Not all presidential staffers are equal.
By on Feb 8th, 2007 at 11:44 am
Not all presidential staffers are equal.
Media Matters documents how liberals get scrutiny while conservatives get a pass.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Damn you, liberal media!!!
February 8th, 2007 at 11:47 amjust the opposite of this web site !
February 8th, 2007 at 11:49 amOne would expect it to be more difficult for a Democrat to pass the requisite “loyalty” test.
February 8th, 2007 at 11:50 amAnd don’t forget, Gannon/Guckert got a free pass too.
February 8th, 2007 at 11:50 amIsn’t the Librul media owned and operated by the conservatives?
February 8th, 2007 at 11:55 amHey, Maw… ya knows how flippy-floppy dem dare lib’ruls ah! Now, git m’gun. Dicks a’comin!
February 8th, 2007 at 11:55 amwho could forget ?
February 8th, 2007 at 11:55 amI’m beginning to feel about our government ( both parties ) the way my neighbor feels about muslims ! a sticker on her car says ” bomb them all, let God sort them out” !
February 8th, 2007 at 11:58 amI’m beginning to feel about our government ( both parties ) the way my neighbor feels about muslims ! a sticker on her car says †bomb them all, let God sort them out†!
Comment by freeman
Your neighbor must be a Republican.
February 8th, 2007 at 12:01 pmSeveral years ago I had considered voting for McCain. With what has happened to McCain and his campaign in the last several months, I would not even vote for him as a dog catcher or as Senator again.
February 8th, 2007 at 12:11 pmThere really is no giant difference between Dems and Repubs. They all answer to the same powers, just in different capacities.
February 8th, 2007 at 12:12 pmthe 2 party system ,
February 8th, 2007 at 12:13 pmwhen one party garners 49 % of the vote their entitled to 0 % representation is the system .
Everything fits so nicely into these 2 packages ?
the major difference between the 2 parties is which corporations they represent !
February 8th, 2007 at 12:15 pmWhen I was young, my friend had a monkey who used to escape its’ cage, climb the tree in the front yard, shit in its’ hand and throw it at people as they walk by. I feel about the Re-pubics, this way. They’re disgusting, any way you look at it.
February 8th, 2007 at 12:15 pmbut AIPAC is an equal opportunity employer
February 8th, 2007 at 12:15 pm#13- Yes, you’re right. We need another party/other parties that don’t take corporative money.
February 8th, 2007 at 12:18 pmto think .people were concerned about the influence of the pope when Kennedy was elected president .Now an organization which represents a foreign power receives preferential treatment in the corridors of power .
February 8th, 2007 at 12:19 pmwe sure have come along way since then !
when one party garners 49 % of the vote their entitled to 0 % representation is the system .
Comment by freeman — February 8, 2007 @ 12:13 pm
In the case of the last Senate, where one party garners 52% of the vote and was given 0% representation.
February 8th, 2007 at 12:21 pmMr lib new mex ,
February 8th, 2007 at 12:23 pmyour pleased with your party of choice ?
we should become a 1 party system ?
strike that last comment youve already answered it .I stand corrected
February 8th, 2007 at 12:24 pmThere really is no giant difference between Dems and Repubs. They all answer to the same powers, just in different capacities.
Comment by ForTruth
A sad truth, I’m afraid. Both represent the oil companies and Walmart types because the corporations have learned to pad the political pockets on BOTH sides of the congressional isle.
All one is has to do is look at the ‘08 leaders among the presidental candidates: one has been casting herself as a conservative and a war hawk (Hillary-Democrat) and the other an anti-gun, pro-choice liberal (Rudy-Republican).
Go figure.
February 8th, 2007 at 12:28 pmWhat Democrat would want to be a staffer for Bush Regime?
February 8th, 2007 at 12:32 pm#22
February 8th, 2007 at 12:40 pmone who thinks out of the box ?
Sad thing is, guys like Webb, Obama, and that cool dude from Wisconsin are good politicians, but the machine is too overwhelming, they either give in, go insane, or get “taken care of”. Its been happening for decades.
February 8th, 2007 at 12:43 pmA minor gripe: The headline would have been more accurate if it said “presidential CAMPAIGN staffers” instead of merely “presidential staffers.”
I was going “Liberals in the White House? Huh?”
February 8th, 2007 at 12:49 pmOk, how hard is it to fake that you’re a Bushbot?
February 8th, 2007 at 6:34 pm#16 – #
#13- Yes, you’re right. We need another party/other parties that don’t take corporative money.
Comment by Liberal in New Mexico — February 8, 2007 @ 12:18 pm
It’s called public campaign finance and you’d think a site like ThinkDemocrat, I’m sorry, ThinkProgress would be all for it. Yet we never hear about it from them.
February 8th, 2007 at 6:36 pmRon Paul, this site, I believe, is all for it. Go ask Ron Paul if HE is? I do see that the retard is all for going back to the gold standard. Do you know how unrealistic and plain stupid that is? I could enlighten you, if you would like.
February 8th, 2007 at 9:25 pm