CNN

Vish,

You wrote, "You mean when we create civilized democracies and install leaders we feel give the U.S. an economic boost."

If you have been following the political debate in Washington, Vish, you know it's DEMOCRATS (Hillary, Carl Levin, etc) calling for the Democratically-elected leader, Al-Maliki, to be removed. Bush has publicly defended the Iraqi political process.

And Vish, if you're JUST now waking up to the fact countries have (for thousands of years) operated in their national best interest... welcome to the real world!

The terrorists don't care about any country, they are committed to their delusional view of ISLAM, so they don't give a flying melinda how many countries we attack.

The terrorist love how we respond, we spend trillions of dollars invading countries, which in turn increase their recruits, they don't have to do anything but sit back and laugh; they come into the country we invade and set up house, because the war has caused chaos.

History will not judge President Bush kindly. All the FACTS show that Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11.

Quick note on conflicts and wars: it's been a long time since I gave someone a beating, but when I was through I pulled my fist back instead of leaving it stuck to the guy I was beating. I didn't follow him home and beat him again, either. I know I'm not a sovereign nation and neither was he, but I had an exit strategy and successfully resolved the conflict (and that's why I'll shortly be announcing my candidacy for President on the Jay Leno Show).

Jon in Sacramento:

"Soon enough, Ray, our soldiers will be home.. and history will record their valient effort and how Afghanistan and Iraq formed into civilized democracies."

You mean when we create civilized democracies and install leaders we feel give the U.S. an economic boost. Won't the same thing that happened to the Bin Laden Royal Family and Saddam happen? 2 families we loved and gave money to in return for economic favors (oil) turn on us and then we invade to kill them because they don't have our best interests first?

By the way, for all you apologists out there who spew the talking point ' no attack in U.S. since 9/11' If Bush/Rove/Cheney had been competent in their job 9/11 should not have happened. The buck does stop there!

Jon, Sacramento ~ Ca

Nowhere did I say Afghanistan was not a just war even though the job isn't finished no matter what you say. If you notice, my point was about being in Iraq.

I was talking about the similarities between what happened to Russia when they occupied Afghanistan and what we're now going through in Iraq. In fact you would be surprised how many more similarities there are.

One thing that really irritates me about you guys is that you equate anti-Iraq war Americans with the enemy. What annoys me even more is that when you can't prove your point, you start screaming, "...well you must be against the troops". In other words, "you're either with us or you're against us".

EVERYONE supports our troops! You would have to be an idiot not to. They're the ones laying their life on the line! However, we also have the right, and the responsibility, to question our governement.

Typical Republicans, you need to quit listening to Rush.

Raymond ~ El Paso TX,

You wrote, "Maybe you should go back and educate yourselves by reading up on why Russia lost in Afghanistan and wound up having to get out of there with their tails between their legs. It's the same reasons we're bogged down in Iraq and what will eventually happen to us."

Ray – newsflash – US forces removed the Taliban controlled government of Afghanistan. September 2005 democratic elections were held and Hamid Karzai was the FIRST EVER elected head of state. We – the US – did what the Soviets could not.

The reason we CAN still have success in Iraq is because we did not remove Saddam so that WE (U.S.) could occupy and control the people of Iraq. Rather we are there to provide the Iraqis people a chance to create their own future – free of brutal dictators.

Sounds like you would rather our soldiers take their marching orders from Al Qaeda and Islamic Extremists (getting ALL infidels off their soil)?

Soon enough, Ray, our soldiers will be home.. and history will record their valient effort and how Afghanistan and Iraq formed into civilized democracies.

[...] three in 10 Americans think that the U.S. is winning the war on terrorism, according to a CNN poll. That corresponds to the number of people who think George Bush is a good president and that [...]

I love it when CONservatives spout.."there's been no attack since 9-11, because of Bush's leadership". By that "logic", where is Bill Clinton's credit for no attacks on our soil from the first attack until he left office almost 8 years later??? (just adding my chink to the CONservative armor..)

You know what? We shouldn't even bother with the "war on terror." Today is September Whatever. I'm not scared of bin Laden, I'm not scared of terrorists. Their threats don't scare me. I'm tired of the global war on terror and I'm furious that we spend so much money to make these guys famous.

http://wecouldbefamous.blogspot.com/

"I am convinced there is still hope to see terrorism eliminated as a major influence."

