3
   

Bush supporters' aftermath thread II

 
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Sep, 2006 10:13 am
Quote:

At any rate that was not my point. My point was the double standard in reactions to these two films both targeted at the same event was impossible to miss and how hypocritical that double standard is.


With the difference being, one was actual film of people, whereas the other was a 'dramatic representation' of events. Not exactly the same thing.

Not that I am advocating for F911; I feel it was poorly made and could have been far more effective with better editing, and focusing more on salient points then cheap shots.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Sep, 2006 10:13 am
blatham wrote:
Quote:
while tacit approval of anything, accurate, made up, misrepresented, distorted, or otherwise incorrect that makes the Bush administration look bad was applauded or shrugged off as showbiz
.

And I did this where?


Where did I say that you did?
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Sep, 2006 08:16 pm
More of the same ole wonderful 'aftermath'.


Quote:


Video available at,

http://www.crooksandliars.com/

and the remaining portion of the transcript is available at,

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/09/11/keith-olbermanns-special-commnet-on-bush-who-has-left-this-hole-in-the-ground-we-have-not-forgotten-mr-president-you-have-may-this-country-forgive-you/#more-10195
0 Replies
 
BernardR
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Sep, 2006 10:30 pm
JTT reported that Olbermann wrote:

Five years later this space… is still empty.
Five years later there is no Memorial to the dead.
Five years later there is no building rising to show with proud defiance that we would not have our America wrung from us, by cowards and criminals.
Five years later this country's wound is still open.
Five years… later this country's mass grave is still unmarked.
Five years later… this is still… just a background for a photo-op.
It is beyond shameful.

**********************************************************

I think that JTT is aware that the President of the United States does not move legislation through the Congress of the United States. Perhaps JTT had evidence that President Bush in some way BLOCKED legislation which would fill the hole in the ground?

Perhaps JTT has evidence that Billary Rodham Clinton submitted a bill to fill the "hole" in the ground?

Perhaps JTT has evidence that Chuckie Shumer submitted a bill to fill the hole in the ground?

If JTT has no evidence of that, then it is clear that Olbermann was just reaching for "effects" with no evidence behind him--a typically IGNORANT left wing ploy!
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Sep, 2006 05:34 am
Dear Possum, many of us assume that (because we have no evidence otherwise) you came from normal parents and had a normal/happy childhood, we wonder, What went wrong?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Sep, 2006 06:16 am
sierra song wrote
Quote:
I agree that there's a 'disconnect', but as these Democrats, in their "Message of Misery" (apt title) argue, the disconnect is on the part of their own miserable party:


So, how about that little wager?

A measely 100 smackers on control of congress after nov 7. Surely, an increase in my misery would bring fullness to your hopes and harmony to your worldview. Surely, your expansive and cheek-puffy demeanor indicates a swelling and robust confidence and not something merely methanic. Surely.

Whaddya say? Got a big enough dick to head out onto mainstreet at sun-up or are ya gonna whimper behind mommies gingham smock?
0 Replies
 
SierraSong
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 06:15 am
blatham wrote:
sierra song wrote
Quote:
I agree that there's a 'disconnect', but as these Democrats, in their "Message of Misery" (apt title) argue, the disconnect is on the part of their own miserable party:


So, how about that little wager?


Huh? Where?

blatham wrote:
A measely 100 smackers on control of congress after nov 7. Surely, an increase in my misery would bring fullness to your hopes and harmony to your worldview. Surely, your expansive and cheek-puffy demeanor indicates a swelling and robust confidence and not something merely methanic. Surely.


Cheek-puffy demeanor?

blatham wrote:
Whaddya say? Got a big enough dick to head out onto mainstreet at sun-up or are ya gonna whimper behind mommies gingham smock?


Poetic. So, what you're saying is that if I "don't put my money where my mouth is", I'm full of beans?

Let me think about it, but don't get your hopes up. I'm not averse to a 'friendly' bet here and there, but we're not friends, nor even close to it, so your "increased misery" isn't something upon which I dwell. Besides, it's those in your party of choice that coined the title outlining their foibles. Generally speaking, I think misery and Democrats go hand-in-hand and apparently there are a few who are finally starting to realize that.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 06:47 am
dyslexia wrote:
Dear Possum, many of us assume that (because we have no evidence otherwise) you came from normal parents and had a normal/happy childhood, we wonder, What went wrong?


Why don't you take your **** to a different forum? I am sick of reading your derogatory bullshit. I am reporting your post and I will continue to report EVERY SINGLE post of yours I see in which you try this crap. It's uncalled for and immature. I don't give a **** what vendetta you have, nor do I care, but take it to PM's or whatever you need to do. There is no reason for you to continually get away with your typical bullshit insults.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 06:58 am
A pro pos BernhardR

Voters painting state blue

http://i8.tinypic.com/2urmrdz.jpg
(from today's Chicago Tribune, print edition, frontpage and page 9)

Quote:
The percentage of Illinois voters who call themselves Democrats is at its highest pre-election level in more than a decade, posing a problem for Republicans trying to win the governor's mansion and key congressional seats, a Tribune/WGN-TV poll shows.

