ABC Falsely Claims Pelosi Opposes Cutting Funds For Iraq Escalation
ABC Falsely Claims Pelosi Opposes Cutting Funds For Iraq Escalation
Apparently in desperate search for a headline, ABC last night issued the following “breaking news” alert:
Breaking News from ABCNEWS.com:
HOUSE SPEAKER NANCY PELOSI TELLS ABC NEWS’ DIANE SAWYER SHE WON’T BLOCK FUNDING FOR MORE TROOPS IN IRAQ
Watch ‘Good Morning America’ for the full interview.
In fact, Pelosi said nothing of the sort on Good Morning America. She merely repeated her stated view that she does not support cutting funds to U.S. forces already in Iraq.
Pelosi told Sawyer, “[W]e will hold the president accountable. He has to answer for his war. He has dug a hole so deep he can’t even see the light on this. It’s a tragedy. It’s a historic blunder.” Asked about reports that President Bush has already begun increasing U.S. troop levels by 3,500 soldiers, Pelosi said, “The president knows that because the troops are in harm’s way that we won’t cut off the resources. That’s why he’s moving so quickly to put them in harm’s way.” Watch it:
The White House hit back against Pelosi today. Administration spokesperson Dana Perino claimed Pelosi’s comment was “poisonous,” adding, “I think questioning the president’s motivations and suggesting that he, for some political reason, is rushing troops into harm’s way, is not appropriate, it is not correct, and it is unfortunate because we do have troops in harm’s way.”
But earlier this month, a senior Pentagon official admitted to NBC News that “this surge option is more of a political decision than a military one.”
Full transcript:
SAWYER: On Iraq, as we sit here right now, 3,500 troops are moving in. That’s the first of the surge. It has begun. Are you going to move to cut off funding for troops going into Iraq as part of the surge?
PELOSI: Democrats will never cut off funding for our troops when they are in harm’s way. But we will hold the president accountable. He has to answer for his war. He has dug a hole so deep he can’t even see the light on this. It’s a tragedy. It’s a historic blunder.
SAWYER: Are you acquiescing in the surge…
(CROSSTALK)
SAWYER: … since the pocketbook is the only other control mechanism?
PELOSI: The president knows that because the troops are in harm’s way that we won’t cut off the resources. That’s why he’s moving so quickly to put them in harm’s way.
SAWYER: Are you saying that the president deliberately manipulated the timing that he sent the troops in, in order to avoid congressional action?
PELOSI: Well, I would certainly hope he didn’t manipulate the timing of sending the troops in. I think he could have told us about it sooner, and invited any comments we might have had, any constructive proposals we might have had. We found out about it as the troops were going in.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
84 Responses to “ABC Falsely Claims Pelosi Opposes Cutting Funds For Iraq Escalation”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
um - yesterday’s news?
January 19th, 2007 at 8:00 pmok … oops… read the whole thing first, katy… sorry…
taken as a whole, this is an important thread…
perino: “…suggesting that he, for some political reason, is rushing troops into harm’s way, is not appropriate, it is not correct, and it is unfortunate because we do have troops in harm’s way.â€
so, pelosi nailed it then…
January 19th, 2007 at 8:06 pmABC’s just trying to get the script right for “The Path to Iran” due in theaters of war this spring.
Have you all noticed how Corporate Media is continually painting Democrats in a false light?
January 19th, 2007 at 8:10 pmWe all know Mr. Halperin is very unbiased, and follows all the professional ethics in his field.
January 19th, 2007 at 8:13 pmMadam Speaker,
Please just escalate the impeachment process of bushco and we need not waste our time with any other escalation. Such an escalation would certainly escalate your acceptance among the thinking Americans and ensure cooperation with your Presidency.
Should you have qualms about any conflict of interest just offer to step down as Speaker after the impeachment and announce your intentions to run on the Democratic ticket in 2008 as Vice-President with Senator Obama. You will have my vote. And you can’t lose!
January 19th, 2007 at 8:15 pmThis is a prime example of how a Democratic leader can be just as illogical and just as uncaring as the Republicans. If Pelosi truly cared for those troops she would certainly cut off the funding for the war, which the then ensure that this occupation would come to a swift halt, which would mean less soldiers coming back to this country in flag draped coffins and less soldiers returning brain damaged, both physically and psychologially. Cut off the funds to this unnecessary occupation so the troops can return safely- now.
January 19th, 2007 at 8:17 pmABC, FOX News… they’re all the same. Nothing but bulls**t.
Remember, Republicans never had a plan for Iraq.
