Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 25

Thread: The White House paid somebody $240,000

  1. #1
    All League
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    In Kicking Pats-a$$ country
    Posts
    874
    To promote the NCLB act. Where's the shock CBTNY? Where's the outrage NE hick? This is just another in a long line of disgusting acts by the Bush WH, completely raping taxpayer's money to support their tax policies.

    [url=http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/1/7/94726.shtml]http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/1/...1/7/94726.shtml[/url]

    But thankfully newsmax has the answer for us, it has nothing to do with the complete blasphemy that is paying somebody a quarter of a million dollars to promote your policies, but it's because he's black. Yes that's it folks, it's all about race. Just when you thought Republicans weren't getting ridiculous enough. Oh and then there's Tom "ethics have nothing to do with morals" DeLay calling Congressional Dems who temporarily blocked the counting of Ohio's EV's for Bush the "X-Files" Wing of the Dem party, because Boxer and Tubbs-Jones want election reform and repeatedly insisted they were not looking to overturn the results and make Kerry the winner.

    "This objection does not have at its root the hope or even the hint of overturning or challenging the victory of the president," said Stephanie Tubbs Jones, "But it is a necessary, timely and appropriate opportunity to review and remedy the most precious process in our democracy"

    "Rather than substantive debate, Democrat leaders are still adhering to a failed strategy of spite, obstruction, and conspiracy theories. They accuse the President, who we are told is apparently a closet computer nerd, of personally overseeing the development of vote-stealing software." -DeLay

    Seriously, this guy is one of the most powerful people in the country. Hold me. :unsure:

  2. #2
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    Very stupid move on behlaf of the WH and everyone involved...of course if you think this is the first time it's happened and the clintonistas didn't pay megabucks to get that great universal health plan promoted in the media then your a fool.

    Speaking of outrage:

    [b]CBS Fires 4 After Bush Guard Story Review [/b]

    Mon Jan 10, 6:03 PM ET

    By DAVID BAUDER, AP Television Writer

    NEW YORK - CBS issued a damning independent review Monday of mistakes related to last fall's "60 Minutes Wednesday" report on President Bush (news - web sites)'s National Guard service and fired three news executives and a producer for their "myopic zeal" in rushing it on the air.

    The review said CBS compounded the damage with a circle-the-wagons mentality once the report came under fire. The independent investigators added, however, that they found no evidence of a political bias against Bush.

    CBS News President Andrew Heyward and Dan Rather, who announced in November he was stepping down as the anchor of "CBS Evening News," escaped without any disciplinary action. But Rather, who narrated the Sept. 8 story and subsequent follow-ups, was criticized by CBS chief executive Leslie Moonves for "errors of credulity and over-enthusiasm."

    "The system broke down on this one, for sure," said Louis D. Boccardi, retired chief executive officer of The Associated Press, who conducted the investigation along with former Republican Attorney General Dick Thornburgh. They delivered their 224-page report to Moonves last week.

    Fired were Mary Mapes, the story's producer; Josh Howard, executive producer of "60 Minutes Wednesday"; Howard's top deputy, Mary Murphy; and CBS News senior vice president Betsy West.

    The "60 Minutes" story had questioned Bush's Vietnam War-era commitment to service in the Texas Air National Guard. Mapes began reporting the story in 1999, but the report centered on documents obtained only weeks earlier, supposedly written by Bush's commander, the late Lt. Col. Jerry Killian. The memos said that then 1st Lt. Bush did not take a mandatory medical exam and that Killian reportedly felt pressured to sugarcoat an evaluation of him.

    Questions were quickly raised about the typed memos, with some document experts saying it appeared they contained a computer character inconsistent with typewriters at the time.

    Boccardi and Thornburgh found that Mapes had said the documents were authenticated, when in fact she had found only one expert to vouch for only one signature in the memo. They said she also failed to look into the background of her source, retired Texas Army National Guard Lt. Col. Bill Burkett; to find Burkett's source; or to find other corroboration of the charges.

    "Her confidential source was not reliable and her authenticators were unable to authenticate the documents, and yet she maintained the opposite. ... This is truly disquieting," Moonves said in a statement released with the report.

    Reached at her Dallas home Monday, Mapes said: "I haven't seen the report yet, so I won't be saying anything until I do."

