Another Topic That Fell Through the Cracks

[Guest MikeSC]

I agree. The liberals are pretending that they are upset by this man's phony press credentials and links to prostitution, but they can't fool me. Fucking homophobes.

No, they're making a big deal that an allegedly gay man opposed the gay agenda.

 

BOOO!

 

Just like their criticism of Condoleeza Rice NEVER devolves into blatant racism, right?

-=Mike

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

This Jeff Gannon thing is the dumbest thing I've ever heard someone bitch about. I didn't even know who this guy was until this thread and I imagine that pretty much goes for everyone.

 

You're trying to compare a nobody to the head of a major news network.

[Guest MikeSC]

This Jeff Gannon thing is the dumbest thing I've ever heard someone bitch about. I didn't even know who this guy was until this thread and I imagine that pretty much goes for everyone.

 

You're trying to compare a nobody to the head of a major news network.

I just wonder where the outrage was when Larry Flynt was trying to dig up dirt on Republicans.

-=Mike

...Or is Larry Flynt NOT as morally reprehensible as whomever the hell this Ganon fella is/was?

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

I don't even care about that. It's just stupid for people to do this mock outrage over a guy no one has heard of to try and divert attention from what Eason did. They have nothing to do with each other.

[Guest MikeSC]

I don't even care about that. It's just stupid for people to do this mock outrage over a guy no one has heard of to try and divert attention from what Eason did. They have nothing to do with each other.

Oh, I agree. There is a world of difference between a guy nobody heard of and the head of the news division at CNN.

-=Mike

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Just like their criticism of Condoleeza Rice NEVER devolves into blatant racism, right?

-=Mike

That makes no sense at all. If they hated her because of her race, then Colin Powell would get a slagging, too.

 

This guy shouted something off he heard word of mouth from somebody else without proof, probably thinking nobody would ask for it. I wouldn't call it slander, but I would say it's probably a lie.

 

Sad thing is, if it turned out someday to be true, I wouldn't be very suprised.

[Guest MikeSC]

Just like their criticism of Condoleeza Rice NEVER devolves into blatant racism, right?

        -=Mike

That makes no sense at all. If they hated her because of her race, then Colin Powell would get a slagging, too.

 

Did you miss the editorial cartoons about her?

 

You don't find it odd that one of the most intelligent people on Earth is portrayed as Bush's "puppet" by the Dems?

This guy shouted something off he heard word of mouth from somebody else without proof, probably thinking nobody would ask for it. I wouldn't call it slander, but I would say it's probably a lie.

 

Sad thing is, if it turned out someday to be true, I wouldn't be very suprised.

And if it turned out to be a blatant lie, it'd simply be par for the course for the press.

-=Mike

[Vyce 0]

I don't even care about that.  It's just stupid for people to do this mock outrage over a guy no one has heard of to try and divert attention from what Eason did.  They have nothing to do with each other.

Oh, I agree. There is a world of difference between a guy nobody heard of and the head of the news division at CNN.

-=Mike

This was my point.

 

Jordan has infinitely MORE influence that whoever this other schmuck is, which is why everyone should be uneasy over his reckless and unsubstantiated claims.

 

That makes no sense at all. If they hated her because of her race, then Colin Powell would get a slagging, too.

 

Mike is primarily talking about the editorial cartoons, which at times rather blatantly use racist or stereotypical depictions / caricatures of Condi.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Did you miss the editorial cartoons about her?

Again, if this was done because the cartoonists were racist against people with black skin, Colin Powell would have taken a beating, too. In fact, the only time someone DID attack someone in the Bush administration for the color of their skin was when someone called Powell as a house servant. And he was rightly bitched to hell by everyone.

 

You don't find it odd that one of the most intelligent people on Earth is portrayed as Bush's "puppet" by the Dems?

 

Well that's just an obvious conclusion. Reports are that she and he really think alike, despite the fact that she's so well- educated and he talks like a buffoon despite his diplomas. Reportedly, she can finish his senteces before he can quite often and once she almost called him "my husband" at a dinner function before correcting herself.

 

Even the smartest person can be dragged down to yes-man level if offered power, really.

 

And if it turned out to be a blatant lie, it'd simply be par for the course for the press.

