Bad news = "trustworthy source"

Good news = "spin"

Now that the terms have been defined, discussion can proceed.
Jay Anderson | Homepage | 03.30.06 - 4:50 pm | #

No.

Chaldean Christians who are suffering on the ground in Iraq (and being careful to note that it's the same for non-Christians) = good source.

Professional spin doctors for the Bushies planting stories anonymously in the Iraqi press = bad source.
Mark Shea | Homepage | 03.30.06 - 5:04 pm | #

Mark--I agree that the auxiliary Bishop's views are credible and should not be lightly dismissed. But it is not "happy talk" or empty "spin" to point out that there is also good news and real progress when Iraqis "on the ground" report to pollsters that they are glad Saddam is gone, believe they are better off, and are optimistic about the future, when housing values in Iraq shoot through the roof, when other economic variables indicate that Iraqis are beginning to prosper, and when expatriate Iraqis vote for the future and return by the tens of thousands (rather than flee). We don't know (and won't for some time) whether Iraqis will be able to overcome the terrorists determined to inflict carnage on the innocent and build a stable, peaceful society. But, despite very real dangers, despite uncertainty, despite setbacks, most Iraqis -- not just Bush Administration spin meisters -- are optimistic.
Ed Graham | 03.30.06 - 5:26 pm | #

Here to help refocus on why many of us correctly decided the war in Iraq was just.

http://www.freerepublic.com/ ^htt...00603310745.asp
SteveF | 03.31.06 - 9:19 am | #

http://www.nationalreview.com/ ha...00603310745.asp

This might work better.
SteveF | 03.31.06 - 9:20 am | #

Also check out the fine but lengthier three-part analysis at Right Reason: Paleoconservatism and the war in Iraq, Part III
Chris-2-4 | 03.31.06 - 11:10 am | #