• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

media & dems scandalizing Bush in everything

Stu Ghatze

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2005
Messages
531
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
It should be paramount now, ..even to the whackos themselves that love inventing conspiracy theories, & those making the wreckless accusations & finger pointing at the whole Bush administration.

Ever since Bush took his oath of office after the 04' election, ..it has been one insane, trumped up attempt to villainize, scandalize at least him, or any person who has a link to him.

For those with short convenient memories:

Bush stole the election, Bush "might" have created 9/11 himself, Bush lied about the war in Iraq, Bush lied about WMD's, Bush is a racist, Bush had the New Orleans levees blown up to kill our black citizens, American soldiers are committing mass atrocity, White house aid outed CIA employee as payback (Valeri Plame), A culture of corruption, America cannot win In Iraq (Shades of Viet-Nam), Bush is taking away civil rights, >>>which he is CURRENTLY being accused of because of Bush's committment to ferret out foreign nationals by using electronic eavesdropping devises.

Why, ...with the news media, & leading democrats, the severity of the accusations, & charges MUST be bigger than any proofs.

The media invents & creates the TOPICS, & SO CALLED CONTROVERSIES & talking points, & the democratic party leadership invents the accusations, & lunatic conspiracy theories.

Their goal IMO, & it SHOULD be obvious by now; ..is to portray All americans as being outraged by president Bush. (it is not the case)

The other goal is to portray the Democratic party leadership as being represented by the mainstream majority. (a real laugher)

They have had a hard time stigmatizing President Bush for all of their imaginative, colorful disingenuine machinations in a pathetic effort & attempt to empower their democratic party, & even in their attempt to gather enough support for a ground swelling grassroots re-call of the president.

They have used the old 60's standard, .."individual rights /civil rights" (ooh civil rights) race, the war in Iraq, charges of insensitivity to foreign nationals, to Bush's judge nominees. (A rehash of the Viet-Nam liberal democratic Glory years) Yep....the old template of the 60's!

They have tried every concievable effort to destroy Bush's presidency, ..& anybody with a half ounce of honesty cannot even debate about it any longer. :cool:
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,344
Reaction score
7,210
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Stu Ghatze said:
It should be paramount now, ..even to the whackos themselves that love inventing conspiracy theories, & those making the wreckless accusations & finger pointing at the whole Bush administration.

Ever since Bush took his oath of office after the 04' election, ..it has been one insane, trumped up attempt to villainize, scandalize at least him, or any person who has a link to him.

For those with short convenient memories:

Bush stole the election, Bush "might" have created 9/11 himself, Bush lied about the war in Iraq, Bush lied about WMD's, Bush is a racist, Bush had the New Orleans levees blown up to kill our black citizens, American soldiers are committing mass atrocity, White house aid outed CIA employee as payback (Valeri Plame), A culture of corruption, America cannot win In Iraq (Shades of Viet-Nam), Bush is taking away civil rights, >>>which he is CURRENTLY being accused of because of Bush's committment to ferret out foreign nationals by using electronic eavesdropping devises.

Why, ...with the news media, & leading democrats, the severity of the accusations, & charges MUST be bigger than any proofs.

The media invents & creates the TOPICS, & SO CALLED CONTROVERSIES & talking points, & the democratic party leadership invents the accusations, & lunatic conspiracy theories.

Their goal IMO, & it SHOULD be obvious by now; ..is to portray All americans as being outraged by president Bush. (it is not the case)

The other goal is to portray the Democratic party leadership as being represented by the mainstream majority. (a real laugher)

They have had a hard time stigmatizing President Bush for all of their imaginative, colorful disingenuine machinations in a pathetic effort & attempt to empower their democratic party, & even in their attempt to gather enough support for a ground swelling grassroots re-call of the president.

They have used the old 60's standard, .."individual rights /civil rights" (ooh civil rights) race, the war in Iraq, charges of insensitivity to foreign nationals, to Bush's judge nominees. (A rehash of the Viet-Nam liberal democratic Glory years) Yep....the old template of the 60's!

They have tried every concievable effort to destroy Bush's presidency, ..& anybody with a half ounce of honesty cannot even debate about it any longer. :cool:
LOL... I think this is a conspiracy theory in itself.
WAAAAA.. Cry me a river.
 

t125eagle

Active member
Joined
Sep 15, 2005
Messages
384
Reaction score
7
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
i do agree, a bit. it does seem like everything that the president does wrong is big news. everything that happens is blamed on him. the president does not control how the city and state governments work, but he is still being blamed for the democrat's failure to act in New Orleans. lol, and i laugh at people who think that Bush is a racist! oh yeah, he's racist alright..that's why he had an african american secretary of state followed by another african american secretary of state.
 

