President Bush must have failed math

[lhopp77]

Good stuff don't you think. But you seem to cast doubts on whether that was a true story or not about him meeting with the communists. You know he did and I have personally seen his picture in the Hanoi Communist War Museum. Even a picture of him meeting Madame Binh and other representatives. If, as you claim, this story is a lie--why has he not sued for libel. Get real. You know it happened.

Also, you keep saying he did 2 tours in Vietnam. A tour on a ship off the coast of Vietnam does not qualify as a real Vietnam tour. If you really check you will find that he spent significantly less than one year on the ground in Vietnam.

Read all of those other links and you might finally learn something. That is if you will watch FOX news and really get both sides of all issues.

Lee

Freedom is NOT Free

[Electrophil]

No, the story is true. He was trying to get some POW's released. It's the neo conservative bias that is the problem.

I actually sat and read a couple of them. Geez! Talk about a far right slant. We must really do something about this right wing media!

CNSNews.com is of course part of the "media research group". Uhhhhmmm... You probably know them from their commissioning of that other group. Uhhhmmmm... what was their name again? Oh yeah!! Swift Boat Veterans!!

We aren't going to find a middle ground on this debate, are we Lee?

[lhopp77]

I give you a big BS that his primary purpose was to negotiate release of the prisoners. AND the fact that his picture is in the Communist War Museum definitely speaks otherwise and points out his propaganda value to them.

I do have one other comment. The Navy must have had very different standards for heroism medals than the Army. If a soldier chased down a single Viet Cong and killed him, he would probably not get anything more than a thumbs up or pat on the back. Definitely not a Silver Star.

Lee

[Electrophil]

Originally Posted by lhopp77

I give you a big BS that his primary purpose was to negotiate release of the prisoners. AND the fact that his picture is in the Communist War Museum definitely speaks otherwise and points out his propaganda value to them.

I do have one other comment. The Navy must have had very different standards for heroism medals than the Army. If a soldier chased down a single Viet Cong and killed him, he would probably not get anything more than a thumbs up or pat on the back. Definitely not a Silver Star.

Lee

If the United States Navy awarded him a Silver Star, he deserved it. None of the services were just handing these things out. We've already hashed out that one. I believe in our military leadership, not a bunch of idiots with a political agenda.

It's a lost cause anyway. My guy lost. I fought to get him elected. Not so much that he is my ultimate savior, but to get rid of this obstruction to justice we now have occupying the White House.

After 40 years as a republican, I am ashamed of these guys now. It used to be the party with the most common sense, with the democrats out hugging trees and dwelling in silly issues. Now it has reversed completely. The republicans are no longer conservative, they are the big spenders as the democrats were when I was a child. Their only conservative twist now is far right religion, and the squelching of free speech. I was just watching Hannity. He had that kid that turned that teacher in to a conservative talk show host. The teacher that compared the President up against Hitler. Have you noticed it isn't on any other news service? Who cares about that? How in the world is that a national issue? They make it an issue to avoid actual real issues. It's just another lost rich girl on an island story, and that is how all these neo conservative news organizations are working.

Things aren't looking good for the republican party. They've really botched a lot of things up. I'm proud of the fact that I recognized this 5 years ago and re-registered as a Democrat. Eventually you will see it too. The only slant in our media is right, and it's localized. The rest are ignoring them. The republican party has turned from the gleaming days of Reagan, to the incompetant, unethical, and ignorant days of Bush. It's a shame, it really is.

Luckily, we just have another year until at least the house recovers and we can start getting back to being the proud nation we once were.

[mohrds]

Originally Posted by Electrophil

At the onset of the war, there was absolutely, positively, no evidence of WMD's anywhere in the country. The UN inspectors had found absolutely nothing. Before we get into the "Saddam" refused at the end and threw out the inspectors", remember why. They had searched everywhere but his main palace, and he refused to allow them to invade his home. His argument was "I have allowed full access, but I will not allow the invasion of my home." He finally gave in and allowed them to search his home.

He let them search his home after he moved everything. The UN inspection program was so corrupt that Saddam had several days notice prior to the inspections and had itineraries of what time and which places would be searched so he could orchestrate the relocation of contraband.

Also,
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real.
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seizing and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,

And my personal favorite:
"In the four years since the inspectors left, Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

These leaders read the same intelligence reports that Bush did and obviously drew the exact same conclusions. All of the leaders quoted above (except Al Gore who wasn't in office at the time) voted to approve the war in Iraq.

Now its about Haliburton and oil??? Wake up and smell the doubletalk.

