The New York Times And A "Jim Webb" Of Lies

Today on Meet the Depressed with Tim Russert Senator Jim Webb accused Senator Lindsey Graham of "putting political words in the Soldier's mouths." Actually, it seems Senator Webb did much worse than that today. He put words in their mouths and the mouths of their families and it also appears he got it wrong both times.

Webb was citing this below from a current NY Times story. (full NYT version here) A few interesting things happen when you try to confirm this specific item from a poll taken in May, which we only seem to be hearing about now for some odd reason.

Among military members and their immediate families who responded to a national New York Times/CBS News poll in May, two-thirds said things were going badly, compared with just over half, about 53 percent, a year ago.

There is indeed a May NY Times CBS poll, but if you look at it, you see why it wasn't making bigger news in May. It didn't give the Democrats what they wanted back then. So here we are three months later, they've striped out results they didn't like and are attempting to inject the ones they did like into the coming debate on war funding.

While the troops remain in Iraq, the overwhelming majority of Americans support continuing to finance the war, though most want to do so with conditions.

CBS had coverage of the poll, again, no mention of military families and, keep in mind, this was long before the so-called Surge actually took full effect just two weeks ago. Other than party affiliation the only sub-group mentioned was African-American. CBS cautioned the MOE for that sub group shot up to an unreliable + or - 7 points. Any guesses as to what the MOE might be for this suddenly discovered, though previously unidentified "military family" sub group alleged to have taken part in this dated poll?

Also as regards Senator Webb, while referencing an "only 35% support" for the war number, it at least looks as though he might actually have become confused between the New York Times story and an old and already debunked Military Times survey - debunked as even the MT's is forced to admit they poll veterans and families not necessarily affiliated with active duty military today. You'd think Webb, an old soldier, would know that. He accused Senator Lindsey Graham of "putting political words in the Soldier's mouths." Actually, it seems Senator Webb did worse. He put words in their mouths and the mouths of their families and, as stated, it appears he got it wrong both times. He should apologize to our troops ... and stay off TV until he gets his facts straight ... and a better wig, if he doesn't mind my saying so.

This poll was conducted among a random sample of 1,125 adults nationwide, interviewed by telephone May 18-23, 2007. The error due to sampling for results based on the entire sample could be plus or minus three percentage points. The error for subgroups is higher. An oversample of African Americans was also conducted for this poll, for a total of 192 interviews among this group. The results were then weighted in proportion to the racial composition of the adult population in the U.S. Census. The margin of error for African Americans is plus or minus 7 percentage points.

And strangely, back in May, not one Left wing blog opted to tout the NY Times lede:

"Americans view war in Iraq more negatively now than at any time since invasion,"

Either liberals don't even read the NY Times anymore, or they didn't want people to realize the strong support for continuing to fund the war which, ultimately, led to Bush winning that previous debate. All they are doing now is striping out what they didn't like from an old poll and bringing back the rest. If the numbers against the war still hold, we should assume the support for fully funding the troops does as well and Congress should immediately set about giving President Bush the funds he needs to continue the fine effort of our brave and loyal soldiers in the field.

Comments

[Exalted]

not one number in that poll indicates support for the war, what are you trying to prove?

[Frank Warner]

So exactly what percent of military families said, in May, that the invasion of Iraq wasn't worth it?

The New York Times doesn't give the exact number. Was that because, with the margin of error, a majority could believe the invasion was worth a free Iraq?

The Times also doesn't break out how "military families" responded to the other Iraq questions. I'd like to see it all. Where are the full results?

Keep in mind, these responses came one month after Harry Reid declared, "This war is lost," and during the bitter May debate over funding our troops in Iraq. The funding bill had not passed yet.

[bloodrage bob]

saaaaay, speaking of 1929 and the depression & all, let's us take another look at the idiot noyyyinger's 6:03 PM screed.

the one in which she admits that the profoundly incompetent fool FDR couldn't manage to do jack squat about the depression in 10 years. using her numbers: FDR takes office in '33, jobless rate is 25%. (for you idiot liberals out there, a jobless rate higher than 8% or so is...real bad. picture the despair & hopelessness of jimmuh carter's 1970's nightmare; or france.) and - once again using her [fudged] numbers - we see that FDR couldn't get that rate down to anything CLOSE TO republican/hooverian/1920's numbers until 1942.

even then, he needed a world war to make that happen.

now compare that to bush, who's managed pretty good numbers even in the midst of 9-11 and assholish democrats stridently agitating for surrender.

once again: FDR second-worst prez of 20th century. we can safely assume that had bush been prez in 1933, he'd have had the depression ended in no time flat.....as opposed to you-know-who, who never COULD figure out that trick. whattya gonna do? *democrats are stupid*.

[Fred Beloit]

No doubt about it. Wingky makes a most compelling case........that FDR was a terrible President: "Unemployment fell by two-thirds in Roosevelt's first term (from 25% to 9%, 1933 to 1937), but then remained stubbornly high until 1942. [When WWII got going and defense jobs started to open in earnest.--by FB]

In 1937, the American economy took an unexpected nosedive, lasting through most of 1938. Production declined sharply, as did profits and employment. Unemployment jumped from 14.3% in 1937 to 19.0% in 1938.

The U.S. had not returned to 1929's GNP for over a decade and still had an unemployment rate of about 15% in 1940—down from 25% in 1932." Unemployment at 25% 9%, 14.3% and 19%, her figures." June 2007 = 4.5%