1
   

The Bush Scandals....a handy and complete list

 
 
blatham
 
Reply Tue 18 Jan, 2005 06:04 am
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/01/18/scandal/index.html

(quick ad view required)

ps...complete as of today only...it'll grow.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,330 • Replies: 21
No top replies

 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jan, 2005 07:12 am
Is this list for comparison purposes, or is their a point you are trying to make, such as joining Salon.Com web site?
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jan, 2005 07:12 am
Looking at the top of that list I see a few breakdowns within the system which a president could not reasonably be expected to prevent followed by the usual whining about Haliburton, which is performing essential military duties which our military used to perform for itself but no longer can due to the cuts of the Clinton years, and which apparently nobody else on Earth can provide.

Again for those not following the news, Haliburton employees have died in Iraq.

But the big question is, did I see anything on that list which even remotely compared to the scandles of the Clinton regime, i.e. abuses of power up to and including abuses of the power of government agencies which saw the IRS being referred to as an "Internal Revenge Service", sale of US military secrets to our enemies for campaign cash, sale of pardons for money and sex, bribery, witness intimidation, dog-wagging wars etc. etc. etc ?

The answer in short: BWWWWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA......
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jan, 2005 07:16 am
I mean, if there were any real scandals in the Bush admin at this juncture, would seeBS have been trying to sink the Bush campaign with forged documents and a fictional story about some sort of a misdeed Bush was supposed to have committed in the 70s?


http://img10.exs.cx/img10/7969/cbswitewashincpenfreerepublicc.gif
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jan, 2005 07:17 am
http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/oliphant/vc007271.jpg
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jan, 2005 07:49 am
Interesting reading, Blatham.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jan, 2005 08:00 am
A little unfair to blame DeLay's actions on the Bushies.

Definitely interesting reading, however. I had not caught the nuances of why the energy taskforce membership is important.
0 Replies
 
Dookiestix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jan, 2005 10:04 am
Funny how the REAL scandals, according to Necons, are the ones where nobody died and only a few got fired.

And they use "white wash" in a cartoon to make an even more despicable point.

Political propoganda from these blowhards is getting more pervasive with each passing day, and their attempt at humor continues to fall by the wayside.

Very sad. Very sad indeed...
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jan, 2005 10:21 am
Al Gore? 1997?

Seems about as pertinent as CREEP...

Meanwhile, the guy Armstrong Williams who was paid to flog NCLB claims he just didn't know that was, like, a bad thing to do, while having spent a fair amount of time appearing as a media ethicist, and who says he's not the only one who's made this kind of a deal, seems a good deal spookier than the CBS dealie to me...

Quote:
[Williams] took to CNN last October to give his own critique of the CBS News scandal, pointing out that the producer of the Bush-National Guard story, Mary Mapes, was guilty of a conflict of interest because she introduced her source, the anti-Bush partisan Bill Burkett, to a Kerry campaign operative, Joe Lockhart. In this Mr. Williams's judgment was correct, but grave as Ms. Mapes's infraction was, it isn't quite in the same league as receiving $240,000 from the United States Treasury to propagandize for the Bush campaign on camera. Mr. Williams also appeared with Alan Murray on CNBC to trash Kitty Kelley's book on the Bush family, on CNN to accuse the media of being Michael Moore's "p.r. machine" and on Tina Brown's CNBC talk show to lambaste Mr. Stewart for doing a "puff interview" with John Kerry on "The Daily Show" (which Mr. Williams, unsurprisingly, seems to think is a real, not a fake, news program).

But perhaps the most fascinating Williams TV appearance took place in December 2003, the same month that he was first contracted by the government to receive his payoffs. At a time when no one in television news could get an interview with Dick Cheney, Mr. Williams, of all "journalists," was rewarded with an extended sit-down with the vice president for the Sinclair Broadcast Group, a nationwide owner of local stations affiliated with all the major networks. In that chat, Mr. Cheney criticized the press for its coverage of Halliburton and denounced "cheap shot journalism" in which "the press portray themselves as objective observers of the passing scene, when they obviously are not objective."

This is a scenario out of "The Manchurian Candidate." Here we find Mr. Cheney criticizing the press for a sin his own government was at that same moment signing up Mr. Williams to commit. The interview is broadcast by the same company that would later order its ABC affiliates to ban Ted Koppel's "Nightline" recitation of American casualties in Iraq and then propose showing an anti-Kerry documentary, "Stolen Honor," under the rubric of "news" in prime time just before Election Day. (After fierce criticism, Sinclair retreated from that plan.) Thus the Williams interview with the vice president, implicitly presented as an example of the kind of "objective" news Mr. Cheney endorses, was in reality a completely subjective, bought-and-paid-for fake news event for a broadcast company that barely bothers to fake objectivity and both of whose chief executives were major contributors to the Bush-Cheney campaign. The Soviets couldn't have constructed a more ingenious or insidious plot to bamboozle the citizenry.