Stu Ghatze

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2005
Messages
531
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Caine said:
LOL... I think this is a conspiracy theory in itself.
WAAAAA.. Cry me a river.



Not at all, & its so blatantly easy to see. No, ..I'm not crying at all. I just wish that at least THEY would not pretend that we are getting objective news.

I can't help it IF you cannot see the glaring obviousness of it. What I cannot figure out is why the mainstream media has NEVER done a piece on the fact that the KENNEDY FAMILY has been invested in the OIL BUSINESS.

Especially because how those evil oil companies are ALWAYS in the news? Huh huh, ...Wouldn't THAT be news worthy story?

We get to hear how villainous oil companies are at least once a week 24/7, & of course we also get to hear about the Bush family oil ties to big business.

Do you suppose that maybe its not a news story watching Ted Kennedy, among other kennedy's railing about greedy oil company profits when THEY themselves are invested heavilly in it also.

Media News commandment #1: "Thou shall not expose fellow liberals of hypocrisy".

Besides, ...it sounds so "mainstreamed", & almost so democratic, & almost "socialistic" too..."Citizen's Energy" co.

Gee,... the media could even do a story "pretending" that the Kennedy oil investments are all for the good, & benefit of the poor, & that they are not in it for any profits!:smile:
 
Last edited:
H

hipsterdufus

Stu Ghatze said:
Not at all, & its so blatantly easy to see. No, ..I'm not crying at all. I just wish that at least THEY would not pretend that we are getting objective news.

I can't help it IF you cannot see the glaring obviousness of it. What I cannot figure out is why the mainstream media has NEVER done a piece on the fact that the KENNEDY FAMILY has been invested in the OIL BUSINESS.

Especially because how those evil oil companies are ALWAYS in the news? Huh huh, ...Wouldn't THAT be news worthy story?

We get to hear how villainous oil companies are at least once a week 24/7, & of course we also get to hear about the Bush family oil ties to big business.

Do you suppose that maybe its not a news story watching Ted Kennedy, among other kennedy's railing about greedy oil company profits when THEY themselves are invested heavilly in it also.

Media News commandment #1: "Thou shall not expose fellow liberals of hypocrisy".

Besides, ...it sounds so "mainstreamed", & almost so democratic, & almost "socialistic" too..."Citizen's Energy" co.

Gee,... the media could even do a story "pretending" that the Kennedy oil investments are all for the good, & benefit of the poor, & that they are not in it for any profits!:smile:
Does that new Liberal Hypocricy book you got for Christmas give sources?How about a source for these allegations.

My cousin has a mutual fund that invests in Exxon - does that mean my family is in the oil business?

For the record:

Here are Kennedy's votes in regards to oil.

http://www.issues2000.org/Senate/Ted_Kennedy.htm

Voted NO on Bush Administration Energy Policy. (Jul 2003)
Voted YES on targeting 100,000 hydrogen-powered vehicles by 2010. (Jun 2003)
Voted YES on removing consideration of drilling ANWR from budget bill. (Mar 2003)
Voted NO on drilling ANWR on national security grounds. (Apr 2002)
Voted NO on terminating CAFE standards within 15 months. (Mar 2002)
Voted NO on preserving budget for ANWR oil drilling. (Apr 2000)
Voted YES on ending discussion of CAFE fuel efficiency standards. (Sep 1999)
Voted NO on defunding renewable and solar energy. (Jun 1999)
Voted NO on approving a nuclear waste repository. (Apr 1997)
Voted NO on do not require ethanol in gasoline. (Aug 1994)
Keep efficient air conditioner rule to conserve energy. (Mar 2004)
 

Stu Ghatze

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2005
Messages
531
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
hipsterdufus said:
Does that new Liberal Hypocricy book you got for Christmas give sources?How about a source for these allegations.

My cousin has a mutual fund that invests in Exxon - does that mean my family is in the oil business?

For the record:

Here are Kennedy's votes in regards to oil.

http://www.issues2000.org/Senate/Ted_Kennedy.htm





Wow, ...it must be so difficult to find Kennedy family interests in oil!!:smile: I bet it is when some people PREFER not to look!

