Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Whether or not CBS was deceived, the public should not be:

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
jumpstart33 Donating Member (328 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-20-04 10:35 AM
Original message
Whether or not CBS was deceived, the public should not be:
The facts still remain.
Bush received favored treatment to jump ahead of hundreds of young men to get into the national Guard. He did snort cocaine, and locked up hundreds of young men, mostly minorities, for doing the same thing that he had done. He lied about WMDs and the connection between Iraq and 9/11. He is still an idiot who was able to get into the most powerful position in the world (thereby lowering the esteem of the Presidency forever)simply because of who his parents are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-20-04 10:35 AM
Response to Original message
1. and yuor point
rove won.

For most people that story now is suspect, fully.

I hate to say it, but get used to an even more supine media now
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-20-04 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. You're right. Time to put on our pink tutus and concede defeat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-20-04 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. No, not yet! Not the pink tutu yet! What about the Times' story?
I admit it was about a month late, but they did lay out all the facts. A limp headline, but still a front page story.

Maybe I'm just in my Pollyanna mode here, but I still think this story's not dead yet. Things still might segue into "okay, the memos were bogus but let's talk about what's in em..."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-20-04 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Thank you Wendy. We have to take the fight to 'em.
We knew it was gonna get dirty when we got into this thing. We just have to fight it out.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-20-04 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. true....
Many correspondants are still following the "fake docs" comment with "true content" comment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-20-04 11:16 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. Right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
the Kelly Gang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-20-04 11:15 AM
Response to Original message
6. and I predict the media will hound this story until they get to the end
of werever these memos came from but it keeps Bush's AWOL story out there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenArrow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-20-04 11:27 AM
Response to Original message
8. "fake docs"
Why does everyone call these docs "fake" or "fraudulent." The fact is, no one KNOWS where these documents came from, who wrote them, or why. At least no one who is telling. It would be more accurate to call the documents inconclusive or controversial, as opposed to fraudulent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-20-04 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. The only thing that will conclusively prove them fake...
...is proof that the contents are false. QED.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenArrow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-20-04 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. so, in the meantime
we should stop calling them fake. We simply don't know whether they are fake or not. We don't know their provenance, and until we do, it's inaccurate to call them fakes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC