Iraq war amputee denied photo-op with Bush.
By on Feb 19th, 2007 at 4:05 pm
Iraq war amputee denied photo-op with Bush.
“‘Are you telling me that I can’t go to the ceremony ’cause I’m an amputee?‘” asked David Thomas, an Iraq war veteran who was awarded a Purple Heart. Thomas was told he could not wear shorts to attend a ceremony with President Bush because the media would be there, and shorts were not advisable because the amputees would be seated in the front row. David responded, “I’m not ashamed of what I did, and y’all shouldn’t be neither.” When the guest list came out for the ceremony, his name was not on it. John Aravosis tracks other cases of disgraceful treatment toward veterans.
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
Put that hero/soldier in touch with MoveOn.org…
February 19th, 2007 at 4:10 pmJust an extension of the administrations policy of not allowing photographs of returning coffins.
Anyway, he only does photo ops with troops who still have the ability to serve their country.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:13 pm/sarcasm
I am not suprised…Bull shit and his handlers including all military backers don’t want any one to see what happen’s to real people in war…The recruting would plummet like bush’s number’s..They must be able to romantasize (sp) and pramote their plan to attract more into the military.Note the add’s on T.V are again on the increase…”Be all you can be” is one of the most sickening one’s to me.Yah, right..All you can be is dead or maimed for bush and cheney’s oil…Please do something to get rid of this administration and pramote Peace today and every day…Blessings
February 19th, 2007 at 4:17 pmI saw a report on PBS about wounded American soldiers,and there were a number of 19-22 year old kids…kids…with thier faces blown off. Why is it we never see a photo op with the drunk in chief shaking whats left of one of thier hands? The majority of people in our country have no effing clue what this war truely looks like unless they have had a family member used up by it. What does it do to a soldier like Mr. Thomas already shot to be shot down by the very president who is supposed to support him. We have fallen sooo far….
February 19th, 2007 at 4:18 pmShameful! Talk about supporting our troops…
February 19th, 2007 at 4:19 pmHiding the shameful truth from america! This is what this smoke & mirrors administration is all about! This man needs to make some serious “noise” about this level of hypocrisy in our government. Soon the injured will return home just like the Vietnam War Vets did – to those who sent them shunning them and making a mockery out of their patriotism and level of self-sacrifice. Dubya is laughing in everyone’s faces these days as he gets away with more diabolical chicanery.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:23 pmThis NATIONAL HERO needs to be recognized – not shunned. Shame on the Bush Cabal for their overt hypocrisy! They all need to be impeached and thrown out of office on their ear or rear as the case may be.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:24 pmI feel compelled to point out that according to Chris Clarke at Pandagon, John Aravosis is no longered considered “one of us” if you know what I mean. He is now an outcast and you should not be referencing him.
Pandagon has him on their official shun list, you can verify this with Chris Clarke and by checking out how they refer to Mr. Aravosis in the comments there.
Thank you for paying attention to the Pandagon Talking Points — It’s why we put them out.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:25 pmHave to agree with #2.
This administration does not want people to see the cost of this war.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:25 pmI think the main problem was not that he was an amputee…but that he demanded to wear shorts…perhaps it shouldn’t matter…but I’m inclined to believe that his desire to showcase stubs instead of covering them up (presumably like the rest on the actual guest list)…made the difference, and not the President refusing to have any amputees in general being photographed.
…could be wrong.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:25 pmThey learned in Vietnam what a mistake it was to show the true horrors of war. Why do you think they won’t show the caskets or bodies? Out of respect for the dead? Hell no! That’s just a bunch of BS. Since when have they cared about that?
February 19th, 2007 at 4:26 pmPlease, no reality! That’s the last thing we want people to see!
February 19th, 2007 at 4:26 pmbut I’m inclined to believe that his desire to showcase stubs instead of covering them up (presumably like the rest on the actual guest list)…made the difference,
Comment by Hello…#10
No argument with your logic but…
…given how he got that way…
…Bushiva’s culpability (and the ongoing debate about “supporting/honoring the troops)…
…is the Bushite’s decision any less disgusting and infuriating?