Why its as hard as doing a "search", & letting your mouse do the clicking through the sites.

The kennedy family, & their financial interests have ALWAYS been about profits, & bullcrapping the public on how THEY care about the little people.

Modern day Robin Hood's they aint, ..or have they ever been; but you won't find any major story coming out of the media on that.

But the media has no problem whatsoever taking us to a ditch in Crawford Texas telling the world that Bush murdered Cindy Sheehan's son, ..right?;)
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,344
Reaction score
7,210
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Stu Ghatze said:
Wow, ...it must be so difficult to find Kennedy family interests in oil!!:smile: I bet it is when some people PREFER not to look!

Why its as hard as doing a "search", & letting your mouse do the clicking through the sites.

The kennedy family, & their financial interests have ALWAYS been about profits, & bullcrapping the public on how THEY care about the little people.

Modern day Robin Hood's they aint, ..or have they ever been; but you won't find any major story coming out of the media on that.

But the media has no problem whatsoever taking us to a ditch in Crawford Texas telling the world that Bush murdered Cindy Sheehan's son, ..right?;)
If you haven't figured out by now that CONTROVERSY SELLS your a moron.

Did the media "turn the other way" when the Clinton scandal occured?
HELL NO!
Why?
BECAUSE CONTROVERSY SELLS!
 

Stu Ghatze

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2005
Messages
531
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Caine said:
If you haven't figured out by now that CONTROVERSY SELLS your a moron.

Did the media "turn the other way" when the Clinton scandal occured?
HELL NO!
Why?
BECAUSE CONTROVERSY SELLS!



Now I'm a moron, ..thank you! :smile: Must have struck a nerve huh?

Ohh, ..I get it, the media was being fair in reporting Clinton's sexual exploitation of the young intern, & the media was only being fair in covering Clinton's perjury when he lied? Clinton should thank God he was not tried for perjury, ..because he DID lie while under oath, & he knew it, & so did everybody after the fact. The evidence was left on the blue dress!!

The overwhelming MAJORITY of congressional democrats ALL believed Clinton, & SAID so when he declared "I never had sexual reations" with that woman.
They verbally announced their belief in his words!

THe media did NOT pile on him, NO..in fact, the media & fellow democrats just brushed it off i.e...ITs only about sex., ..so who cares!

Clinton was ALLOWED to gracefully put it all behind him after it all died down, & the media helped his wish come true.

Now, ...when Bush opined that he believed that Scooter Libby was innocent after he was indicted for "everything" EXCEPT the reason of finding out who outed Valeri Plame, ...why these same congressional democrats were "outraged", & thought it morally wrong for Bush to have publicly supported Libby's innocence because it might influence peoples thoughts on Libby.

A double standard, ..you KNOW it is, you are just in denial.

Bill Clinton was NEVER villified as Bush has been, & that cannot even be disputed.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Caine said:
If you haven't figured out by now that CONTROVERSY SELLS your a moron.

Did the media "turn the other way" when the Clinton scandal occured?
HELL NO!
Why?
BECAUSE CONTROVERSY SELLS!
Your right overall, but that's 180 degrees from the issue here...

If Bush gained because of oil ventures, it's NOT a conspiracy due a longtime family interest which is widely publicized every 14 seconds on your local dial...

There is simply no controversy here...If you saw what the Bush family received in any year for compensation due to their interests in oil, the obvious response would be, "Just as I suspected"...

BUT if the same were true for the Kennedys the controversy would be sky-high, due to the LACK of widely publicized family interests...

If you saw what the Kennedy family received in any year for compensation due to their interests in oil, there would be no "expectation"...The response would be, "Holy crap!...Whiskeydick's going around yelling about the environment and quagmires and monopolizing all due to the oil companies, but now we find out he's PART of it!"...

Now there's your controversy...
 

Stu Ghatze

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2005
Messages
531
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
cnredd said:
Your right overall, but that's 180 degrees from the issue here...

If Bush gained because of oil ventures, it's NOT a conspiracy due a longtime family interest which is widely publicized every 14 seconds on your local dial...

There is simply no controversy here...If you saw what the Bush family received in any year for compensation due to their interests in oil, the obvious response would be, "Just as I suspected"...

BUT if the same were true for the Kennedys the controversy would be sky-high, due to the LACK of widely publicized family interests...