Just like the "War on Drugs" and the "War on Poverty", right?

What a scam.

The people who don't believe in STATS and mathematics, albeit conservatives (coincidence?), are the sames that attend crummy schools in the south where open mindedness and case study isn't taught. These are the people who, like Kent Hovind (a christian joke), proclaim they have doctorates from schools where the Bible is the only textbook allowed in class. Is it any wonder that all the ivy leagues are in predominatly liberal voting states?

1000 people samples is more than ample as long as it is a random sampling.
Do you think Ornithologists (scientists who study birds) took a sampling of every bird in the world before comming up with certain hypotheses'?

and the neocons who are preaching about how liberals want instant gratification are hypocrites. Your sacrificing the future (monetarily), to gratify what you feel right now! (fear)

One last thing, all the neocons peaching how we havent been attacked in 6 years, don't forget, 9/11 was planned as far back as 1982! so stop being brainwashed by Faux Nous and read some articles from acclaimed independent scientists once in awhile.

Jon, Sacramento ~ Ca and the rest of you pro-Iraq war cronies.

Maybe you should go back and educate yourselves by reading up on why Russia lost in Afghanistan and wound up having to get out of there with their tails between their legs. It's the same reasons we're bogged down in Iraq and what will eventually happen to us.

We helped Bin Laden prolong the war longer than the Russians could afford to fight it. Today in Iraq, Iran and Saudi Arabians with their deep pockets are prolonging the war for us ...and I'm pretty sure there's other nations involved.

The other reason is Islam's fundamental belief that outsiders simply DO NOT belong there, PERIOD!

If you're like the rest of the "kick ass" crowd that thinks we must fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here, maybe you haven't kept up with the news. We've just gotten lucky we haven't been hit! How long do you really think our luck will last? Even Chertoff admits that.

I guess you're not much better since all you people do is regurgitate Cheney sound bites and drown yourselves in the Bush kool-aid.

What poll results should we EXPECT when most Americans have an educated opinion about Brittany Spears’ MTV performance but couldn't name the current Secretary of Defense nor find Iraq on a map?

MOST people in America simply regurgitate whatever kool-aid they've been drinking (mainstream headlines, late-night comics, moveon.org ads, etc).

I figured someone would eventually trot out their stats 101 book and lecture us on random samples, blah blah blah.

Folks, there is so much bias inherent with ANY poll, that the politics of the pollster is irrelevant.

Bias, you say? Yes, Bias. Inherent to polling in and of itself. For instance, the use of telephone polling. I ALWAYS look at caller ID before picking up the phone. Some people don't have caller ID, namely old folks who believe eeeeeeverything the mainstream media tells them, because they trusted ol' Walter Kronkite, so the media must be truthful, right? Right there is just one example of major bias in the sample... which people will actually answer the phone.

Another is the use of land line polling. How many people today have cell phones? Who, as a group, for the most part, does not? You guessed it... older Americans yet again. To these folks, FDR was a god and Dan Rather is believable.

What about the day and time the poll was conducted? That would impact the result tremendously.

I'm sorry, stats fans... you just cannot draw ANY logical conclusion from a poll of 1,000 people (except one, see paragraph below). The evidence simply does not support it. I know, your stats books and your stats professor says differently.

The only logical "conclusion" that can HONESTLY be drawn from a poll of 1,000 people, is that 1,000 people answered a poll (it doesn't even suggest that those 1,000 people ENJOY answering polls). That's all the evidence suggests. Anything else is wishful conjecture and projection.

Wow, shocking statements! Is everyone dumb? Terrorists are just like a common thief, if there is a way to infiltrate someplace they will find a way to get in. This is a huge country surrounded mostly by water, there is no way to isolate us from everyone. All we can do is stay vigilant and aware of the things going on around us. Had the FBI looked into James Woods' airplane experience prior to 9-11, we might have had a little better security in the airports. Hindsight I guess. There is no way we can keep these radical, Allah worshipers from attacking, but with the help of our allies as they have been, we can stop them one cell at a time. Their intrepretation of the Qaran is different than the basic Islam believer. Keep the faith, one step at a time, we will get better, but the people entrusted to do their job everyday, have to to them and not slack when it comes to our security!

