Accuracy in Media
... just pointing out the ridiculous nature of the source... If it had come from a legitimate source I would have taken it seriously and either agreed or argued each point. It's the political equivalent of US World News, that checkout stand rag that always has headlines like "Grandmother gives birth to alien twins."
There are some legitimate sites that highlighted truths about both candidates (one put out by the Annenberg Foundation, I think), that try to present a balanced picture. This certainly isn't one of them. The bottom line is I don't care if Kerry lied about where he was some Christmas. We have a President who lied to us about getting into a war! That's the number one news story of 2004!
What was presented wasn't the truth and it certainly didn't hurt.
Ok.. and what would YOU consider a real, non-partisan news source?? Democratic Underground?? CBS? Yeah... we make up stories based on forged documents and just hope there may be some truth.. OOPS... there wasn't..
Seriously, though.. The president (AND John Kerry, And most everyone else in this country for that matter) DID feel that Iraq DID have WMDs..it was only after we invaded that we found no WMDs.
Personally, I think Iraq DID have WMDs.. but the mistake WE made (Yes, I admit our very own Bush administration made a mistake..).. I think we gave Iraq way too long to get rid of, actually more like HIDE their WMDs.. probably somewhere in some neighboring country. If you remember, we were threatening them and threatening them for months before we finally attacked, giving them plenty of time to hide the weapons. It's kinda like if you thought your child had cocaine or something. You'd say "Son.. I know you have drugs in your room and your going to be in big trouble! NEXT WEEK I'm going to do an inspection of your room and if you have it, you're grounded forever". Now, if you give him that long, what do you think he's going to do?? Hide it.. maybe at a friend's house.. if he gets REALLY desperate, maybe even flu**** down the toilet. But that doesn't mean he didn't have the drugs or won't have them again in the near future. You just gave him way too long to hide the evidence. This is exactly what I feel happened with the WMDs in Iraq. Saddam still had 'em, just not where we could find them.
I will agree that I don't agree with everything that President Bush has ever done. I don't think he is perfect. And to be totally honest, I'm not against all democrats. Back about 10-15 years ago when I lived in Pennsylvania, we had a governer named Bob Casey. He was a democrat, and a great man. Had I been old enough at that time (I was only about 17) I definately would have voted for him. The point I'm trying to make is that I usually vote based on the person, not always on the party. It's just that I happen to agree with the republicans 90 times more than I do the democrats.
-Mike
He lied about going to war. He argued that Saddam Hussein had WMDs, yet there are interviews with Colin Powell ("He has not developed any significant capabilities with respect to weapons of mass destruction."
February 2001) and Condi Rice ("We are able to keep arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt" July 2001) state that Saddam Hussein was not a threat.
He lied about his military record.
He lied about the cost of the Medicare reform bill.
He lied about the "Mission Accomplished" banner.
His administration doctors-up scientific reports that don't fit it's political ideology.
And anyone who would like a serious look into the lies, secrecy and deception of the Bush Administration need only buy a book by Republican John Dean called "Worse Than Watergate".
"The liberties of the people never were nor ever will be secure when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." Patrick Henry.
"..the only truly self-governing people is that people which discusses and interrogates its administration." Woodrow Wilson.
Top Underreported/Buried Stories for 2004
1. How CBS and the Kerry campaign allegedly broke federal election law in trying to defeat President Bush. This is the subject of a Federal Election Commission complaint.---What is the nature of the complaint??? Are there any complaints on the other side of the aisle?
2. How liberals tried to use federal agencies to delay or censor Sinclair Broadcasting's airing of Stolen Honor, showing how John Kerry's anti-war testimony led to the torture of our Vietnam POWs.--- "tried to use federal agencies".... meaning what? Did they ask the Election commission to check into whether this violated Campaign finance laws? And asking the Election Commission to do that would be bad because..... why?
3. The lies and inaccuracies in Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11, including the claim that the FBI didn't screen the Saudis who were in the U.S. and left shortly after 9/11 for terrorist connections. Also, Moore's claim on his web site that Iraqi terrorists were comparable to America's Revolutionary War heroes.--Actually, there were lots of reports about how the Saudi story may have been overblown in F9/11. How many of the points in F 9/11 were valid and NOT reported on by the media? (hint: a lot of them!!!) I've been to Michael Moore site... can't find the comment about Iraqi terrorists and America's Revolutionary War heroes. Got a link?