[lhopp77]

Originally Posted by Electrophil

After 40 years as a republican, I am ashamed of these guys now. It used to be the party with the most common sense, with the democrats out hugging trees and dwelling in silly issues. Now it has reversed completely. The republicans are no longer conservative, they are the big spenders as the democrats were when I was a child. Their only conservative twist now is far right religion, and the squelching of free speech. I was just watching Hannity. He had that kid that turned that teacher in to a conservative talk show host. The teacher that compared the President up against Hitler. Have you noticed it isn't on any other news service? Who cares about that? How in the world is that a national issue? They make it an issue to avoid actual real issues. It's just another lost rich girl on an island story, and that is how all these neo conservative news organizations are working.

Things aren't looking good for the republican party. They've really botched a lot of things up. I'm proud of the fact that I recognized this 5 years ago and re-registered as a Democrat. Eventually you will see it too. The only slant in our media is right, and it's localized. The rest are ignoring them. The republican party has turned from the gleaming days of Reagan, to the incompetant, unethical, and ignorant days of Bush. It's a shame, it really is.

Luckily, we just have another year until at least the house recovers and we can start getting back to being the proud nation we once were.

Its obvious by the sum total of your political opinions and leanings that you were never a republican. You may have pretended to be one since the vast majority of career military personnel are, but you were only trying to fool the leadership and yourself. The party has not changed that much at all. I will admit that they have slipped somewhat on fiscal responsibility, but they are still far and above the democrats in that area. It is true that the religious and very conservative right has become more vocal, but that is to counter the extreme far liberal left that is taking control of the democratic party. It is obvious that you are one of these extreme liberals.

I also watched the Hannitty AND Combs show with the young kid on there. You only report what you think and not what actually happened. Super liberal Combs worked that young 16 year old over for about 80 percent of the segment trying to make him admit that what he did was wrong. That he should not have recorded it, that he should have taken up his problem only with the teacher and that the teacher actually presented both sides for discussion purposes. The kid stood his ground and the liberal looked like an idiot for browbeating the young kid. Listen to that entire tape and tell me honestly that the teacher was not WAY off base. Hannitty only made a few comments at the end in support of the kid.

And it IS a national issue. It is very indicative of our problems in our institutional educational system. The majority of educators are liberal espousing positions and one sided opinions that detract from the real purpose of providing an education that prepares students for future leadership. Our educational system is one of the worst in the world and we are suffering from that now and will have great problems in the future. We are already importing foreigners to support our needs for the hard sciences and math. Get real----lousy educators ARE A NATIONAL ISSUE.

You are very wrong, I will never accept the democrat far left leaning philosophy that believes in taking my money to give to people that don't want to work. I can spend my money better than the governement. The democrats do not have a plan or plans--they can only criticize Bush because that is easy. I do not agree with Bush on everything, but the democrats have not presented a single plan that is any better----on ANY issue.


Lee

Freedom is NOT Free

[mohrds]

Originally Posted by Electrophil

The only slant in our media is right, and it's localized. The rest are ignoring them.

What???

You honestly think the media slants right???

Please tell me I misunderstood what you were saying.

CBS, NBC, CNN, ABC, etc all have tumbled onto the left side so hard that they can't even find the center with both hands.

On a scale of 1 to 10, 1 being conservative, 5 being moderate, and 10 being liberal, NBC & CNN are a 8, NPR is a 9, CBS is at a 6, ABC is a 7 and FOX is a 4.

"NPR - We give you both sides of the story, the hyper-liberal and the moderate liberal"
Me, March 8, 2006.

[lhopp77]

LETS ALL STAND AND GIVE A ROUSING CHEER AND GREAT ROUND OF APPLAUSE TO Mohrds FOR HIS WONDERFUL JOB OF INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING AND REVEALING CURRENT LIBERAL DETRACTORS FOR WHAT THEY REALLY ARE.

Lee

People who rely on TV as their primary news source rarely get the full story.

[Noir]

Originally Posted by Bipa

People who rely on TV as their primary news source rarely get the full story.

LETS ALL STAND AND GIVE A ROUSING CHEER AND GREAT ROUND OF APPLAUSE TO Bipa FOR HER WONDERFUL JOB OF INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING AND REVEALING CURRENT TUBULAR DETRACTORS FOR WHAT THEY REALLY ARE.

[lhopp77]

Unfortunately most newspapers are equally as bad. They editorialize instead of reporting factual news. I watched the press at work first hand in Vietnam. A news reporter would be assigned to go with my unit for a few days. I watched numerous individual soldier interviews. The problem was that the reporter might question 7 or 8 troops before he found the single trooper that was saying what he wanted to hear. This troopers words were what were printed in the media back in the states. NOT the words of the other 7 or 8 soldiers or a balance of all opinions. This was slanted reporting from the very source and after editing---a totally distorted picture was provided back in the US.

I would say that FOX Cable NEWS is by far and above the best news available. While the leaning my be slightly conservative---BOTH sides of issues with liberal and conservative representatives are presented at the SAME time. The likes of Hillary Clinton have a standing invitation to appear and present their side on any important issue. So far she as been afraid to appear.

