Liberal Media At It Again

[red states rule]

Now, Pres Bush and the Iraq war is to blame for the tornado cleanup


Bush Derangement Syndrome at AP: ‘Iraq War Hampers Kansas [Tornado] Cleanup’
Posted by Noel Sheppard on May 7, 2007 - 09:59.
In 2005, Bush Derangement Syndrome -- the as of yet inexplicable malady effecting much of the left whereby anything bad that happens on the planet can be tied to the White House -- peaked with continuous press accusations that Hurricane Katrina was the President’s fault.

Almost two years later, and just hours after tornadoes devastated the Midwest, the President is being indirectly blamed for potentially hampering rebuilding efforts in the hardest hit area.

I kid you not.

As reported by the Associated Press late Sunday evening with the headline “Iraq War Hampers Kansas Cleanup” (emphasis added):

The rebuilding effort in tornado-ravaged Greensburg, Kansas, likely will be hampered because some much-needed equipment is in Iraq, said that state’s governor.

Governor Kathleen Sebelius said much of the National Guard equipment usually positioned around the state to respond to emergencies is gone. She said not having immediate access to things like tents, trucks and semitrailers will really handicap the rebuilding effort.

[…]

The Kansas National Guard has about 40 percent of the equipment it is allotted because much of it has been sent to Iraq.

Please notice that the article conveniently omitted the Governor’s party affiliation, which not surprisingly is Democrat.

However, maybe most interesting is how the AP’s position was similar to the Iranian news agency Press TV’s (emphasis added):

Search continues after a massive tornado obliterated most of Kansas's Greensburg, amid claims that rescue efforts are hampered by war in Iraq.

[…]

Governor Kathleen Sebelius said Sunday evening that the state's response will likely be hampered because much of the equipment usually positioned around the state to respond to emergencies, including tents, trucks and semi-trailers, is now in Iraq.

"Not having the National Guard equipment, which used to be positioned in various parts of the state, to bring in immediately is really going to handicap this effort to rebuild," said Sebelius.

Much like the AP, this Iranian news outlet ignored the Governor’s party affiliation, while leading with the connection to the Iraq war.

Isn't that special?


*****Update: Something the AP neglected to mention in the above-referenced piece that was reported by the wire service earlier on Sunday (h/t to NBer Mighty Mouth): "The president has declared parts of Kansas a disaster area, freeing up federal money to aid in recovery."

Yet, for some reason, even in this piece, the party affiliation of the Governor remained unidentified: "Bush said Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius and Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., briefed him on the destruction."

Why is it important to the AP to keep her party affiliation a secret, yet Sen. Roberts being a Republican is clearly identified?


http://newsbusters.org/node/12569

 

[CTRLALTDEL]

Now, Pres Bush and the Iraq war is to blame for the tornado cleanup


Bush Derangement Syndrome at AP: ‘Iraq War Hampers Kansas [Tornado] Cleanup’
Posted by Noel Sheppard on May 7, 2007 - 09:59.
In 2005, Bush Derangement Syndrome -- the as of yet inexplicable malady effecting much of the left whereby anything bad that happens on the planet can be tied to the White House -- peaked with continuous press accusations that Hurricane Katrina was the President’s fault.

Almost two years later, and just hours after tornadoes devastated the Midwest, the President is being indirectly blamed for potentially hampering rebuilding efforts in the hardest hit area.

I kid you not.

As reported by the Associated Press late Sunday evening with the headline “Iraq War Hampers Kansas Cleanup” (emphasis added):

The rebuilding effort in tornado-ravaged Greensburg, Kansas, likely will be hampered because some much-needed equipment is in Iraq, said that state’s governor.

Governor Kathleen Sebelius said much of the National Guard equipment usually positioned around the state to respond to emergencies is gone. She said not having immediate access to things like tents, trucks and semitrailers will really handicap the rebuilding effort.

[…]

The Kansas National Guard has about 40 percent of the equipment it is allotted because much of it has been sent to Iraq.

Please notice that the article conveniently omitted the Governor’s party affiliation, which not surprisingly is Democrat.

However, maybe most interesting is how the AP’s position was similar to the Iranian news agency Press TV’s (emphasis added):

Search continues after a massive tornado obliterated most of Kansas's Greensburg, amid claims that rescue efforts are hampered by war in Iraq.

[…]

Governor Kathleen Sebelius said Sunday evening that the state's response will likely be hampered because much of the equipment usually positioned around the state to respond to emergencies, including tents, trucks and semi-trailers, is now in Iraq.