 

Despite this guy's stroke at CNN, it hasn't been reported on that news station. I know you're trying to use this to set up an arguement that any old story can be reported on CNN as fact without any kind of credibility. But you're missing a critical piece, there.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

I will henceforth discuss these two issues seperately:

 

On "Gannon":

 

This guy with no journalistic credentials becomes a member of the White House Press Corps, the big leagues for a journalist, with absolutely zero credentials and serves for 2 full years. A couple weeks after starting at the WH, he is given access to classified documents (regarding the identity of outed CIA agent [via douchebag extraordinaire Bob Novak] Valerie Plame) AND allowed to ask blatantly biased questions in RARE Bush press conferences while credible journalists get shut out. He was denied a press pass to the House and Senate because Talon news' relationship w/ GOPUSA.com made it ineligible--yet he still retained his WH Press Corps pass! His access to classified documents and the unabashedly conservative slant of his questions make the possibility that all of this was an accident seem absurd.

 

The "Gannon" incident is particularly disturbing in the light of the recent "payola" incidents:

-Armstrong Williams paid $240K to fellate NCLB

-Maggie Galagher paid to shill for Bush's marriage policies

-DoD investigations into possible payola violations

 

On Jordan:

 

Vyce, you're ignoring the fact these claims about Jordan have yet to be proven. And, again, I would agree that, if he really said what the Congressman said he said (not what the BBC director said he said), then it's outrageous.

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

Vyce, you're ignoring the fact these claims about Jordan have yet to be proven. And, again, I would agree that, if he really said what the Congressman said he said (not what the BBC director said he said), then it's outrageous.

 

Actually after reading some more on the subject I found out that this isn't the first time Jordan has thrown this accusation around with no proof. The only difference this time was someone in attendence called him out on his bullshit. He's also made the same unfounded claims about Israel.

 

On Gannon. You only have to prove you write for a publication and that said publication is being published. Gannon easily fell into that category. He was denied Conressional ones because the publication has to cost money. It basically boils down to the fact that he asked a question the Boston Globe didn't like so they hired two guys to dig up dirt on a guy.

[Guest MikeSC]

Did you miss the editorial cartoons about her?

Again, if this was done because the cartoonists were racist against people with black skin, Colin Powell would have taken a beating, too. In fact, the only time someone DID attack someone in the Bush administration for the color of their skin was when someone called Powell as a house servant. And he was rightly bitched to hell by everyone.

Jobber, it is impossible, legitimately, to ignore the blatant racism in many of the criticisms of Rice. I would suggest you go back and look at what has been implied about Rice and tell me this: If a conservative said it about, say, Maxine Waters --- would there be any doubt about it being racist?

 

Just as it is impossible to ignore Reid's criticisms of Clarence Thomas as anything more than racism.

You don't find it odd that one of the most intelligent people on Earth is portrayed as Bush's "puppet" by the Dems?

Well that's just an obvious conclusion. Reports are that she and he really think alike, despite the fact that she's so well- educated and he talks like a buffoon despite his diplomas. Reportedly, she can finish his senteces before he can quite often and once she almost called him "my husband" at a dinner function before correcting herself.

Even that, honestly, is offensive.

 

Rice, by MANY accounts, was the brains behind the pre-emptive action mentality. People who have talked to her say, flat out, Bush did not put this idea in her head.

And if it turned out to be a blatant lie, it'd simply be par for the course for the press.

Despite this guy's stroke at CNN, it hasn't been reported on that news station.

Which is pretty much expected.

 

You didn't CBS discussing their report about memogate in any depth.

I know you're trying to use this to set up an arguement that any old story can be reported on CNN as fact without any kind of credibility. But you're missing a critical piece, there.

I have several people, none of whom terribly affectionate of Bush or his policies, stating --- without hesitation --- that Eason accused the military of killing journalists intentionlly.

 

He's made the comments before.

 

CNN's refusal to cover this is simply a condemnation of the press --- especially considering the shitstorm the general's "It's fun to shoot some people" comments caused.

On "Gannon":

 

This guy with no journalistic credentials becomes a member of the White House Press Corps, the big leagues for a journalist, with absolutely zero credentials and serves for 2 full years. A couple weeks after starting at the WH, he is given access to classified documents (regarding the identity of outed CIA agent [via douchebag extraordinaire Bob Novak] Valerie Plame) AND allowed to ask blatantly biased questions in RARE Bush press conferences while credible journalists get shut out. He was denied a press pass to the House and Senate because Talon news' relationship w/ GOPUSA.com made it ineligible--yet he still retained his WH Press Corps pass! His access to classified documents and the unabashedly conservative slant of his questions make the possibility that all of this was an accident seem absurd.