So, Thomas and Bubba, are you saying that all Arabs are terrorists? It certainly looks that way from your posts. Are all prisoners at Abu Ghraib terrorists? Have they been charged, tried, and convicted of terrorism? Did you ever consider that some of those prisoners might be innocent, or is due process something that should just be reserved for Christians? Whose buildings were leveled and whose economy was ruined? Iraq's? Saddam Hussein, the man Osama bin Laden called an apostate, is no longer alive and in control of Iraq. So, if you are referring to Iraq, which government are you referring to? Hussein's or the one instated since our occupation? Frankly, I don't see much logic in what you're saying, just a lot of generalities. Actually, you have a lot in common with those who hate us just because we're Americans. It's a shame that the bigots on both sides of this argument can't fight each other and leave everyone else on the planet alone.

The truth, if you can handle it, is that the media is mainstream. It's right down the middle between liberal and conservative. You want to talk about serving an agenda, Mike? The media's agenda is to make money. They make money by attracting the largest viewership. Most Americans are right in the middle of the political spectrum, so the media matches that to maximize profit. You only think the media has a liberal bias because you contrast it to Faux News, created by Rupert Murdoch to serve his conservative agenda.

P.S. If CNN had a liberal bias, why would it go toe-to-toe with Michael Moore?

Posted By Zack, Boston, MA : September 11, 2007 11:52 am

Your "Faux news" comment is all that needs to be read here.

You probably have never watched Fox or you would know that EVERY SINGLE show they have on has both sides on any given issue and yes, HORRIBLY, one of those sides may even be conservative.

Polls have been conducted on the media over the years and the range of 70 to 80 percent of all media consider themselves Democrats. Fair and balanced and "mainstream???

I watch Fox, CNN and even MSNBC and I challenge anyone to watch Keith Olberman's show and not come away with him spewing his views and his "expert guest" parrots exactly what he says.

Bill O'Reilly will spew his views and then have Kirsten Powers and Michelle Malkin on and they will have a two-sided dialogue.

Hannity and Colmes ALWAYS do he same as does Britt Humes roundtables.

People loved Crossfire (myself included) because it had differing viewpoints.

We don't even need to bring up the Editorial pages in this country do we?

I wish the media was as "mainstream" as you state, then we would have more informed voters and more reasoned discussions.

Eric, from THE Republic of Texas,

Can't wait until the former governor of your Republic goes home. Maybe the Republic of Texas and the Country of Mexico can join to form the Nation of Failure, Deceit, Lies and Corruption!

Pete, proud citizen of the United States of America!

Well, I for one am overjoyed that there hasn't been a terrorist attack on our soil for six years.

I think that is an amazing fact and am shocked that the media dosn't seem to ever want to talk about it.

If you would have taken a poll on Sept. 12, 2001 and said that we could have a President who would go after Al Queda and kill or capture countless of its members and sympathizers, and keep us from having any terrorist attacks on our soil for the next 6 years I think you would have nearly 100% support for our President.

But this is a what have you done for me lately kind of America these days, thanks in large part to our media who has been used our situation in Iraq to bolster ratings. Average American citizens sitting at home watching their 3 minutes of news a week can't help but think we are losing the war on terror with all they see on the news.

The rest of the people voting in this manner have agendas. They were unhappy when Bush won the election in 2000 and they were never going to give him a fair shake.

I look for a very spirited debate amongst the various presidential candidates in the upcoming months and hope that the American public will use their heads in deciding the future direction of this country.

Mike from Seattle: You really need to pick up a textbook on basic statistics before you start in on the "liberal media". Surveys are based on random sampling and polling the entire population (e.g. everyone) is not necessary to get a clear idea of what people think. These polls are pretty accurate (95% probability) if they're done on a truly random basis.

Before blasting the "liberal media" and yelling "Bias!", do your homework.

I think liberal bias in the media is a myth, and all those who claim it not to be are the same ones who use name-calling ("flip-flopper") to replace their lack of ability to form a coherent argument. The names they use in name-calling are adopted from the neocons who think for them, but they'll use the labels as if they themselves originated them.

