By Jug Varner

You may not agree with my pet peeve, but I get a little tired of the politically motivated spin that most mainstream liberal print and TV “experts” subtly (and sometimes blatantly) put on their concept of news and history. There are daily instances of this political propagandizing, most of which is aimed against Presidents 41 and 43 — but here are two typical examples:

1. Frequent statements that George H. (41) Bush “hesitated to finish the Gulf War” and “shrunk from the fight” with Iraq. (“Quoted references”)

Well excuse my ignorance of history, but I could have sworn that was a United Nations war. Granted, the U.S. (as usual) provided the bulk of the troops, equipment, and cost of the Gulf War, but was under the UN’s mandate to end it. And I certainly do not agree that the overwhelming U.S. aerial pounding and total rout of the Iraqi army in record time could be considered by any stretch of the imagination as “shrinking from the fight.”

2. Editorials that the “American people” are impatient for immediate results and wavering in their support for “George W. (43) Bush’s War on Terrorism”:

First of all, it is America's war, not George W. Bush's! And, how many weeks have we been at war now, six or so? Where do these people get this kind of information? If they conducted their own “poll,” they obviously hand-picked the respondents and framed their questions to get the kind of result they desired, especially in face of a nationwide renewal of patriotism unrivaled since WWII. No, friends, it is not the American people — it is the liberal media and others of their ilk.

Three cheers for the Bush Administration’s keeping a lid on highly classified information that would aid and abet the enemy, and threaten the safety and security of our own forces. The media does not have the right or need to publish that sort of information until it is history. (They can at least wait until then to distort it.)

We might never have won WWII if the media of the 1940s were like they are today.