| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Home Front | |
| Fun with watching Guardian struggle to spin American’s 2-1 support of war | |
| 2003-12-19 | |
| EDITED Americans think the war in Iraq was the right decision by a 2-1 margin and are more inclined to approve of the job done by President Bush in foreign policy and terrorism following the capture of Saddam Hussein, an Associated Press poll found. They remain wary, however, of the continuing deadly conflict in Iraq. Note there are no facts to support this statement... but it sets up the theme that they are trying to promote....remember that line in 12:00 High? "Go home...you have already lost the war!" Here they modify it to: "go home Saddam’s capture appears to have given Bush’s re-election prospects a boost: The poll conducted for the AP by Ipsos-Public Affairs found that nearly half of respondents, 45 percent, said they would definitely support Bush’s re-election, while 31 percent said they would definitely vote against him. A month ago, people were evenly divided on that question, at 37 percent definitely for and 37 percent definitely against. Clever how they use the word "definitely" to keep the percentage "supporting" Bush at the absolute minimum. More than six in 10 registered voters, 63 percent, said they approved of Bush’s handling of foreign policy and terrorism, up from 54 percent who felt that way in early December in an AP-Ipsos poll. Bush’s overall job approval among voters was 59 percent, up from 53 percent in early December but still far below his mid-70s war ratings from earlier this year. NO need to feel complete despair..there is still hope those numbers may drop again! Two-thirds in the poll said they were confident the United States would capture or kill Osama bin Laden, who is believed to have orchestrated the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. That’s up from about half who felt that way in a poll in September. ``I’m confident we’ll capture Osama bin Laden,’’ said Jill Chiccino, a surgical technician from Wilmington, Del. ``I still don’t feel that will solve terrorism, but it may help.’’ Interesting quote choice, considering the thousands available. It’s just downright staggering in it’s stupidity. duh... golllyyy... ya think?? Could it be Al Guardian is worried that Binny will turn up soon?? Or maybe there just were no intelligent quotes available to support their theme (without pulling a Jason Blair) and this was the best they had: Asked whether they thought Saddam’s capture last weekend would cause violence against U.S. troops to increase, decrease or stay about the same, the biggest group, 47 percent, said they expected no change. A third, 33 percent, said violence would decrease and 19 percent said it would increase. Clap, clap...well done! They managed to hide that 80% think that the violence will not increase and that almost twice as many think violence will decrease, than will increase.
Evenly divided, and thousands of quotes...I know...let’s pick this one! Six in 10 thought the government was likely to be embarrassed by some of the information disclosed by Saddam in a trial. That was higher than the percentage of people who felt Saddam’s disclosures would embarrass the governments of France, Russia, Britain or Germany. Does a stripper get embarrassed when you see her naked? Bottom Line: Overall support for Iraq policy was strong in the poll. Seven in 10 said they believed the Iraq war was an important part of the campaign against terrorism rather than a distraction, as some critics have charged. And by more than a 2-1 margin, people said the war was the right decision and not a mistake. There is more good news in this report...read it yourself. It’s tough to take overwhelming numbers of support and make them look negative....but Al Guardian did a good job of reporting the truth while still managing a subtle negative spin. I rate this one an 8.5. | |
| Posted by:B |
| #5 ..US Government officials on the Saddam payroll,.. That would be the only thing that would genuinely be embarrassing, especially if it were administration officials being bought off. All the other stuff, however, is potential egg on other people's faces. |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2003-12-19 1:53:14 PM |
| #4 OP - It'd be great to hear corroboration from Saddam, but I wouldn't find his rantings credible without those captured docs and files to back them up. He could spout off all kinds of lies right now and accuse just enough of the guilty that he could throw in some innocent names for spite and really wreak havoc, or tell just enough of the truth that his lies seem credible. I would never trust anything he says without any proof or corroboration. |
| Posted by: Dar 2003-12-19 12:55:27 PM |
| #3 And this "information" would be....? The back-door maneuvering by the likes of Jim McDermott, US Government officials on the Saddam payroll, United Nations payoffs to ignore or lift sanctions, Bill Clinton's ineffective behavior toward Saddam, the "useful idiots" like Sean Penn who were wined and dined by Saddam and fed so much shit they almost choked, how the money was diverted from the Oil for Food program to the Oil for Palaces and Oil for Weapons programs, who helped out when with WMDs... the list could be virtually endless. Coming from Saddam's mouth, it would be ten times more damning than if it came from captured intelligence documents or government files. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2003-12-19 12:43:37 PM |
| #2 Six in 10 thought the government was likely to be embarrassed by some of the information disclosed by Saddam in a trial. And this "information" would be....? |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2003-12-19 11:54:33 AM |
| #1 Yeah. Subtle as a sledgehammer, B... |
| Posted by: Raj 2003-12-19 11:18:58 AM |