Americans doubt ‘General Betraeus’ over troop surge

The Times ^ | 8/19/2007 | Sarah Baxter

[pacelvi]

I commented on this article too.. so far nothing is showing up yet...

In typical UK Big Brother fashion, they must be moderating the comments

[mware]

including one recently retired general.

[fortcollins]

Lawrence Korb is an **shole

[DakotaRed]

Some more of Ms. baxter's handiwork recently,

Has America lost the will to win?

Britain faces Iraq rout says US

[Eagles6]

Just remember that this could have been written by a democrat here, it fits. The UK has it’s share of lefty America haters, so do we. Remember that the UK is still there and in Afghanistan despite the rumors of pulling out over the last 2 years.

[I got the rope]

Uhhhh...I think they meant:

Media doubt ‘General Betraeus’ over troop surge

[crazyhorse691]

Sarah Baxter needs to check the source she used for her editorial. Here’s a good one; http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1882509/posts

more info;
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1882463/posts

[LibFreeOrDie]

Not apologizing for the headline, but the author’s background is interesting. Sarah Baxter (although a lib), voted for Bush in 2004, because she doesn’t want the Islamofascists to win. And she hates John Kerry... She was near the WTC on 9/11:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article495470.ece

[shield]

The hateful UK...

[G8 Diplomat]

So he's facing a backlash from Congress, which has a 14% approval rating. So what. That probably means he's doing a good job. If anyone needs to be criticized it is the real General Betrayus, Senator Reid.

And about the line "Only 43% said they trusted the US commander to give an objective picture"; typical twisting of words to make something sound worse than it is. What do you mean only 43%? That's a fairly solid percentage! For one thing, the polls didn't interview EVERY American so that number is not completely accurate (as are all polls), and two, they only interview registered voters (or people of that age), and they do not represent the whole population; they don't poll all the kids out there. And chances are they only interview those who cared to vote in the last election, or else why would they want the opinion of someone who doesn't even know the issue well enough to decide who to vote for? About 52% of the registered voters voted in 2004. 43% of 52% of the population is an astounding amount of support! If that many are in favor of the Iraq policy just out of those polled, imagine how many more Americans there are out there who likely share the same opinion. The media is trying to make public support for the war seem low, but in reality I think it is much higher than the MSM plays it out to be. I see dozens of yellow Support Our Troops ribbons on cars even here in Maryland, a blue state, and when I travelled this summer across the country I saw tons more, including billboards and posters calling for troop support. More people are behind this than the MSM wants you to see.

[ozzymandus]

Wow, that’s some nasty sh*t.

[jimfree]

I have to quote a YR leader in Orange County CA in the early 70s. “The masses are asses.” It’s hard to argue otherwise when you read stories such as this.

[Bernard]

There's something else missing; a sense that the General just might do the right thing, because he is an honest man and is interested in America's best interest.

Gee, I wonder if that is a reflection of the General, or the author.

[ishabibble]

Hey, “Great” Britain:

Three simple words: PINK GOODIE BAGS!!!

[FlingWingFlyer]

Sarah Baxter needs to stick with writing for the home and garden section. She’s in over her head trying to write for grownups.

[Billthedrill]

You beat me to that. It is clear that the antiwar zealots are absolutely petrified at the report that Petraeus hasn't even written yet. The pathetic screed she cowrote HERE is nothing less than a desperate effort to discredit a fellow that certain Democrats simply refused to hear.

That's too bad. He will be heard. And if his report doesn't agree with the defeatist fantasy world the MSM has clung to so desperately they'll always have this tack to fall back upon.

Yes, it is contemptible. It is the very antithesis of open, free, questioning journalism. This is the dreariest and most predictable sludge pile of propaganda I've slogged through in a long time.

[Finalapproach29er]

It’s an old tactic of the left; accuse your opponent of that which you are guilty of.

Lefties are acting treasonous so they accuse a brave General of betrayal.

Socialists the world over do this. The general should take it as a badge of honor.

[Darkwolf377]

The liberals see the writing on the wall and are engaging in pre-spin. Read this article as if you don't believe the author has an axe to grind and you will be programmed to think that anything positive he says is just BS; if he says otherwise, the writer will post something about his "refreshing candor".

The libs are getting WAY out in front after being caught off-guard when the Gen. was given unanimous approval by the senate. Now, after too many articles about what a straight-shooter he is, and of the NYT poll that they re-did because they couldn't believe there was THAT much support for the war, they are starting the drumbeat. On morning commutes we'll hear the scoffers who delight in being contrary for the sake of it talking about "They call him 'General BETRAY-US!'" as if they are insiders.

Things aren't supposed to be this way. Bush is supposed to continue to flounder until Nillary's inauguration in January '09, and they're panicking.