I posted this on a different board as a rebuttal. I freely admit to visiting a left wing board. It allows me to poke people without getting cited in the process. Anyway, just as some accuse us of being drones, there is a propoganda machine at work for the other side. Hope y'all enjoy
**************************
In this thread, titled BUSTED, I complimented RWG on her writing style. I thought at first she was putting together a digest of sorts to start a thread. Later I got to thinking that the method didn't match RWG's normal style or MO. So I went hunting and found her source site. It is a political digest type site that caters to the left and appears to stop short of actual lies. But, they do a very good job of spinning an issue.
I pulled a different paragraph from the same site as the BUSTED paragraph. Source
UNPROTECTED TROOPS: Shockingly, a "third of the 35,000 Humvees and other trucks in Iraq" still "rely on sheet metal as a last-minute solution" to thwart insurgent attacks. And until yesterday, the war supplemental bill didn't include one red cent for armored Humvees and trucks. In an eleventh hour push, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) was able to crowbar roughly $200 million into the Iraq package for armor costs. Too bad the Army and Marine Corps say they need at least $750 million to finish the job.
Journalism I (ala public school in the 1970's) gave the first commandment as "Thou shalt show no bias". Words such as "shockingly" and phrases such as "didn't include on red cent" were known as "slanting" which later morphed into "spin". To pin down the slant we have an "eleventh hour push" where an old line Senator "was able to crowbar" etc. After a review of the website as a whole I would say that it ranks up there with newsmax etc as a partisan site which excels at "packaging" it's news to fit the perceptions of an audience weakened by spoon fed opinion.
The next thing I noticed about the "progressive", nice label btw, propaganda site is how the links to supporting documentation do not actually reflect what they link to. The first link above, for example, goes the Boston Globe who reported that Sen K asked for more money to buy armor. But nowhere in the story is the inflammatory language of the link used. Just another way to get the faithfuls blood boiling I guess. The second link is from a foreign newspaper. This will send a subliminal message to the faithful that the world feels your liberal pain in conservative occupied America. Feel good journalism at it's finest. Each reader should also be aware that the second link actually quoted a opposition member. But the propaganda site doesn't acknowledge that.
On to the substance. Does any of our readers know the difference between a combat vehicle and a logistics vehicle? Can you discuss intelligently the different tactical doctrines being formulated due to political concerns? Are you aware that the unit commanders had the option to include supplemental armor kits on their vehicles from jump street? Did you know that for every extra pound of armor, that is one pound of food, medicine, or water that won't get to the locals? Did you know that for every extra pound of armor, that is one pound of blood, that won't get to the field hospitals? Did you know that for every extra pound of armor, that is one pound of ammunition that won't be provided to the local security that is slowly and painfully standing up on it's own? Did you know that for every extra pound of armor, that is one pound of fuel that cannot get to the vehicles that need it? Notice how the digest never touched those?
As this rant winds down the point is that you can get your news from anywhere you want. But if you are going to use the democratic underground and americanprogressaction then you are no better than the right side drones that only read newsmax or listen only to Rush.
Happy Sunday, Keep the Faith
**************************
In this thread, titled BUSTED, I complimented RWG on her writing style. I thought at first she was putting together a digest of sorts to start a thread. Later I got to thinking that the method didn't match RWG's normal style or MO. So I went hunting and found her source site. It is a political digest type site that caters to the left and appears to stop short of actual lies. But, they do a very good job of spinning an issue.
I pulled a different paragraph from the same site as the BUSTED paragraph. Source
UNPROTECTED TROOPS: Shockingly, a "third of the 35,000 Humvees and other trucks in Iraq" still "rely on sheet metal as a last-minute solution" to thwart insurgent attacks. And until yesterday, the war supplemental bill didn't include one red cent for armored Humvees and trucks. In an eleventh hour push, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) was able to crowbar roughly $200 million into the Iraq package for armor costs. Too bad the Army and Marine Corps say they need at least $750 million to finish the job.
Journalism I (ala public school in the 1970's) gave the first commandment as "Thou shalt show no bias". Words such as "shockingly" and phrases such as "didn't include on red cent" were known as "slanting" which later morphed into "spin". To pin down the slant we have an "eleventh hour push" where an old line Senator "was able to crowbar" etc. After a review of the website as a whole I would say that it ranks up there with newsmax etc as a partisan site which excels at "packaging" it's news to fit the perceptions of an audience weakened by spoon fed opinion.
The next thing I noticed about the "progressive", nice label btw, propaganda site is how the links to supporting documentation do not actually reflect what they link to. The first link above, for example, goes the Boston Globe who reported that Sen K asked for more money to buy armor. But nowhere in the story is the inflammatory language of the link used. Just another way to get the faithfuls blood boiling I guess. The second link is from a foreign newspaper. This will send a subliminal message to the faithful that the world feels your liberal pain in conservative occupied America. Feel good journalism at it's finest. Each reader should also be aware that the second link actually quoted a opposition member. But the propaganda site doesn't acknowledge that.
On to the substance. Does any of our readers know the difference between a combat vehicle and a logistics vehicle? Can you discuss intelligently the different tactical doctrines being formulated due to political concerns? Are you aware that the unit commanders had the option to include supplemental armor kits on their vehicles from jump street? Did you know that for every extra pound of armor, that is one pound of food, medicine, or water that won't get to the locals? Did you know that for every extra pound of armor, that is one pound of blood, that won't get to the field hospitals? Did you know that for every extra pound of armor, that is one pound of ammunition that won't be provided to the local security that is slowly and painfully standing up on it's own? Did you know that for every extra pound of armor, that is one pound of fuel that cannot get to the vehicles that need it? Notice how the digest never touched those?
As this rant winds down the point is that you can get your news from anywhere you want. But if you are going to use the democratic underground and americanprogressaction then you are no better than the right side drones that only read newsmax or listen only to Rush.
Happy Sunday, Keep the Faith
