“Why Won’t the Media Act as a Propaganda Arm of the American Government?”
That’s pretty much the gist of Mary Mostert’s latest column, called “Why won’t the media just report what President Bush SAYS?” Let’s take a look:
Why won’t the media report what President Bush actually SAYS?
Mary Mostert
December 1, 2005In my youth in the 1930s and in World War II, back in the days when Democrat Franklin Delano Roosevelt was president of the United States, when it was announced he would be speaking on the radio, throughout this nation families gathered around the radio and listened to what he had to say. The New York Times printed what he said IN FULL in its next edition.
“Plus, nickels had picture of bees on them. ‘Give me five bees for a quarter,’ you’d say.”
Yet, it is almost impossible, it seems, for Republican George W. Bush to get the national media to even mention anything he actually says ? in this so-called “information age.”
You obviously don’t ever read anything, Mary. Here are some of the headlines about Bush’s speech written by the anti-American MSM:
The New York Times: “Bush Gives Plan for Iraq Victory and Withdrawal”
CNN: “Bush: ‘U.S. to Stay in Iraq till War is Won.'”
MSNBC: “Bush: Iraq conflict ?will take time and patience?”
And looky-looky! The Washington Post has an entire transcript of Bush’s speech today commemorating National AIDS Day!
If you really want to know what President Bush says ? especially if it is upbeat or positive ? you have to find it on the Internet.
Yeah, because if you don’t like the real news, you can just get the fake stuff from Powerline.
For example, let’s look at the coverage of the the major speech on Iraq given yesterday by President Bush at the United States Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland […] For example, in an “analysis” authored by the Washington Post today entitled “An Offering of Detail But No New Substance” some how Peter Baker managed to write a lengthy article without even mentioning ANYTHING the President of the United States actually said in his speech. Baker’s first two paragraphs in “analyzing” the speech were:
“Thirty-two months after U.S. forces invaded Iraq, President Bush’s advisers concluded that his message of ‘stay the course’ has been translated by a weary American public as ‘stay forever.’ And so yesterday the president tried to reassure the nation that he has a comprehensive vision for beating the insurgency and eventually bringing U.S. troops home.
“The message was hardly subtle as the White House posted a 35-page >’National Strategy for Victory in Iraq’ on its Web site and hung dozens of “Plan for Victory” signs behind Bush as he addressed midshipmen in Annapolis. But it was intended to reshape the argument against critics who have been gaining traction with congressional calls to withdraw troops immediately or at least set a timetable for pulling out.”
See, Mary, this is why news analysis is different than news reporting. When journalists analyze something, they provide behind-the-scenes information and context that average folks can’t get just from reading the transcript on the White House’s web page.
Of course, if you’re Mary Mostert (or Marie Jon’, or Michelle Malkin, or the Powertools), the only proper analysis of the President’s speech is “BUSH RAWX!!! WOOOOOO!!!!”
I could not even find a report on the President’s actual speech on ABC News’ website…
That’s because you didn’t look very hard.
…although there was an article entitled, “Pace: Message of Iraq Progress Stymied” that mentioned a speech made apparently the same day by General Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
CNN, on the other hand, features headlines about a “poll” they apparently took, rather than the President’s speech.
As I pointed out earlier, here’s the headline from CNN: “Bush: ‘U.S. to Stay in Iraq till War is Won.'” You’re right, Mary, that’s so flagrantly pro-Islamocommiehomo.
Their headline reads: “Poll: Most doubt Bush has plan for Iraq victory” and the first 2 paragraphs of the story reads:
“As President Bush launched a new effort Wednesday to gain public support for the Iraq war, a new poll found most Americans do not believe he has a plan that will achieve victory.
“But the CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll released Wednesday night also found nearly six in 10 Americans said U.S. troops should not be withdrawn from Iraq until certain goals are achieved.”
Most of the millions of people around the world who get their news from CNN will continue to believe that you and other Americans don’t even think your president HAS a plan than can achieve victory.
Say, Mary? I’m an American and I don’t think Bush has a plan that can achieve victory.
And, that made me go back and re-read an article in the November 30, 2005 American Thinker that was sent to me by Len, one of my readers.
Vasko Kohlmayer, author of the article entitled “The Left’s Secret Pact: Subverting the War on Terror” puts forth the sobering thought that the media and the political left are not as innocent at the President seems to believe but are, in fact actually deliberately sabotaging the War on Terror to “give relief to the other side.”
I just wanna point out how much I love crazy-assed shit like this. People like Mary will never accept that Bush is anything less than a Jesus who drinks a lot and enjoys starting wars. Ergo, they instinctively lash out at any piece of information that undermines their creepy, Manson Family-esque devotion to their anointed Savior.
Whether or not they INTEND to sabotage the War on Terror, there is no doubt in my mind from reading the reports of foreign newspapers and commentators that those who want to destroy us and the political enemies of President Bush do believe they can eventually cause the Americans to “cut and run” as we did in Vietnam and the Sudan with their misinformation techniques.
America conducted major military operations in the Sudan? Since when? I think Mary must have confused it with Somalia. Ehn. Same difference. They’re both countries that are populated by dark-skinned Muslamics.
