If this is your first visit to the Roth Army, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
1. In every election in which I have voted, I usually am voting for the lesser of 2 evils.
In Chimpy's case, I did not vote FOR Kerry.
I voted AGAINST Chimpy.
Also, I find it hilarious Chimpy was caught in another lie.
The White House had claimed Abramoff was not at a meeting between Chimpy and the leader of an Indian Tribe. Today they showed a picture from that day on CNN and Abramoff can clearly be seen in the background.
The lies will not stop until we get Chimpy and his regime of fucking asslickers out of office.
Originally posted by Hardrock69 1. In every election in which I have voted, I usually am voting for the lesser of 2 evils.
In Chimpy's case, I did not vote FOR Kerry.
I voted AGAINST Chimpy.
Also, I find it hilarious Chimpy was caught in another lie.
The White House had claimed Abramoff was not at a meeting between Chimpy and the leader of an Indian Tribe. Today they showed a picture from that day on CNN and Abramoff can clearly be seen in the background.
The lies will not stop until we get Chimpy and his regime of fucking asslickers out of office.
Actually if you didn't want to vote for Bush, you wouldn't have voted at all.
I always vote for the guy I want to win, not the lesser of two evils.
Originally posted by blueturk I will say one thing for Kerry, though. If he only sustained a paper cut while in Vietnam, he still served his country far more admirably than Dubya and Uncle Dick. It's total bullshit when two draft-dodging chickenhawks try to smear a man that did what they were too fucking chickenshit to do.
Does that mean you think all Presidential candidates need to have military service on their resumes? Is that what you mean to say? That limits your choices for '08 rather considerably.
Interesting.
“If bullshit was currency, Joe Biden would be a billionaire.” - George W. Bush
Originally posted by Warham Actually if you didn't want to vote for Bush, you wouldn't have voted at all.
Says who? I will do as I wish and tell people like you to go fuck yourselves.
I always vote for the guy I want to win, not the lesser of two evils.
I am not required to abide by your narrow mind-set.
I did not want Kerry or Chimpy to win, but I would much prefer to have an UNTRIED (and less evil) president in office when the incumbent is a global terrorist.
I already knew Chimpy was a lying, genocidal maniac.
There is always the chance that Kerry would not be so corrupt or hell-bent on destroying the United States of America as Chimpy.
Anyone who WANTS to support someone like Adolph Hitler's Bastard Stepchild (Chimpy) is themselves a fascist, Nazi fuckhead motherfucker.
Are you calling 50,000,000+ Americans Nazis because they voted for him?
Are you that moronic?
Nevermind, don't answer that.
I think it's you who has the narrow mind, let alone narrow mindset. Your hatred for your country has gotten the best of you. Take a valium and rethink your position.
Originally posted by BigBadBrian Does that mean you think all Presidential candidates need to have military service on their resumes? Is that what you mean to say? That limits your choices for '08 rather considerably.
Originally posted by BigBadBrian Does that mean you think all Presidential candidates need to have military service on their resumes? Is that what you mean to say? That limits your choices for '08 rather considerably.
Interesting.
As for my choices being limited, they already are. Condi? Hillary? No fucking way.
"If the American people had ever known the truth about what we (the BCE) have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets and lynched." - Poppy Bush, 1992
Originally posted by BigBadBrian Does that mean you think all Presidential candidates need to have military service on their resumes? Is that what you mean to say? That limits your choices for '08 rather considerably.
Interesting.
I didn't quite read his comments that way...
I think it was something more to the effect that it's hard in good conscience for a candidate to surround himself with a bunch of deferment chickenhawks (Cheney, Rove, etc...), and then play the macho rhetoric "war-president" card when said chickenshitters are in fact running that war, and are overruling uniformed service members to advance their agenda.
These guys clearly haven't a clue as to what they're doing...
And it's been that way since they began trying to propagate their Neo Con "remaking the world" views...
Maybe you should just go off of what he actually said instead of injecting your own stupid views in...
Originally posted by Warham Didn't Clinton bring integrity to the White House? He served right after Bush the Elder. Surely a peoples' man from Arkansas can do no wrong, right?
Aren't you getting sick of this by now? I know I am. You contribute nothing.
Originally posted by FORD
Well, the White House hasn't explained all the unauthorized time that Jimmy Jeff Gannon-Guckert spent in the West Wing. Maybe when Rove gets desperate enough to cut a deal, he'll give up Jeffy......