January 19th, 2007 at 8:21 pmWhy do people now seem to shrug their shoulders and accept that ABC is a government propaganda tool? Of course, at the moment it is….but why do people accept it? It is an outrage and unacceptable. There is no excuse…..it is alarming.
alarming.
not …”what did you expect” …..not “well of course”…..
wake up………………..this is horrendous. ABC/Disney…etc etc
IT’S TIME TO TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK.
January 19th, 2007 at 8:21 pm“I think questioning the president’s motivations and suggesting that he, for some political reason, is rushing troops into harm’s way, is not appropriate, it is not correct,
Right, because the invasion was carried out as a sound military strategy, the occupation was not a political decision, and the escalation has nothing to do with Pres Bush trying to rescue his “legacy”.
Not to mention Pres Bush has always been candid and forthcoming in his motivations to invade and occupy Iraq: We were never told the reason for the invasion were WMD, that the insurgents were in their “last throes”, or that the US has “never been ’stay the course’ “, or that the Iraq reconstruction would pay itself, or that the US is not into nation building.
No, that never happened because those are statements born out of (the horror!) political decisions to better sell a war to a gullible public.
Give nthe Bush administration track record, I would say not questioning their ulterior motives is not correct, appropriate, or even sane for that matter.
January 19th, 2007 at 8:22 pmThe president puts troops in harms way when he, the Decider, decided to invade Iraq. Stupid, stupid, stupid. Bush makes sure that he takes his stupidity pills with breakfast every day.
January 19th, 2007 at 8:24 pmABC? Misrepresent a Democrat? How could this be???
Seriously, who here didn’t see this coming?
The corporate media misrepresent the positions of the Dems because they can’t advance the agenda of their neocon masters very well with the truth…truth has that annoying liberal bias, after all…
January 19th, 2007 at 8:26 pmStupid, stupid, stupid. Bush makes sure that he takes his stupidity pills with breakfast every day.
Comment by CoffinsDrapedWithFlags — January 19, 2007 @ 8:24 pm
He does NOT need them…He’s pure, naturally stupid.
January 19th, 2007 at 8:30 pmCoffinsDrapedWithFlags sez:
While that may very well be true of Chimpy himself, one must never lose sight of the fact that Chimpy is not calling the shots, however much he beats his breast and calls himself ‘the Decider’.
The real decisions are being made by the neocons’ masters…the Zionists and the central banks, and these people are the farthest thing from stupid.
Don’t attribute the mess we’re in to mere incompetence…the truth is far more malicious.
January 19th, 2007 at 8:30 pmI saw the interview and frankly speaking Palosi will get another email from me tomorrow..Unlike me she does show a great deal of edicate and manner’s……On the one hand I would of been in bush’s office with reporters and Murtha and threatening to rip his ass off through his lieing throat….On the other hand she had to know after 6 year’s the game’s these miserable war mongers pull..Sending in more troop’s before the fact is so typical of this rabid bunch…..Blessings
January 19th, 2007 at 8:39 pmTripMaster Monkey,
Was the Bush War (Iraq) also a bank raid? (In addition to oil)
Where’s Saddam’s massive wealth supposedly stolen from the oil fields?
We need some answers here!!!
January 19th, 2007 at 8:41 pmComment by TripMaster Monkey — January 19, 2007 @ 8:26 pm
Exley. He posted this earlier:
Maybe he won’t be so quick to trust a Mickey Mouse news source from now on….
January 19th, 2007 at 8:46 pm“It was a selective and misquotation of the interview”
Exactly.
January 19th, 2007 at 8:50 pmMaybe he won’t be so quick to trust a Mickey Mouse news source from now on….
Comment by Briseadh na Faire
Pffftt…
January 19th, 2007 at 8:53 pmrachel kinnardi (and all variations thereof) —-HA HA HA HA HA
PLEASE PUT ME ON YOUR LIST OH GREAT RIDICULOUS ONE.
HA HA HA……..WOW ….THANKS FOR THE LAUGH I NEEDED THAT!!!!!!! IDIOT ( shaking head)
January 19th, 2007 at 9:11 pmJanuary 19th, 2007 3:20 am
Retired Generals Slam Bush’s Iraq Plan
(CBS News) WASHINGTON The President’s troop build-up — already taking political fire from both Democrats and Republicans — came under withering attack on Thursday from a panel of retired generals on Capitol Hill, CBS News national security correspondent David Martin reports.
“The proposed solution is to send more troops and it won’t work. The addition of 21,000 troops is too little and too late,” former Marine Gen. Joseph Hoar said.
Hoar once commanded all American forces in the Middle East and has nothing good to say about the war.
“This administration’s handling of the war has been characterized by deceit, mismanagement and a shocking failure to understand the social and political forces that influence events in the Middle East,” Hoar said.
Retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey, who commanded a division in the first Gulf War and was consulted by the president in drawing up the new Iraq strategy said, “They’re going to try to muscle this thing out in the next 24 months with an urban counterinsurgency plan that I personally believe, with all due respect, is a fool’s errand.”
It will take political compromise to end Iraq’s sectarian violence, and retired Lt. Gen William Odom, who once headed Army intelligence, doubts it will happen.
“The Sunnis certainly are not committed to it, and I don’t think the Shiites have ever been committed to it,” Odom said. …
January 19th, 2007 at 9:19 pmComment by S — January 19, 2007 @ 9:11 pm
rachel posted a reasonable comment on an earlier thread, and ForTruth suggested baiting her to get her to rant. He succeeded. That’s when she began posting the list.
January 19th, 2007 at 9:22 pmYou losers who refused to post yesterday,could you please do it more often? It was a much better place without all your small talk and whining.
WAAAAAA!MOMMYJUDDWWAAAAAAAA!
January 19th, 2007 at 9:23 pmComment by Briseadh na Faire — January 19, 2007 @ 9:22 pm
which comment was that? link? thanks…
January 19th, 2007 at 9:26 pmThere must be thousands of retired generals, and I think it is a shame that we don’t hear from more of them. Surely many of them have been seething about Bush’s misadventure in the sands of the Middle East. They are retired. Why don’t more of them speak up or take up a petition. A petition opposing escalation signed by a few hundred retired generals would be a good thing.
January 19th, 2007 at 9:26 pmABC lies almost as much as GOP FOX News now!
January 19th, 2007 at 9:31 pmMcCain no longer rocks in Granite State
By Brett Arends
Boston Herald Business Columnist
Thursday, January 18, 2007 - Updated: 04:20 PM EST
As Mitt, Hillary, Barack and a dozen others jump into the presidential stampede, something interesting is happening in New Hampshire.
For seven years, conventional wisdom has said that the state’s pivotal independent voters would line up behind maverick Sen. John McCain, as they did so famously in the 2000 GOP primary. But new polling data, to be released later this week, will suggest that might no longer be the case.
Manchester, N.H.-based American Research Group finds that McCain’s popularity among New Hampshire’s independent voters has collapsed.
“John McCain is tanking,†says ARG president Dick Bennett. “That’s the big thing [we’re finding]. In New Hampshire a year ago he got 49 percent among independent voters. That number’s way down, to 29 percent now.â€
American Research Group, which is New Hampshire’s leading polling company and has been operating in the state since 1976, polled 1,200 likely Granite State voters in the survey.
Bennett says ARG is finding a similar trend in other states polled, including early primary battlegrounds like Iowa and Nevada. “We’re finding this everywhere,†he says.
The main reason isn’t hard to find: His hawkish stance on the Iraq war, which is tying him ever more closely to an unpopular president. “Independent support for McCain is evaporating because they view him as tied to Bush,†says Bennett.
January 19th, 2007 at 9:32 pmRachel:
If you must have my name on your list,particularly at the top,please learn to spell it right.
Thank you.
Yours truly,
Si Byl
January 19th, 2007 at 9:57 pmA major broadcast ntwk misreporting what the Speaker of the house has said;Even some third world countries B’cast netwks are better than what we have.That’s indicative of how f..uped our country has become.
January 19th, 2007 at 9:58 pmwhich comment was that? link? thanks…
Comment by katy — January 19, 2007 @ 9:26 pm
It is about half a dozen threads back, the one on the Abramoff prosecutor, starting with #39, signed by Heritage Foundation. But I don’t see anywhere that it has been established that rachel kinnardi wrote this comment.
In any case, regarding the comment by “Heritage Foundation” that started it all: although the post is reasonable in tone, and seems informative, it is misleading. The think tank world in no way represents the beliefs of most Americans. The overwhelming majority of think tanks are conservative or hard right, and there is no such thing as a progressive or liberal think tank. The beliefs behind institutions like Cato, Heritage, and AEI can only be described as radical. The existence of these think tanks is supported by wealthy plutocrats and large corporations to manufacture propaganda on behalf of the top 0.1% wealthiest Americans. So it is a bit disingenuous of “Heritage Foundation” to begin the comment by saying “It seems as though you are not as popular as you may think.” Popular with who? The plutocrats? The propagandists? The paid liars? I don’t think that TP or anyone here is striving to be popular with that crowd. Quite the contrary.
January 19th, 2007 at 10:04 pmABC - Another sycophantic media propagandist???
