You made it appear as though there was some sort of poll taken whose results were 4 out of 5 soldiers support Obama. Whether you qualify it with a "asked" is immaterial to the impression you were trying to give your readers. It is meaningless, it is not empirical evidence, it is not even anecdotal evidence of anything. How do you know that the reporter didn't ask 100 soldiers and reported only those willing to give their names, or only the names of those she agreed with, or only those she thought gave quotable statements that were coherent? You have no idea as to the context, the time, the number of soldiers questioned, if the reporter is reliable, what the motivations of the soldiers were in answering the reporter's questions and who authorized their speaking with a reporter. It's the equivalent of saying 9 out of 10 dentists recommend using Trident chewing gum - it is as meaningless as it is misleading.

Not only is your blog entry misleading, it is irresponsible and unethical to report stories to your readers of which you either do not understand or choose not to understand. You have consistently posted irresponsible rumours, smears and conjectures on your part with headlines that are outrageous and misleading to the readers.

Now I am willing to concede that this is Drudge's world and I just live in it, but I will not concede my right to point out the immorality of such blogging entries. You have a responsiblity to get it right, don't you understand that?