"Not having the National Guard equipment, which used to be positioned in various parts of the state, to bring in immediately is really going to handicap this effort to rebuild," said Sebelius.

Much like the AP, this Iranian news outlet ignored the Governor’s party affiliation, while leading with the connection to the Iraq war.

Isn't that special?


*****Update: Something the AP neglected to mention in the above-referenced piece that was reported by the wire service earlier on Sunday (h/t to NBer Mighty Mouth): "The president has declared parts of Kansas a disaster area, freeing up federal money to aid in recovery."

Yet, for some reason, even in this piece, the party affiliation of the Governor remained unidentified: "Bush said Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius and Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., briefed him on the destruction."

Why is it important to the AP to keep her party affiliation a secret, yet Sen. Roberts being a Republican is clearly identified?


http://newsbusters.org/node/12569

Christ.....all she was saying is that EQUIPMENT that could have been used in the search/rescue was diverted to Iraq. SHE WAS STATING A FACT. How is that propaganda??

 

[red states rule]

The Blame Bush talking points again

 

[RetiredGySgt]

It is politics as usual because the Senior National Guard General in Kansas ALSO spoke and he said the Guard had EVERYTHING they needed for this disaster, now not being a LiberalIi will add what else he said...

He said the Guard can handle the current disaster and probably one more small tornado, but if another big one hits before this clean up is done they will have problems. The White House responded by noting that there are plans already available to help ANY State that needs help. ( of course why they would have to say it is beyond me, any reasonable journalist should already have known it and noted it in any report)

 

[red states rule]

It is politics as usual because the Senior National Guard General in Kansas ALSO spoke and he said the Guard had EVERYTHING they needed for this disaster, now not being a LiberalIi will add what else he said...

He said the Guard can handle the current disaster and probably one more small tornado, but if another big one hits before this clean up is done they will have problems. The White House responded by noting that there are plans already available to help ANY State that needs help. ( of course why they would have to say it is beyond me, any reasonable journalist should already have known it and noted it in any report)

The key words in your post were "responsible journalist"

There are very few in the liberal media

 

[CSM]

Seems to me that the good Governor is hedging her bets already.

 

[mattskramer]

Your link has an agenda - exposing and combating supposed liberal media bias. That game is not hard to play. One can do the same with conservative media bias. You will always find what you are looking for through your own filters. Checkout these sites:

http://mediamatters.org/

http://www.fair.org/index.php

 

[red states rule]

Your link has an agenda - exposing and combating supposed liberal media bias. That game is not hard to play. One can do the same with conservative media bias. You will always find what you are looking for through your own filters. Checkout these sites:

http://mediamatters.org/

http://www.fair.org/index.php

you know who funds those sites?

George Soros - the ATM machine for the Dems

 

[mattskramer]

you know who funds those sites?

George Soros - the ATM machine for the Dems

Likewise, there probably are wealthy Republicans and Conservatives donating to web sites and organizations looking for examples of left-wing media bias.

 

[red states rule]

Likewise, there probably are wealthy Republicans and Conservatives donating to web sites and organizations looking for examples of left-wing media bias.

not to the tune of the tens of millions Soros gives to the Dems

He is the power broker who is running the party - along with Moveon.org

 

[mattskramer]

not to the tune of the tens of millions Soros gives to the Dems

He is the power broker who is running the party - along with Moveon.org

A conservative complaining that it is not fair that one political side is wealthier than another?!? Wow. Rush Limbaugh might have more money than does Soros. Anyway, I’m not going to count pennies. The bottom line is that each side of the political spectrum does what it can to make the other side look bad. It searches for, and finds, bias to support its side. It puts on radio shows, TV shows, newspaper articles, books, and web sites. To nearly the same extent that one can find examples of liberal bias, one can find examples of conservative bias. It is an old tiresome game easily played.

 

[red states rule]

A conservative complaining that it is not fair that one political side is wealthier than another?!? Wow. Rush Limbaugh might have more money than does Soros. Anyway, I’m not going to count pennies. The bottom line is that each side of the political spectrum does what it can to make the other side look bad. It searches for, and finds, bias to support its side. It puts on radio shows, TV shows, newspaper articles, books, and web sites. To nearly the same extent that one can find examples of liberal bias, one can find examples of conservative bias. It is an old tiresome game easily played.