    When the Bush report aired, Mapes was a veteran, respected producer on a professional high: She had produced the "60 Minutes" report last spring that showed the first pictures of Americans mistreating Iraqis in Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison.

    The review concluded that accomplishment essentially made her bulletproof despite the delicate, complicated nature of the Bush story, and that Howard, a CBS News veteran who had become chief of "60 Minutes Wednesday" in June, and Murphy failed to adequately question her.


    Moonves said Howard "did little to assert his role as the producer ultimately responsible for the broadcast and everything in it. This mistake dealt a tremendous blow to the credibility of `60 Minutes Wednesday' and to CBS News in general."

    Two days after the report aired, Heyward ordered West to review the opinions of document examiners and confidential sources who had supported the story but no such investigation took place, the investigators said.

    If the review had been conducted promptly, Thornburgh and Boccardi said they did not believe CBS would have publicly and stridently defended the report for nearly two more weeks. The two men also criticized CBS for falsely saying the source of the documents was "unimpeachable" and that experts had vouched for their authenticity.

    CBS aired subsequent stories designed to support the original installment prepared by the same people instead of providing a balanced look at the controversy, the investigators said.

    They also said it was "inappropriate" for Mapes to have helped Burkett get in contact with Joe Lockhart, a political adviser to Democrat John Kerry (news - web sites), in the midst of the presidential campaign. [b]But Boccardi said that to conclude CBS was guilty of anti-Bush bias would be to make the same mistake "60 Minutes Wednesday" made drawing a conclusion without enough evidence. [/b] :lol: :lol: :lol: yeh...and the Pope is Jewish!

    Still, Thornburgh said he doubted the review would deflect the political criticism of CBS.

    "A lot of different news organizations were pursuing the same story," Thornburgh said. "Were they all politically motivated? I doubt it. What we did take notice of was the insensitivity of the people involved to appearances."

    Scott McClellan, Bush's press secretary, said he hoped CBS would take steps to "prevent something like this from happening again."

    "We felt all along that it was important for CBS to get to the bottom of this," McClellan said. "CBS has taken steps to hold people accountable and we appreciate those steps."

    The independent panelists even faulted CBS' eventual apology for the story, saying the network placed too much blame on Burkett and not enough on itself.

    [b]Rather was portrayed as an overworked anchor who had just finished coverage of the Republican convention and Hurricane Frances in Florida. As a result, he did little to help prepare the original report, and did not even appear to have seen it before it aired, the panel said. [/b]...awwwwww Complete BS.

    "He asked the right questions initially, but then made the same errors of credulity and over-enthusiasm that beset many of his colleagues," Moonves said.

    In light of Rather's announcement that he will step down as anchor in March a move the anchor insisted had nothing to do with the investigation Moonves said he concluded no disciplinary sanctions against his anchor were necessary.

    An aide to Rather said Monday that he would have no immediate comment on the report, since he had just returned from covering the tsunami in Thailand and had not yet read it.

    As for Heyward, the panel said that he had urged extreme caution in preparing the story, an order that apparently wasn't heeded. But Thornburgh and Boccardi did note that Heyward attended a screening of the story the night before it aired an unusual step for the top news executive and apparently saw nothing to stop it.

    "Andrew's sin was in trusting his lieutenants too much," Moonves said in an interview with the AP.

    CBS is the third major news organization to sustain a black eye recently: Top editors at both The New York Times and USA Today left in the wake of plagiarism and fraud scandals involving correspondents Jayson Blair and Jack Kelley.

    For television news organizations, the incident rivals CNN's retraction of a June 1998 report that the U.S. military used sarin nerve gas in Laos during the Vietnam War, which led to correspondent Peter Arnett's departure. Former NBC News President Michael Gartner resigned under pressure in 1992 after "Dateline NBC" rigged crashes of General Motors pickup trucks to show alleged fire dangers.

    As a result of Monday's report, CBS News said it had appointed one of its executives, Linda Mason, to a newly created job of senior vice president of standards and special projects, charged with thoroughly reviewing investigative stories before they air.

    Both Moonves and the panel said it hoped the report did not have a "chilling effect" on CBS' commitment to investigative journalism.