February 19th, 2007 at 4:31 pmThis would be consistent with Bush’s having a bug up his ass over what people are wearing in his presence. He goes apeshit if someone’s not wearing a tie. I’ve never seen a guy who was so obsessed with how other people were dressed. Not one who was claiming to be straight, anyway.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:32 pmIf he really wanted the photo op, he would have glady done it with pants. The fact that he insisted on shorts was his way of saying he didn’t want to have it take place. I cannot blame him for not wanting a photo op with someone he despises. The fact is, I probably would do something similar if I was in his position.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:38 pmWe can’t have The Boy King exposed to any of that nasty reality, can we? It just wouldn’t do….
February 19th, 2007 at 4:38 pmChimpeach, I think it is a combination of the king or pope, superior in charge that is also part of the maniacs stance on dress code’s….He demand’s alegence in every way and form of dress is part of that. You know, kind of like some church people believe one has to be all dolled up to go to their church..just more bull shit from the circus barker….Blessings
February 19th, 2007 at 4:41 pmThis is absolutely disgraceful, but I am not surprised. This Admin. has no shame, all that matters is that the War Profiteers and the NeoCONS keep their agenda on schedule (i.e. a provocative act like Operation Northwoods, 9/11 — this time involving Iran). Let’s keep the Maimed and Coffins out of public viewing. Let’s just keeping fighting this Phoney Baloney War on Terrorism off the backs of these men and women. Let’s not infiltrate the Duped 30% that we keep hearing about that still support this Crooked Administration.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:41 pmThank you for paying attention to the Pandagon Talking Points — It’s why we put them out.
Comment by anon
Aravosis can be a prick sometimes, much like the rest of us, but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t have something valuable to contribute on this topic.
Thanks anyway.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:45 pmright on #1 big papa-
Business as usual – keep the war sanitized and dear God do not wear shorts showing off the stubs…. This is just as phoney as the rubber turkey, movie with Jessica Lynch as a war hero – how much more of this BS are we going to have in the next 22 months?
February 19th, 2007 at 4:46 pmDavid Thomas will be the new hate object for the Bush cultists. His patriotism and sacrafice will be questioned because he dared to inject a little reality in AWOL’s delusion.
Who’ll be the first to come to Bush’s defense by swift-boating Mr. Thomas?
February 19th, 2007 at 4:47 pmHere’s a set of resources to support the troops and their families.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:49 pmIf he really wanted the photo op, he would have glady done it with pants. The fact that he insisted on shorts was his way of saying he didn’t want to have it take place. — kevin
Really reaching to blame this on the veteran, huh?
Way to support the troops asshat.
I noticed you also failed to show on the thread on the conditions inthe VA hospitals, in fact none of you Bush enabling trolls showed there at all. You do not support the troops as long as you support this administration and the way they are treating the troops.
The Republicans, including the Bush administration do not really supportthe troops, and neither do you koolaid drinking asswipes supporting Bush.
February 19th, 2007 at 5:10 pmComment by Angry One — February 19, 2007 @ 4:49 pm
Good post and very important.
An even better is to stop the carnage is to IMPEACH these fascists!!!
Now!!
Start with the AG, then Dick(head) and then Botch!!!
February 19th, 2007 at 5:11 pm#14 According to Dr. Justin Frank, Bush suffers from ADHD along with dyslexia and has spent his entire life “putting on a facade” that he fits into his Bush Family Oligarchy by creating false personas for himself. It’s because of his “guilt & shame” for not being smart enough or accomplishing enough (under a dominatrix mother when Papa was absent most of his life) that he insists on this form of decorum and “respect” (at least in his twisted mind of false veneers, the tie is symbolic of a level of “class” or “intelligencia” – both of which he lacks.
February 19th, 2007 at 5:14 pmI believe the families of those wounded in Iraq need to speak out loudly now – it’s up to them to save the respect and dignity of their loved ones by telling the truth about how ill-equipped our troops really are and how these maiming incidents may have been averted.
The families of war heroes need to unify and begin to express their voice now before this war is over and their loved ones are “left out in the cold” just like the Viet Vets were by those whom they trusted….by their very own government.
February 19th, 2007 at 5:15 pm…but gee…wouldn’t the Decider look even more handsome and virile standing next to a scarred and wounded guy??? – maybe his “image consultants” will pick up on that and get the situation fixed…..after all, if it enhances image, it can’t be bad…..
