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.
Of course I have no idea what this guy has said over the years, but these were the same people, I'll bet, that defended Bill Clinton when he gave away the farm to the Chinese in exchange for campaign donations. Now the radical left are experts on national security.
You are suggesting via your response to low-bridge that "history" of DU'ers doesn't matter. But only that they be taken at their word in the here and now. The irony is -- Democrats also generally take this position -- that one should drop "historical" relevance in favor of the "now".
And upon what basis are Duer's at nauseum going after Jeff Gannon -- his alleged "history".
Irony.
But I think the point of my post is getting overlooked here, which can only be my own fault for not expressing it more clearly.
I have no idea if Democrat Underground users are actually becoming more concerned about national security. I don't visit there very often, so I can't form an overall judgment. I'm going only on the excerpt provided here, and the sarcasm-tagged response that was attached to it.
This is my point: If someone who has previously shown little interest in national security is suddenly showing interest in national security, that merits applause from those of us who have always shown an interest in national security. No matter WHAT the context.
Let's say I'm a big-time Beatles fan with an acquaintance named Joe who has done nothing but disparage the Beatles, despite all my longtime efforts to get him into my corner. And one day Joe suddenly announces, "Hey, you know, I just realized that 'Ticket to Ride' is actually a really good song." I'd be happy. I wouldn't sarcastically say, "Gee, good to see that Joe is such a big Beatles fan now." I'd be pleased that Joe had seen things my way for a change.
As for the "DUmmies" thing, it might be "fun." But it does little to advance debate. I want to persuade those who disagree with me -- not turn them off. Free Republic and other conservative voices harbor such powerful potential for convincing others that our positions are the right ones. A single "DUmmy" or "Hitlery Clinton" can do severe damage to that potential, because it can make others think that this is a playground, not a place where arguments should be taken seriously.
Yes you would be pleased, unless you knew that Joe was lying to you about liking the Beatles for some underhanded reason. Thats the thing you seem to be missing. The DUers sudden concern for national security is NOT genuine. It's phony and will not last for long.
Lowbridge, I see your bigger point. And I understand why you would be suspicious of the motivations of some Democratic Underground participants.
But taken on its face, I didn't see anything in that user's post to indicate he was being insincere. I couldn't care less about the whole Gannon brouhaha, but his/her overall point was actually a pretty good one: Without more careful credentialing, a foreign agent actually COULD penetrate the protective layers that keep the president safe.
Sounds to me like a worthy point of concern. And yes, that's indeed "good to see," no sarcasm needed.
lowbridge is correct in his assessment of the "conversion" to being concerned about national security. They are not concerned for any reason other than it might be a way to do a gotcha on President Bush.
I've lurked at DU for close to 2 years and the majority of posters there simply want to do anything they can to discredit the Bush WH. The rare few who are not fanatical in their hatred of Bush usually end up being banned or as they call it, tombstoned.
Actually, with more careful credentialing, foreign agents could and have penetrated the protective layers.
It depends on what that foreign agent wanted to do. He certainly is not going to get state secrets in a press briefing room. And if he wanted to do physical harm, there is no foolproof way to protect the President. Foreign agents have been getting access to the President for hundreds of years, without the help of a simple press pass. Alger Hiss comes to mind. So does all the chi coms that Clinton let in the door.
And I'm reminded of all those soviet spies who didnt have access to the President, but did have access to state scecrets, and had that much more careful credentialing than the press to get their jobs (Aldrich Ames comes to mind).
I'm sure that the credentialing of the press is quite adequate in that they didnt find any threat or harm in giving a day pass to Gannon. And I'm sure that they keep the press briefing rooms quite safe. I imagine they still have to walk through metal detectors and such.
Semolina, I kind of look at it like this in regards to far left dems changing their spots. I have a few friends and ex-friends who were 60s & 70s lefties. Some of us, over time, grew up and changed our spots completely. Some did not. There is no way that some of these folks can or would change their ideology. They almost appear brainwashed. You can't reason with them and the harder you try the glassier their eyes get and the more insane they sound.
BTW, the Fighting Illini have it all sewed up! ;)
Hah! Looks like somebody was poking around my profile page.
Illinois will probably make it through the rest of the Big Ten season undefeated. I really don't think they should get their hopes too high for the NCAA tournament, though. Danger is lurking, and I think you guys will in for rude awakening.
That said... I'm a little nervous about my Tar Heels these past couple of weeks. They're still winning, of course, and will be #2 again when the new polls come out Monday. But something about the style of play has changed recently -- the fast breaks and smooth tempo just don't seem to be as reliable as they were earlier in the season.
Ahh, well. Fodder for a more appropriate thread sometime, I suppose!
Why were they silent when members of Code Pink recieved front row tickets for the inaugeration.
"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."
Just like to point out, none of these have panned out at all, even the gay activist who outted him tried that shock and awe tag and realized it wasn't going anywhere since many people knew about it.
I'm sorry, I don't understand the reference. Could you elaborate/explain?
IIRC, some Democrat member of Congress provided front row seat tickets to a group of known protesters intending to allow them to disrupt the inauguration.
Speaking of "access", mwyounce.
IIRC, there were at least six member of Clinton's "Inner Circle" and Cabinet whose FBI Background Checks were initiated, then mysteriously quashed in the early moths of Clinton's first term by the FBI.
Rumors are rife that Bill and Monica played "phone sex" over a secure phone line on Bill's many trips to Europe as well.
Jack.
Other than the fact none of this is true, it makes for an amusing story.
DEMS GAVE CODE PINK DISRUPTERS TICKETS By Michelle Malkin · January 21, 2005 10:02 PM The San Francisco Chronicle reported today:
The most effective -- and disruptive -- protest may have come from the anti-war group Code Pink, which obtained 16 tickets to the inauguration from their members of Congress. Eight female activists, including Code Pink co-founder Medea Benjamin of San Francisco, obtained seats in the VIP section. They took their cue during Bush's speech -- when he spoke about the rights of people living under dictatorships to "free dissent" -- and unfurled banners reading "No War" and "Bush Mandate: Bring the Troops Home." Police confiscated the banners but did not remove the women.
A few moments later, the women stood up again, but this time they shouted, "Champagne is flying while soldiers are dying" and "Out of Iraq now." The pro- Bush crowd began chanting, and Bush momentarily paused. Police pulled the women off their chairs and escorted them out of area.
Two of the women were still being held late Thursday -- Benjamin and Diane Wilson of Texas -- but the others were released after the speech was over.
Wonder which members of Congress supplied the tickets? Jim Angle of FOX News reports that it was congressional Democrats from New York and California. Shame on them. If they wanted to disrupt the president's speech, the Democrats should have had the guts to do the dirty work themselves instead of hiding behind Code Pink's skirts.
Cowards.
What do DUmmies call us?
Boss.
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.