Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Check out the last paragraph - the AP reporter was a former DSCC official and is the wife of Kerry's campaign manager (talk about incest). Now, would we ever know this little factoid if Fox News and the "new media" did not exist?
1 posted on 04/23/2003 5:30:42 AM PDT by Hacksaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-31 next last
To: Hacksaw; nutmeg
Some Republican sources are quietly raising questions about the reporter who first quoted Santorum and who is continuing to report on the conflict it created. Her name is Lara Jakes Jordan. She is married to Jim Jordan, a former DSCC official who now manages Kerry's campaign.


Big fat coincidence, of course.

Hang tough, Santorum. Don't let the Homo Rights Campaign make you cave.
2 posted on 04/23/2003 5:33:54 AM PDT by Bigg Red (Beware the Fedayeen Rodham!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hacksaw
He is in the mainstream. He's voicing what people think.

The majority have stayed silent for so long because of the decade of repression of speech fostered by the left. It is time to acknowledge that there are standards in the country that cross a broad spectrum of people, but are still the norm.
4 posted on 04/23/2003 5:37:18 AM PDT by OpusatFR (Using pretentious arcane words to buttress your argument means you don't have one)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hacksaw
the AP reporter was a former DSCC official

It says she is married to a former DSCC official.

6 posted on 04/23/2003 5:39:19 AM PDT by Drango (There are 10 kinds of people in this world. Those that understand binaries, and those that don't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hacksaw
we believe he should pay a price for those comments," said David Smith

Where are all of the Hollywood pro-free speechers on this??

8 posted on 04/23/2003 5:40:01 AM PDT by jrushing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hacksaw
I guess that free speech thing that so many peace protestors and Hollywood activists used as a shield against criticism does not extend to Senator Santorum. He still "supports" the gays, he just doesn't support their actions.
10 posted on 04/23/2003 5:44:09 AM PDT by rockinonritalin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hacksaw
Certainly we can expect the Hollywood leftists to support Santorum's right to free speech. Right.
11 posted on 04/23/2003 5:45:39 AM PDT by Mariposaman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hacksaw
It seems like the Democrats take a poll, find out that most Americans are uncomfortable with homosexuality, and then establish their position "support homosexuality at all costs" in spite of the poll results.

Is that party trying to shoot itself in the foot on every policy issue?

12 posted on 04/23/2003 5:51:05 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hacksaw
Now, would we ever know this little factoid if Fox News and the "new media" did not exist?

Nope. The "old" media sees nothing wrong or conflict of interest with a "reporter" being married to a campaign manager of a demo Presidential candidate.

Now if a reporter is married to a Pubbie official, the old media would be having a case of the vapors over this "shocking" conflict of interest.

13 posted on 04/23/2003 5:51:43 AM PDT by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hacksaw
"you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything."

It's all about embracing abnormal,deviant behavior isn't it? Where's the hole in his logic? I've always felt this way about legalising deviant relationships.

14 posted on 04/23/2003 5:52:24 AM PDT by Crowcreek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hacksaw
Wish I could vote for him. Santorum that is.
15 posted on 04/23/2003 5:53:18 AM PDT by Conspiracy Guy (Saddam's Hiding In Tikrit He's Eating Another Daisy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hacksaw
Expect more of these ill timed off the wall attacks, now that the war of Iraq is not on the front page. The enemies of the American Public will try one by one to remove anyone who stands for some kind of decency.
16 posted on 04/23/2003 5:54:08 AM PDT by rovenstinez
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hacksaw
"I do not need to give an apology based on what I said and what I am saying now. I think this is a legitimate policy discussion ... These are not ridiculous comments. These are very much very important points and ones that most members of Congress are concerned about," Santorum told Fox News.

Satorum's exact words have been published. Maybe I am missing something, but when I read them I don't see the big offense. He has been taken way out of context.

Link to Comments Here

What is really important now is if the Republican party will rally around what is right, defending one of their own and not cowering as they did when Dan Quayle made his Murphey Brown speech. Santorum's comments, at least as I read them, are not far off the mark. They are no cause for criticism and the Republican party should be putting this issue to rest with strong showing of support for Santorum.

17 posted on 04/23/2003 5:55:22 AM PDT by BJungNan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hacksaw
Santorum should absolutely NOT step down because of this, and conservatives everywhere should take the left to the mat over this. This has nothing to do with gay rights. It has to do with Constitutional interpretation. Sodomy laws have been constitutionally permissible in this country for more than 200 years. The Supreme Court does not have the power to change the Constitution by judicial fiat just because societal attitudes have changed, or because the Supreme Court thinks they have. If the gay community doesn't like these laws, it should address its outrage to the Texas legislature, not the Supreme Court.
18 posted on 04/23/2003 5:55:28 AM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hacksaw
Nonetheless, gay activists were quick to express outrage.

When you publicly speak against and bring to light the Devil's activities you can expect deadly retaliation to be vomitted up by the Devil's followers!

Do not fear the Devil's response, he has no power, for he walketh about as a roaring lion seeking whom he MAY devour, only with that which you freely give to him of your will can he cause you to err.

19 posted on 04/23/2003 5:56:19 AM PDT by VOYAGER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hacksaw
His press person should have known this and advised him not to do the interview with that reporter. As I said yesterday, this was a set-up. AP should feel its feet being held to the fire for a while, and should have to explain this.
22 posted on 04/23/2003 6:02:54 AM PDT by 3AngelaD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hacksaw
Nonetheless, gay activists were quick to express outrage.

Now there's a shocker!

23 posted on 04/23/2003 6:06:57 AM PDT by b4its2late (Seen it all, done it all, can't remember most of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hacksaw
Fox News' Brian Wilson contributed to this report.

From the article - who is Brian Wilson married to, who does his spouse work for, where has he worked in the past. Are these points of interest or relavant to the story. I don't think so. How does Brian Wilson know so much about the life and relationships of the AP reporter? Is he a spy?

C'mon now - the second and third hand relationships of a reporter are not germane to the discussion. None of this changes what Se. Santorum said - he stands by his comments.

This type of looking for some underlying conspiracy is what makes FOX look like Tabloid TV - they should give it up & report the facts.
25 posted on 04/23/2003 6:18:38 AM PDT by familyofman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hacksaw
Good job by Santorum. First I heard of this was on Imus this morning. That old bleating fart had some liberal newsie on mocking Santorum. Of course, the "I-man" will be slobbering out of the other side of his mouth next time Santorum is on the program.

Bottom line: typical politics of personal destruction. It won't work. Santorum is good.

26 posted on 04/23/2003 6:33:00 AM PDT by Huck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hacksaw
These comments take us backwards in America

It's interesting that "backwards" is supposed to be a bad thing, yet the shorthand American term for a community of prosperity, peace, safety, decency and morality is "the 50's." I was born in '67, and it took me a while to realize--against the media hype I had heard growing up--that the 1960s were a cultural disaster for America. An absolute disaster.

27 posted on 04/23/2003 6:35:50 AM PDT by Huck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hacksaw
Gee, let's see if we can gin this up; Maybe we can get Jesse involved; Don't look over in Robert Byrd's direction, look over here; Call the usual civil rights groups to make statements; and whatever you do...........................

............Don't let this story die!

Keep it in the news cycle!

33 posted on 04/23/2003 6:45:02 AM PDT by DoctorMichael (Stay alive; No jive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-31 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson