The AP gives us the headline, Democrats Praise Military Progress:
WASHINGTON (AP) – One senator said U.S. troops are routing out al-Qaida in parts of Iraq. Another insisted President Bush’s plan to increase troops has caused tactical momentum.
One even went so far on Wednesday as to say the argument could be made that U.S. troops are winning.
These are not Bush-backing GOP die-hards, but Democratic Sens. Dick Durbin, Bob Casey and Jack Reed. Even Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services committee, said progress was being made by soldiers.
The headline is technically correct, but it fails to indicate that the article contains grafs like this:
Levin, while saying military progress was being made, said the troop build-up could not be considered a success because its purpose was to make way for political reconciliation, and that hasn’t happened.
“The only hope is if they take the responsibility onto themselves and we end the open-ended military commitment,” Levin, of Michigan, said Sunday on CNN’s “Late Edition.”
Reed, a Rhode Island senator who visited Iraq last month, said there’s been tactical momentum, but it “has yet to translate itself into real political momentum, which is the key, I think, to progress.”
Durbin, an Illinois senator who is traveling this week with Pennsylvania Sen. Casey, told CNN on Wednesday that “naturally” troops are routing out al-Qaida in parts of Iraq, but then explained there’s no evidence of the government in the areas.
Maybe the AP could work on making their headlines a little more fair and balanced?
Our local paper here relies heavily on AP sourced stories. And while you will occasionally see one with a “fair and balanced” title they more often than not will be just what you pointed out, misleading. Often times they are not just misleading, but outright deceptive. Makes you wonder if there might be a subtle agenda??? I have come to rely more and more on McClatchy (formerly Knight Ridder) for a more well rounded presentation of the news.
I wonder what the context of these statements is. Were the Senators answering direct questions or were they spouting equivical language to cover their asses when they don’t do anything about the war in September?
Some context here and here.
Were people cherry-picking comments?
I’ll let you be the judge.
Thanks.