February 19th, 2007 at 5:19 pmAs an American, I’m thoroughly ashamed of the way this Administration is treating our fighting men and women in uniform who are putting their lives on the line for an unfounded, illegitimate and senseless war that we’re paying heavily with our brave men and women overseas and with our tax dollars that could of been used to actually make the world a better place.
One has to wonder what kind of a place the world would have been if we spent more time, manpower and money solving problems facing people all across the world today like hunger and disease instead of spending countless trillions on arming ourselves.
I’m not Anti-war, but I’m against exploiting the use of our military for the benefit of a few wealthy elite.
Let’s restore honor to our country and our military.
February 19th, 2007 at 5:19 pmIt’s the least we owe the troops, ourselves and the world.
This story gives a whole new meaning to the word ‘hypocrite’.
February 19th, 2007 at 5:22 pmPortraits: 1st prize singles
Nina Berman, USA, Redux Pictures for People.
Wounded US Marine returns home from Iraq to marry
http://www.worldpressphoto.com/index.php?option=com_photogallery&task=view&id=875&Itemid=146&bandwidth=high?rss
February 19th, 2007 at 5:24 pmSuck it up, chump, Jeezus luvs u.
February 19th, 2007 at 5:25 pm#25 veritas
the tie is symbolic of a level of “class†or “intelligencia†– both of which he lacks
A tie is a piss-poor substitute for brains or sophistication. I remember when I was in the service and someone mentioned the distinction between “commanding respect” and “demanding respect”. All Bush can manage is the latter.
February 19th, 2007 at 5:28 pm#26 veritas
I would like to see military families voice their opinion too, but I fear they may have restrictions. Ex: Military Families Speak Out used to have an open and active message board but had to take it down. Security reasons….. BS.
February 19th, 2007 at 5:28 pmThe families of war heroes need to unify and begin to express their voice now before this war is over and their loved ones are “left out in the coldâ€
Comment by veritas #26
veritas,
…the problem lies in convincing family members (to see the truth)…
…that their loved ones have been maimed for other than an honorable cause…
…it even sounds fu*ked up when I’m posting it here…
…I can’t imagine how difficult it is for a mother, father, sibling, or significant other to WANT to believe that their loved one has been scarred for life…
…for lies, and other ulterior motives of ruthless corrupt politicians…
…and especially the ONE politician the nation’s supposed to be able to trust without question…
February 19th, 2007 at 5:29 pmBut, George W. Bush is a “man of faith” and Mitt “The Flipper” Romney says we need a man of faith running America.
Can we send these chuckleheads to Saudi Arabia so they can live out their relgiously autocratic fantasies please?
-GSD
February 19th, 2007 at 5:32 pmWell, he wouldn’t want to create a “bad image” of his war now would he? Sarcasm/On
What a heartless sum-bitch this manipulator is. Sarcasm/Off
February 19th, 2007 at 5:35 pm” ‘Are you telling me that I can’t go to the ceremony ’cause I’m an amputee?’ ” David recalled asking. “She said, ‘No, I’m saying you need to wear pants.”
Amputee asked to wear pants, why does Bush hate the troops?
February 19th, 2007 at 5:39 pmOf course, this is par for the course for Bush&Co. Don’t let anyone near Bush who might draw attention from the lies he’s telling us.
February 19th, 2007 at 5:41 pmFirst, they stopped those who weren’t “invited” to attend his campaign stump speeches for fear they might ask a question of the stupid one. Now they refuse to let a veteran, wounded in Bush’s war based on lies and deception, appear near the boy-king because the press will be there.
Tsk, tsk — can’t have that, can we? Keep those wounded guys back there at Walter Reed, where they can be ignored.
Every day brings another revolting story about the “compassionate” one. Damn him to hell, then damn him again.
If you haven’t done so already — check out the WaPo, yesterday and today, the articles by Dana Priest about the treatment of veterans at Walter Reed, in Washington, DC.
February 19th, 2007 at 5:43 pmI don’t want to make you sick, but I am afraid you will be.
38 – Marie,
February 19th, 2007 at 5:47 pmI don’t think that W needs to worry about hell. He should be more worried about where Satan sends his discards!
#39 – Marie,
February 19th, 2007 at 5:52 pmBusy girl, today, I read them and am shocked! How W and Cheney won in 04 still mystifies me. Perhaps they rigged the election? By the bye, why aren’t the trolls all over this thread?