January 19th, 2007 at 10:12 pmThink tanks are propagandist, radical and plutocratic - that’s always been clear. It’s “group mind” fashioned by some reichwing ‘guru’/'nut’ who brainwashes all the supposed progressive ‘thinkers’…..basically, these are a joke and totally out of kilter with the heartbeat of the american populace. I take them with a grain of salt because that’s about all they’re worth these days.
January 19th, 2007 at 10:14 pmVerbalKint,
rachel acknowledged being “Heritage Foundation” on another thread.
January 19th, 2007 at 10:18 pm31, 33.
Now those are good responses to the “think tank” issue! Although, Veritas, I would not call think tanks a joke. They are all too serious. As you both note, their mission is propaganda on behalf of the ruling class. As such, they are not trying to influence us, but the proles, the mindless minions who still believe Fox News is fair and balanced.
They have helped guide this country incredibly close to that Utopian Vision of Orwell: 1984. Remember, from the point of view of the Party, 1984 is a Utopia.
January 19th, 2007 at 10:21 pmI see no greater proof of conservative bias in the MSM than its excessive reliance on think tanks for “expert” quotes. The think tank system has been described as a shadow academic system, complete with its own faux-academic journals. This is necessary because much of the research promoted by think tanks couldn’t get published in real academic journals. It would get blown out of the water by peer review before ever seeing the light of day. The statistical chicanery they use when discussing tax policy, for example, tends towards the outrageous, and would be quickly spotted by any competent scientist.
January 19th, 2007 at 10:27 pmrachel acknowledged being “Heritage Foundation†on another thread.
Comment by Zooey — January 19, 2007 @ 10:18 pm
thanks for the clarification
January 19th, 2007 at 10:28 pmIt is no surprise that think tanks are behind many of the attacks waged against true academics in this country. A popular theme pushed by many of the think tanks is that university professors are lazy louts who don’t teach (except when they are indoctrinating students in leftist propaganda). They base their claim on a very narrow definition of teaching that only counts lecture time in front of a classroom (anyone who knows the slightest bit about academics and university life knows this storyline is a total crock).
Their solution, of course, is to eliminate tenure and force professors to teach more in this very narrow sense. The underlying goal has nothing to do with teaching, however. Once tenure is gone, anyone with ideas that threaten the interests of the ruling class can be pressured and harassed into dropping those ideas. Entire universities can be harassed to deal with any “problem” faculty, by threatening their funding. And so on.
January 19th, 2007 at 10:48 pmComment by VerbalKint — January 19, 2007 @ 10:04 pm
thanks for that info… i had guessed it was that comment…
January 19th, 2007 at 10:52 pmwhen i noticed it showing up at each thread i saw that distinct pattern…
while that repetition is annoying, it is also easily ignored…
Rachel Kinnardi, Rachel b. Rachel b blair, procupiny, madashell, blair witch, linda blair….and the freak’n 20 other names that you go by….hey rachel hows your kid?
Duh…mommy why do you spend so much time talking to the computer? I don’t understand mommy why you don’t pay any attention to me. You spend all your time at that place yelling at the computer…your scaring me mommy. Who’s Zooey and ForTruth mommy….why are they more important then me. Mommy come back………
You crazy b!t@h! Please put me on your list.
January 19th, 2007 at 11:04 pmEveryone should realize that ( especially after Gonzales referred to the blogs and NSA in the same sentence) that this post and others are very likely “infiltrated.”
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize that we are not just plain old citizens discussing things reasonably here. The extreme posts have an eerie feeling of unreality very often. Why?? Cause they AREN’T REAL in the sense of being just folk.
Here’s what I think we should do. Ignore the totally irrational posts, the foaming at the mouth right wing garbage, and consider it static on the phone while the rest of us discuss how to get this country back from the brink. And to do that we have to once again state out loud and often what reasonable social values are. Caring for others, a strong economy without exploitation, fairness, the rule of law, non discrimination, free speech, and the right to vote and have it counted. As I said, not rocket science …. to me at least. The Rachel b’s - exleys etc. are diversions and they only succeed if they divert.
January 19th, 2007 at 11:14 pmSorry folks, I am late coming in tonight. Who is rachel kinnardi and when did she take ownership of this site with her list of people she will or will not accept that is repeated on almost every thread more than once?
January 20th, 2007 at 12:21 amMarie - She’s just a crazy troll that gets paid to disrupt the website, but shes not good at it.
January 20th, 2007 at 1:17 amThanks, 44.
January 20th, 2007 at 1:25 amThe ‘president’ rushing troops into war? Pshaw.
NOT GUARDING AL-QAQAA’S 380 TONS OF HIGH-EXPLOSIVES
was Bushco’s greatest crime against our troops.