Can you prove even the tiniest sliver of this?

 

You can prove that he had access to the name of an outed CIA agent that the WH political machine wouldn't have access to.

 

And, again, Helen Thomas --- as biased a human as exists on Earth --- was a WH reporter for EONS.

The "Gannon" incident is particularly disturbing in the light of the recent "payola" incidents:

-Armstrong Williams paid $240K to fellate NCLB

-Maggie Galagher paid to shill for Bush's marriage policies

-DoD investigations into possible payola violations

They actually asked Gallagher to help write some of their materials. It's not like anything she wrote wasn't basically the same stuff she wrote BEFORE Bush took office.

 

Ganon was simply a gay man who the left had no problem smearing. So be it.

-=Mike

[BUTT 0]

Well, to be honest, the "left" will really take anything they get with regards to being able to criticize the Bush adminstration. So if a story breaks in which they can make it appear as though the administration let a blatantly biased non-reporter into press conferences simply so he could spread their ideology, are you surprised they went with it? Or do you really believe that they did it simply because the left hates gays and they wanted to have some fun by bringing one down? Because I feel trying to spin this as a mater of sexuality is the same kind of crap Gov. McGreevey tried this summer.

[Guest MikeSC]

Well, something was really big --- seeing as how Jordan was pressured to quit today.

-=Mike

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Jobber, it is impossible, legitimately, to ignore the blatant racism in many of the criticisms of Rice. I would suggest you go back and look at what has been implied about Rice and tell me this: If a conservative said it about, say, Maxine Waters --- would there be any doubt about it being racist?

Look, race-hate occurs because people have some sort of complex where they do not like someone because of the color of their skin.

 

While a lot of people say a lot of nasty things about Dr. Rice, not many of them have been inspired because they hate black people. I don't think I've ever heard anyone say "Condi Rice is a liar and a con-artist and holds responsibility for the deaths of so many, but you know why I really don't like her? Because she's black."

 

Which is pretty much expected.

 

You didn't CBS discussing their report about memogate in any depth.

 

Get a brain. If you had the proper focus I wasn't saying that this guy's comments weren't a news story. That's even idiotic to suggest, although it's happened before (CNN reporting on Ted Turner's looniest comments, namely.) I mean that despite all the power this guy wields at CNN, you didn't see a Breaking News alert over reports that soldiers are intentionally fitinig at reporters.

 

I have several people, none of whom terribly affectionate of Bush or his policies, stating --- without hesitation --- that Eason accused the military of killing journalists intentionlly.

 

He's made the comments before.

 

Whoo. Look what the ownership of the Washington Times believes in. And yet, until Moonie sermons start appearing in that paper, some people will still feel fit to cite it as a legitimate source. Even the President sat down for an interview with them recently.

[Vyce 0]

Vyce, you're ignoring the fact these claims about Jordan have yet to be proven. And, again, I would agree that, if he really said what the Congressman said he said (not what the BBC director said he said), then it's outrageous.

 

I trust Frank more than any director of the BBC.

 

Frank, quite honestly, has about 1,000 fewer idealogical axes to grind than any representative of the BBC.

 

While a lot of people say a lot of nasty things about Dr. Rice, not many of them have been inspired because they hate black people. I don't think I've ever heard anyone say "Condi Rice is a liar and a con-artist and holds responsibility for the deaths of so many, but you know why I really don't like her? Because she's black."

 

Race may not be the driving factor in the criticism against her, but, at least in the editorial cartoons, it's too often imbedded within it, for no good reason other than just to childishly insult her.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Whoo. Look what the ownership of the Washington Times believes in. And yet, until Moonie sermons start appearing in that paper, some people will still feel fit to cite it as a legitimate source. Even the President sat down for an interview with them recently.

Meh. I don't feel it's that legitimate of a paper. However, the Christian Science Monitor is a good newspaper.

[Guest Brian]

CSM is an excellent paper. For years it was the only thing where you could find out what was happening in the archipelago of Southeast Asia.

[Guest MikeSC]

Jobber, it is impossible, legitimately, to ignore the blatant racism in many of the criticisms of Rice. I would suggest you go back and look at what has been implied about Rice and tell me this: If a conservative said it about, say, Maxine Waters --- would there be any doubt about it being racist?

Look, race-hate occurs because people have some sort of complex where they do not like someone because of the color of their skin.