Classic conservative non-thinkers: If they don't understand it or can't explain it, they label it.

Mike Scanlan obviously never had a course in statistics, so he doesn't understand the idea of a population sampling. He also doesn't understand that with over 1,000 respondents, CNN has a sampling more than 10 times the amount needed to obtain a fairly accurate representation of the entire population. Since he doesn't understand it, he falls back on what he was taught to do, which is to just toss out the "liberal" media label so that he doesn't have to think too hard.

ReadBtwthlins uses a similar tactic, deciding that since he doesn't like the results of mathematics, he'll label CNN's poll as biased. That way he can fell justified in his anger. It seems he also feels that using mathematics is "anti-American." He may be right on that one, since today's youth in general don't understand math or science too well. They better understand the 2 minute sound bytes that Jeff described.

If the media has such a "liberal bias" then why does it love war so much? The media loved the Panama invasion, the Gulf War, the war in Yugoslavia, and the war in Afghanistan.

The truth, if you can handle it, is that the media is mainstream. It's right down the middle between liberal and conservative. You want to talk about serving an agenda, Mike? The media's agenda is to make money. They make money by attracting the largest viewership. Most Americans are right in the middle of the political spectrum, so the media matches that to maximize profit. You only think the media has a liberal bias because you contrast it to Faux News, created by Rupert Murdoch to serve his conservative agenda.

P.S. If CNN had a liberal bias, why would it go toe-to-toe with Michael Moore?

"The August 6-8 CNN-Opinion Research Corporation poll questioned 1,029 Americans."

I'm sorry, but even a poll of THREE MILLION Americans still wouldn't be relevant, as the polling sample would be only one percent of the population.

So tell me why I should care about the opinion of a mere ONE THOUSAND people?

I know... I know... statistics folks would doubt me and give the pat answer of "a random representative sample of blah blah blah..." Yeah, I know, I took stats, too. Whatever.

The opinions of 1,000 people are only representative of the thousand people. And to try to extrapolate some bigger meaning that "the country is dissatisfied with the outcome of the GWOT" is simply dishonest.

Typical liberal media tactic: cook up some carefully worded poll (one guaranteed to get the result they're looking for), then write a news story about the results of the poll, as if it's written in gold. Then, other media outlets pick it up, shave off any specifics, and tout it as "Americans are demanding pull-out (read: 'retreat') now!"

Who needs enemies when...

Mike, I think you misunderstood the question. It was "do you feel safer from terrorism?" not "do you think 1017 is too small a group to be statistically significant?" And you mean 'its agenda,' not 'it's adgenda.' Try again: do you expect another 9-11 attack, or do you think the war did some good? Are they a bit afraid of us now, ya think? And Jeff, um, you may form your average opinion from sound bites but I don't think the rest of us do. Matter of fact, you sound kinda suspicious. I bet you don't take stuff at face value any more than I do. Actually this article's probably pretty accurate in saying that a survey of 1017 people found a majority unhappy with the war, and they are inviting your comments pro and con as a reality check. Seriously, both you guys should post again on topic – safer or not?

Mike

If you knew ANYTHING about statistics a sample size of around 1000 will five you a margin of error around 3% of the entire population, so it has nothing to do with liberal, conservative, or anything else. Don't be ignorant, or hateful, please.

Bill, Streamwood, IL,

First of all, almost half the country tried to vote the president out of office in 2004.

To go even further, we voters tried even earlier than 2004 to keep someone like him out of office. 500,000 more people voted for Gore than for Bush. That's a pretty significant number, though you're right in saying America gets what it deserves because the Electoral College should be either revamped or gotten rid of.

Why do you continue to think that poll results constitute "news" worthy of reporting??? Do you really think that those polled are authorities on the subject? Why do you think that I care how a bunch of anonymous unqualified people answered some questions that you made up and do not have the guts to show how you worded them? Why don't you get off your butt and do some real investigation of actual facts!

As if America is the only terrorist target and we can win against man's inherent evil.. HAHA Got to love those bias CNN poll questions. Can you get any more anti-American?? Please...

This whining is making me sick.

Voters had a chance to throw this foul-mouthed president and his cronies out in 2004 and install a real veteran with combat experience as commander-in-chief.