They were warned of the danger, and did nothing.
They either Baghdad’ed Katrina, or they Katrina’ed Baghdad, but either way they buggered the occupation. 500 amputees — how many blown up with Al-Qaqaa munitions that Bushco didn’t bother to guard?
One thing to rush them into war against the wrong enemy, and under-armor them as well as underdeploy them.
No, Bush/Rumsfeld ARMED THE INSURGENCY.
Isn’t it treason to arm our troops’ enemies?
January 20th, 2007 at 1:32 amMarie - Go over to “Obama/Muslim smear spreads”, and see her in action. It’s getting strange.
January 20th, 2007 at 1:51 amWhat can one expect from ABC. ABC stands for American Bigots and Crooks. Their entire effort is to twist,distort, outright lie and be dishonest about everything the Democrats and the non-Republicans do. They are following the 19 principles of propganda expounded by Herr Josef Goebbel, Hitler’s Propganda Minister. If Hitler were alive today, ABC would condone Hitler’s order of the killing of Jews. ABC and its staff are selected on the basis of their support to the GOP. Why was George Stefanopaulos hired by ABC. One he said he would sell out the Clintons, two he will say anything negative about the Clintons and the Democrats and third he will propagate positive falsehoods about the GOP. This got him the job as ABC’s Chief Washington Correspondent and host of his Sunday morning show with a lot of money. Take the case of Mark Halperin. He has agreed to do exactly like George S and he was offered the job of ABC’s political director. Past political directors like Hal Bruno were very careful to be impartial and fair. Mark has told his friends that he wants to make quickly a lot of money by speaking good of GOP and slandering the Democrats. This way the GOP’s corporate supporters would take care of him by publishing his book and also he gets a lot of speaking engagements and access to the GOP powerful, movers and shakers (with corporate connections). All the nextworks are afflicted by the GOP sycoophantic syndrome. Only the Divine PPower can cure this malaise. This is the GOP Sycophantic Syndrome (GOPSS), predominantly prevailent among the US Mainstream Media.
January 20th, 2007 at 2:52 amKurdish Iraqi soldiers are deserting to avoid the conflict in Baghdad
SULAIMANIYAH, Iraq - As the Iraqi government attempts to secure a capital city ravaged by conflict between Sunni and Shiite Muslim Arabs, its decision to bring a third party into the mix may cause more problems than peace.
Kurdish soldiers from northern Iraq, who are mostly Sunnis but not Arabs, are deserting the army to avoid the civil war in Baghdad, a conflict they consider someone else’s problem.
January 20th, 2007 at 5:26 amDraft Law Keeps Central Control Over Oil in Iraq
The law would also revive the Iraqi National Oil Company,
January 20th, 2007 at 5:30 amIran Reportedly Set for Talks With U.S.
BAGHDAD, Iraq - President Jalal Talabani said in remarks published Friday that the Iranians were ready to meet with the U.S. for talks about security issues _ part of an apparent effort by Talabani to encourage a dialogue between two nations that are increasingly at odds, and vital to Iraq.
Talabani’s comments, in an interview with the respected pan-Arab daily Al Hayat, came amid escalating tensions between Washington and Tehran. In recent weeks, the U.S. has built up naval forces in the Persian Gulf and raided an Iranian liaison office in northern. Iran meanwhile has stepped up military operations along its border, Iranians arriving in Iraq say.
January 20th, 2007 at 5:32 am[…] More at Think Progress The Carpetbagger Report who responds to the White House: Really? Two weeks ago, several White House aides acknowledged that “their timetable for completing an Iraq review had been based in part on a judgment that for Mr. Bush to have voiced doubts about his strategy before the midterm elections in November would have been politically catastrophic.†And two years ago, the White House delayed an offensive in Falluja until after the 2004 elections were over, even if it meant making the mission more dangerous. Indeed, throughout the entire ordeal, every major decision in Iraq seems to have been based largely, if not exclusively, on political motivations, up to and including filling key government posts in Iraq based on whether applicants wanted to see Roe v. Wade overturned. […]
January 20th, 2007 at 6:09 amHave you noticed the administration’s perpetual use of the phrase “in harm’s way”?
It reminds me of some 1950’s, grade B, Audi Murphey film. Good guys, bad guys, American heros, American patriotism, etc. etc.
The criminals in the white house are trying to associate the disaster in Iraq with the courage and sacrifice of WWII. Iraq is not about saving the world from fascism. It is about oil, Israel and imperialism.
I sometimes think that the bushies are NOTHING BUT PR; they have no real substance beyond what Karl Rove gives them.
January 20th, 2007 at 8:47 amStruddle your finguz and Sieg up! Left hand!