 

While a lot of people say a lot of nasty things about Dr. Rice, not many of them have been inspired because they hate black people. I don't think I've ever heard anyone say "Condi Rice is a liar and a con-artist and holds responsibility for the deaths of so many, but you know why I really don't like her? Because she's black."

 

 

And it's unfathomable that these people hate blacks --- but won't speak ill of those who agree with their worldview?

 

It happens. I mean, Zell Miller went from decent guy to "Dixiecrat" with one speech. If Robert Byrd endorsed a Republican in 2008, his Klan history would suddenly become relevant.

 

People will overlook things they disdain if it benefits them politically.

Which is pretty much expected.

 

You didn't CBS discussing their report about memogate in any depth.

 

Get a brain. If you had the proper focus I wasn't saying that this guy's comments weren't a news story. That's even idiotic to suggest, although it's happened before (CNN reporting on Ted Turner's looniest comments, namely.) I mean that despite all the power this guy wields at CNN, you didn't see a Breaking News alert over reports that soldiers are intentionally fitinig at reporters.

Again, it's truly stunning that a company is trying to sweep a scandal under the rug.

 

That has NEVER happened before.

 

I mean, again, CBS managed to not really report on just how fraudulent their memos were, didn't they? You don't see FNC airing "Outfoxed", do you?

I have several people, none of whom terribly affectionate of Bush or his policies, stating --- without hesitation --- that Eason accused the military of killing journalists intentionlly.

 

He's made the comments before.

Whoo. Look what the ownership of the Washington Times believes in. And yet, until Moonie sermons start appearing in that paper, some people will still feel fit to cite it as a legitimate source. Even the President sat down for an interview with them recently.

I suppose this is a relevant point in some alternate universe.

-=Mike

...And I suppose you can actually point to where Rev. Moon influences the Washington Times coverage of anything...

[The Czech Republic 0]

I don't think that they hold random-partner mass weddings in the Washington Times newsrooms like Al Franken says they do, (ironically, in Lies And The Lying Liars That Tell Them, "well it was a joke this time! it's satire!") but I am skeptical of a newspaper run by the Unification Church.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

If Robert Byrd endorsed a Republican in 2008, his Klan history would suddenly become relevant.

Like you have room to talk. You've criticised him about it before in political arguements, proving your own point.

 

Again, it's truly stunning that a company is trying to sweep a scandal under the rug.

 

That has NEVER happened before.

 

Considering they got rid of the guy, I'd say they're a much more responsible organization than, say, the group below.

 

I suppose this is a relevant point in some alternate universe.

        -=Mike

...And I suppose you can actually point to where Rev. Moon influences the Washington Times coverage of anything...

Do you not consider he puts followers in important positions?

[Guest MikeSC]

I don't think that they hold random-partner mass weddings in the Washington Times newsrooms like Al Franken says they do, (ironically, in Lies And The Lying Liars That Tell Them, "well it was a joke this time! it's satire!") but I am skeptical of a newspaper run by the Unification Church.

Thing is, I cannot name anything that Moon's church has influenced in terms of the Times' coverage.

-=Mike

[Guest MikeSC]

If Robert Byrd endorsed a Republican in 2008, his Klan history would suddenly become relevant.

Like you have room to talk. You've criticised him about it before in political arguements, proving your own point.

I have a problem with Klan membership by anybody. However, if he supports a Republican in 2008, his Klan membership will be mentioned anytime his name is uttered.

 

As it SHOULD be right now.

Again, it's truly stunning that a company is trying to sweep a scandal under the rug.

 

That has NEVER happened before.

Considering they got rid of the guy, I'd say they're a much more responsible organization than, say, the group below.

Hmm, silently accepting a man's resignation on a Friday evening?

 

Forgive me if I don't cut cartwheels here.

 

BTW, they still haven't mentioned it that I'm aware of.

I suppose this is a relevant point in some alternate universe.

        -=Mike

...And I suppose you can actually point to where Rev. Moon influences the Washington Times coverage of anything...

Do you not consider he puts followers in important positions?

Can you PROVE it?

-=Mike

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Thing is, I cannot name anything that Moon's church has influenced in terms of the Times' coverage.

-=Mike

I can't remember CNN saying soldiers are targeting journalists, either. I can't remember when this guy's belief, crazy as it is, was reported on CNN-TV. I cannot remember his conspiracy theory being spread by CNN in any form.