I am pointing out who the Dems are beholding to

Conservatives are not beholding to Rush for anything - he does not give any financial assisatnce to the Republican party

Here is the facts on Soros and how he flows money to the left
Soros has set up a complicated political operation designed to do two things: buy influence among some liberal politicians, and smear people with whom he disagrees.

Now here's a chart of how Soros and a few other wealthy radicals who help him are funneling money into the political process. Stay with me on this. Most of Soros' political money flows through his Open Society Institute. You see it there on the left, which is almost unlimited funding.

Since 2001, according to federal documents, the Open Society Institute has given nearly $20 million to the Tides Foundation right below that. An astounding amount.

Now Tides, in turn, funnels the money to a variety of radical hatchet men who are all well paid. For example, Tides has donated millions to the vile propaganda outfit Media Matters, which specializes in distorting comments made by politicians, pundits, and media people. Media Matters is an Internet site, but directly feeds its propaganda to some mainstream media people including elements at NBC News, columnist Frank Rich and Paul Krugman at The New York Times, columnist Jonathan Alter at Newsweek, and Bill Moyers at PBS. — In fact, as president of the Shoeman Center Foundation, Moyers oversaw at least a $500,000 transfer of money to Media Matters
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,268043,00.html

 

[no1tovote4]

A conservative complaining that it is not fair that one political side is wealthier than another?!? Wow. Rush Limbaugh might have more money than does Soros. Anyway, I’m not going to count pennies. The bottom line is that each side of the political spectrum does what it can to make the other side look bad. It searches for, and finds, bias to support its side. It puts on radio shows, TV shows, newspaper articles, books, and web sites. To nearly the same extent that one can find examples of liberal bias, one can find examples of conservative bias. It is an old tiresome game easily played.

Rush Limbaugh is not a billionaire, this is ridiculous. Nor did somebody complain of Soros' riches, just explained the fact of the groups you were linking to.

Many studies, even liberal academia studies, have shown a bias to the left in Mainstream Media. Not so many studies have for the supposed right-bias. Shoot, in one study, because Drudge actually links directly to stories in the media more often than writes his own, showed that because of that fact his site often leaned left.

The idea of a right-wing bias in the media is funny. Yes there is a channel on Cable News that is that way, but they get their stories from the AP like all the others. They say "Homicide Bomber" instead of "Suicide Bomber" or even "insurgent suicide attack", but really that isn't the issue here. Liberals are upset that one can hear their editorial shows and that they "show a bias". Of course they do! They are EDITORIAL SHOWS.

Anyway, unless you think UCLA is somehow "conservative" here is one of those studies:

http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/page.asp?RelNum=6664

While the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal is conservative, the newspaper's news pages are liberal, even more liberal than The New York Times. The Drudge Report may have a right-wing reputation, but it leans left. Coverage by public television and radio is conservative compared to the rest of the mainstream media. Meanwhile, almost all major media outlets tilt to the left.

These are just a few of the surprising findings from a UCLA-led study, which is believed to be the first successful attempt at objectively quantifying bias in a range of media outlets and ranking them accordingly.

"I suspected that many media outlets would tilt to the left because surveys have shown that reporters tend to vote more Democrat than Republican," said Tim Groseclose, a UCLA political scientist and the study's lead author. "But I was surprised at just how pronounced the distinctions are."

"Overall, the major media outlets are quite moderate compared to members of Congress, but even so, there is a quantifiable and significant bias in that nearly all of them lean to the left," said co‑author Jeffrey Milyo, University of Missouri economist and public policy scholar.

more at link...

 

[Care4all]

Coverage by public television and radio is conservative compared to the rest of the mainstream media.

Meanwhile, almost all major media outlets tilt to the left.

This seems contradictory?

So coverage by broadcast tv (public) is conservative?

so, outside of cable tv, the news on these other stations is conservative?

I can understand broadcast radio being overwelming conservative, because it is!

But this comment is saying that abc, cbs, nbc, report the news with a conservative lean?

Or am I misunderstanding this?

Care

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Once upon a time the NEWS was supposed to be unbiased reporting of facts. Journalists prided themselves on being fair and not creating stories or embelishing them, nor did they push their own private political agenda in the words or news reports they provided.

That is simply not true now nor has it been for a long time. In Iraq reporters for the major networks don't even leave the green zone, they pay Iraqis to "get" stories for them. Their bias is so strong they avoid reporting good news and concentrate on any negative thing they can find, even using negative words when reporting successes.