If you saw what the Kennedy family received in any year for compensation due to their interests in oil, there would be no "expectation"...The response would be, "Holy crap!...Whiskeydick's going around yelling about the environment and quagmires and monopolizing all due to the oil companies, but now we find out he's PART of it!"...

Now there's your controversy...






Excellent post, ..& dead on! The media knows where to roam for a story, & publicly opening up the Kennedy family interests (one of their own fellow liberals)...to scrutiny was never a part of their vocabulary.

On the otherhand, ..Bush family interests have been plastered EVERYWHERE by the same media!

Why that would be an insult to those that believe the Kennedy name should be "cannonized" as sainthood, in spite of family ties to rape (william Kennedy Smith), murder (Michael Skakels), & even wrongful death. (Mary Jo Kopechne)

All got off too I might add;..with the exception of Michael Skakels, ..its pretty tough to overturn a jury's guilty verdict, ..although the kennedy's are still working on getting cousin Michael set free!

Imagine THAT everyday in the news, ..as in like fashion with Bush/Cheney & oil & Halliburton day after day after day, & even Cindy Sheehan living in her CRawford Texas ditch day after day after day, & Bush murdered my son because the war in Iraq was illegal??
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,344
Reaction score
7,210
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
cnredd said:
Your right overall, but that's 180 degrees from the issue here...
Not really. I dislike any claims of bias in the media. When the government is controlled by Democrats, and something that is controversial comes up, they cover it. When an opposition to those Democrats gets enough attention to sell, they cover it. Same thing is happening here. It all depends on how much of a voice those who dislike the current majority has. The media has no bias. There ARE however, certain Network News channels that have extremely biased "segments", like O'Riley Hannity, etc. On Fox. I haven't seen, nor has anyone been able to point out any Biased Segments from any other News Channel. Fox isn't biased in thier news, just in thier "special segments".

If Bush gained because of oil ventures, it's NOT a conspiracy due a longtime family interest which is widely publicized every 14 seconds on your local dial...
Ive been watching CNN (evil liberal ACLU loving media) for the last 5 hours, I haven't heard a thing about it.

There is simply no controversy here...If you saw what the Bush family received in any year for compensation due to their interests in oil, the obvious response would be, "Just as I suspected"...
Just as I would expect from anyone who is intrested in making a dollar.

BUT if the same were true for the Kennedys the controversy would be sky-high, due to the LACK of widely publicized family interests...

If you saw what the Kennedy family received in any year for compensation due to their interests in oil, there would be no "expectation"...The response would be, "Holy crap!...Whiskeydick's going around yelling about the environment and quagmires and monopolizing all due to the oil companies, but now we find out he's PART of it!"...

Now there's your controversy...
I don't think your Average American gives a crap what kind of investments congressmen make. I know I don't give a crap.
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
t125eagle said:
i do agree, a bit. it does seem like everything that the president does wrong is big news. everything that happens is blamed on him. the president does not control how the city and state governments work, but he is still being blamed for the democrat's failure to act in New Orleans. lol, and i laugh at people who think that Bush is a racist! oh yeah, he's racist alright..that's why he had an african american secretary of state followed by another african american secretary of state.
So that's how you rebutt the accusation that he is a racist? LOL

I don't believe Bush is a racist, but I do think he doesn't seem to worry about those whose circumstances he cannot relate to--you know, poor people.
 

Stu Ghatze

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2005
Messages
531
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
aps said:
So that's how you rebutt the accusation that he is a racist? LOL

I don't believe Bush is a racist, but I do think he doesn't seem to worry about those whose circumstances he cannot relate to--you know, poor people.



The last portion of your last paragraph, ..& THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE MEDIA WANTS YOU TO BELIEVE!;)
 

JustMyPOV

Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
143
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Stu Ghatze said:
Not at all, & its so blatantly easy to see. No, ..I'm not crying at all. I just wish that at least THEY would not pretend that we are getting objective news.

I can't help it IF you cannot see the glaring obviousness of it. What I cannot figure out is why the mainstream media has NEVER done a piece on the fact that the KENNEDY FAMILY has been invested in the OIL BUSINESS.

Especially because how those evil oil companies are ALWAYS in the news? Huh huh, ...Wouldn't THAT be news worthy story?

We get to hear how villainous oil companies are at least once a week 24/7, & of course we also get to hear about the Bush family oil ties to big business.