 

You're concerned because of the potential of a guy who believes in a conspiracy such as this being an influence in the news you watch, even if CNN isn't breaking in to say "US shoots reporters!" It's the paranoia about the kind of people who are choosing what you'll see and hear from the news.

 

So I'm telling you about some of my paranoia, too.

[The Czech Republic 0]

I don't think that they hold random-partner mass weddings in the Washington Times newsrooms like Al Franken says they do, (ironically, in Lies And The Lying Liars That Tell Them, "well it was a joke this time! it's satire!") but I am skeptical of a newspaper run by the Unification Church.

Thing is, I cannot name anything that Moon's church has influenced in terms of the Times' coverage.

-=Mike

Yeah all I can come up with is just the conservative slant. It's not like there was a front page saying "New Studies Show The Unification Church Is Super-Great" or anything, but I'm still just sticking with the Trib for my newspaper needs.

[Guest MikeSC]

Thing is, I cannot name anything that Moon's church has influenced in terms of the Times' coverage.

        -=Mike

I can't remember CNN saying soldiers are targeting journalists, either. I can't remember when this guy's belief, crazy as it is, was reported on CNN-TV. I cannot remember his conspiracy theory being spread by CNN in any form.

Considering the constant drumbeat of negativity of coverage of the military on CNN --- yeah, it does seem fully plausible.

You're concerned because of the potential of a guy who believes in a conspiracy such as this being an influence in the news you watch, even if CNN isn't breaking in to say "US shoots reporters!"

They didn't much mention that they covered up Saddam's atrocities to keep their Baghdad bureau open, either.

It's the paranoia about the kind of people who are choosing what you'll see and hear from the news.

 

So I'm telling you about some of my paranoia, too.

I actually have something behind my "paranoia".

-=Mike

[Guest Brian]

It's the paranoia about the kind of people who are choosing what you'll see and hear from the news.

 

So I'm telling you about some of my paranoia, too.

I actually have something behind my "paranoia".

-=Mike

It's not a pink elephant is it?

[Guest MikeSC]

It's the paranoia about the kind of people who are choosing what you'll see and hear from the news.

 

So I'm telling you about some of my paranoia, too.

I actually have something behind my "paranoia".

-=Mike

It's not a pink elephant is it?

That sounds a little ghey.

-=Mike

[Jobber of the Week 0]

I have a problem with Klan membership by anybody. However, if he supports a Republican in 2008, his Klan membership will be mentioned anytime his name is uttered.

Yet he quit in the 50s. And when I call Zell Miller out on some of his lovely comments (like that "black porridge" one) or talked about Strom Thurmond you go out of your way to tell me what reformers they are.

 

Yes, you are correct. People forgive some pretty despicable things when it suits them politically. You are a prime example.

 

Do you not consider he puts followers in important positions?

Can you PROVE it?

-=Mike

 

Former editor and early Sun Myung Moon follower Josette Shiner was appointed U.S. Deputy Trade Representative in 2003.

 

Source

[Guest MikeSC]

I have a problem with Klan membership by anybody. However, if he supports a Republican in 2008, his Klan membership will be mentioned anytime his name is uttered.

Yet he quit in the 50s. And when I call Zell Miller out on some of his lovely comments (like that "black porridge" one) or talked about Strom Thurmond you go out of your way to tell me what reformers they are.

 

 

 

He was rather high up in the organization. He was a friggin' RECRUITER.

 

Strom changed. Zell changed. I've not once heard Byrd spend one moment explaining away his KKK membership --- nor have I heard a civil rights group explain why they don't expect him to do so.

 

I also note that Sen. Dodd praising him didn't lead to shit --- while Sen. Lott praising Thurmond got him shitcanned from his position of power.

 

And there is zero defense, whatsoever, for the Dems not doing anything.

Yes, you are correct. People forgive some pretty despicable things when it suits them politically. You are a prime example.

Feel free to note somebody I "turned on" when they didn't go along with my views.

 

I also note that you seem to have no problem with Byrd who was a recruiter for the KKK, while having considerable issue with Thurmond or Zell.

Do you not consider he puts followers in important positions?

Can you PROVE it?

-=Mike

 

Former editor and early Sun Myung Moon follower Josette Shiner was appointed U.S. Deputy Trade Representative in 2003.

 

Source

And this is proof of him putting his followers in important positions in his paper how?

 

Or are you attempting to claim that Bush is in bed with Rev. Moon?

-=Mike