Skip to comments.
Bush's reversals: AP and CNN publish outright attack on the President as straight news
AP via CNN ^
| March 30, 2004
Posted on 03/30/2004 6:52:52 PM PST by rogueleader
Edited on 04/29/2004 2:04:08 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-27 last
To: rogueleader
I wouldn't worry about this line of argument. It is long winded and wordy, just like Kerry. No one can possibly keep this in their head.
Compare with "I voted for it before I voted against it."
This defines Kerry.
21
posted on
03/30/2004 8:30:59 PM PST
by
js1138
To: rogueleader
CNN lost 50% of it's viewership during the past year!
And .. as they continue to bash Bush, their numbers will continue to drop!
22
posted on
03/30/2004 8:34:03 PM PST
by
CyberAnt
(The 2004 Election is for the SOUL of AMERICA)
To: rogueleader
You're right. An overt attack based on misleading and outright false assertions. For example:
# He argued a federal Department of Homeland Security wasn't needed, then devised a plan to create one.
From this thread I posted a few days ago from *June 2001* just look at what the Bush WH was discussing and considering even before that horrific attack:
The Bush administration has seized the problem aggressively with a range of initiatives to have a working system in place to defend the country against attacks on its critical infrastructure. Pentagon insiders tell Insight that Rumsfeld's reviews pay close attention to homeland defense and that the administration is weighing creation of a special office for that purpose.
~snip~
Now, does anybody believe the spin that Bush was weighing a department of Homeland Security before 9/11 but then argued against it after? Poppycock.
23
posted on
03/30/2004 8:44:12 PM PST
by
cyncooper
("The 'War on Terror ' is not a figure of speech")
To: rogueleader
Sorry B*st*rds!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
24
posted on
03/30/2004 8:47:05 PM PST
by
shield
(The Greatest Scientific Discoveries of the Century Reveal God!!!! by Dr. H. Ross, Astrophysicist)
To: familyofman
This phony cry of bias is really too much - when has anyone here ever complained that Rush or Sean don't give enough of a liberal voice on their shows.Rush and Sean are not pretending to deliver straight news facts sans opinion. They do give their opinions and they back them up with facts. Unlike thisy hooey disguised as "news".
This list is exceedingly misleading and is in fact an attack on the adminitration, yet the writer would most likely deny having presented opinion or biased assertions.
Nonsense.
25
posted on
03/30/2004 8:47:40 PM PST
by
cyncooper
("The 'War on Terror ' is not a figure of speech")
To: plain talk
Only if they're really changes. If they're not wouldn't you agree this is exceedingly misleading if not in fact reporting lies as news?
26
posted on
03/30/2004 8:48:53 PM PST
by
cyncooper
("The 'War on Terror ' is not a figure of speech")
To: rogueleader
27
posted on
04/03/2004 11:16:00 AM PST
by
finnman69
(cum puella incedit minore medio corpore sub quo manifestus globus, inflammare animos)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-27 last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson