With "Journalists" Like These, Who Needs Terrorists?

"Balanced" Mainstream Media Getting Their Licks in Ahead of President's Address
Alright, we get it. Mainstream journalists are unhappy that George W. Bush was elected in 2000 and re-elected in 2004. So unhappy that they are willing to misrepresent events in Iraq using selective reporting and emotion-laden prose in an effort to turn Americans against the war, and, by extension, the President. Here are a few of the salvos being fired before Bush's speech tonight (which will apparently not be carried by CBS or NBC):

From the Associated Press:

...a violent conflict that has cost the lives of more than 1,740 U.S. troops and has no end in sight.

From Reuters:

President Bush will try to shore up support for the Iraq war with an address to the nation on Tuesday night, telling Americans it is essential to keep fighting to stabilize Iraq despite the prospect of more bloodshed.

From CBS (running the AP story):

...a violent conflict that has cost the lives of more than 1,740 U.S. troops and has no end in sight.

From the Los Angeles Times:

The White House may be billing President Bush's speech tonight at Ft. Bragg, N.C., as a major national address, but not all the broadcast networks have yet decided to treat it that way.

Not since Vietnam have mainstream media outlets made such a determined effort to create and slant news in order to shape public opinion (outside Presidential election years, of course).

More and more the actions of the West's mainstream media look like an actual conspiracy, rather than simply like-mindedness among journalists who self-identify as liberals.