Gingrich, latest victim of Argus Leader bias

[Editor Note: Now that this post has been picked up by Google news and this post is getting large traffic from those outside South Dakota, I should explain some history. By looking through my Argus Leader Bias category you will learn that the Argus Leader is South Dakota’s largest newspaper and it is owned my MSM conglomerate Gannett. The paper has been a voice box for the Democrats, especially Tom Daschle. The reason I started this web site was because the paper stonewalled by effort to get the other side of the story on their opinion page. And the pathetic way they treated Newt Gingrich comes as little surprise for those of us who are informed and understand the truth. Here is a link to more.

Here is a link to Gingrich's response delivered on Fos News's Hannity and Colmes.

I have found more information via an Iraq War Veteran.]

The above was from this morning’s Argus Leader web site coverage of yesterday’s Newt Gingrich visit to the University of South Dakota. The report was also on page 1B of its print version. As Sibby Online readers know, the Argus Leader has a huge problem with bias, but this post will demonstrate just haw pathetic South Dakota’s largest paper really is.

I will introduce the Argus Leader complete misstatement of Newt Gingrich’s position on Iraq via a Todd Epp post:

After heavily promoting former Rep. Newt Gingrich's appearance at USD last night on Sibby's own trucker bomb blog, the Sibbenator must be ticked. The Newter had this to say about the Iraq War, as reported by this morning's Argus Leader:

Gingrich at USD: Pull out of Iraq
Apr. 11, 2006

VERMILLION - Newt Gingrich, the former Republican Speaker of the House, told students and faculty at the University of South Dakota Monday that the United States should pull out of Iraq and leave a small force there, just as it did post-war in Korea and Germany. "It was an enormous mistake for us to try to occupy that country after June of 2003," Gingrich said during a question-and-answer session at the school. "We have to pull back, and we have to recognize it." Gingrich was at USD for the inaugural Edmund Burke Lecture, named after a man who is known as the father of modern conservatism.

Sibby, The Voice of the S.D. Republican Party, must be very, very sad to learn that Newt Gingrich is just as unAmerican as me, Chad Schuldt, and Tom Daschle. Dr. Gingrich thinks we should get out of Iraq. Newt also probably attends via teleconference when those secular socialist Republicans like Bill Janklow, Jan Nicolay, and Dave Munson have their daily meetings with the state's liberal mainstream media and decide what part of the American Republic to destroy today.

Steve, I feel your pain.

Posted on Tuesday, April 11, 2006 at 08:53AM

Sorry Todd, but the Argus Leader severely erred. You lose. Here is what Newt Gingrich posted on his web site this afternoon:

Released 4/11/2006 at 2:05pm ET. Updated 2:40pm ET.

The Argus Union Leader article, Gingrich at USD: Pull out of Iraq (video) has caused confusion as to Newt's position on the Iraq War and how to win against the murders and terrorists trying to tear apart the country.

Update: (The title has now been changed to "Gingrich at USD: Scale back to small force in Iraq (video).")[Note the above photo shows the original title]

In an effort clarify, Newt.org has posted the clip from the speech when he talks about Iraq. It can be found here on our media page as an audio stream. It can be downloaded as an mp3 here.

The full video of the speech (over 1 hour and 20 minutes) can be streamed from the University of South Dakota website: mms:\\video.usd.edu\newtgingrich. Copy and paste the link into your browser.

Gingrich's position of Iraq has been consistent and clear:

1. The decision by Paul Bremer to go from a liberation model to an occupation model in June 2003 was a major mistake (Gingrich first said this publicly in December 2003).

2. The United States needs to train the Iraqis as rapidly as possible and "pull back" from the cities to bases and air fields and serve as reinforcers as opposed to occupiers (this position is outlined in today's WSJ as the official policy).

3. The United States is likely to need to keep some forces in Iraq for a very long time (Gingrich has been saying this as far back in 2003).

Gingrich did get the name of the paper wrong. A more accurate name would be the Argus Liar.

Joel Rosenthal said this:

Sidebar – There was some uninformed derision today on the War on Terrorism in blogoland because of a report that Speaker said the US should pull out or Iraq. I challenge that is what he said. The remark was reportedly made at an meeting that the former Speaker had with students at a late afternoon meeting (I did not attend). However at the conclusion of the presentation of the lecture he did speak to the US presence in Iraq. Based on his comments I do not believe the reporter or headline writer got it right but instead (giving them the benefit of the doubt) just either did not understand or did not hear it correctly. Gingrich was critical of Paul Bremer’s role and handling of the transition to Iraqis.

I did attend the afternoon session, and no way did Gingrich gave the impression that we should surrender Iraq and instead presented the three points that he now has at his web site. I also heard Gingrich on Sean Hannity’s talk radio show at 4PM today. After Hannity aired Gingrich’s actually position, Gingrich stated that the Argus Leader got it wrong. He then compared this to the Dan Rather fake document incident where the bloggers corrected the MSM mistake. And tonight I am reporting the terrible error made by the Argus Leader today. It will be interesting to see if the Argus Leader will run a correction and an apology.

Here is Newt’s ending Monday night that makes it clear he is not a far-left Anti-American defeatist:

Remember, most of the people who die everyday now are Iraqis. So this is not about the Iraqis cutting and running. This is about one group of brave Iraqis who want a democracy versus a much smaller group of vicious thugs who hope that they can kill and murder and terrorize to get back to a dictatorship. And that’s what’s at stake. And yes it’s a hard thing to do, but so was the civil war, so was Washington crossing the Delaware, so was winning the cold war. And we may lose this fight, but if we lose it there will be millions of Iraqis who lose it with us. And we have…

I’ll just close with this thought because I find it so sobering. We have 12 thousand hours of tapes of Saddam’s people raping and torturing in their prisons. 12 thousand hours. These were evil, vicious people and the people who are killing innocent people in Iraqi tonight— in Iraq tonight-are evil, vicious people. And I want us to reduce American casualties, I want us to be as smart as possible, but there are no circumstances where I want to see those kind of people win. Not on our watch.

Now for Todd Epp’s silly post. He obviously has trouble dealing with reality. He and his fellow far-left Democrats are not intelligent enough to have a constructive conversation on the issues. So they have a need to instead destroy those they disagree with. If Epp would put down the Kool-Aid and listen to the wisdom of Mr. Gingrich, he will learn that what makes America different from other countries is the declaration that our rights come from our Creator. Epp would then understand that the secular approach is not an American approach. I do not intend that to be a personal attack. It is a truthful articulation of the far-left secular position. If Epp is personally offended by that position, then he should stop associating with those who promote and hold that position. Instead his childish pouting is very sad.