Do you suppose that maybe its not a news story watching Ted Kennedy, among other kennedy's railing about greedy oil company profits when THEY themselves are invested heavilly in it also.

Media News commandment #1: "Thou shall not expose fellow liberals of hypocrisy".

Besides, ...it sounds so "mainstreamed", & almost so democratic, & almost "socialistic" too..."Citizen's Energy" co.

Gee,... the media could even do a story "pretending" that the Kennedy oil investments are all for the good, & benefit of the poor, & that they are not in it for any profits!:smile:
Before you go criticizing a non-profit company that has helped 10's of 1000's of elderly people not have to choose between starving to death or freezing to death, you really ought to do some research. If you want to attack any other Kennedy investment that's fine by me, but taking jabs at Citizens??? I don't even think your God, Karl Rove would have the stones to touch that one.
 

Stu Ghatze

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2005
Messages
531
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
JustMyPOV said:
Before you go criticizing a non-profit company that has helped 10's of 1000's of elderly people not have to choose between starving to death or freezing to death, you really ought to do some research. If you want to attack any other Kennedy investment that's fine by me, but taking jabs at Citizens??? I don't even think your God, Karl Rove would have the stones to touch that one.




Uh Oh...Does that mean that the Kennedy family saint canonization is on hold; ...or at least until the media exposes the fact that both of the eligible saints, ie. JFK & RFK were wiretapping the activities of Martin Luther King when they were reigning in Camelot?


Darn it all, ...that fact just slipped out. Hey, I'm sorry. I know that we are all supposed to believe that the Kennedy boys were all about civil & individual rights, & would never would have wiretapped anybody, or exploited women, or committed adultery, made deals with the mob to assasinate foreign leaders, did not get congressional approval to wage war on Cuban soil, ..or even ever made profits, & God knows that JFK's election victory in 1960 was above reproach, & there never was any vote tampering by organized crime & union influence in Illinois, & West Virginia. ;)
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,344
Reaction score
7,210
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Stu Ghatze said:
Uh Oh...Does that mean that the Kennedy family saint canonization is on hold; ...or at least until the media exposes the fact that both of the eligible saints, ie. JFK & RFK were wiretapping the activities of Martin Luther King when they were reigning in Camelot?


Darn it all, ...that fact just slipped out. Hey, I'm sorry. I know that we are all supposed to believe that the Kennedy boys were all about civil & individual rights, & would never would have wiretapped anybody, or exploited women, or committed adultery, made deals with the mob to assasinate foreign leaders, did not get congressional approval to wage war on Cuban soil, ..or even ever made profits, & God knows that JFK's election victory in 1960 was above reproach, & there never was any vote tampering by organized crime & union influence in Illinois, & West Virginia. ;)
What is your point????
Im trying to figure that out, what is the point of your rambling about Kennedy?
 

Stu Ghatze

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2005
Messages
531
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Caine said:
What is your point????
Im trying to figure that out, what is the point of your rambling about Kennedy?



Dear Caine, ..I guess you can say that my point is that the mainstream media does NOT entreat republican presidents in the same fashion as it has always entreated democratic presidents, & it has become worse the last couple decades.

IMO, ...it is so glaringly obvious that Bush has been villified over EVERYTHING by the democratic party leadership, & by very willing media network accomplices I might add.

It does not take a rocket scientist to see "how, & in the fashion" topics are presented by the media pundits whenever Bush is the topic of discussion, & it matters not one iota what the topic is. It is meant to chagrin Bush, cast doubt upon his character, & when leading democratic party officials are in the mix of it all it is always the same message only worse!

Liberal media bias, ...You bet! It cannot even be refuted any longer.

Its ALWAYS the same subtle messages: Bush lied about the war, Bush is insensitive to minorities & even suggestions of racism, a culture of republican corruption, Bush destroying civil rights, & now...Bush spying on Americans?? All REPLAYED over & over again 24/7.

And...then giving air-time to people like Howard Dean who once quipped, "How do we know Bush did not create 9/11"??

Absolute despicable media behavior, & not simple journalism. The media ought not even pretend anymore about being neutral, or just reporting stories as they happen.

It is THEY (the media), & the modern democratic party mouthpieces that CREATE the "controversy & talking points" that are meant to impugn Bush in all.
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,344
Reaction score
7,210
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Stu Ghatze said:
Dear Caine, ..I guess you can say that my point is that the mainstream media does NOT entreat republican presidents in the same fashion as it has always entreated democratic presidents, & it has become worse the last couple decades.