January 20th, 2007 at 8:47 amcnn
Comment by S:
Everyone should realize that ( especially after Gonzales referred to the blogs and NSA in the same sentence) that this post and others are very likely “infiltrated.â€
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize that we are not just plain old citizens discussing things reasonably here. The extreme posts have an eerie feeling of unreality very often. Why?? Cause they AREN’T REAL in the sense of being just folk.
————-
Yes, we are in the era of professional trolls. Who knows who employs these people — right wing organization, our lovely alphabet agencies, AIPAC, the RNC, etc.etc.
They make it their business to be resonably well informed. Their responses to important issues are carefully crafted in a Rovian sort of way. They try to be hip in the delivery of their disinformation. They especially like to attack the messenger, avoiding the message. All the usual techniques.
Virtual reality …
January 20th, 2007 at 9:02 amTypical media. Everything is breaking news and half of it is incorrect.
January 20th, 2007 at 9:32 amIf we could stack the FCC with some true Dems or Independents we could take away the broadcasting license of ABC.
Or, support Dennis Kucinch. He’s leading the fight to restore the Fairness Doctrine! Once again, Dennis is RIGHT on just about EVERY issue!
January 20th, 2007 at 9:50 amDear Tp Staff,
Is their anything more that can be done by you and your posters to make me more comfortable in my stay here at TP?
They seem to be full of vitriol and hatred for one another and this fervor is at a fever pitch and well, to be honest, some of them are just down right rude and nasty here at TP. I think they know whom they are.
I dont feel like I am getting my moneys worth as a taxpaying United States citizen.
I hope you will look into this slight at your earliest convenience.
I paid for this and I am not getting my moneys worth.
I demand compensation for your lack of goodwill toward your fellow man.
I will accept payment in the form of cooperation and a general feeling of goodwill from your regular posters.
I expect these demands to be met and to resume immediately.
If this is not recieved, other forms of compensation will be sought and recieved.
Somehow until then I will manage to muddle through, but this blogging hobby is starting to become a burden and well you know, I just think you could try harder to make me more comfortable here since after all,it is my hard earned tax dollars funding this site. I just dont feel you are doing enough to make my stay here amiable and pleasurable like your ad stated on the box. Truth in advertising is the law.
I will forgive this mishap this time, but in the future please look into and perhaps sponsor starter academic programs for a select few posters here, perhaps offer simple courses like:
Note - 1 semester equals 6 months
1) People Skills 101 - 1 semester
2) How to Debate and Win! - I II III IV - 4 semesters
3) Know When to Say When - I II III IV - 4 semesters
4) The Basics of Ebb and Flow - I II III IV - 4 semesters
5) Priciples of Sharing - I II III IV - 4 semesters
6) Gift of Knowledge - I II III IV - 4 semesters
7) Communications for the Masses -I II III IV - 4 semesters
I will look forward to your reply in a memo here.
January 20th, 2007 at 10:16 amThink tanks are created for the express purpose of altering reality and, as such, really have no basis in “the truth of the now”. We all here know that. Unfortunately, the average american does not and is subject to being brainwashed by obvious propaganda and lies. However, at least as I see it, the number of enlightened americans is rising exponentially - in fact, the Peace March on Washington later this month is really gathering momentum and SHOULD help to raise public awareness. Do not underestimate the average american though - enlightenment comes quickly and, when it does, there is no turning back into the darkness of illusion, delusion, and mind manipulation.
Think Tanks are the proverbial “circle jerk” - an academic game of mental masturbation about how to “control the minds of people”…. The more that people recognize that they all have a purposeful agenda and will create their own statistics to support any/all hypotheses they create, then, just like the mainstream sycophantic media whores, they will be outed for what they really are.
It’s a shame that a group of intelligent individuals who gather together cannot resist the egomaniacal temptation to tamper with the american collective mind. It’s all about ego, control, & power these days.
January 20th, 2007 at 10:33 am#58 Buck aka Ted Stevens….isn’t this getting a bit staid now?
January 20th, 2007 at 10:34 amThe Bush track record speaks for itself and NOT questioning why it is any different this time is a derelection of duty of this Congress. It’s obvious they never had a plan and still do not have a viable or logical one.
If it smells like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck……yeparoo! This time is absolutely no different. How can it be when we don’t even know who the “enemy” is for goodness sakes!
January 20th, 2007 at 10:45 amAnything Bush has ever done defies logic and common sense. It’s clear that he views himself as an Emperor or an Imperial Dictator. It’s time for Congress to clip his wings and good!
Wow, I made rachel’s “no reply “list. No I will not have to deal with her idocy.
