Michael Cash wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 23:00:05 GMT, "necoandjeff" <spam@schrepfer.com>
> brought down from the Mount tablets inscribed:
> 
> 
>>"Michael Cash" <mikecash@buggerallspammers.com> wrote in message
>>news:3ahol0hrkcrstu5s5lcinaa2s5q5fns4mt@4ax.com...
>>
>>>On 30 Sep 2004 09:32:28 -0700, "John W." <worthj1970@yahoo.com>
>>>brought down from the Mount tablets inscribed:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Michael Cash wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>The AP radio news, in characteristic unbiased fashion, informed me
>>>>>this evening that in the debates Kerry will call Bush to account for
>>>>>"the mess in Iraq".
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Just out of curiosity, do you think it's not a mess and think we were
>>>>absolutely right for going there and taking our eyes completely off the
>>>>ball?
>>>
>>>I have said before that I think it was perfectly justified, though
>>>that doesn't mean it was a good idea.
>>>
>>>My point was not so much as with whether it is or is not a mess. My
>>>point was that using a phrase like "the mess in Iraq" is
>>>editorializing, not reporting. At least not in the context in which it
>>>was used in that particular news broadcast. "The situation in Iraq"
>>>would have been more appropriate.
>>
>>Pretty soon you'll be demanding that the newspapers say "Nanking incident"
>>instead of "Nanking massacre..."

Or call Islamofascists who shoot children in the back "insurgents" or 
militants. Actually, the "news" services such as Reuters already do that.

- Kevin