  3. #3
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Of COURSE the Democrats weren't seeking to de-legitimize Bush's election victory in Ohio with their grandstanding. Of COURSE they only had the best, most noble, and selfless of intentions. Of COURSE not a single Bush voter in Ohio had to wait on a line. Of COURSE millions of black people were denied the right to vote in 2000. Of COURSE Rather didn't know the documents were fake. Of COURSE Kerry's campaign had nothing whatsoever to do with that story. Of COURSE anti-Bush bias had nothing to do with that story.

  4. #4
    i like how someone brings up how the president hired a columnist to push his agenda and now we are talking about CBS news and the swift boats.

    the old bait and switch but remember no one elected the producers at CBS news. maybe we should hold the president to a higher standard? naaaah.

    for 95% of this forum George Bush can do no wrong - geez, he's gotta be the best American president of all time!

  5. #5
    [quote][i]Originally posted by bitonti[/i]@Jan 11 2005, 01:22 PM
    [b] for 95% of this forum George Bush can do no wrong - geez, he's gotta be the best American president of all time! [/b][/quote]
    No, it is that Liberals think their side is above this type of shennanigans. Pppuuuhhhlllleeeeeaaaasssseeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  6. #6
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    [quote][i]Originally posted by bitonti[/i]@Jan 11 2005, 09:22 AM
    [b] i like how someone brings up how the president hired a columnist to push his agenda and now we are talking about CBS news and the swift boats.

    the old bait and switch but remember no one elected the producers at CBS news. maybe we should hold the president to a higher standard? naaaah.

    for 95% of this forum George Bush can do no wrong - geez, he's gotta be the best American president of all time! [/b][/quote]
    Bitonti - the first post in this thread brought up several issues, not just one. To many of YOU, Bush is NEVER right. Round and round we go....

  7. #7
    im still waiting for him to do something positive for the country...

  8. #8
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    [quote][i]Originally posted by bitonti[/i]@Jan 11 2005, 10:13 AM
    [b] im still waiting for him to do something positive for the country... [/b][/quote]
    You're just as biased and slanted as Come Back to NY is, only he admits his biases. You cling to this notion that you are objective. You're not. I'm not. No one is.

  9. #9
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [quote][i]Originally posted by bitonti[/i]@Jan 11 2005, 09:22 AM
    [b] for 95% of this forum George Bush can do no wrong - geez, he's gotta be the best American president of all time! [/b][/quote]
    Once again you prove your tom-foolery....the first line of my response said it was a stupid move by the WH and everyone involved.

  10. #10
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Come Back to NY+Jan 11 2005, 10:40 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (Come Back to NY @ Jan 11 2005, 10:40 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-bitonti[/i]@Jan 11 2005, 09:22 AM
    [b] for 95% of this forum George Bush can do no wrong - geez, he&#39;s gotta be the best American president of all time&#33; [/b][/quote]
    Once again you prove your tom-foolery....the first line of my response said it was a stupid move by the WH and everyone involved. [/b][/quote]
    yeah 1 line about how it was stupid and 150 lines about CBS News - gee you gave it to the prez real hard&#33;&#33;&#33;

  11. #11
    [b]5ever[/b]

    i&#39;ve never said im unbiased - i&#39;ve said that im independent - i&#39;ve said that im a realist - none of that adds up to unbiased - it is not surprising that a self-described independent would disagree with the president

    honestly i feel like George Bush has accomplished next to nothing in his 4 years in office. we can sit here and go back and forth but history will be the ultimate judge of his legacy - right now - what will Bush be known for? - the Iraq war, which roughly 60% of the country dissproves of - please tell me what Bush has done (anything) to improve this country... to set it on a positive course - im drawing a blank...

  12. #12
    If Armstrong Williams were a liberal Democrat, he&#39;d be playing the race card and the criminal liberal media would be backing him 100%.

    But because he is conservative, he can&#39;t or won&#39;t. I admire Mr. Williams.

  13. #13
    Where is the outrage? Where the hell is it? After all, the White House, they...why, they...

    ...they paid some guy to lobby their plans. If there is any outrage, it should be on the journalist for sale. Armstrong Williams isn&#39;t exactly the news department of a major network, either. Speaking of CBS, where there was indeed some justified outrage, to whom was the anger vented against anyway? Kerry? No. CBS, where it belonged. So, in conclusion, call for Armstrong&#39;s head. I&#39;ll join you.

    Armstrong must go.

    Happy?

  14. #14
    [quote][i]Originally posted by sackdance[/i]@Jan 11 2005, 02:21 PM
    [b] Armstrong must go.

