http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/16442601.htm
Upon even reading this article found in the pages of Philidelphia's Daily news newspaper, it is apparent to a reader that the editors of the news paper have a clear opinion on President Bush and his Policies. In the first sentence, The author is suggesting that our president to our president is a child by deeming his new Iraq policy as a "do-over." One does not even have to read the rest of the article to know that it will contain numerous rants and bashings against Bush and his policy. He goes on to give reasons why Bush's plan wont work and is even so brash to say "America must realize that this is our last chance to keep President Bush from making Iraq into our new Vietnam." Whether or not this was posted in the paper as an editorial or an actual article, one thing is certain: These guys don't like Bush, and they want to convince you not to like Bush.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
The point Dexter establish is very good. The author of this article, also came up with a great point comparing this situtation with the same or almost similar situtation; the author compared the Iraq situtation with Vietnam situtation. The author had said "If that sounds familiar, it's how another Texan acted in another war. President Lyndon B. Johnson refused to be the president who "walked away from the table." Johnson became so obsessed that he scrapped his entire "Great Society" in his ultimate failed gamble in Vietnam. It took the nation too long to realize that LBJ was on the wrong path." This establishes the fact that the President Bush's Iraq Policy will not work since the same situtation happened before and ended up in a dreadful failure. This purposes a great situation to the people to go agaisnt what President Bush's Iraq Policy, becuase this will fail dramatically.
Great title and great point dexter.
You are right about the people who said this stuff. they are against Bush.
I agree with you one hundred percent on this article Dexter i didnt have to look far to see that the author was against Bush.He clearly shows it and has good points to back it up.
Post a Comment