What the people think

[tristano's ghost]

Tip o' the hat to Atrios:

What the People Think

Obviously what orthodontists and the other members of the dirty masses think is much less important than, say, the thoughts of Washington insiders who have proven their inability to find their own asses again and again over the past few years. So, I imagine such views will be left out of the Sunday outlook. Still, here it is:

Fifty-seven percent (57%) of American voters now favor either an immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq (37%) or a firm deadline for their withdrawal (20%). The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that just 35% of voters are opposed to both of these options for ending the war.

...

Underlying these attitudes is pessimism about the War itself. Just 29% of American voters believe the troop surge launched earlier this year has made things better in Iraq. Twice as many, 61%, believe the surge has either made things worse (43%) or had no impact (18%). A separate survey found that just 33% believe history will judge the U.S. mission in Iraq a success. Fifty percent (50%) believe it will be viewed as a failure.

BTW, I really think it's important for all good people to cancel their Washington Post subscriptions. It has become yet another propaganda arm for the Bill Kristol wing of the Republican party, as if that territory wasn't already amply covered.

-Atrios 12:18

>>the other members of the dirty masses think is much less important than, say, the thoughts of Washington insiders who have proven their inability to find their own asses again and again over the past few years. <<

Heh--yes, indeedy. True that, true.

But the preznit told me that the people voted FOR his surge last November!

[Sandi22]

Have any of you ever read Kristols "neo conservative" magazine the Weekly Standard? I expected something totally different from what I was seeing. The articles were no more than so much propaganda from what I could see. Even it's twisted science about global warming has been debunked.

Many of the Weekly Standard's articles, seemed childlike in how viewpoints were articulated. Who is it they are trying to convince that the Neo Con way of being, is the best way? That magazine can't be sucessful in doing this, or is it? Dull and poorly written from what little I've seen of it. Who would buy into their hair brained schemes other than Cheney and Bush? OK, I admit, there's more out there than these two, but we get the idea as to type and motive.

We hear that now Time magazine is dumbing down for the United States buyers and subscribers, while publishing a "smarter Time" for news junkies in other countries. Just look who's on board at Time now - none other than Bill Kristol himself - with him telling us how things are, which we already know to question, to be suspect of everything, and all, coming from him. We're already getting dumbed down news, or so the reports go. So, just where do we go from here? Really! They're telling us Europe is getting the "smart" news, as they don't think we're bright enough or interested enough to grasp the feed they're sending to Europe and other parts of the world? Just how dumbed down do we have to be to appreciate Bill and his convoluted message? Sorry, we're not there yet. This new move towards the Neo Con world isn't appreciated by those who want fairness in the press, a more middle of the road approach, not the trip into where we don't want them to go. I just can't get over them bringing Bill Kristol on board. I really can't.

[tristano's ghost]

Well, they had to balance out that notorious "liberal" Joe Klein, ya know. (Cough, cough...)

D.C. pundits have become very clubby & conservative, center-right at best (Broder is a prime example, though he's always been that way, to some degree... somebody dug up a really asinine column he wrote in '69 about Nixon & Vietnam that pretty much shows he never had a half-step to lose.) And they're waaaay out of touch with the common folk, esp. on Iraq.