NOYB wrote:

3/4 of CBS's reporting dealt with "negatives" in Iraq...which means less
than 1/4 dealt with the "positives". Is it because bad news sells better
than good news? Or is it because of a stark anti-Bush and anti-war bias in
the media?

It's because less than 1/4 of Bush's contribution to events in Iraq is
positive.

How come you right-wingers have to believe that accurate reporting of
failed policy and strategy is some kind of "bias" or a conspiracy to
make Bush look worse than he is, as if such a thing is possible.

Rick