Clarification/Follow-up by ETWolverine on 05/22/06 7:28 pm:
Excon, CENTCOM already informs the public (where it is able to do so without affecting operational security) of enemy casualties. The Media simply ignores it. Why should Bush do it sepparately from them?

>>>You just can't make a guy who's doing a very bad job, look good - not even with his spin meisters.<<<

But you CAN make a guy who is doing a very good job look bad, despite his spin meisters. The Media did it to Reagan for 8 years, and they have been doing it to Bush for 5 1/2 years.

Think about it: Bush gave a prime-time speech in 2004 that the media simply ignored because it felt like it. They are constantly ignoring good reports coming out of Iraq (including enemy casualties). They are constantly playing up bad reports, no matter how thin the accusations turn out to be. They refuse to print retractions when they are prove wrong. Not ONE SINGLE MAINSTREM MEDIA OUTLET has said "We now have documentation that proves Bush was right about the WMDs, and we were wrong", despite the fact that such documentation has been available to the public for over 6 months. The NY Times printed the story about POW torture, but they got the facts wrong. The original story was PAGE 1 ABOVE THE FOLD news: the retraction was buried somewhere on page 98.

This is a pattern of MSM bias against Bush that has been clearly demonstrated, time and time again. And that translates back to what I said: it is quite easy for the media to make someone who is doing a good job look bad, by simply neglecting to report certain facts, over-reporting others, being slippery with facts, and burying retractions of those stories where nobody can find them. That's what they've been doing to Bush.

And you continue to fall for it.

Elliot