Fortunately our US TV news is not as bad and or as slanted as the Canadian news network. Many Canadians now have access to Fox, so maybe they will get the more balanced reporting.

Noir--the Atlanta Journal/Constitution is one of the most liberal printed media publications in the US. Probably right behind the New York Times. The cartoon above is obviously a printed media slap at the news networks because they are stealing customers and newspaper subscriptions are going down rapidly because of mostly slanted reporting. Yes, I do agree that with 24 hours of time to fill---we get many garbage stories on TV. They seem to beat every sensational story to death trying to cover every possible angle, etc. However, if more viewers would send messages to them letting them know that sensational reporting was not was is desired, they might change. Unfortunately many viewers like the sensationalism.

Lee

Freedom is NOT Free

[mohrds]

Originally Posted by Bipa

People who rely on TV as their primary news source rarely get the full story.

Unfortunately not only do people rely on TV for news, they also rely on its commercials to decide who to vote for

How did we ever elect a government before radio and TV? Oh wait, some people thought for themselves back then.

Originally Posted by lhopp77

Fortunately our US TV news is not as bad and or as slanted as the Canadian news network. Many Canadians now have access to Fox, so maybe they will get the more balanced reporting.

I have never depended upon a single source, or perspective, for my news. I have German, Austrian, Swiss, French, US, and British channels on TV via satellite (my Italian isn't good enough but I have that, too) and major North American news programs are now streamed via internet. Soon I'll be getting Eastern European channels, too. I'd be curious to know how many people in the US ever attempt to get news from non-US sources.

In major Canadian cities, by the way, people can get regular TV news in their own languages on multi-cultural cable channels. Many of these news programs combine local news with reports taken from their country of origin. The stories are often translated and printed in the English-language press.

I guess I'm spoiled. Having come from Toronto, Canada with such a diversity of news perspectives available both on TV and print, I often forget that the average US citizen is limited in their access. But surely major cities in the US also have multiple perspectives available? Hmm.... I wonder if that can explain the often glaring differences between big city folk and smaller town thinking: access to information and a variety of perspectives?

Originally Posted by lhopp77

The cartoon above is obviously a printed media slap at the news networks because they are stealing customers and newspaper subscriptions are going down rapidly because of mostly slanted reporting.

I totally disagree. Reading is work and makes you think. It is much easier to sit on a couch and be spoon fed pablum news, rather than actually read an in-depth analysis from a newspaper, journal, or magazine. Slanted reporting has nothing to do with it.

In the old days, people would start new newspapers if they didn't like the editorializing of the local paper. That's how Toronto ended up with 4 major dailies in addition to many tabloids and semi-weeklies in a variety of languages. Nowadays, people turn to writing blogs.

So another reason that subscriptions are going down is the internet. For example, I read daily newspapers from Toronto over the internet for free, yet obviously am not a subscriber since they wouldn't be able to deliver in a timely fashion to Germany. I do have electronic subscriptions to a few that aren't free, but most make their content freely accessible.

Regarding Balanced Reporting

True balanced reporting is almost impossible. Every human being filters reality through their own life experiences. It is up to the viewer/reader to seek out the information and draw their own conclusions. Imagine for a moment that two reporters are watching the same historical event unfold, and later write a news report. One is a democrat, the other is a communist. Would you really expect each to write the same thing? Even police have a hard time sometimes getting the story straight on something as simple as a car accident. Surly an event of more complexity would provide for even more various interpretations.

We have to stop simply accepting the "analysis" that is handed to us on silver platters by both the TV and print writers, and start thinking for ourselves again. But that would be work, and I think we've become a bit allergic.

[lhopp77]

In deference to Robert, I suspect the Liberal Democrat and the Communist would see the story the same way.


And I guess maybe your reasons for not living in Canada may be indicated in your signature line "staying out or your pockets" where the sliding trend toward socialism will get into your pocket even deeper.

Lee

Originally Posted by lhopp77

In deference to Robert, I suspect the Liberal Democrat and the Communist would see the story the same way.


And I guess maybe your reasons for not living in Canada may be indicated in your signature line "staying out or your pockets" where the sliding trend toward socialism will get into your pocket even deeper.

Lee

Bless ya Lee, but I truly didn't expect you to fall into that trap so easily. When I talked about Democrat and Communist, I meant a person who believed in Democracy, and a person who believes in Communism. So in the broader sense, members of both the Republican and Democratic parties would be lumped together.

As for my reason for not living in Canada, you are again way off base, but I forgive your ignorance of internal German politics and its horrible economy. We are paying more in taxes here than we would be in Canada. My reason for moving here is simply that I love my husband, and he got a good job in Germany, so I went along. Before that, we were in Switzerland for a number of years, and from a purely tax perspective I still rue the day we moved. But again, I didn't move to Switzerland because of any monetary considerations, but simply to stay with my husband.

Love makes fools of us all, eh?