Posted on 02/19/2005 8:12:53 AM PST by lowbridge
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1607992
TomClash (1000+ posts) Sat Feb-19-05 09:49 AM Original message
Here's the problem with Gannon
It's not that he's gay.
It's not that he's a prostitute.
It's not the kinky websites.
It's not even the hypocrisy.
It's the breach of national security. What if Gannon was an agent for China, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Iran, Israel, North Korea or some other country? He received classified information about Valerie Plame. He received classified information about the timing of "Shock and Awe." He was close to someone in the White House (and yes it could be Bush or Rove) who probably had access to sensitive intelligence.
What? These are the same a$$holes who have been rooting for a high American body count in Iraq so BushHitler would lose the election to Kerry, and now they're worried that Gannon the Rump Ranger might be a Chicom Agent? Pass the bong, I need to drink some of the water!
Be Seeing You,
Chris
Didn't Monica Lewinsky take a memo of some sort off Bill's desk to prove she was close to him? Who knows what access she had...
And they are the same Clymers who downplayed the national security implications of Monicagate and the 'toon's connections to Chinese interests.
The "problem" with Gannon is that he is just a small fish in a big pond, and the DUmmies are worked into a lather because that is all he is, not the "jackpot gotcha" they were dreaming of to damage President Bush.
It is not a given.
In this regard, Jeff Gannon is being astute. No doubts his lawyers are taking names and notes, and they should be.
An innuendo'd assumption has morphed into a "so-called" given. It's not a given. It's not even been proved nor disproved.
And this is exactly how Gannon-gate continues to grow in furthering its "morph".
A number of issues are morphing. I'm watching it happen.
People with a given track record of liberalism, a proven track record of despising America are suddenly being billed as "rational" preservers of the BofR, and simply because they joined in on the "eason-gate" matter. Or the "gannon-gate" matter.
Jeff Gannon's case has now morphed into "prostitution". Freepers and Du'ers are both accepting this as a fact. It ain't a fact unless it is proven in a court of law.
Jeff Gannon is being tried in the public court room of opinion.
Jeff Gannon has said that he has done things in his past which he wishes he hadn't done. That's his answer. Period. And the morph assumes this is a direct admission of the innuendo'ing about him.
It's not.
Oh, I'm keeping that very well in mind. I'm pretty familiar with theories that evolve on DU. They run with something, anything negative about conservatives long before anything has been established as an actual proven fact.
Why "sarcasm"? Is it somehow a bad thing if the people who post at Democratic Underground start showing concern for national security?
If Democratic Underground posters are now expressing concern for national security after a long record of apathy, that sounds to me like a GOOD thing. Something to celebrate, not be sarcastic about. It could be a signal that our efforts (by "our," I mean we conservatives) have paid off. It shows that we may have finally won the greater debate.
What's your preference -- that Democrats become concerned about national security, or that you get to keep having an "enemy" around to argue with?
Just asking.
Um.......has Gannon been in the Oval Office????
Under the President's desk???? Offered jobs by Republican Party
power brokers, or the freakin US Ambassador to the UN?????
These people are delusional.
That combined with these a$$holes being on the side of Dan Rather...
CNN who admitted to hiding Saddam's atrocities, and Jimmah Carter who keeps showing up in the hip pocket of Communist dictators and global thugs, and they still have the nerve to question anyone?
It IS a bad thing for DUmmies to focus on a White House Press reporter who asked softball questions as a national security risk.
Anytime, anywhere in the world a bomb goes off, a hostage is taken, or a plane goes down the DUmmies accuse the United States FIRST of being behind it. They don't give a rat's behind about real threats from Islamic extremists because their goal is make President Bush out to be the next coming of Hitler and the greatest threat to global security.
So, when the DUmmmies get a grip on who the REAL threats to national security are then I'll think it's a "good thing."
Perhaps so, but that's not the sentiment expressed by the original poster, and thus isn't germane to my response to that poster.
The original poster said it's "good to see" posters at Democratic Underground being concerned about national security, then noted that he/she was being sarcastic. I asked why does concern for national security merit sarcasm? Isn't it actually a sign that the conservative message may be getting through and making a difference?
Also, I don't see what point is served by using expressions such as "DUmmies." That sort of rhetoric doesn't help persuade one's opponent that the opponent is wrong. In fact, it can actually achieve the opposite effect, by indicating to the opponent that one's argument is not to be taken seriously. That's because name-calling, no matter how clever the pun, is typically a sign of unserious thinking.
Oh brother, are these guys reaching. You have wonder at their circular logic. They claim that Gannon is a bad writer and only rewrote the White House press releases, but at the same time they claim that he had inside information. Now they are claiming that he had secret information that would make him vulnerable to black mail.
Right, foreign powers are going to blackmail a reporter to obtain White House press releases.
"sarcasm" because in reality, they dont give a damn. They're not now "at long last" showing any concern for national security. They just see something with which they hope to bring the Bush administration down with.
The next time a Democrat President gets into the oval office, he could hand the Iranians our nuclear launching codes if he wanted to, and they'll shrug their shoulders and say something along the lines of "Oh well. It's in the interest of world peace"
For an obviously intelligent person (checked out your nice blog) this is an incredibly naive comment.
As for the "DUmmies" thing...it's called fun. Lighten up.
The context is important in the original poster's comment. He was talking about this Gannon thing, and the DUmmies suddenly showing interest in national security as a direct result of this situation.
okay-bet away!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.