    Happy? [/b][/quote]
    so the fault is 100% with the journalist who took the money and 0% with the Administration that paid him the money?

  15. #15
    [quote][i]Originally posted by bitonti+Jan 11 2005, 03:04 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (bitonti @ Jan 11 2005, 03:04 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-sackdance[/i]@Jan 11 2005, 02:21 PM
    [b] Armstrong must go.

    Happy? [/b][/quote]
    so the fault is 100% with the journalist who took the money and 0% with the Administration that paid him the money? [/b][/quote]
    Why aren&#39;t Jesse and Al defending Armstrong? America wants to know&#33;

  16. #16
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [quote][i]Originally posted by New England Hick+Jan 11 2005, 03:13 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (New England Hick @ Jan 11 2005, 03:13 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> [quote]Originally posted by bitonti@Jan 11 2005, 03:04 PM
    [b] <!--QuoteBegin-sackdance[/i]@Jan 11 2005, 02:21 PM
    [b] Armstrong must go.

    Happy? [/b][/quote]
    so the fault is 100% with the journalist who took the money and 0% with the Administration that paid him the money? [/b][/quote]
    Why aren&#39;t Jesse and Al defending Armstrong? America wants to know&#33; [/b][/quote]
    What would you expect that?? Where were they defending Clarence Thomas?? Condi Rice??? Colin Powell??

    Dude...I got a better chance of Pamela Anderson knocking on my front door, taking off her top then dropping to her knees to blow me...er, I got to run...there&#39;s a knock at my door&#33;&#33; :lol: :lol:

  17. #17
    Come Back and Hick from your comments it is clear you don&#39;t actually care if the president does a good honest job, as long as the Administration is not as morally repugnant as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson then that&#39;s acceptable to you.

    it&#39;s the same with Clinton - doesn&#39;t matter if the Prez&#39;s foreign policy is any good as long as it is better than Clinton&#39;s then that&#39;s acceptable -

    oh wait i remember now Republicans only hold people to high moral standards when they are on the OTHER side of the discussion. when a GOP president BRIBES a columnist to KISS HIS ASS that&#39;s not even worth a mention... at least not compared to what CBS did 4 months ago :blink:

  18. #18
    double

  19. #19
    [quote][i]Originally posted by bitonti[/i]@Jan 11 2005, 03:36 PM
    [b] oh wait i remember now Republicans only hold people to high moral standards when they are on the OTHER side of the discussion. when a GOP president BRIBES a columnist to KISS HIS ASS that&#39;s not even worth a mention... at least not compared to what CBS did 4 months ago :blink: [/b][/quote]
    Okay, one more time: Was outrage hurled at the Democrats for the CBS fiasco? No.

    Two very different events.

  20. #20
    All League
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    In Kicking Pats-a$$ country
    Posts
    874
    [quote][i]Originally posted by jets5ever[/i]@Jan 11 2005, 07:40 AM
    [b] Of COURSE the Democrats weren&#39;t seeking to de-legitimize Bush&#39;s election victory in Ohio with their grandstanding. Of COURSE they only had the best, most noble, and selfless of intentions. Of COURSE not a single Bush voter in Ohio had to wait on a line. Of COURSE millions of black people were denied the right to vote in 2000. Of COURSE Rather didn&#39;t know the documents were fake. Of COURSE Kerry&#39;s campaign had nothing whatsoever to do with that story. Of COURSE anti-Bush bias had nothing to do with that story. [/b][/quote]
    Well, 5ever, I guess when they STATED that they weren&#39;t trying to say Kerry won, they didn&#39;t really mean it. And when DeLay makes up something that they said to make their legitimate concerns about this country&#39;s election process seem illegitimate, he wasn&#39;t completely bonkers. Some Democrats have the spine to want to make people aware of the problems we are experiencing with the election. These are real problems, as opposed to those Bush is trying to scare people into believing about Social Security. It is not in a crisis, but as Hitler said, if you repeat a lie often enough...

    And yes, CBS was absolutely wrong and completely mistaken for what they did. But I guess there&#39;s nothing wrong with every single station giving hours upon hours upon hours of free advertising Smear Boat Veterans, while not even mentioning the obvious lies they were telling. It took 2 weeks to mention that, oh, United States Navy Documents contradicted their bogus story. If the media is liberal, then I&#39;m the Queen of England.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us