Ever since Mr. Williams was exposed by USA Today, he has been stonewalling all questions about what the Bush administration knew of his activities and when it knew it. In his account, he was merely a lowly "subcontractor" of the education department. "Never was the White House ever mentioned anytime during this," he told NBC's Campbell Brown, as if that were enough to deflect Ms. Brown's observation that "the Department of Education works for the White House." For its part, the White House is saying that the whole affair is, in the words of the press secretary, Scott McClellan, "a contracting matter" and "a decision by the Department of Education." In other words, the buck stops (or started) with Rod Paige, the elusive outgoing education secretary who often appeared with Mr. Williams in his pay-for-play propaganda.


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/16/arts/16rich.html
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jan, 2005 10:23 am
Aw, here's the rest:

Quote:
But we now know that there have been at least three other cases in which federal agencies have succeeded in placing fake news reports on television during the Bush presidency. The Department of Health and Human Services, the Census Bureau and the Office of National Drug Control Policy have all sent out news "reports" in which, to take one example, fake newsmen purport to be "reporting" why the administration's Medicare prescription-drug policy is the best thing to come our way since the Salk vaccine. So far two Government Accountability Office investigations have found that these Orwellian stunts violated federal law that prohibits "covert propaganda" purchased with taxpayers' money. But the Williams case is the first one in which a well-known talking head has been recruited as the public face for the fake news instead of bogus correspondents (recruited from p.r. companies) with generic eyewitness-news team names like Karen Ryan and Mike Morris.

Or is Mr. Williams merely the first one of his ilk to be exposed? Every time this administration puts out fiction through the news media - the "Rambo" exploits of Jessica Lynch, the initial cover-up of Pat Tillman's death by friendly fire - it's assumed that a credulous and excessively deferential press was duped. But might there be more paid agents at loose in the media machine? In response to questions at the White House, Mr. McClellan has said that he is "not aware" of any other such case and that he hasn't "heard" whether the administration's senior staff knew of the Williams contract - nondenial denials with miles of wiggle room. Mr. Williams, meanwhile, has told both James Rainey of The Los Angeles Times and David Corn of The Nation that he has "no doubt" that there are "others" like him being paid for purveying administration propaganda and that "this happens all the time." So far he is refusing to name names - a vow of omertà all too reminiscent of that taken by the low-level operatives first apprehended in that "third-rate burglary" during the Nixon administration.

If CNN, just under new management, wants to make amends for the sins of "Crossfire," it might dispatch some real reporters to find out just which "others" Mr. Williams is talking about and to follow his money all the way back to its source.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jan, 2005 10:25 am
Dookiestix wrote:
Funny how the REAL scandals, according to Necons, are the ones where nobody died and only a few got fired.

And they use "white wash" in a cartoon to make an even more despicable point.

Political propoganda from these blowhards is getting more pervasive with each passing day, and their attempt at humor continues to fall by the wayside.

Very sad. Very sad indeed...


Nice to see you, Dookie.
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jan, 2005 10:40 am
It is my opinion that if bush were caught on video raping a thirteen year old girl then certain members of both this forum and this country would cry from the rooftops that bush was implementing a new program to boost and strengthen the USA's genetic pool and deal with it as an altruistic and forward thinking strategy.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jan, 2005 10:42 am
No, they'd get to work proving that the 13 year old girl was actually a spy from Al Qaeda and he was showing her what the US does to terrorists.
0 Replies
 
Dookiestix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jan, 2005 10:43 am
Would ya believe, I was banned this whole time? And under rather specious circumstances.

Anyway, it's good to be back. It's been quite a ride these last few months.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jan, 2005 10:46 am
I like your new avatar. I still love to play pong.
0 Replies
 
Dookiestix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jan, 2005 10:46 am
Perhaps Bush is mearly proving the efficacy of the U.S. Military's secret "sex bomb:"

http://www.explodingcigar.com/article1643.html

http://www.lyricsfreak.com/t/tom-jones/138371.html
0 Replies
 
Dookiestix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jan, 2005 10:48 am
Quote:
I like your new avatar. I still love to play pong.


What better way to exemplify the tit-and-tat of Abuzz.com, eh?
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jan, 2005 10:48 am
I too have been sent to the corner a couple of times Dookie...one makes do....
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jan, 2005 12:42 pm
As stated before, if these "scandals" were so bad then how come they haven't been sent up the ladder for investigation by an independent counsel? I mean come on, the way the media has been gunning for Bush over the last four years you would think they could make something stick.

After all isn't this just an attempt to keep the whining and belly aching going for the next four years? You guys will have to try better then that.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jan, 2005 12:50 pm
Two words for you, Baldimo. Republican Congress.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The Bush Scandals....a handy and complete list
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/18/2024 at 01:20:49