IMO, ...it is so glaringly obvious that Bush has been villified over EVERYTHING by the democratic party leadership, & by very willing media network accomplices I might add.

It does not take a rocket scientist to see "how, & in the fashion" topics are presented by the media pundits whenever Bush is the topic of discussion, & it matters not one iota what the topic is. It is meant to chagrin Bush, cast doubt upon his character, & when leading democratic party officials are in the mix of it all it is always the same message only worse!

Liberal media bias, ...You bet! It cannot even be refuted any longer.

Its ALWAYS the same subtle messages: Bush lied about the war, Bush is insensitive to minorities & even suggestions of racism, a culture of republican corruption, Bush destroying civil rights, & now...Bush spying on Americans?? All REPLAYED over & over again 24/7.

And...then giving air-time to people like Howard Dean who once quipped, "How do we know Bush did not create 9/11"??

Absolute despicable media behavior, & not simple journalism. The media ought not even pretend anymore about being neutral, or just reporting stories as they happen.

It is THEY (the media), & the modern democratic party mouthpieces that CREATE the "controversy & talking points" that are meant to impugn Bush in all.

Welp, Thats great, thats your opinion.

There is no way to prove that if all this were happening under a Democratic President that the media would go any easier on him.
The major network news groups are out to report on something that will get attention, while at the same time isn't a flat out lie. If it is happening, they report on it.

While you may say "the media didn't pay enough attention to Clinton's lie" well, Clinton's sitaution is different. You do know that children sometimes watch the news as well? What? Did you want them to show "hidden video" of Monica on her knees? Get real, there are some things that absolutely DO NOT need to be covered "in detail" when it comes to the news.

Your just pissed because Bush screwed up here and there, and the media won't stop talking about it. Thats thier job, to report the news, get the **** over it.
 

Stu Ghatze

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2005
Messages
531
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Caine said:
Welp, Thats great, thats your opinion.

There is no way to prove that if all this were happening under a Democratic President that the media would go any easier on him.
The major network news groups are out to report on something that will get attention, while at the same time isn't a flat out lie. If it is happening, they report on it.

While you may say "the media didn't pay enough attention to Clinton's lie" well, Clinton's sitaution is different. You do know that children sometimes watch the news as well? What? Did you want them to show "hidden video" of Monica on her knees? Get real, there are some things that absolutely DO NOT need to be covered "in detail" when it comes to the news.

Your just pissed because Bush screwed up here and there, and the media won't stop talking about it. Thats thier job, to report the news, get the **** over it.




Dear Caine, ...It is far more than just my opinion, & your reason about media limiting its stories on Monica;....a good rational "excuse".

Personnally, ...I really wasnot interseted in the two love birds, ..or Clinton's adultery.

Clinton's sexual addiction was somewhat well known in circles, ..but the media was not interested.

Imagine IF BUsh was groping Kathleen Willey, (sex for job referrals), exposing himself to Paula Jones as Billy did, & while in Arkansas.. & even sending out staff aids to help bring him some new sexual candidates to help him feel more relaxed?

Why Juanitta Broaderick (Clinton's rape accuser) would have been graced by the media with a first hand account of her rape, ...had it been Bush!

No...I'm not pis.sed at all, & in fact not even surprised by the obvious media bias.

Know what is really great? The fact that MOST mainstream anmericans know it too.;)

Don't you find it amazing in all the many, many leaks that come out, ...EVERYONE of those leaks that comes out is ALWAYS favorible to the democratic party leadership, & ALWAYS used as a tool to help smear Bush, & impugn his character, honesty...or both?

AND...even more remarkable is the amount of news & air time the media graciously spends on those so called; "hot" stories.

A real co-incidence huh?

Naw, ,....the media is, & has been nothing but an extension, & an arm of the modern democratic party for the last few decades.

I personnally like referring to the media in more honest terms; "Lap dogs", because that is exactly what the media is today for the modern democratic party.

Isn't that great to live in America? You can express your views, & others like me can express ours without fear of retribution?
 
Last edited:

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Oh Stu, Oh Stu
Watcha gonna do
Now that the Reps are thru

Have a happy 2006.
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,344
Reaction score
7,210
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Stu Ghatze said:
Dear Caine, ...It is far more than just my opinion, & your reason about media limiting its stories on Monica;....a good rational "excuse".

