For each entry, include the following as the TITLE

1) the title of the news article (in quotation marks);

2) the author of the article if one is listed (Associated Press & Reuters count as authors);

3) where you read the story (eg: New York Times online), in italics;

4) The URL of the story if you read it online; the page number(s) if you read it in print;

5) the date the story was published (and if you read it on line, the time you consulted it).

At the end of the summary, write your name!

"McCain Sees 'No Plan B' for Iraq War"

By: Michael R. Gordon

New York Times online 

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/15/us/politics/15mccain.html

Published: April 15, 2007

Viewed: October 21, 2007 @9:00pm

This article highlights presidential candidate John McCain's support for the Bush administrations proposed troop surge strategy in dealing with the crisis in Iraq.  Senator McCain stated that he is in favor of the plan and that, given time, it can work to quell violence in the country.  According to the senator, if this plan does not work, he does not have an alternative solution at the moment, but if such a plan was needed he would come up with one.  However, McCain did say that the plan would only continue to work if the Iraqi government established better relations with Suni leaders.  The senator also wanted to ensure the American people that if faliure occurs he would be open to troop withdraws.  Even though McCain said he would consider this, he wants the American people to understand that plans proposed by the democratic party are flawed.  Stating that such plans like pulling troops back to Kuwait, and implementing a timetable for troop withdraws would backfire creating an even more unstable situation in the Middle East.

This article seems to be slightly biased against John McCain.  In the article the facts are being represented fairly but the author seems to suggest that things could reverse themselves in Iraq and if McCain were to get elected there would not be a readily available option from him.  I believe it portrays him as ill-prepared to handle the situation in Iraq.

-Andrew T. Buchanan

"Obama Links Effects of War Costs to Fragility in the Economy"

By: Jeff Zeleny

New York Times online

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/21/us/politics/21campaign.html

Published: March 21, 2008

Viewed: October 21, 2008 @10:00pm

In this article presidential hopeful Barack Obama, in a speech in West Virgina, explains that the weakening economy and the cost of the Iraqi War are tied together.  Obama uses examples like rising fuel costs and elevated taxes to inform Americans on how the war affects them.  Obama also commented on republican Senator McCain's policies on Iraq saying, "No matter what the costs, no matter what the consequences, John McCain seems determined to carry out a third Bush term."  Obama also said that the $12 billion spent every month in Iraq have put other national issues on hold.  Such issues include education, health care, and the countries infrastructure.  The McCain camp fired back, saying Obama would rather bring up the past then deal with the challenges facing America today and the challenges our nation will face in the future.

This article appears to represent both sides fairly.  However, there is still a slight bias towards Obama here.  I get the idea that the author wants to show a equal side but he makes the reader believe that the weakening economy is the sole fault of the republican party.  Also i believe he does not shoe the reader what the money is used for in Iraq, he leads people to think its not being put to good use.

-Andrew T. Buchanan

"Obama Fuels Pullout Debate With Remarks"

By: Michael Cooper

New York Times online

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/04/us/politics/04policy.html

Published: July 4, 2008

Viewed: October 23, 2008 @8:30pm

Senator Barack Obama, during a speech in North Dakota, said he may "enhance" his policies on Iraq after speaking with U.S. commanders there.  This statement brought speculation that Obama may not stick to his original policy, which is a purposed pullout of American forces in Iraq within 16 months.  Prior to his speech republicans have stated that Obama would probably change his stance on the pullout plan due to decreasing violence in Iraq.  They suggest that withdrawing the troops could destroy any gains American forces have made.  So within hours Obama, attempting to clarify his earlier comments, held a second speech stating that he would not stray from his intention of ending the war.  However, Senator John McCain's support for the war has also shifted, suggesting he too may change his stance on Iraq. 

This story also contains bias towards McCain.  I assumed that when I read this article it would be dealing with Obama's comments on the situation in Iraq and it did for the most part.  But since it was an article focusing on Obama I believe by bringing McCain up they downplay the possible importance of Obama's remarks.  They show the reader that yes Obama did say this but McCain is doing it too.

