BS Summary: This article contains 11 faulty reasoning types, including Pessimism Bias, Biased Writer Voice, and Status Quo Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 8.7% saturation with 40 hits. Analysis detected 243 faulty-reasoning hits from 461 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 47.2% and a BS Rank of 44% (11,900 of 21,145 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 56.30% of the article peer group.

WASHINGTON (AP)  Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth faced fiery questions and protests Tuesday over the U.S. war with Iran, which he estimated has cost $37.5 billion so far, as Republicans prepare a $95 billion package to fund the military, along with other White House priorities. 
Hegseth provided the new estimate, up from earlier assessments, during a combative Senate Appropriations Committee hearing, which came days after the Pentagon announced that three more American service members have died in the conflict, bringing the death toll to 17, and that more than 100 have been injured since early July. 
Several times protesters interrupted his opening remarks. 
Hegseth said the supplemental war funding is an “urgent, necessary” injection of money, and with President Donald Trump’s proposed $1.5 trillion defense budget a generational investment in the military. 
“Without these funds, we face critical shortfalls,” Hegseth testified. 
But Sen. 
Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the panel, warned of “another forever war.” 
“This war is now spiraling out of control again,” Murray said. 
Trump has said repeatedly that “a deal is near, and the war will be over soon,” she said. 
“But now, he’s asking for $70 billion more  and for us to just trust him it’ll all work out fine.” 
Gen. 
Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins were also testifying before the panel. 
The proposed budget package includes $60 billion and $12 billion for other national security needs, along with $10 billion for farm aid and $10 billion for voting law changes. 
Before the hearing, the White House issued a statement urging support of the budget resolution, “without modification  immediately.” 
War funds make up the bulk of the GOP budget plan 
War funding makes up the bulk of the GOP’s new budget proposal, one last priority package the Republicans hope to launch before lawmakers recess to campaign for the midterm elections. 
The package aims to help farmers struggling under Trump’s tariffs and to pay for voter law changes, none of it paid for with offsets. 
It’s the same lengthy process Republicans used to approve Trump’s big tax cuts bill last summer, as well as Homeland Security money earlier this year. 
The proposal is headed toward a House vote this week, which would start the process by instructing various committees to begin drafting the legislation. 
Johnson can afford only a few defectors from his slim majority, and some conservatives want the funding offset with spending reductions elsewhere. 
GOP senators have so far panned the House budget plan, but are waiting to see if Johnson can kickstart the process. 
___ 
Associated Press writers Matt Brown and Ben Finley contributed to this report. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 1.1%AP News: 2.0%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.5%AP News: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 4.8%Lisa Mascaro: 2.2%AP News: 2.7%Availability Heuristic4.8%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.4%AP News: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 3.9%Lisa Mascaro: 0.2%AP News: 0.4%Hindsight Bias3.9%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 1.8%AP News: 1.6%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 8.7%Lisa Mascaro: 13.7%AP News: 8.0%Framing Effect8.7%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.7%AP News: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 5.4%Lisa Mascaro: 0.4%AP News: 0.5%Status Quo Bias5.4%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.3%AP News: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 1.3%AP News: 2.2%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 7.4%Lisa Mascaro: 2.4%AP News: 2.1%Pessimism Bias7.4%This article: 2.4%Lisa Mascaro: 11.7%AP News: 9.6%Negativity Bias2.4%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 1.8%AP News: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.8%AP News: 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.2%AP News: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 3.0%AP News: 1.1%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.8%AP News: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.6%AP News: 1.4%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.0%AP News: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.8%AP News: 1.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.3%AP News: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 1.4%AP News: 0.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.5%AP News: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 1.6%AP News: 3.7%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 4.6%Lisa Mascaro: 2.1%AP News: 1.2%False Dilemma4.6%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.9%AP News: 0.8%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 4.8%AP News: 2.5%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.3%AP News: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.4%AP News: 0.3%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 2.0%Lisa Mascaro: 7.3%AP News: 4.7%Appeal to Emotion2.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.9%AP News: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 1.6%AP News: 2.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.1%AP News: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.2%AP News: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.1%AP News: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.1%AP News: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.4%AP News: 1.2%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 1.3%AP News: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.0%AP News: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.2%AP News: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.0%AP News: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.1%AP News: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.1%AP News: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 2.8%Lisa Mascaro: 1.0%AP News: 2.0%Unattributed Quote2.8%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 1.0%AP News: 1.2%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 6.3%Lisa Mascaro: 7.0%AP News: 3.1%Biased Writer Voice6.3%This article: 4.6%Lisa Mascaro: 0.6%AP News: 0.6%Indoctrination4.6%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 3.1%AP News: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 1.2%AP News: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lisa Mascaro: 0.3%AP News: 0.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

461 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers22%attributed speech360writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 45 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 51 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coveragePete Hegseth • 29 words • 100.0% coveragePete Hegseth • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coveragePatty Murray • 13 words • 100.0% coveragePatty Murray • 11 words • 0.0% coveragePatty Murray • 18 words • 0.0% coveragePatty Murray • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Patty Murray

100%flagged-word coverage
63 attributed words62% of attributed speech16% writer coverage
0%17.5%35.0%Indoctrination+33.3 ptsWriter: 0.0%Patty Murray: 33.3%33.3%Unattributed Quote+20.6 ptsWriter: 0.0%Patty Murray: 20.6%20.6%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.