| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"K C" |
| Date: |
24 May 2004 07:33:44 PM |
| Object: |
networks agree with Bush - 2nd try |
I posted this a sec ago but I guess it didn't go through..so here it
is again.
--
George Bush went on tv to explain how the war in Iraq is going, and
none of the networks covered it (except news networks). This shows
one of two things...
1. The networks disagree with Kerry that the war is either A> a
failure or B> a major issue, because if either were true, it would be
important to hear his speech on it.
OR
2. The networks chose, intentionally, to not cover it out of fear
that Bush might explain himself too well. This would show a political
agenda of the networks attacking Bush. However, if this is true, it
is a good thing. The last thing the networks attacked was the Passion
of the Christ, which has become a blockbuster hit.
http://beingone.20m.com/troopsupport.html
.
|
|
| User: "Jamo" |
|
| Title: Re: networks agree with Bush - 2nd try |
24 May 2004 07:52:08 PM |
|
|
"K C" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2aab65fe.0405241633.679dd29@posting.google.com...
I posted this a sec ago but I guess it didn't go through..so here it
is again.
--
George Bush went on tv to explain how the war in Iraq is going, and
none of the networks covered it (except news networks). This shows
one of two things...
1. The networks disagree with Kerry that the war is either A> a
failure or B> a major issue, because if either were true, it would be
important to hear his speech on it.
OR
2. The networks chose, intentionally, to not cover it out of fear
that Bush might explain himself too well. This would show a political
agenda of the networks attacking Bush. However, if this is true, it
is a good thing. The last thing the networks attacked was the Passion
of the Christ, which has become a blockbuster hit.
http://beingone.20m.com/troopsupport.html
Well, those networks that didn't broadcast it weren't missing out. He
offered nothing new exccept for the possible bulldozing of Abu G. (if the
new Iraqi gov't wants it done). But then, he didn't come forward to say
anything new: he came forward to muster up waning support.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: networks agree with Bush - 2nd try |
24 May 2004 07:55:51 PM |
|
|
"Jamo" <nomorspam@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:YMwsc.8148$Tn6.6737@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Well, those networks that didn't broadcast it weren't missing out. He
offered nothing new exccept for the possible bulldozing of Abu G. (if the
new Iraqi gov't wants it done). But then, he didn't come forward to say
anything new: he came forward to muster up waning support.
He had to counter all those leftist
whiners crying "there is no plan"
when what they really mean is
we don't like the plan.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mook23" |
|
| Title: Re: networks agree with Bush - 2nd try |
26 May 2004 07:32:18 PM |
|
|
"Bob" <no@email.address> wrote in message
news:_Lwsc.1418$UA3.1127@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
"Jamo" <nomorspam@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:YMwsc.8148$Tn6.6737@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Well, those networks that didn't broadcast it weren't missing out. He
offered nothing new exccept for the possible bulldozing of Abu G. (if
the
new Iraqi gov't wants it done). But then, he didn't come forward to say
anything new: he came forward to muster up waning support.
He had to counter all those leftist
whiners crying "there is no plan"
when what they really mean is
we don't like the plan.
Enlighten us bob. You're obviously a republican insider with a great deal
of perspective on this matter. Why don't you lay it all out for us, with
supporting evidence from pre and post war presidential speechs, exactly what
Bush plans to do with Iraq?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: networks agree with Bush - 2nd try |
26 May 2004 08:17:58 PM |
|
|
"Mook23" <no_one@no_where.com> wrote in message
news:mGatc.9376$gf1.23644@news1.mts.net...
"Bob" <no@email.address> wrote in message
news:_Lwsc.1418$UA3.1127@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
"Jamo" <nomorspam@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:YMwsc.8148$Tn6.6737@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Well, those networks that didn't broadcast it weren't missing out. He
offered nothing new exccept for the possible bulldozing of Abu G. (if
the
new Iraqi gov't wants it done). But then, he didn't come forward to say
anything new: he came forward to muster up waning support.
He had to counter all those leftist
whiners crying "there is no plan"
when what they really mean is
we don't like the plan.
Enlighten us bob. You're obviously a republican insider with a great deal
of perspective on this matter.
I'm not even a republican, much less an insider.
Why don't you lay it all out for us, with
supporting evidence from pre and post war presidential speechs, exactly what
Bush plans to do with Iraq?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gray Shockley" |
|
| Title: Re: networks agree with Bush - 2nd try |
26 May 2004 09:59:46 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 26 May 2004 19:32:18 -0500, Mook23 wrote
(in article <mGatc.9376$gf1.23644@news1.mts.net>):
"Bob" <no@email.address> wrote in message
news:_Lwsc.1418$UA3.1127@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
"Jamo" <nomorspam@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:YMwsc.8148$Tn6.6737@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Well, those networks that didn't broadcast it weren't missing out. He
offered nothing new exccept for the possible bulldozing of Abu G. (if
the
new Iraqi gov't wants it done). But then, he didn't come forward to say
anything new: he came forward to muster up waning support.
He had to counter all those leftist
whiners crying "there is no plan"
when what they really mean is
we don't like the plan.
Enlighten us bob. You're obviously a republican insider with a great deal
of perspective on this matter. Why don't you lay it all out for us, with
supporting evidence from pre and post war presidential speechs, exactly what
Bush plans to do with Iraq?
Whatever Cheney tells him to do.
It's an "emotional" sort of thing.
Tune in on your inner feelings while you've still got a chance to
have them before Patriot Act VII.