What did voters do in '04? Believed the lies Karl Rove and the Swift Boat Campiagn were putting out and gave George another four years to do it his way.

America, deal with it, you got what you deserved.

The "War on Terror" is being waged just as the "War on Drugs" has been handled. We spend billions of our tax dollars and see no results. The people that are in charge of these "wars" are incompetent at best and they find themselves handcuffed by our administation who is afraid to upset our allies such as Pakistan, Saudi Arabia etc.

Afghanistan is the worlds number one opium supplier and our inept policy feeds the trade and in return funds the Taliban.

And oh yeah where is Osama? Bush proclaimed to "smoke em out" 6 years ago. Instead of finishing this we went to invade Iraq and have created the largest terror training ground in the world.

All this paid for by our yet unearned tax dollars and the blood of our brothers and sister.

When is enough, enough?

I'm no fan of Bush, but our government's initial response of rather calmly dismantling Afghanistan and then going nuts on Iraq is very likely to prevent major acts of terrorism against us for quite a while. The 9-11 attacks were such a major statement that they put the cost of minor terror attacks out of reach of any half-sane terrorist (cost of exploding two buildings: your whole country). Any obvious act of terrorism would provoke retaliation, so they'd hardly dare to blow up a bus now thanks to Osama's grandstanding; plus it's obvious to most America-haters that they did us no real harm and made us very, very angry.
And they've managed to raise the price of gas, while we've leveled their buildings and ruined their economies. Our status as victims of Islam has created anguished splits in Mohamed's legacy instead of strengthening the faith.
Like I said, no fan of Bush, but Iraq should be thanking its lucky star that we're discussing how to turn them loose without getting bit instead of how best to skin and eat them. Next country might not get lucky that way.

What do you expect when the the media and democrats continually preach that we are losing the war (although we haven't been attacked in 6 years) in order to win the next election. The average American opinion is formed from the 2 minute news blurb that the predominantly liberal media puts out which is politically motivated.

1017 people surveyed is not the "majority" of Americans. Once again the liberal media puts it's own slant on news to serve it's adgenda.

In the days immediately following 09/11/2001, President Bush clearly stated that the War on Terror would be unlike all prior wars. The enemy does not come from any one nation, nor does he wear a uniform. Most Americans have forgotten President Bush's warning in those dark, solemn days 6 years ago this week.

Unfortunately, Americans tend to be very short sighted and impatient. Terrorists, on the other hand, are extremely patient and pay meticulous attention to detail.

Furthermore, the 'far left' hate Republicans and President Bush more than they love the United States. Liberals have undermined our Commander in Chief EVERY STEP OF THE WAY since the War on Terror began. These acts of treason are unforgivable.

When the enemy captures an American soldier, the poor soul is ruthlessly depcapitated, yet the incident is barely given any attention in the American media. However, some captured terrorists were embarrassed and slapped around a little in ABU GHRAIB, and you'd think our brave soldiers decapitated these intolerant murderous terrorists based on the chronic attention it was given by the American media. It is critical to remember: NO ONE WAS MURDERED AT ABU GHRAIB. Also, the perpetrators were punished. As a former independent voter, I will NEVER vote for a Democrat again (with a small exception for "Truman Democrats" such as Joe Lieberman and Zeb Miller).

It is no accident that America hasn't had another terrorist attack since 09/11/2001. This is due to President Bush's leadership. History will be kind to President Bush, and once again, liberals will be on the wrong side of history.

The polls are a joke, with a country that has millions of residents in it, how come the polls have only a sampling of 1000. And what political affiliation does those 1000 people represent. If you want to poll the American people than poll them, but use an equal sampling of registered voters and try to add a couple of zeros to the numbers. If any of these 1000 people spoke to anyone serviceman over in Iraq, they would find that there has been significance improvement over there, but the opinions of those polls come from the anti war activists of the media. If the media would print the truth and write about the improvements made than the minds of the public would definitely change. Its too bad the media influences the public so much, why dont they start speaking the truth?

I am convinced there is still hope to see terrorism eliminated as a major influence. We just have to be ready for a very long haul. There is always hope.

ThirstyJon
freedomthirst.com