Point taken, but you will note that the "opinions" noted here are
lukewarm and arguably belong in the story.  The first one you mention
would not be enhanced by the addition of "or failures," since most of
the press and the political environment in general is focusing on the
"failures" exclusively.  To back this up, listen to any of the nine
dwarves running for the Democratic nomination.  Any success in Iraq (or
anywhere else,) resonates deeply and negatively in Democratic circles.
The political overtones are indeed obvious.

The second one is again a follow-on to the first and is more of an
observation than an opinion.  One would have to be totally blind not to
notice that many people hope that Iraq goes badly, nine of them are
running for the Democratic nomination.  Any good news for America is
indeed bad news for the Democratic Party.

The third one you mention is subtler and denotes a deep understanding of
the current gun control debate in America.  It also tries to draw a
parallel between the situations here at home and in Iraq.  One must not
forget most reporters in Iraq are "utopians" that firmly believe that
all guns are evil, used only for evil purposes.  There are only a few
who believe that guns are tools and that people can be evil.  (Sidebar -
The misnamed AWB (Assault Weapons Ban) is sunsetting in 10 months.  It
demonstrably had absolutely no effect on crime, however it did
contribute to the fact the Democrats lost the house and Senate in 1994.
There is virtually no movement to renew the ban in October of 2004.  The
Democrats in Congress are scared to touch any gun control legislation,
less they further erode as a viable party.)

A couple more things.  The article in question was written by John Lott,
a well-known and published supporter of the second amendment.  His story
was less about reporting a situation in Iraq and more about comparing
different reports and reporting on what he had discovered on his own.
It was an opinion piece, but even under that rubric, it still had few
opinions.  However, this opinion piece was more factual and less
opinionated than what passes for pure news in the elite media.

Finally, read this one.  Remember, the byline is 5 December, before they
caught Saddam.
http://www.shns.com/shns/g_index2.cfm?action=detail&pk=IRAQ-REALITY-12-0
5-03


Denys

-----Original Message-----
From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On
Behalf Of Greg Cagle
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 11:03 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] OT: The Other Side of the Story

 Well said. Let me point out a few things in the Fox News article
that looked like opinion to me:

> The political overtones are obvious, not just in terms of the Bush
> administration's successes

I would have added "or failures" to this statement. That would make
it balanced.

> Some were bothered simply because this indicated that Iraq was being
> handled well

A clear shot at people who don't think Iraq is being handled well
and irrelevant to a discussion of murder rates in Baghdad. And there
are no supporting facts or data.

> The claim did not sit well with those pushing to renew the assault
> weapons ban (search) in our own country.

A clear shot at gun control types. There was no need to bring this
into a "factual" discussion of the murder rate in Baghdad. Again there
are no supporting facts or data.

I would imagine the reason these statements are included is to
inclusively support the positions (Bush is doing a good job,
Iraq is being handled well, gun control advocates are wrong) with the
actual facts used to prove the actual point. Which is well made
and proven with the facts as you note. But Lott really didn't
have to drag along the hot button side issues.

- Greg

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *