is article is biased/misleading isnt it?

Question

http://www.fairpress.org/mbow02/outragearchive0204.htm

please explain the parts that is biased.misleading.. THANKS!

Answer 1

(1) The article started out by saying "Sam Donaldson made no secret of his disdain for military spending." but Sam Donaldson never expressed his own opinion. He indicated what "sone cynics believe" and what "the critics will say" without endorsing what they said or expressing his own opinion.

(2) The portion of the "transcript" in the article shows Donaldson cutting Rumsfeld off mid-sentence after saying ""Oh, that's -" While the United States Department of Defense transcript shows the same portion of the interview like this:

QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, I understand and take your point. Some cynics, of course, believe when you were saying that, you were tying it to the increase in the defense budget, that you and the president -
RUMSFELD: Oh, nonsense! No.
QUESTION: I understand. These people in Washington, they say the darndest things!
RUMSFELD: (Laughs) There's the understatement!

with Rumsfeld cutting off Donaldson mid-sentence.

(3) The "transcript" omits Donaldson's comments "Mr. Secretary, I understand and take your point." at the start of the transcript and "And we appreciate it." in response to Rumsfeld last comments.

(4) The article blamed President Clinton for his "eight years in office eviscerating and emasculating the armed forces" while, if I remember correctly, Presidents Reagan and Bush 41 reduced the military far more in the eight years before Clinton took office than Clinton did in his eight years in office. It is also worth remembering that the Republican Congess during most of Clinton's presidency had as much control of the reduction in military spending as Clinton did.