Originally posted by Warham All of these stories get cooked up in places like Daily KOS and the DU.
Nowhere reputable.
Oh yeah, there isn't any evidence that the White House was letting a gay prostitute with a fake name enter the press room without a background check and then lob softball questions to the press secretary. That would never happen!
Man worked for Web site owned by Republican activist
Thursday, February 10, 2005 Posted: 9:04 AM EST (1404 GMT)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A New York congresswoman asked the White House to explain Wednesday why a man who worked for a news Web site owned by a GOP activist was able to obtain White House press credentials under an assumed name.
James Guckert, who reported from the White House for the Talon News Service under the name "Jeff Gannon," announced he was quitting the business "in consideration of the welfare of me and my family."
"Because of the attention being paid to me, I find it is no longer possible to effectively be a reporter for Talon News," he said in a statement posted Wednesday on his Web site.
In a letter to President Bush, Rep. Louise Slaughter, a Democrat, questioned why Guckert routinely received credentials for White House news briefings.
Slaughter linked Guckert's case to recent revelations that two conservative columnists who supported Bush administration policies had received government money.
"It appears that 'Mr. Gannon's' presence in the White House press corps was merely as a tool of propaganda for your administration," Slaughter wrote.
The White House had no comment.
The House and Senate press galleries declined Guckert's request for credentials in 2003.
Julie Davis, chairwoman of the Senate press gallery's executive committee, said Guckert could not demonstrate any separation between Talon News and GOPUSA, a Republican consulting group.
Both organizations are run by Bobby Eberle, a Texas GOP activist. Many Talon News articles also appeared as news releases on the GOPUSA Web site, said Davis, a reporter for The Sun newspaper of Baltimore, Maryland.
In a statement on the Talon Web site, Eberle referred to "Gannon's" resignation and said, "I understand and support Jeff's decision."
Slaughter said she was writing at the request of senior editors of the Niagara Falls Reporter in her Buffalo-area district.
The newspaper ran an open letter questioning "how a partisan political organization and an individual with no credentials as a reporter -- and apparently operating under an assumed name -- landed a coveted spot in the White House press corps."
During White House press secretary Scott McClellan's regular briefings, Guckert routinely offered administration-friendly questions.
He became the focus of liberal and media Web sites after Bush called on him during his news conference January 26.
Guckert asked Bush how he could deal with Democratic congressional leaders "who seem to have divorced themselves from reality."
Guckert told The Washington Post in an article published Tuesday that his political leanings were "admittedly" conservative "and that point of view is not represented in the briefing room at all."
"Call me partisan, fine, but don't let my colleagues off the hook," he said. "They're partisan too, but they don't admit it."
Slaughter said ideology had nothing to do with the dispute.
"It doesn't matter whether he's a conservative reporter. The question is, is he a reporter?" she said.
She told CNN that she believed the White House gave Guckert credentials to get a friendly questioner into the room during White House briefings.
"I don't want to be fed propaganda from this White House," she said. "I don't want people to be paid to give it to me. We deserve the facts, or this democracy will suffer."
Last month, conservative commentator Armstrong Williams apologized for not disclosing that his company had received $240,000 from a public relations agency hired by the Department of Education to promote Bush's No Child Left Behind education overhaul.
Syndicated columnist Maggie Gallagher also apologized to her readers for not disclosing a $21,500 contract with the Department of Health and Human Services to help create materials used to promote Bush's $300 million initiative encouraging marriage to strengthen families.
At the January 26 news conference, Bush said he disapproved of such practices and wanted them to stop.
"There needs to be independence," he said.
"All our Cabinet secretaries must realize that we will not be paying ... commentators to advance our agenda. Our agenda ought to be able to stand on its own two feet," Bush said. (Full story)
HHS later disclosed that a third conservative columnist, Mike McManus, had received $10,000 to promote Bush's marriage initiative, according to an Associated Press report. His weekly column appears in about 50 newspapers.
Several congressional Democrats have introduced a bill to stop what they termed taxpayer-funded "covert propaganda campaigns" that violate a provision included in annual appropriation acts since 1951.
Under the new bill, dubbed the Federal Propaganda Prohibition Act of 2005, the prohibition on propaganda would become a permanent part of federal law.
Federal agencies would also have to notify Congress about public relations, advertising and polling contracts, and the funding sources of all federally funded public relations materials would have to be disclosed.
Comment