4. How the Senate Intelligence Committee report and the Lord Butler Report in England discredited Joe Wilson's charges against the Bush administration regarding Iraq seeking uranium from Africa.--I need sources of both the Lord Butler report and the Senate Intelligence Committee report. What I do know is that the claim that Hussein seeking uranium from Niger was removed from a 10/2002 speech by the Bush administration because they themselves believed the story to be UNTRUE, and even days after Bush used the claim in his State of the Union Speech, Colin Powell refused to use the story in his speech to the UN because he believed the claim to be unreliable.
5. How and why MIT's Dr. Richard Lindzen, perhaps the country's leading climatologist, doesn't accept the man-made global warming theory.-- There are plenty of highly respected climatologists who do accept the theory. Scientists disagree all the time. This is supposed to be news?
6. Revelations of John Kerry's documented presence at a meeting in which the assassination of pro-Vietnam War senators was discussed, and which he failed to report.--I'm still waiting to see evidence of this that doesn't come from the Swift Boat Veterans. After all, as you will see by the links below, they are not exactly beacons of truth at all. They've lied so many times they make rugs look bad.
7. The accuracy of the claims of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, such as that John Kerry didn't spend Christmas in Cambodia, as he had claimed.--Probably not reported because so much of what they said was untrue (kval.com/x30530.xml?ParentPageID=x2649&ContentID=x46616&Layout=kval.xsl&AdGroupID=x30530) (nytimes.com/2004/08/20/politics/campaign/20swift.html?ex=1104642000&en=31070ccbf60da573&ei=5070&hp&oref=regi)
8. The financial affairs and sources of income of billionaire George Soros and his grants and contributions to press organizations.--What about them? Has he done something illegal?
9. How Senator John Edwards used "junk science" in some of the cerebral palsy lawsuits that made him rich. --link... need info.
10. The New York Times' refusal to return a Pulitzer Prize awarded to a Times correspondent, Walter Duranty, whose dispatches lied about the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian famine.--Did he win his Pulitzer for the story on the Ukrainian famine or for something else?
11. How AIM's film, Confronting Iraq, makes a persuasive case for war with Iraq after 9/11.--Really, how come so many are saying that Bush wanted to go into Iraq even before 9/11? I need a link to this film or some information about it.
12: How USA Today ran a story based on the same discredited documents used by CBS News in its story questioning President Bush's service in the National Guard. -- Bush could clear this up if he would present any documents at all that have him reporting for duty during the months in question. It shouldn't be that hard to do. He has yet to do it.
13. The questionable background and qualifications of Michael Scheuer, the former CIA analyst who gave interviews as "anonymous" and criticized the war in Iraq and the war on Islamic terrorism.
14. The U.N.'s use of questionable and changing statistics on the nature and spread of AIDS. --need specifics.
15. The media's growing embrace of the "gay rights" movement by running wedding announcements for homosexual couples. -- Why shouldn't wedding announcements be run for homosexual couples? Why is "gay rights" in quotes?
16. The physical attack on and hospitalization of anti-drug activist Steven Steiner after he tried to speak to the National Press Club about George Soros' pro-drug policies.--If there is ANY validity to this story, I'm betting it's not headline news because most people don't know who Steven Steiner or George Soros are.
17. John Kerry's failure to release all of his military and medical records.--John Kerry has released all of his records. They are on his website. Anyone who hasn't seen them isn't looking for them.
18. How terrorists are inaccurately described as militants or insurgents, rather than as terrorists.--Interestingly enough, there are more of them in Iraq now than there were before we attacked, and that's according to the Pentagon. Feel safer yet?
19. How the International Association of Firefighters endorsed John Kerry for president without a vote of its members.
20. Anti-Serb and anti-Christian violence in U.N.-controlled Kosovo.--Need more information. Are you asserting that the violence in Kosovo is equivalent to the types of attacks in Iraq? Is that why you think it deserves airtime on the news? If it's such a valid story, how come Fox hasn't reported on it? I mean, they're so accurate and all (gag).
Please, let Mike F know I'm right here, responding to this stuff and not running away (like he did) , and that my life is just fine, thanks.
(deactivated member)
on 12/31/04 1:44 am
on 12/31/04 1:44 am
Hi,
I do not know Mike is so you will have to tell him yourself..
I get bored once in a while so I drop in here and post just for the ranting, raving and foaming at the mouth that happens everytime someone posts a different point of view.. great entertainment.. Thanks!!!
You blasted one person for side-stepping the issues.
I didn't side-step the issues and I get blasted for "foaming at the mouth".
Just what do you expect us to do when you post--agree with you and tell you how brilliant you are? That's not about to happen. So if you're entertained by being handed your hat, then by all means, keep coming back.