Jeff Gannon, Jim Guckert, and... Prostitution?

...and who's this "family" he's talking about. If it's his wife and kids as well as his parents and other relatives, they have all got a rude awakening. If it's his gay societal family, they are likely Laughing

0 Replies

Notice the link where you can donate money to him...

0 Replies

Yes, but with bloggers we know it'ss basically amatuers. Someone in the White House Briefing room should be able to be a trusted source for real news. Being there gives a status that in this case was not deserved.

0 Replies

It always boils down to fund raising. This is ending up (sic) being fun raising, however.

0 Replies

Dookiestix wrote:

dyslexia says:

Quote:
after watching the Wolf Blitzer interview with Jeff/Jim I found it difficult to tell who was the worst, Wolf or Jeff/Jim.

I hear you. It's hard to tell who's worse in the national media these days. It's safe to say that journalism as we knew it sometime ago in a galaxy far, far away, is dead.

It isn't journalism anymore. It's propoganda. It's promoting an agenda.

Now it's up to the bloggers to perhaps bring some honesty and integrity back in reporting the truth.

dookie

Don't let yourself fall under the spell of this simplistic and fraudulent line of bullshit arising from the rightwing media machine. It very much serves their purpose to pretend and proclaim that all journalism is merely partisan-driven propaganda - because that IS what THEY are up to. It not only excuses them but it also puts everyone else down at their despicable level. It allows them to claim that no matter the quality of evidence gathering/presentation, if it is anti-Bush or anti-administration policy, it is therefore ONLY partisan and nothing more.

The Chicago Tribune and the Wall Street Journal are two papers which have a heavy editorial slant in favor of the right. But even so, both are excellent papers (content often far less guilty of biased slant) with high standards for thoroughness in investigation and verification of sources, etc. Neither restricts itself to voicing information and opinion entirely from their favored side. One ought not to read just them, but one ought to read them too.

There's no great mystery in why the mainstream media is usually hesitant to cover Bush in the manner they covered Clinton. Very few corporate bodies control much of the mainstream media now and increasingly they operate as such ownership would suggest...they care about bottom line before their role as gadfly and conscience. And they have been quite successfully bullied into their present 'hands off Bush' state.

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

Tico is running a con job, and he's following the typical modern rightwing pattern in this...no matter whatever is going on or who has done what, insist loudly that you are the victim.

We'll note how frequently Tico in the past has defended homosexuals who post naked pictures of themselves on the web and hire out their body parts...these political threads are jam-packed with such Tico posts and it is a principle thing for Tico...nothing so crass as political affiliation marks his moral aghastitude.
...

#11.

What I've noticed, blatham, is how often you like to bring up an individual's sexual past. I don't recall doing that myself.

0 Replies

This thread has become a waste of time. Let's finish it

Quote:

Gannon didn't write about gays. No "hypocrisy" is being exposed. Liberals' hateful, frothing-at-the-mouth campaign against Gannon consists solely of their claim that he is gay.

Ann Coulter

0 Replies

Lol, this thread is far from finished; just temporarily derailed.

Nice Coulter quote, thou - shows you just how stupid that lady is, as Gannon wrote about gays several times... and, I would think the issue would be more about his illegal prostitution than it would about his sexual orientation.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

I think Coulter secretly has a thing for Gannon afters seeing the online photos.

0 Replies

http://www.salon.com/comics/tomo/2005/02/28/tomo/index1.html

Good ol' tom tommorrow sums it up well. Day pass req'd, or you can see it at www.americablog.org

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

*heh*

Remember the old days when the left liked to believe people were innocent until proven guilty by the mean ol' conservatives? Yeah, those days were fun....

Now, all you have to do is be against their cause and you bcome a homosexual prostitute, even though no one has ever admitted to being serviced by the victim of their over-zealous rage. It's intersting to watch the dying flagellations of a historic party...

0 Replies

Yeah, the lefties created the websites that had the naked advertisements and price listings for Guckert on them. Sure.

You're off your rocker, McG.

Once again, what did I predict? That the only defense that will be regularly brought up by the conservative faction will be the 'gay' card, to accuse the Liberals of being anti-gay. It's a ridiculous argument which holds no water at all.

Can't you come up with something better? It just shows that it's the fact he was gay that matters the most to you people, after all...

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Yeah, the lefties created the websites that had the naked advertisements and price listings for Guckert on them. Sure.

You're off your rocker, McG.

Once again, what did I predict? That the only defense that will be regularly brought up by the conservative faction will be the 'gay' card, to accuse the Liberals of being anti-gay. It's a ridiculous argument which holds no water at all.

Can't you come up with something better? It just shows that it's the fact he was gay that matters the most to you people, after all...