9) You defend policies the Democrats believe in because it is in †vogue †and is †fashionable †knowing full well it is not what is in your heart.
BTW, I love how she included me as one who defends the Democrats. That was rich!
10) You will twist facts, slander other posters with opposing ideas and ideals and generally engage in some form of †group lynching †if all does not go well for you.
Umm, hello, do we need to run down the list of “twisted facts” and “slander” from rachel? OOOPS, seems as though they have been removed. Thanks Judd and TP staff.
Rach, do me a favor and keep me on that list.
January 20th, 2007 at 10:53 amRachel Kinnardi, Ted Stevens, Charlie “Buck” Owens are trolls that TP will have to ban from this site. We must ignore them.
January 20th, 2007 at 10:53 amBack on topic,
Didn’t Pelosi an dher crew say that, if Bush wanted to escalate troop levels he would have to justify it in order to get the funding? I seem to remember reading that somewhere.
January 20th, 2007 at 11:14 amHave you noticed the administration’s perpetual use of the phrase “in harm’s way�
Comment by nineteen84 #53
…clearly a propagandist ploy…
…right wing buzz word a’ la “9/11″…
January 20th, 2007 at 11:41 amHardball’s Tweety was pretty upset over the indications that we’ll be in Iran before long. He hammered John Fund yesterday, along with the lawyer, Ginsberg.
January 20th, 2007 at 12:00 pmTweety said he’s hearing the same kind of inflammatory rhetoric, based on nothing, as we heard in 2002, and he accused Bush of having an itchy trigger finger.
Interesting TV - particularly coming from Tweety.
Is TP going to get rid of the damn trolls? Having to scroll through bs, by “Charlie Buck Owens” and “rachel(whateveritistoday)”
January 20th, 2007 at 12:37 pmI just think you could try harder to make me more comfortable here since after all,it is my hard earned tax dollars funding this site.
In which alternate, chemically-imbalanced universe? Rachael’s shtick is to play the victim - as she’s savaging everyone else. But as long as she quits posting those crappy pictures, it’s all good.
January 20th, 2007 at 12:37 pmAs has been said all along; the corporate networks are either not relating pertinent news, or maligning it in its’ translation. Along with the current adminstration, next on my list of big, bad, ugly prostitutes that charge too much for what you get is the corporate news network. It’s no wonder this travesty (Bush administration and the resulting occupation of Iraq) was allowed to continue as long as it did. They should be fined and there should be legal oversight against such propaganda technique.
January 20th, 2007 at 2:00 pmRandy - I guess when the networks report no god news in Iraq, you approve. I suppose when the NY relates SEVEN front page stories trelating the “horrific” execution of Saddam, you approve. When the NYT buries stories of medals awarded in Iraq, this must meet with your approval.
“They should be fined and there should be legal oversight against such propaganda technique.” Comment by Randy Nason
Do you approve of the “fairness doctrine” being revived by Congressman Steve Cohen? He wants to force “mainstream media” to relay “both sides of the story”. I guess you and Congressman Cohen missed the the First Amendment when it says:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
January 20th, 2007 at 5:04 pmwhen both sides of the story are relayed, we get THE TRUTH. It’s not rocket science. But then anyone living in the real world, would know that.
What is wrong with “buck owens”? stupid freepers have hit the site. What did Karl Rove wanna start playing games. And what about that threat that old Rachel made? Someone should send it off to NSA and the FBI. It was a theat. As for “buck owens”— his tax dollars pay for this website and hes not getting his monies worth??? hahahahaha-idiot. Like this site really is being paid for by ANY tax dollars. See, the repugs are brain dead. Literally. No wonder our country is in the situation it is in, 30% are MORONS!!
January 20th, 2007 at 6:07 pm#70- When is the last time you heard any good news coming out of Iraq? Are the legless and armless folk having any cookie and bake sales, lately?
January 20th, 2007 at 6:50 pmI made no mention of government oversight. I was referring to legal oversight and the responsibilty of professional journalists to tell the truth, much like the professional ethics an attorney must observe. I do not observe the “right” of anyone or anything to malign, corrupt or hinder another entity, in any malicious or self-serving way. Yes, I do believe and endorse the Fairness Doctrine, with the emphasis on FAIR, my dear.
Why are the democrats and real Americans not boycotting the sponsor’s products on these networks. Hell, when the republicans want the news media, any sponsors or businesses to do what they wish, even when they are suppressing the truth and factual news that is published, they send email chain letters around the country to their many groups, businesses, corporations and news media to threaten them if they did not do as they wished. Look what they did to Air America they have the sponsors to boycott the program .
