I'm waiting for a defense of this by the conservatives. Or perhaps more "this isn't important" posts from their fellow travellers the contented moderates who always see benign motives for the Bush Administration errors and omissions.
I always like the "call outs" here. "I'm just wondering when Group X is gonna come here and spin this story...blah." That's awesome. And by awesome, I mean totally sweet. p.s. i still haven't read the story....so if you're looking for me to spin it...well...don't hold your breath!
Just curious here MadMax, but if you hadn't read the story why did you read the comments in the thread? That just seems odd to me, espically when it's not one of the 10,000 word essays that tend to get posted here from time to time... Btw it is kinda an interesting story, even in a non-partisan way.
Read more here: http://americablog.blogspot.com/ Gannon/Guckert is likely a GAY PROSTITUTE who hawks his wares on the interenet. This story just keeps getting better and better. Gannon/Guckert also may have had access to the classified CIA document critical to the Plame case.
FWIW the 100% naked spread eagle shots mentioned above are not at the http://americablog.blogspot.com/ web site but are referenced there (or least links suggesting such things which I chose not to follow).
OK, so the white house gave press credentials to a gay hooker to pose as a real reporter for a fake news service and toss softball questions to the President? Liberal media? Where are you? Isn't this kind of embarrassing for the president? Anybody home?
Rove et. al has got their check books out now as we speak to get reporters to not bring this subject up.
Well I guess not reading about this fake reporter or trying to think about it is a way of maintaining one's contentedness with the Bush administration. Let's see. Putting fake reporters to ask leading questions at a presss conference when you have fewer than any recent president is no biggie. Paying right wing pundits and columnists to praise your agenda is no biggie either. Ignorance is bliss I guess.
Republicans always critized Clinton for following polls when deciding on policies, which at least will reflect the will of majority of the people. He never stooped to the low of paying pundits to influence public opions, but it is just so Bush like.
is this directed towards me?? i'm flattered!!! glynch, you have this mentality that is EXACTLY like the criticisms you level at Bush. the idea that he sees the world in black and white...right and wrong. you do the EXACT same thing. the dems are the good guys. the republicans are the bad guys. the republicans are evil and mean. want the truth?? they both suck. nothing surprises me...and i can't believe it surprises you.
Methinks a Presidential hummer in the oval office from a nearly underaged interm hottie surprised you. It surprised me. Unfortunately my expectations are so low for GWB nothing as of yet has surprised me
yeah..it surprised me because of the nature of it. but the fact that he lied about it under oath...that he asked the girl to lie about it under oath and destroy evidence? none of that is all that surprising. it's called a power grab. the point is that everyone's crap stinks. no matter their political stripes. this game of "aha!!! we caught you. you're bad guys!!! we're good guys!"" team sports mentality is just dumb.
I couldn't agree more with this. This type of crap is ridiculous, no matter what party it comes from.
I find lying about wmds to start a war to be a little more surprising than lying about sex (make that a lot). When is Bush going to go on tv an apologize like Clinton did?