Personnally, ...I really wasnot interseted in the two love birds, ..or Clinton's adultery.

Clinton's sexual addiction was somewhat well known in circles, ..but the media was not interested.

Imagine IF BUsh was groping Kathleen Willey, (sex for job referrals), exposing himself to Paula Jones as Billy did, & while in Arkansas.. & even sending out staff aids to help bring him some new sexual candidates to help him feel more relaxed?

Why Juanitta Broaderick (Clinton's rape accuser) would have been graced by the media with a first hand account of her rape, ...had it been Bush!

No...I'm not pis.sed at all, & in fact not even surprised by the obvious media bias.

Know what is really great? The fact that MOST mainstream anmericans know it too.;)

Don't you find it amazing in all the many, many leaks that come out, ...EVERYONE of those leaks that comes out is ALWAYS favorible to the democratic party leadership, & ALWAYS used as a tool to help smear Bush, & impugn his character, honesty...or both?

AND...even more remarkable is the amount of news & air time the media graciously spends on those so called; "hot" stories.

A real co-incidence huh?

Naw, ,....the media is, & has been nothing but an extension, & an arm of the modern democratic party for the last few decades.

I personnally like referring to the media in more honest terms; "Lap dogs", because that is exactly what the media is today for the modern democratic party.

Isn't that great to live in America? You can express your views, & others like me can express ours without fear of retribution?

Paranoia Paranoia Everybody's Comming to Get Me!!!!!!!!!!!!

BE VERY AFRAID, BECAUSE PARANOIA IS PATRIOTISM!!!

Guys, don't blame Stu, he is just trying to be a George Bush Patriot!
 

Stu Ghatze

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2005
Messages
531
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Billo_Really said:
Oh Stu, Oh Stu
Watcha gonna do
Now that the Reps are thru

Have a happy 2006.



:smile: Thats a cute rhyme! Bill, ..I honestly cannot believe that YOU actually think that the democratic party has helped themselves politically by the things that the dems, & media has been saying.

You guys, ..I'm afraid, ..No, I'm actually glad are misreading the american people on this.


Although 2006 "might" pay some democratic senatorial dividends, ..depending on certain states; ..the 08' presidential election is going to be another disaster for the DNC.

Now...is the DNC going to replay the fixed election charge card after the 08' election when the democrats lose again?

I promise that I will not gloat...."too" much; but you guys believe too many of your liberally inspired poll takers who PRETEND to be independent!.;)
 

Stu Ghatze

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2005
Messages
531
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Caine said:
Paranoia Paranoia Everybody's Comming to Get Me!!!!!!!!!!!!

BE VERY AFRAID, BECAUSE PARANOIA IS PATRIOTISM!!!

Guys, don't blame Stu, he is just trying to be a George Bush Patriot!




Yea, ..their coming to take me away ha ha!!!!!!!:rofl Hey, you are almost funny!

It is NOT paranoid to see in the fashion the mass media has been operating along with democratic party culpability; ..there's no conspiracy there because it is so WELL known by most!

Paranoia is patriotism? How so..? What is NO secret is that the senate democrats have been trying to pretend that 9/11 never happened.

I will tell you what lunacy is: Its the behavior of the democrartic party leadership that WANTS to expand civil liberties to foreigner's, ..& make it all the more difficult to indentify them, ..cause' afteral, Bush "must" be SEEN AS taking away peoples civil rights. Ooh, "civil rights"......the catch all word for politiscizing all of Bush's policies.

Here's a little clue for some of you people: Civil rights are meaningless to those that may find themselves dead by successful terrorists just so the democratic party leadership can be, & act irresponsible by charging Bush with "Spying on Americans".

Would the modern democratic party indict FDR for murder AFTER he had his justice department EXECUTE most of the foreign national german saboteurs who were found on the shores of a Florida beach in june 04 1942? Some of these german men even lived in America at one time, ..or another!

FDR was correct, ..but then that was at a time when the democratic party cared about common sense; ..something that the modern democratic party has divested itself of long ago.

The mass majority SUPPORTS Bush on this issue;...or maybe you still believe those Kerry "exit voting polls" too?;)
 

alphieb

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 13, 2005
Messages
1,982
Reaction score
31
Location
Vincennes IN
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Stu Ghatze said:
It should be paramount now, ..even to the whackos themselves that love inventing conspiracy theories, & those making the wreckless accusations & finger pointing at the whole Bush administration.

