Originally posted by 99blacksesport: No, pointing out to you that because it's your opinion does not mean it is true, is not a symantics argument.
There has been far too much sensationalization of our troops doing wrong over-seas, only to have the investigation prove that they did nothing wrong. All the big media outlets, CNN especially, do nothing but report on Iraq with only negatives. Hell, even their reporting of Zarquawi's death had headlines like "He's Dead, but is it really good for us?" They are so biased in their hatred of Bush that they take it out wherever they can, including our troops.
My question is why can the major news outlets not report anything good about the war? And why can they not save reporting these details of events, after they are confirmed by a court of law?
but what does zarqawis' (SP?) death have anything to do with bush or CNN hating him. Frankly I dont see CNN being that biased. I see them report crap about Clinton when he was in office, I see them report on Bush, same deal. Ive never seen them make any distinction between the two parties in how they report, with maybe the exception of lou dobbs, but he focuses on domestic issues more than anything and well the bush regime hasnt done that well in certain cases. But than again, lou dobbs is more of an editorial thing than real news reporting.
I do agree with the fact they sure like to go to air before anyone has the foggiest idea on whats going on. Than they spend all day reporting "updates" that were the same as 6 hours ago!