This is clearly false … any number of stories on any given day do not make Bush look bad. I can point you to some if you like … in any case, as a government you have to deal with the media you have, not the propaganda machine you wish to have.

While I can certainly see a case for claiming bad faith on the part of the media, I can’t support that just yet.

Of course! Why didn’t I think of that? America doesn’t give aid because it is generous, but because it doesn’t want to be SEEN as stingy! When I read that headline, I smashed my fist down so hard on reporter Zachary Coile’s name that my kitchen table bounced off the floor. Its is bad enough that the European press is monopolized by America haters. Does our own press have to be monopolized by America haters too?

For more on the problem, and what it will take to fix it, click on my link.

Nonsense, it was and is all about spin.

It is actually no different in concept to this nonsense.

I humbly disagree that such journalists as Robin Wright of the Washington Post were under this innocent impression. On the contrary, what we witnessed was a pathetic attempt by opponents of the Bush Administration to score partisan points before larger aid sums were committed. The military was already on notice and assessment teams already in theatre when she and her fellow believers over at the New York Times printed their screeds. This was obvious.

I hope you are making clear to your friend the certainty that much more than $350 million will be committed, as well as an appreciation of the invaluable contribution (and tremendous resource outlays) involved in our military efforts there.