The man never ceases to lower the bar to new depths for ‘compassionate conservativism”…
Where are the nasty-mouthed trolls to defend him? Or how much he supports the troops?
February 19th, 2007 at 6:04 pmThe soldier said “I am not ashamed of what I did…” Unfortunately, this shows that this soldier cannot come to grips with the fact that he was used as cannon fodder by this most uncaring administration. One hopes that he will soon reach an epiphany and realized that he and others who came back maimed and crippled were used most cruelly by those currently in power. Perhaps if Bush or Cheney’s daughters came back to this country the way this soldier did, there might actually be talk of getting those troops out of that meatgrinder as quickly as possible.
February 19th, 2007 at 6:08 pmAmputee asked to wear pants, why does Bush hate the troops?
Comment by paul
How many amputees do you know that lost a leg, paul?
1. he showed up wearing shorts. I am sure he brought a spare set of long pants to change to /snark
2. shorts are easier to wear for some amputees, fact.
Tell you what, why don’t you go down to your localVA and get to know the people and the issues you are talking about.
February 19th, 2007 at 6:08 pmImagine a direct one on one conversation between President Bush and this soldier. The soldier asks why his name has been deleted from the guest list. The President offers a real answer and does not say that he’ll look into it. What does the President say? How does he justify this decision?
Andrew Pass
February 19th, 2007 at 6:12 pmhttp://www.pass-ed.com/Living-Textbook.html
If I was David Thomas, I would have said that I would be happy to wear pants. Then I would have attended the ceremony with shorts on under my pants, and then take the pants off halfway through the ceremony.
Then put up the biggest fight I could when they tried to eject me.
February 19th, 2007 at 6:13 pmDavid Thomas has no reason to be ashamed, but Bush has plenty of reasons to be ashamed. Whatever happened to his mantra of personal responsiblity and accountability?
February 19th, 2007 at 6:19 pm#47 Uncle Ho
For one to feel shame they must first possess a soul … which Bush, it would seems, lacks.
February 19th, 2007 at 6:30 pmWayne. You’re probably a reasonable guy when your not fretting the peer pressure from your progressive buddies here at TP. Let’s put aside my contact with amputees for a second and let me ask you this:
A case worker quizzed him about what he would wear. It was summer, so David said shorts. The case manager said the media would be there and shorts were not advisable because the amputees would be seated in the front row.
A case worker. ThinkProgress has morphed a case worker into the President of the U.S. I’m assuming you don’t have the conscience to admit that you have been mislead, but please explain to me how this case worker is an inditement of the Bush Administration. Incredible stretch that you and others here are eager to believe.
February 19th, 2007 at 6:32 pmWhatever happened to his mantra of personal responsiblity and accountability?
Comment by Uncle Ho
That’s for us, not him. His mama told him that.
February 19th, 2007 at 6:33 pmShakespeare writes:
“But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all ‘We died at such a place;’ some swearing, some crying for a surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left. I am afeard there are few die well that die in a battle; for how can they charitably dispose of any thing, when blood is their argument? Now, if these men do not die well, it will be a black matter for the king that led them to it; whom to disobey were against all proportion of subjection.” (Henry V, Act V, Scene 4)
February 19th, 2007 at 6:35 pmI bet he won’t vote for THEM again.
February 19th, 2007 at 6:35 pmWayne. You’re probably a reasonable guy when your not fretting the peer pressure from your progressive buddies here at TP.
–paul
Oh Wayne, say it ain’t so. I know it says in the terms of use that you have to try to impress your fellow commenters at all costs, but I never thought you’d succumb to such pressure. Please Wayne, try to be yourself, don’t put on a mask just to impress us.
You be your best YOU!!
*gag*
February 19th, 2007 at 6:37 pm“A case worker. ThinkProgress has morphed a case worker into the President of the U.S. I’m assuming you don’t have the conscience to admit that you have been mislead, but please explain to me how this case worker is an inditement of the Bush Administration.”
Paul, point us to a picture of Bush having a photo-op with an amputee. Or a pic in front of a flag draped casket. It’s been, what?, 4 years since his grand Iraqi adventure started…there must be all kinds of pics with AWOL in near proximity to scarred-for-life vets.