January 20th, 2007 at 9:31 pmThe only way Corporations response is to dollars, for that is their GOD….
This has all worked out very well for you. You all were so underprivileged, anyway.
January 20th, 2007 at 10:12 pmBabs Bush to the Iraqi people.
“I made no mention of government oversight. I was referring to legal oversight and the responsibilty of professional journalists to tell the truth, much like the professional ethics an attorney must observe….”
*******Dear Randy, Who do you think enforces “LEGAL” oversight - the tooth fairy? I think you’ll find that since the last time you looked, the government codifies the LAW…..I doubt the “Fairness Doctrine” could withstand Constitutional scrutiny….unless you ran it past the 9thCircuit in Fan Sanfrisco……
“I do not observe the “right†of anyone or anything to malign, corrupt or hinder another entity, in any malicious or self-serving way.”
******Reallllly? You observe the First Amendment right Progs and Progettes use to malign everyone they disagree with right here at TP.
malign - “To make evil, harmful, and often untrue statements about; speak evil of.”
Well, if you’ve not observed the right of anyone (an “anything” has a difficult time maligning) to malign, you must have been wearing a blindfold…..
I’m confident someone, somewhere was dazzled by your intellect….unfortunately, it was probably around closing time at a bar……..
Tooooodles…….
January 20th, 2007 at 11:59 pmDear Wannabe - “A license permits broadcasting, but the licensee has no constitutional right to be the one who holds the license or to monopolize a…frequency to the exclusion of his fellow citizens. There is nothing in the First Amendment which prevents the Government from requiring a licensee to share his frequency with others…. It is the right of the viewers and listeners, not the right of the broadcasters, which is paramount.”
— U.S. Supreme Court, upholding the constitutionality of the Fairness Doctrine in Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC, 1969.
The Fairness Doctrine was enacted at the time there were THREE television stations which might require shared frequency in the event of monopolized frequencies. But you would have us believe YOU knew that…. Not surprisingly, you’re not the “progressive” you tout yourself to be. (Thank goodness the FD doesn’t apply to PBS and cable - where would you be without “Sesame Street”? Steve Cohen, Dem Congressman extraordinaire and master Constitutional trampler, is ready to “adjust” the First Amendment - and the Fairness Doctrine…..not that you seem to mind…….
Checkmate……
January 21st, 2007 at 1:02 amFreebird (Great FREELOADER name!)- This site is a part of a tax exempt organization…..so ALL of us do our small part for TP…….Wouldn’t you think a group of people so intent on raising taxes on everybody else would want to do their “fair share”?
January 21st, 2007 at 1:07 amYou said it. heh-
January 21st, 2007 at 9:45 amWhat happened? Did you run out of your favorite drugs? At the very least, you are a tad entertaining. Tah-tah, dah’lin.
The point is that Pelosi should be cutting off all funding for the Iraq war period. A war started on the basis of lies that has killed so many is an abomination. Pelosi is bought and paid for by zionist AIPAC lobbyists who want Americans to die for Israel. Enough of this wicked treason against America for the interests of a foreign nation.
January 21st, 2007 at 12:34 pmActually #83- Bush had funding approved for this period, before the 109th Republican Congress was dismissed. Now that the 110th Democratic Congress is in session, funding CAN be cut off, after the end of this month. Beginning in February, Bush plans on asking for more money. Let’s see how it all plays out and then start with the condemnations. If Congress doesn’t say no at that point, I’ll be angry as hell, too.
January 21st, 2007 at 4:46 pmfull block business letters
. Six Apart started a working group in February 2006 to improve the Trackback protocol with the goal to eventually have it approved as
March 21st, 2008 at 1:39 pmCarpet lover
I wonder how many of these facts you have really checked your self.
March 26th, 2008 at 9:38 amdisney’s mickey mouse
I Googled for something completely different, but found your page…and have to say thanks. nice read.
March 31st, 2008 at 2:07 pm[…] the media seem to be disagreeing about what Pelosi actually means. As pointed out at this site, ABC Falsely Claims Pelosi Opposes Cutting Funds For Iraq Escalation, Pelosi says (1) there’s no blank check on troops, and Congress will not approve funding more […]
April 2nd, 2008 at 12:56 pmPainting Your House To Sell
I couldn’t understand some parts of this article, but I guess I just need to check some more resources regarding this, because it sounds interesting.
April 7th, 2008 at 12:26 pmWashington Universities
This is similar to comment spam but avoids some of the safeguards designed to stop the latter practice.. This enables authors to keep
April 7th, 2008 at 1:44 pmJim Crow Laws Employment Law Us Supreme Court
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 10th, 2008 at 12:06 pm