Anyone remember a certain CBS headliner that falsified a report about Bush just before the election? His entire defense was "well it may be a forgery, but the information is true" His researcher spent 5 YEARS on the story and couldn't provide any real information or facts, they had to resort to a forgery and then tried to influence an election by reporting it just before the vote ( they were rushed to report early because someone was going to expose their story, the original plan was to do the report a few days before the vote).

Main stream media news is biased to the left. For years they denied it but now the defense has shifted to " don't look at our bias, check out Fox"

Talk about bias.... no main stream network would even show or discuss the "swiftboat" claims other than to label them lies, but they ran every story that claimed Bush was awol from the National Guard or that his daddy used influence to get him in to the Guard. They even trotted out the bogus claim that Bush stole the election in 2000. And after the 2004 election they tried to claim that republican operatives had used hidden codes in the machines the press and the democrats demanded be used to to steal that election. of course if one does a little research one finds out that just as many companies that sell those machines are owned and run by Liberal Democrats.

 

[red states rule]

Once upon a time the NEWS was supposed to be unbiased reporting of facts. Journalists prided themselves on being fair and not creating stories or embelishing them, nor did they push their own private political agenda in the words or news reports they provided.

That is simply not true now nor has it been for a long time. In Iraq reporters for the major networks don't even leave the green zone, they pay Iraqis to "get" stories for them. Their bias is so strong they avoid reporting good news and concentrate on any negative thing they can find, even using negative words when reporting successes.

Anyone remember a certain CBS headliner that falsified a report about Bush just before the election? His entire defense was "well it may be a forgery, but the information is true" His researcher spent 5 YEARS on the story and couldn't provide any real information or facts, they had to resort to a forgery and then tried to influence an election by reporting it just before the vote ( they were rushed to report early because someone was going to expose their story, the original plan was to do the report a few days before the vote).

Main stream media news is biased to the left. For years they denied it but now the defense has shifted to " don't look at our bias, check out Fox"

Talk about bias.... no main stream network would even show or discuss the "swiftboat" claims other than to label them lies, but they ran every story that claimed Bush was awol from the National Guard or that his daddy used influence to get him in to the Guard. They even trotted out the bogus claim that Bush stole the election in 2000. And after the 2004 election they tried to claim that republican operatives had used hidden codes in the machines the press and the democrats demanded be used to to steal that election. of course if one does a little research one finds out that just as many companies that sell those machines are owned and run by Liberal Democrats.[/QUOTE



Once upon a time, MSM reporters reported what happened

Now they report what they want to happen

 

[red states rule]

The Army insists the devastation in Kansas isn't overly straining the Guard's admittedly limited resources. There are still thousands of troops and hundreds of vehicles available. In fact, of the state's more than 7,600 Guard troops, only around 10 percent are deployed in Iraq or Afghanistan. And Kansas has not asked for any reinforcements or extra equipment from neighboring states.... The Army says it has enough equipment for both a simulated drill and the real-life disaster, and argues, if the governor of Kansas has an urgent need for more bulldozers, backhoes, or Black Hawk helicopters, she only has to ask.

http://newsbusters.org/node/12611

 

[Rosotar]

He said the Guard can handle the current disaster and probably one more small tornado, but if another big one hits before this clean up is done they will have problems. The White House responded by noting that there are plans already available to help ANY State that needs help. ( of course why they would have to say it is beyond me, any reasonable journalist should already have known it and noted it in any report)

Yeah right.

Just like the White House promised that NO would be rebuilt better than it was before.

Hasn't happened yet.

What point are you trying to make here Ret.GySgt.?

You just quoted a statement that says bush has over extended our resources with his foible in Iraq and now we can't even take care of our own country's needs.

Was that your intention?

 

[red states rule]

Yeah right.

Just like the White House promised that NO would be rebuilt better than it was before.

Hasn't happened yet.

What point are you trying to make here Ret.GySgt.?

You just quoted a statement that says bush has over extended our resources with his foible in Iraq and now we can't even take care of our own country's needs.

Was that your intention?

Billions ahave been sent to NO and the state of LA for cleanup efforts

Funny how the Dems who run NO and the state found $125 million to open the Superdome for football and then whine how things are not back to normal

 

[Rosotar]

not to the tune of the tens of millions Soros gives to the Dems

He is the power broker who is running the party - along with Moveon.org

As long as it's legal what's the problem?

You should have the same standards for your president and his twisted minions that you have for others.

How many times have you cons tried to defend the shady actions of this White House with the argument "Can you prove that any laws were broken?"