Cycloptichorn

I was merely replying to what YOU wrote...

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Lol, this thread is far from finished; just temporarily derailed.

Nice Coulter quote, thou - shows you just how stupid that lady is, as Gannon wrote about gays several times... and, I would think the issue would be more about his illegal prostitution than it would about his sexual orientation.

Cycloptichorn

I guess only you libs can discuss it and should anyone else dare counter the gibberish being spouted, they get called with the gay card. How wonderful for you.

0 Replies

You see, McG, in order to understand what people are saying, you have to actually read. I was responding to the asinine lie Coulter told, saying that G/G didn't write about gay issues; he did, several times. I bring this up and then state 'it's not about his orientation, it's about his profession,' in order to take it AWAY from the gay discussion. AGAIN.

To which YOU responded,

Quote:

Now, all you have to do is be against their cause and you bcome a homosexual prostitute, even though no one has ever admitted to being serviced by the victim of their over-zealous rage. It's intersting to watch the dying flagellations of a historic party...

... bringing the gay angle right back into it. Grow up, why don't you, and find a real defense of this joker other than to accuse others of being anti-gay, when it is completely obvious that the real anti-gay crowd are the ones trying to defend this idiot?

Sheesh.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Who posted the coulter line? Who responded to it?

Quote:

Grow up, why don't you, and find a real defense of this joker other than to accuse others of being anti-gay,

When you guys stop accussing him of being gay and deal with the other issues, I may stop calling you on it.

Until then, I guess I will just have to ignore your homophobia like I do your pro-terrorism agenda.

0 Replies

Quote:

Who posted the coulter line? Who responded to it?

Thomas Hayden posted the Coulter line. I responded to it by saying 'though Coulter is wrong in stating that he didn't write about gays, the issue has more to do with prostitution than his orientation.' Specifically I state that his orientation is not the issue, and yet you tell me I'm continually accusing him of being gay.

Quote:

When you guys stop accussing him of being gay and deal with the other issues, I may stop calling you on it.

Until then, I guess I will just have to ignore your homophobia like I do your pro-terrorism agenda.

You want ME to deal with the issues?!?!?!

I have yet to see you respond to any of the issues that have been brought up other than the gay angle. In fact, I counter that it is YOU who continually is bringing up the issue of his sexuality.

You are completely full of crap, not just on one, but several threads today, McG; congradulations! Come back with a real argument or quit trolling it up by accusing people of homophobia when you have no other response to logical arguments.

How did G/G get access to the WH when he didn't work for a news organization and had no published pieces?

How did he get in for years on a 'day pass' in violation of SS and WH policy?

How was G/G involved with the Thune campaign so closely in their smear of Daschle?

How did G/G receieve secret, confidential information about the Valerie Plame outing? Why hasn't he been called before Fitzgerald to talk about how he got this memo; one that he actually DID write an article about, as opposed to the reporters facing jail time who didn't even write any articles?

How did G/G get paid? Where did the money come from? What is the relationship between G/G and Bruce Eberle? Between Eberle and Karl Rove? We know the ties are there due to the direct-mail connection.

Not a DAMN ONE of those questions has anything to do with his orientation; I've asked these questions over and over this thread, as have others! Yet you continually accuse me (and others) of only focusing on the Homosexual issue. I am beginning to take offense to your lack of respect for the fact that I, and others, are specifically staying away from the issue and focusing on the larger problems.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Like I said, when you guys stop bringing it up, I will stop commenting about your bringing it up. It really is that simple.

0 Replies

Quote:

Like I said, when you guys stop bringing it up, I will stop commenting about your bringing it up. It really is that simple.

Okay, well, noone's bringing it up now. Do you have anything constructive to add other than what you've already written about homophobia?

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Tor,

It's a good article, but please don't post it to every thread that looks like it's getting activity.

Thanks

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Quote:

When you guys stop accussing him of being gay and deal with the other issues, I may stop calling you on it.

Buy a clue, McGentrix; he is gay. But that doesn't matter.

What matters is how this fake journalist got such exclusive access to this administration when press passes were extremely difficult to come by. What matters is that this mearly represents another notch in Bush's propogandist bedpost regarding the GOP neoconservative shills in which he's willing to employ in order to further the neocon's agenda.

What matters is the continued hypocrisy from neoconservatives who are willing to demonize the homosexual community in one breath, and then flalsely defend it in the next.

What matters is the way this administration is allowing, and in some cases infusing, fake news, paid propogandist campaigns disguised as news stories, and neoconservative vitriol of the likes never seen before in the national media (Hannity, Savage, O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Drudge, etc.)

0 Replies

Jeff Gannon, Jim Guckert, and... Prostitution?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know