Remember back in April when Nancy Pelosi went to Syria? All of the usual suspects piled on, despite the fact that several republicans had visited Syria just days before and the 9/11 Commission explicitly recommended increasing diplomacy with Syria. At the time, Bush said:
Meetings with President [of Syria] Assad lead the Assad government to believe they're part of the mainstream of the international community, when, in fact, they're a state sponsor of terrorCheney called Pelosi’s trip “counterproductive” and that Assad’s “bad behavior’s being rewarded in a sense.” White House
I know that Assad probably really wants people to come and have a photo opportunity and have tea with him, and have discussions about where they're coming from, but we do think that's a really bad idea.Mittwit Romney, who doesn’t really like Muslims anyway, was told to say:
[Pelosi] going to a state which is without question a sponsor of terror, and having her picture taken with Assad and being seen in a headscarf and so forth is sending the wrong signal to the people of Syria and to the people of the Middle East…I just don't know what got into her head, to be completely honest with you. I think it was a huge, huge mistake.That head scarf thing really riled up the right wing, whose idea of religious tolerance is killing all muslims.
Luckily, the diabolical “liberal” media rose up in Pelosi’s defense. ThinkProgress took a small sample of their irrational far-left droolings:
CNN’s Suzanne Malveaux: “Why should the Americans, or even the international community, see this any more as a political stunt here, a publicity stunt, a big wet kiss to President Al-Assad?”
Washington Post Editorial Board: “Ms. Pelosi’s attempt to establish a shadow presidency is not only counterproductive, it is foolish.”
Thomas Sowell of the Baltimore Sun: “All that Ms. Pelosi’s trip can accomplish is to advertise American disunity to a terrorist-sponsoring nation in the Middle East while we are in a war there.”
NBC’s Matt Lauer: “But if the Democrats and Speaker Pelosi appear to be acting irresponsibly or incompetently — and let’s face it, a lot of people think she messed up on this one — what’s the impact for Democrats overall?”Boy, that “liberal” media sure bends over backwards to elevate democrats and knock down the Bush administration (unless, of course, they’re too busy bending over forwards and lowering their pants when it comes to the 2000 election, the 2004 election, the Iraq war, etc. etc.)
Fast forward to November 2007. Syria announced that they would be attending Bush’s Middle East lovefest in Annapolis. Hmm. I thought Syria was “a state sponsor of terror” and talking with them is “a bad idea” and “sends the wrong signal”. I guess the Bush administration and all the republicans and all the right wing bloggers were for it before they were against it. So there’s a softball for you, “liberal” media — have at it!
The Denver Post: “Victory for U.S.: Syria to attend summit.”
The AP’s Amy Teibel: “The Bush administration was able to declare a clean sweep when Syria, the last Arab world holdout, said Sunday it would attend this week’s high-stakes Mideast peace conference.”What’s going on? Surely ultra-liberal, America/Bush-hating NY Times has our back:
The Wall Street Journal: “The Bush administration is even courting a long-time pariah, Syria. … Talks with Syria could go some way in weakening Tehran’s strongest alliance in the region.”
The AP’s Sam Ghattas: “The Syrian participation is already seen in Washington as a success for the Bush administration.”
New York Times: “Syria announced Sunday that it would attend the Middle East peace meeting beginning here Monday night, joining Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Arab League participants in a turnabout that represented a victory for the Bush administration.”Crap! Strangely, the only one whose Thanksgiving turkey was apparently not stuffed with amnesia pills and smothered in inconsistency gravy was conservative Bret Stephens of the Wall Street Journal editorial board:
Remember Nancy Pelosi’s spring break in Damascus? Condoleezza Rice apparently does not. When the House Speaker paid Syrian strongman Bashar Assad a call back in April, President Bush denounced her for sending “mixed signals” that “lead the Assad government to believe they are part of the mainstream of the international community, when in fact they are a state sponsor of terror.” Today, said sponsor of terror will take its place at the table Ms. Rice has set for the Middle Eastern conference at the Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md.What the hell happened to you, “liberal” media?!? How could you have missed such a blatant example of hypocrisy?!?
Oh wait, I remember — THERE IS NO LIBERAL MEDIA.
The surge is working??? Working to do what????
Nice try dumbasses. For th4e most part every one of you repeats whatever media clown icon says for your dumbasses to repeat. can't think for yourselves i take it so you site idiots from the media that know nothiong about anything. Define working for me please, since the media clowns didn't and you idiots(Raz) act like you intuitively know what working means. Also a slumlord should not use the word work, since it is obviously against your religion.
Define working please. I didn't think you could. you were one of the clowns claiming that they really did find weapons of mass distruction in Iraq, but could not disclose it because of national security.
party politics for the pablum class of fifth graders that need a media clown to tell them what to repeat. Define how in an occupation this could be considered working. Your troops are going to get real tired waiting these guys out. They live there dumbass.