CNN and MSNBC are among the latest media outlets to suggest that the term "slow bleed" was the Democrats' description of Rep. John Murtha's strategy in dealing with the administration on Iraq. In fact, the term has been embraced by Republicans to attack Democrats after it appeared in a Politico article.
In an article on President Bush's recent speech, The New York Times suggested that Democrats have blamed the Bush administration's decision to go to war in Iraq for the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan. But, contrary to the Times' suggestion, it is not just Democrats who have made the link between Iraq and Afghanistan. The bipartisan Iraq Study Group noted in 2006 that the mission in Afghanistan has "been complicated by the overriding focus of U.S. attention and resources on Iraq."
Numerous media outlets that previously highlighted the controversy surrounding the hiring of two bloggers by the presidential campaign of John Edwards failed to note the criticism by the National Jewish Democratic Council of Mitt Romney's choice of venue for his presidential announcement.
In reporting on the Bush administration's allegations about Iran's role in Iraq, media outlets have covered the matter in a muddled, incomplete manner, omitting any skeptical or critical analysis of these allegations, which suggests, in the words of washingtonpost.com's Dan Froomkin, that "the lessons we should have learned from Iraq may not have been learned at all."
In reporting that William Donohue had criticized John Edwards for retaining two campaign bloggers despite their purportedly "anti-Catholic" writings, The New York Times failed to mention Donohue's own history of bigoted comments. A Washington Post article on the issue reported that Media Matters for America "cast [Donohue's] comments as purely partisan," when, in fact, Media Matters faulted the media for ignoring Donohue's extensive record of bigoted statements and of tolerating and excusing bigotry from conservatives.