And we wore an onion on our belt, which was the fashion of the time.
We would pin a small frog on our lapels, and say “bibble” to passers-by.
This was all orange groves once!
Big deal! When I was a pup, we got spanked by presidents ’til the cows came home! Grover Cleveland spanked me on two non-consecutive occasions!
Funnily enough it was Osama who cut and run from Sudan after Clinton blew up that pharmaceutical factory.
Bushes plan for victory could not have been more clear. I will use my amazing analytical powers to summarize his speech, and his plan, in one sentence:
We’ll keep doing what we’re doing until we’ve won!
So simple, so clear.
“Throughout this nation families gathered around the radio and listened to what he had to say.”
Except those of you who were still walking 18 miles uphill each way to school, of course
(Grandap Simpson “with an onion on your belt, as was the fashion”)
Sorry mike, i should read more carefully. well said!
damn my lazy name
That was the year FDR raced Superman. FDR beat him by a furlong, or at least that’s what the comics would have you believe.
Maybe they won’t report what he says because he says the same stupid tired shit every time. Hasn’t he been giving the same speech for about 3 years now?
I’m sure Roosevelt had something new to say for each speech and that’s why people wanted to hear it.
And he also had a plan. Before the war, not After he claimed Mission Accomplished
The personality cult kills me too. After all, shouldn’t they worship someone with an actual personality.
If people actually had to listen to (and/or) read everything he says, President Bush never would have been elected.
It’s funny how she concludes with the media and political left will force the president to (oh gasp!) cut and run! Considering the Iraqi leadership is now pressing for a timetable for the troops to leave, can the right keep repeating this same old tired line. Of course, if only the American public could read the president’s words the media would be powerless against his mangling of the english language.
Also take a look at the links to columns on the left hand side there’s some frightening stuff there.
What she wants is transcription, not journalism. There are at least two companies I know of that can provide her a wide selection of the pearls of wisdom dribbling from every orifice of this administration, unadulterated by any sort of analysis whatsoever. She’s gonna have to dig into her pocketbook — past the Kleenexes good for one more blow, past the hard candies — and come up with a few quarters for the privilege, but it can be done.
Personally, I don’t think she’s ready to drink from the firehose of unfiltered bozocity, but I totally support her paying for the chance to indulge in that kind of political bukkake. Every dime she spends at one of those enterprises will eventually insure that some of the transcriptionists get the medication they will surely need by the time 2008 rolls around.
Every dime she spends at one of those enterprises will eventually insure that…
insure? ensure? Ensure ™?
The laff party never stops when you can turn a potential usage error into a reference about the elderly!
See also: “Boys love candy.”
“Not many people know this, but I own the first radio in Springfield. Not much on the air then, just Edison reciting the alphabet over and over. ‘A’ he’d say. Then ‘B’. ‘C’ would usually follow…”
Aah, grandpa Simpson. Always a cutup.
About the Sudan war. I got a funny story about that. Well it’s not so much funny as it is long. . .
Why not just leave the nice lady alone?
We would– if she were nice.
Yeah, her craginess looks like she’d bake up a batch of cyanide brownies and force feed em to ya.
“Why don’t you just read what he SAYS? HUH?”
What if I could get her to convince you that she were nice? She’s my aunt. And she makes some great Christmas gingerbread cookies.
She adds her own secret ingredient to the cookies that make them extra yummy. We all get the Christmas spirit immediately after munching on them. The room is instantly filled with laughter. We don’t call her aunt “Mary” for nothing you know. Summers at aunt Mary’s farm are also quite peaceful and enchanting. That’s when she grows those beautiful plants in her garden, right behind some bigger, but much less conspicuous plants.
Oh, man, I’m so sorry! Heh. You should really not leave yourself wide-open like that, BLT. I suppose it’s possible that you’re wondering, “Would any Sadly, No!ers stoop so low as to snark my beloved aunt?”, ignoring for the moment the question as to whether or not she actually is your aunt, beloved or not. Why, yes. Yes we would. It’s a weakness, really.
But…
Special brownies?!?
Yoiks!
I didn’t think claiming her as my aunt would earn me any brownie points with you, Marq. And by the way, I didn’t say we were related by blood. I’ve adopted her as my aunt. Blood may be thicker than water, but neither blood nor water can hold a candle to aunt Mary’s special treats.
Blood may be thicker than water, but neither blood nor water can hold a candle to aunt Mary’s special treats.
Oh man, this is just getting too creepy for me.
Um, your wife know about these “special treats” you’ve been lappin’ up, BLT? Eeew-I just grossed myself out!
Stop. This thread needs to fucking stop!
Hi Anonymous! I’d like you to post a link, write a letter and sign a petition to remind people that it’s not polite to blogwhore. At least you didn’t bang away at the post button several times like a spastic monkey!
Hi Anonymous! I’d like you to post a link, write a letter and sign a petition to remind people that it’s not polite to blogwhore. At least you didn’t bang away at the post button several times like a spastic monkey!
Hi Anonymous! I’d like you to post a link, write a letter and sign a petition to remind people that it’s not polite to blogwhore. At least you didn’t bang away at the post button several times like a spastic monkey!
D’oh!