++ Gray //
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "dave" |
|
| Title: Re: networks agree with Bush - 2nd try |
24 May 2004 09:35:46 PM |
|
|
"Bob" <no@email.address> wrote in message
news:_Lwsc.1418$UA3.1127@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
"Jamo" <nomorspam@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:YMwsc.8148$Tn6.6737@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Well, those networks that didn't broadcast it weren't missing out. He
offered nothing new exccept for the possible bulldozing of Abu G. (if
the
new Iraqi gov't wants it done). But then, he didn't come forward to say
anything new: he came forward to muster up waning support.
He had to counter all those leftist
whiners crying "there is no plan"
when what they really mean is
we don't like the plan.
Whine, whine, whine from the reactionary right. The networks knew better
than to carry more Bushit.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: networks agree with Bush - 2nd try |
24 May 2004 10:13:54 PM |
|
|
"dave" <dave@gbronline.com> wrote in message
news:-O2dnWPdw6ufLC_dRVn-hw@gbronline.com...
"Bob" <no@email.address> wrote in message
news:_Lwsc.1418$UA3.1127@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
"Jamo" <nomorspam@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:YMwsc.8148$Tn6.6737@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Well, those networks that didn't broadcast it weren't missing out. He
offered nothing new exccept for the possible bulldozing of Abu G. (if
the
new Iraqi gov't wants it done). But then, he didn't come forward to say
anything new: he came forward to muster up waning support.
He had to counter all those leftist
whiners crying "there is no plan"
when what they really mean is
we don't like the plan.
Whine, whine, whine from the reactionary right. The networks knew better
than to carry more Bushit.
What whining are you talking about?
.
|
|
|
| User: "dave" |
|
| Title: Re: networks agree with Bush - 2nd try |
25 May 2004 09:36:15 PM |
|
|
"Bob" <no@email.address> wrote in message
news:lKysc.15575$Sc.2808@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"dave" <dave@gbronline.com> wrote in message
news:-O2dnWPdw6ufLC_dRVn-hw@gbronline.com...
"Bob" <no@email.address> wrote in message
news:_Lwsc.1418$UA3.1127@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
"Jamo" <nomorspam@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:YMwsc.8148$Tn6.6737@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Well, those networks that didn't broadcast it weren't missing out.
He
offered nothing new exccept for the possible bulldozing of Abu G.
(if
the
new Iraqi gov't wants it done). But then, he didn't come forward to
say
anything new: he came forward to muster up waning support.
He had to counter all those leftist
whiners crying "there is no plan"
when what they really mean is
we don't like the plan.
Whine, whine, whine from the reactionary right. The networks knew better
than to carry more Bushit.
What whining are you talking about?
Name calling, projecting and whining complaints about thinking people being
"leftists" and "liberals". If the right wing in America hadn't become such
a group full of hate and vitriol they might be able to recognize the truth
and try genuinely caring about America, rather than slam dissent and close
their eyes to the lies of this "administration of fools".
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jamo" |
|
| Title: Re: networks agree with Bush - 2nd try |
24 May 2004 07:59:13 PM |
|
|
"Bob" <no@email.address> wrote in message
news:_Lwsc.1418$UA3.1127@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
"Jamo" <nomorspam@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:YMwsc.8148$Tn6.6737@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Well, those networks that didn't broadcast it weren't missing out. He
offered nothing new exccept for the possible bulldozing of Abu G. (if
the
new Iraqi gov't wants it done). But then, he didn't come forward to say
anything new: he came forward to muster up waning support.
He had to counter all those leftist
whiners crying "there is no plan"
when what they really mean is
we don't like the plan.
He's been countering it all along, but this hasn't stopped his loss of
popular support. When your own party members start taking flight....man,
it's a goner.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gray Shockley" |
|
| Title: Re: networks agree with Bush - 2nd try |
24 May 2004 08:29:13 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 24 May 2004 19:55:51 -0500, Bob wrote
(in article <_Lwsc.1418$UA3.1127@bignews3.bellsouth.net>):
"Jamo" <nomorspam@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:YMwsc.8148$Tn6.6737@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Well, those networks that didn't broadcast it weren't missing out. He
offered nothing new exccept for the possible bulldozing of Abu G. (if the
new Iraqi gov't wants it done). But then, he didn't come forward to say
anything new: he came forward to muster up waning support.
He had to counter all those leftist
whiners crying "there is no plan"
when what they really mean is
we don't like the plan.
Just like Richard M Nixon's "secret plan" for ending the conflict
in VietNam, huh?
Gray Shockley
--------------------------
"Swinehood hath no remedy." - Sidney Lanier
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: networks agree with Bush - 2nd try |
24 May 2004 09:02:46 PM |
|
|
(K C) wrote:
I posted this a sec ago but I guess it didn't go through..
You need more patience. You keep doing this, and it indeed DOES go
through. Usenet does not propagate instantly. Next time wait an hour
before assuming it didn't post.
George Bush went on tv to explain how the war in Iraq is going, and
none of the networks covered it (except news networks). This shows
one of two things...
Nope. I'll take option number 3 - when Bush released the advanced
text of his speech (as he probably does for most speeches), they
looked at it and decided that it was either a) not sufficient news to
drop primetime programming that actually makes them money in order to
cover the speech live, or b) too political and therefore requiring
equal time for Kerry, which costs them even more money or c) they
weren't sure, and thus presumed both, knowing that they could cover it
on the 1100 news.
lojbab
--
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
