Posted on 02/18/2005 1:33:59 PM PST by areafiftyone
Yes, but someone getting a day pass every single day for two years is not going to be viewed the same as someone who needs a day pass because he's visiting for one day.
Sorry, the Gannon thing looks like what it looks like. I'm sure Clinton would have done the same, it's too bad he got caught. It will blow over in a few weeks and no one will remember him.
Thank you!!!!!
I had to wonder about that but I'm rushed this evening and didn't double check him.
A-MEN.
LOL.
Evidently you didn't know you were posting to someone who got zotted.
And your credentials, which are virtually nill, went even lower when you referenced Scott Ritter, the pedophile, to bolster your case last week.
The Neville Chamberlain of FR.
How do you know the guy's a Republican? Have the photos been authenticated? Why is it a "security lapse"?
The Nation has a pass to the briefings and they're commie scum. A gay, internet, porn guy looks like Shirley Temple in comparison.
As I mentioned, there are other reporters in the pool doing the same thing, because their organizations aren't accredited by the committee that deals with "hard passes".
Like others had, he was not unique.
Sorry, the Gannon thing looks like what it looks like.
Which is what? Are you claiming he was "planted"? LOL
Check the thread to see what NPR did to Lynne Cheney in questioning her about her gay daughter, even though she said she didn't want to discuss her.
I'm rushed or I'd get you the thread.
From their latest breathless article I see they headline that McClellan reveals Gannon was first admitted under GOPUSA.
No kidding. I, a housewife, deduced that last night when I read the Fleischer interview while the lefty blogs were going nuts over "discovering" that Gannon had attended briefings before the formation of Talon News.
It was simple deductive reasoning.
What fools.
You make many good points. thanks for the post.
Why care ? I really don't get this. I really don't give a fig about a reporters background other than he might be dangerous. I'm must be missing something because folks on both sides are so worried about what the guy does or did or who be worked for. I don't see how his presence changes what was reported. I don't see how his presence changes anything. I must be dense.
As I said. IF this had been the Kerry Whitehouse and "Gannon" was a liberal and in under the same conditions we would have had a field day.
You know... one thing I've not heard in all this hoopla is how past is "past"? Are we talking about a guy who did some sordid stuff when he was younger, then reformed and tried to move on with his life? Or is this the recent past? Nothing I've seen so far seems to indicate either way, except for the constant referral to it as the "past".
And I think, assuming this isn't some crazy left-wing hoax, that it matters. Someone who is a reformed sinner is certainly more credible than someone who is still sinning.
I wanted to believe this was a lib conspiracy, but after following some pretty nauseous links I think the whole thing is just too damn complex and well-documented. A million liberals with a million laptops couldn't put this farce together.
But I am going to withhold judgment for a few days to give time for more facts(?) to be dug up and analysed. The thing should gel or fall apart in the next few days.
No, we wouldn't have had a field day because conservatives aren't into investigating people's private lives and exposing them to ridicule. That is something distinctively Democrat. Republicans only expose the political affiliations of their opponents.
I would like to make a suggestion that from now on we ask reporters at the Whitehouse briefings to hold up either a red or blue card to be called on to ask a question and to affix a rainbow to the card if he or she is gay, to make everyone aware of the bias of his or her question. This would solve the problem that the left seems to have with Gannon.
Oh BS. We've discussed Teddy's offshore drilling if you get my drift, Barney Frank's gayness and the more lurid details of it. You'll find threads on aids being a homosexual disease. We've discussed the various daliances of other media, political and Hollywood folks. Even Ron Reagan Jr. sexual preferences have been debated.
No, there is a big difference, we didn't go investigating their private lives, siccing legions of internet detectives to dig up their pasts and into Gay bars to ask if they had been seen there. Everything that was joked about regarding Teddy and Barney was dug up by the MSM. As I said before the only ones digging are those with their minds already in the gutter, the left.
So Mr. Gannon/Guckert does fit your ideal when it comes to family values? I believe values is a conservative trait. Nude photos on the internet looking for love whether straight or gay is not a conservative trait.
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.