February 19th, 2007 at 6:42 pmIf you want to see how your typical Freeper reacts to media exposure of the appalling conditions that our wounded troops endure at Walter Reed…check this link out. They would prefer that the soldiers rot in silence rather than bring attention to the neglect that this administration has created by budget priorities that reward war profiteers at the expense of our sons/daughters/aunts/unlces/brothers/sisters/mothers/fathers. It’s the WaPo’s treasonous fault for shining light on these deplorable conditions….
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=247141&mesg_id=247141
February 19th, 2007 at 6:48 pmTwo men set the temour of the Bush 43 presidency – Karl Rove and Dick Cheney. W sits on the sidelines and tries to mimic Nero. He dares to compare his life with that of George Washington – Judas provides a better example. Constant failure is his legacy.
February 19th, 2007 at 6:53 pmcomment by paul
I am a vet who has been protesting treatment of veterans by the Bush Adminstration for the last 6 years. All the veteran protests have fallen on deaf ears at this administration.
David told the case worker, “I’m not ashamed of what I did, and y’all shouldn’t be neither.” When the guest list came out for the ceremony, his name was not on it.
The case worker was following the guidelines set by the PR people. An amputee showing his prosthetics is obviously considered an obscenity by Bushco.
The real obscenity is the way Bushco treats the troops. From an earlier thread, that you trolls seem to have skipped:
Behind the door of Army Spec. Jeremy Duncan’s room, part of the wall is torn and hangs in the air, weighted down with black mold. When the wounded combat engineer stands in his shower and looks up, he can see the bathtub on the floor above through a rotted hole.
There are alot more stories, like a female veteran ( someone I know personally ) who didn’t lose any limbs, but 90% of her pancreas, half her liver and part of her intestines. Losing the pancreas put her in full blown diabetes. An army medical review board kicked her off medical because there was no proof her injuries caused her diabetes. She is fighting it now. Her husband re-upped and is in Iraq now, so she can get medical coverage through him.
These stories are going on daily with the underhanded measures this administrationis using to “cut costs” at the expense of those who bleed for this country.
February 19th, 2007 at 6:55 pmtemour s/b tremor. Sorry
February 19th, 2007 at 6:56 pmBush does not give a damn about our troops. He does not care for ones who have been maimed or disabled due to this stupid war.
February 19th, 2007 at 6:57 pmI’m sure you all have seen this, or maybe someone already posted it, but McCain threw Rummy under the bus today:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070219/ap_on_el_pr/mccain2008
February 19th, 2007 at 6:58 pmAn anti-war caseworker told one of the code pink ladies she shouldn’t wear a pink hat in the room with Hillary, further proof, Hillary Clinton hates the anti-war movement.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:00 pmOh Wayne, say it ain’t so
– Zooey
hahahaha
umm, yeah, thats why I trash Hillary when there is a TP thread about her. Peer pressure, yeah, right.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:00 pm=D
This is off topic, however. John McCain said that if he became president, he would overturn Roe vs. Wade. Sen. McCain has no business making decisions for women.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:05 pmWayne.
The case worker was following the guidelines set by the PR people. An amputee showing his prosthetics is obviously considered an obscenity by Bushco.
It’s like you’re clarvo.., clairvoen,..clarev…, it’s like you’re a mindreader.
Re-read your post and try to convince yourself that you are objective. Even if what you believe is true; read the TP post and recognize how thin a link it is to someone without your bias, I mean, your experience.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:06 pmPinko. I won’t believe it until a caseworker says it so.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:07 pmAn anti-war caseworker told one of the code pink ladies she shouldn’t wear a pink hat in the room with Hillary, further proof, Hillary Clinton hates the anti-war movement.
Comment by paul — February 19, 2007 @ 7:00 pm
Proof?
You should know better by now that we won’t take your word for it, because your side has a habit of twisting things to fit your pre-conceived conclusions.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:09 pmEven if what you believe is true; read the TP post and recognize how thin a link it is to someone without your bias, I mean, your experience.
Comment by paul — February 19, 2007 @ 7:06 pm
Don’t disrespect him for doing something you’re not man enough to do.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:10 pmPaul, go to AOL news and there is an article about McCain stating that he would overturn Roe vs. Wade if elected president.
http://www.aol.com/news
February 19th, 2007 at 7:11 pm#63 Pinko
February 19th, 2007 at 7:14 pmI am of the opinion that the position men should have on abortion … be either pro-choice, or shut up. I say that because we don’t have the ability to carry a child … though we could always take Colberts advice and get a womb implant.