The poll found 43 percent of voters identified themselves as Democrats while a little more than a quarter of the voters identified themselves as Republicans. The 17 percentage point difference ranks among the most polarized partisan spreads in more than 16 years of Tribune surveys taken prior to an election day.
more at link


The survey was taken after the Ryan sentencing!
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 07:13 am
In case you missed that:


GOP Moderate Chafee Wins R.I. Primary


http://i2.tinypic.com/2s8kc9i.jpg
Copied/pasted from today's Chicago Tribune, page 2
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 07:45 am
From Drudge this morning:

NOVAK: ARMITAGE DID NOT TELL ALL
Wed Sep 13 2006 08:37:07 ET

"When Richard Armitage finally acknowledged last week he was my source three years ago in revealing Valerie Plame Wilson as a CIA employee, the former deputy secretary of state's interviews obscured what he really did," Bob Novak claims in a column set for Thursday release.

Novak, attempting to set the record straight, writes: "First, Armitage did not, as he now indicates, merely pass on something he had heard and that he 'thought' might be so. Rather, he identified to me the CIA division where Mrs. Wilson worked, and said flatly that she recommended the mission to Niger by her husband, former Amb. Joseph Wilson. Second, Armitage did not slip me this information as idle chitchat, as he now suggests. He made clear he considered it especially suited for my column."

Novak slams Armitage for holding back all this time.

Armitage's silence for "two and one-half years caused intense pain for his colleagues in government and enabled partisan Democrats in Congress to falsely accuse Rove of being my primary source," Novak explains.

"When Armitage now says he was mute because of special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's request, that does not explain his silent three months between his claimed first realization that he was the source and Fitzgerald's appointment on Dec. 30. Armitage's tardy self-disclosure is tainted because it is deceptive."

Developing...
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash9.htm

Bless Drudge, Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, et al. (Not that Drudge is anywhere nearly as partisan as the others named.) Whatever you think about these people, if it were not for them, much of what should be in the MSM would never see the light of day there. Their research teams come up with information that the MSM seems to miss, but once its out there, the MSM has to deal with it.

In this case, do you think there will be anywhere near as much press coverage to exhonerate the President, Karl Rove, et al on the Valerie Plame issue as there was in the attempt to condemn them?
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 09:20 am
Novak made it clear that Rove was quick to confirm what Armitage told Novak. Thus, Rove has equal culpability for outing Plame. Also, Rove was the initial source of this information to Cooper of the NYTs. There is evidence that Cheney, upon hearing reading about Wilson's attack on the administration for ignoring his reports, essentially ordered the revenge on the Wilsons.

To me, it is a joke to say that the administration is blameless in the Plamegame.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 09:23 am
Advocate wrote:
Novak made it clear that Rove was quick to confirm what Armitage told Novak. Thus, Rove has equal culpability for outing Plame. Also, Rove was the initial source of this information to Cooper of the NYTs. There is evidence that Cheney, upon hearing reading about Wilson's attack on the administration for ignoring his reports, essentially ordered the revenge on the Wilsons.

To me, it is a joke to say that the administration is blameless in the Plamegame.


And I'm sure you have conclusive 'proof' for this that you can link to back this up? I'll tell you up front that I won't consider fiction from other anti-Bush websites to be conclusive proof.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 09:34 am
Fox, what I said has been covered in the media ad nauseam, and also covered in this thread. Do a search.
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 09:38 am
Advocate wrote:
Fox, what I said has been covered in the media ad nauseam, and also covered in this thread. Do a search.


This is the last refuge of the Bush apologists. Just deny everything and ask for proof. If these delsuionistas can't see it by now, they never will.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 12:25 pm
Advocate wrote:
Fox, what I said has been covered in the media ad nauseam, and also covered in this thread. Do a search.


Sorry, but you'll have to point me to a valid post to support your declaration there, because I don't think you can support it with any credible source. Now if you wish to amend your statement to say that this is your opinion, that would be fine. And in that case I would tell you that it would be far more appropriate and much better received on one of the several dozen active Bush-bashing threads instead of one devoted to Bush supporters.
0 Replies
 
Stradee
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 03:08 pm
http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Plame_Leak_timeline
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 03:25 pm
Okay Stradee, please go back through your timeline and underscore things like "Vice Cheney met with staff to discredit Wilson. . .." or any other inflammatory headlines contained in the timeline to accurately relfect what the stories say: "Wilson ACCUSED Cheney (et al) of meeting to discredit.l . . ." or what the stories actually say.

Websites like the one you posted drive anybody who wants the real truth, not the convenient 'truth', absolutely crazy. And the most unfortunate thing about them is there are numbnuts out there who actually believe them without doing their own research to verify what actually happened.
0 Replies
 
Stradee
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 03:35 pm
Fox, Wikepedia's current timeline...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plame_scandal_timeline
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 03:37 pm
Quote:
And the most unfortunate thing about them is there are numbnuts out there who actually believe them without doing their own research to verify what actually happened.


Almost as unfortunate as the numbnuts who criticize them without doing any research to show how they are incorrect.

Cycloptichorn
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
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/23/2025 at 11:05:49