CTV's Tom Clark Full of Opinionated Spin, Not Facts

Based on this CTV story, about US President George W. Bush's plans for the rebuilding of New Orleans following the massive devastation wrought by Hurricane Katrina, CTV's Washington bureau chief Tom Clark has just sought to, rather than dutifully inform Canadians of the President's plans, launch into a clearly biased spin against Mr. Bush.

In part, Mr. Bush said:

"As we rebuild homes and businesses, we will renew our promise as a land of equality and decency and one day Americans will look back at the response to Hurricane Katrina and say that our country grew not only in prosperity but in character and justice."

A beautiful, progressive plan, as any reasonable person could easily agree.

But Tom Clark doesn't want any part of this optimism and progressiveness. He says, instead:

"Anybody who knows that part of the United States knows its rather sorry history ... What George Bush wanted to do politically was shore up his support in the black community."

Oh, yeah? And how does Mr. Clark figure he's an expert on US history and on what Mr. Bush wants to do? Pure opinion; no factual information...

And, naturally, Mr. Clark, as any dutifully anti-conservative liberal MSM elitist obviously must, cites "some polls"...

"Some polls suggest 56 per cent of the American population feels less secure about what their government can do to protect them than they did before Katrina,"

Once again, an arrogant leftist MSM elite hides behind the tinfoil-like armor of "the polls", not specified, mind us... of which Mr. Clark seems to suggest, all find that exactly 56 percent of Americans feel "less secure"... Apparently Mr. Clark cares not a whit of having some kind of healthy perspective as to how unreliable polling can actually be regardless of its established scientific-like methodology and pollster peer esteem. Of course, after all, if one goes about asking people, following a disaster of this magnitude, if they're feeling less secure, one can naturally expect such an answer. And even if the "polls" are miraclously accurate, so what? How does this logically help Mr. Clark's attempt at making Mr. Bush look as if he really doesn't care at all and rather just wants to look politically good? Why, Mr. Bush can't even run in the next US presidential election, therefore, it's more likely he wants to do the right thing for the right reasons!

And the MSM tries to dismiss us caring, concerned citizens of the blognet who believe in factual information dissemination, as irrelevant, amateur, pajama-clad losers trying to play like we're a real information medium...

Looks like they're no better than we are, doesn't it now?