull. Did they "cover" the turning of the tide? Maybe a mention was made here or there. But did it equal in magnitude the overwhelming deluge of day in day out negative media coverage during the times when things were going badly? Not even close. Only a self deluded person with their cranium firmly lodged in their rectal cavity would fail to see that.

DaJudge, no one can paint word pictures like you.

soulsearcher wrote:DaJudge, no one can paint word pictures like you.

That's one of the nicest things anyone has ever said to me, soulsearcher.

My Son William will be deployed back to Iraq for his second tour end of April.

I distinctly recall a sharp reduction in bad news coming from the media about Iraq in the fall of 2007. The surge had reduced the number of bombings and reprisal killings in Iraq, and the economy and election began to dominate the news cycles. I remember thinking at different times during 2008 that very little news from Iraq was being aired at all, and when it was mentioned as a campaign issue it was usually framed as a positive for McCain because of the success of the surge but as something that was being eclipsed by the economic crisis. Iraq was primarily covered during the election season as a policy issue that pitted McCain's surge success against Obama's push for withdrawal. The success of the surge was generally portrayed as a possible weakness for Obama, and any specific negative coverage about Iraq came in the immediate aftermath of a bombing.

Since Obama has been President, there have been two bombs that I remember being covered, and in both cases the articles I read about it questioned Obama's strategy. I have also heard and read coverage of liberals who are disaffected with Obama's military strategy in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

If there is a before/after distinction in coverage, it is before and after the surge or before and after the economic crisis in the fall of 2007. There has been little to no notable change in negative/positive coverage of Iraq turning on the presidential transition. The most coverage that the Iraq War has gotten since the inauguration has been over Obama's change of policy, not negative or positive news coming out of Iraq itself.

My adopted grands dad has been deployed to Iraq... I think he actually leaves sometime the 1st of April...