-Andrew T. Buchanan

"McCain Troop Withdrawal Remarks Draw Fire"

By: David Jackson

USA Today online

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-06-11-mccain_n.htm

Published: June 12, 2008

Viewed: October 23, 2008 @9:00pm

Senator John McCain's comments on the withdrawal of troops from Iraq sparked another debate over the war.  When questioned as to if he had an estimate on when troop reductions would start, McCain stated, "No, but thats not too important.  What's important is the casualties in Iraq."  Senator John Kerry, a democrat, responded by calling McCain "unbelievably out of touch" with the situation in Iraq.  The republican nominee's camp answered back stating that McCain's comments mean that he is more concerned with stopping U.S. deaths in Iraq, then giving approximate withdraw dates for American forces.

This is a clear case of bias against John McCain.  This article is trying to suggest that McCain is unconcerned with bringing troops home.  Its also interesting to point out that when the article is about McCain the media does not tie in Obama's comments, yet in the previous article McCain was brought up when the story dealt with Obama.

-Andrew T. Buchanan

"McCain's Focus on Iraq War Carries Risk"

By: Michael Abramowitz

Washington Post online

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/03/AR2008090303794.html

Published: September 4, 2008

Viewed: October 26, 2008 @8:26pm

John McCain is deciding to use the Iraq War and his experience in foreign policy the main focus in his campaign.  This decision, however, could prove dangerous for the McCain campaign since public opinion on the war was the turning point in the 2006 GOP defeat during the congressional elections.  The problem facing McCain may lie in trying to convince the American people that the war in Iraq was the right thing to do from the start instead of focusing on the current successes in Iraq during recent months.  John McCain may need to step carefully to avoid his stance on Iraq being compared to the the last 8 years of unpopular foreign policy.

This article also shows bias to John McCain.  I think its interesting that the article suggests that the war in Iraq was once again the sole fault of the republican party.  It also seems to suggest that McCain should be careful because his term may have the same outlook as Bush's.  By saying this thay give the reader the impression that John McCain is going to follow in the foot steps of George Bush.

-Andrew T. Buchanan

"War Still Top Issue For These Voters"

By: Moni Basul

Google News

http://www.ajc.com/services/content/news/stories/2008/10/26/preswar.html

Published: October 26, 2008

Viewed: October 26, 2008 @9:47pm

Military members and their families view national security as the most important issue facing America today, and the number one issue in the upcoming presidential election as well, despite a shift of focus by the country on the economy.  One family from Georgia, who lost their son in Afganistan, explain that loosing your job, car, or home can not compare with what they have been through.  Like many military families, they believe the war has been put on the back-burner.  The Army Times suggest that 3 out of 4 service members support John McCain, but 79% of African American troops favor Barack Obama.  Many soldiers are supporting McCain because they believe withdrawing from Iraq would dishonor the American lives lost in the war.  Some troops also believe that despite who wins the election, life for the military will remain the same.

This article is bias because it appears to suggest that Obama is not focused on Iraq and McCain is better in dealing with the situation there.  It also suggests that the only soldiers that will vote for Obama are black and all others are voting for McCain.  The author seems to possibly be suggesting that Obama is not concerned with American loss of life as well.

-Andrew T. Buchanan

Based on the articles I have been reading it appears evident that most media coverage appears to be biased against John McCain.  Even though they often point out that he has more foreign policy experience and may be better suited for handling the situation in Iraq the media seems to prefer Barack Obama.  They do attempt to show equal sides but I believe its clear that the media believes that Obama did not support the war to begin with so he is more likely to bring our troops home.  Also the media loves to point out McCain's unpopular support for staying in Iraq and that it makes him out of touch with the American people.  Most of my articles come from national newspapers, which appear to show a trend in their support for Obama, they do not just come out and say it, it appears very slightly.  

-Andrew T. Buchanan