Ever since Bush took his oath of office after the 04' election, ..it has been one insane, trumped up attempt to villainize, scandalize at least him, or any person who has a link to him.

For those with short convenient memories:

Bush stole the election, Bush "might" have created 9/11 himself, Bush lied about the war in Iraq, Bush lied about WMD's, Bush is a racist, Bush had the New Orleans levees blown up to kill our black citizens, American soldiers are committing mass atrocity, White house aid outed CIA employee as payback (Valeri Plame), A culture of corruption, America cannot win In Iraq (Shades of Viet-Nam), Bush is taking away civil rights, >>>which he is CURRENTLY being accused of because of Bush's committment to ferret out foreign nationals by using electronic eavesdropping devises.

Why, ...with the news media, & leading democrats, the severity of the accusations, & charges MUST be bigger than any proofs.

The media invents & creates the TOPICS, & SO CALLED CONTROVERSIES & talking points, & the democratic party leadership invents the accusations, & lunatic conspiracy theories.

Their goal IMO, & it SHOULD be obvious by now; ..is to portray All americans as being outraged by president Bush. (it is not the case)

The other goal is to portray the Democratic party leadership as being represented by the mainstream majority. (a real laugher)

They have had a hard time stigmatizing President Bush for all of their imaginative, colorful disingenuine machinations in a pathetic effort & attempt to empower their democratic party, & even in their attempt to gather enough support for a ground swelling grassroots re-call of the president.

They have used the old 60's standard, .."individual rights /civil rights" (ooh civil rights) race, the war in Iraq, charges of insensitivity to foreign nationals, to Bush's judge nominees. (A rehash of the Viet-Nam liberal democratic Glory years) Yep....the old template of the 60's!

They have tried every concievable effort to destroy Bush's presidency, ..& anybody with a half ounce of honesty cannot even debate about it any longer. :cool:
You watch too much Fox News. Bush has done everything to himself. Please read my quote from him below.
 
H

hipsterdufus

Stu Ghatze said:
Its ALWAYS the same subtle messages: Bush lied about the war, Bush is insensitive to minorities & even suggestions of racism, a culture of republican corruption, Bush destroying civil rights, & now...Bush spying on Americans?? All REPLAYED over & over again 24/7.
Stu - It's the truth. The same "liberal media" was doing 24/7 coverage of the Monica scandal back in Clinton's term - Bob Nofacts lead the charge for crying out loud.

Stu Ghatze said:
And...then giving air-time to people like Howard Dean who once quipped, "How do we know Bush did not create 9/11"??
Where did Dean say that - or did you hear it on Fauz Newz?

Stu Ghatze said:
Absolute despicable media behavior, & not simple journalism. The media ought not even pretend anymore about being neutral, or just reporting stories as they happen.
Read the AP wire if you just want the facts. A good journalist goes beyond the pure data and interprets what is going on, digs deeper and generally muckrakes. That's why the founding fathers believed deeply in a free press, the 4th estate as it were , as a check and balance on the government.

Stu Ghatze said:
It is THEY (the media), & the modern democratic party mouthpieces that CREATE the "controversy & talking points" that are meant to impugn Bush in all.
So you're saying that the media made up the following stories?

1. Outing a CIA agent
2. Illegal wiretapping of American citizens
3. Illegal acceptance of campaign contributions - Delay
4. Illegal sale of stocks - Frist
5. Incompetant response of Fedaeral Govt. to Katrina disaster
6. Raising acceptable mercury, arsenic levels in water
7. Governamet in the bedroom on Teri Schiavo and end of life issues
8. Harriet Miers gross incompetence to be on SCOTUS
9. Diebold being vulnerable to hacking
10. 2,179 deaths in Iraq
11. Duke Cunningham admitting bribery
12. $8 trillion debt from 230 billion surplus in 5 years
13. Tax breaks for richest 1/10 of 1%
14. Bush suggesting the teaching of ID in schools
15. Abu Graib torture

The list goes on and on....

This is the media's JOB! We have a network that is the mouthpiece for the administration :Fox. Fine. But for all others it is their DUTY to find the truth, no matter who is in charge. If you don't want to see it, then keep the dial tuned to GOP-TV, but even they will do some muckraking when it concerns Dem corruption or scandal.
 
Top Bottom