Paul, I also know that Bush could care less about our young men and women in uniform. Bush lied and got them sent over there to Iraq for no reason. There are over 2,000 of our young men and women dead and there is no telling how many have been disabled or maimed due to this war. Now, the government does not want to help them. That is wrong. The government has an obligation to help them.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:15 pmPeer pressure, yeah, right.
=D
Comment by Wayne
Not too over the top, was it? Heh.
I actually made myself sick….
February 19th, 2007 at 7:15 pmI strongly agree with you AshenShard on post #69.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:18 pm#70 Pinko
To try and play devil’s advocate and take on the mindset of a republican ….
the government doesn’t owe them anything. they were payed, and the fact that they were injured on the job is not the governments fault or responsibility. if they want good health care, they should be paying for their own policy, and if they cannot afford it, then it is their own fault.
o.k. … that felt disgusting, …. might need a shower after that.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:19 pmo.k. … that felt disgusting, …. might need a shower after that.
Comment by AshenShard
That was good. For a second, I truly despised you. :)
February 19th, 2007 at 7:23 pmYou’re right, a shower is in order.
Hillary Clinton hates the anti-war movement.
Comment by paul
Glad you noticed at least that.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:24 pmHillaryClinton supported Bush and the war untill the political winds started blowing the opposite way. She is a republican-lite, democrat in name only.
Try again….
How can it be their own fault when some insurance companies in the first place will not insure them because of their injuries?
The soldiers got hurt and disabled because Bush sent them off on some wild goose chase and got them hurt. It is Bush and Cheney’s fault that 2,000 American soldiers have died in Iraq. It is Bush and Cheney’s fault that tens of thousands of our soldiers have come home disabled and unable to work. Yes, Bush and Co. should be held accountable for what they have done.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:28 pmI would like to see Bernie Sanders as president.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:29 pmtemour s/b tremor. Sorry
Comment by WaltTheMan — February 19, 2007 @ 6:56 pm
I think you really mean “tenor”. BTW, thanks for your nice comment last week–”MrsTheMan” is a lucky woman! :-D
Hate to comment and run, but I was wracking my poor brain trying to figure out the right word–goodnight!
February 19th, 2007 at 7:32 pmo.k. … that felt disgusting, …. might need a shower after that.
Comment by AshenShard
And a good brillo brushing between the ears LOL
February 19th, 2007 at 7:35 pmComment by paul — February 19, 2007 @ 6:32 pm
Why didn’t you include the lead sentence in the paragraph you quoted from? Maybe because it would make you look the fool?
“David tangled with Walter Reed’s image machine when he wanted to attend a ceremony for a fellow amputee, a Mexican national who was being granted U.S. citizenship by President Bush.”
There’s more from the article, which talks about many different soldiers:
Got that, Paul? The military command runs the hospital. The “case worker” is in the Army. And guess who is the Commander-in-Chief?
Come on, Paul, even you can figure this one out. That’s right. President Bush is the Commander-in-Chief.
Now, this might be a bit of a stretch, but, the Hospital is a Military Hospital, under a Military Command, and President Bush is the Commander-in-Chief of the Military, and someone in that Military Hospital under that Military Chain-of-Command kept an Iraq War Veteran who lost a leg in Iraq from attending a Ceremony for one of his friends where the Commander-in-Chief was going to be present. Now I know I’m going out on a limb here, but I’d say that does not reflect too well on how the Commander-in-Chief receives his troops.
And remember, the Commander-in-Chief’s mommy didn’t want to dirty her beautiful mind with pictures of flag-draped coffins.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:38 pmCome on, Paul, even you can figure this one out. That’s right. President Bush is the Commander-in-Chief.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire
leave it to Briseadh na Faire to say it eloquently, just as I was about to get pissed enough to break down into:
f*ck you paul.
;)
February 19th, 2007 at 7:45 pmComment by Briseadh na Faire — February 19, 2007 @ 7:38 pm
I found this disturbing:
“Perks and stardom do not come to every amputee. Sgt. David Thomas, a gunner with the Tennessee National Guard, spent his first three months at Walter Reed with no decent clothes; medics in Samarra had cut off his uniform. Heavily drugged, missing one leg and suffering from traumatic brain injury, David, 42, was finally told by a physical therapist to go to the Red Cross office, where he was given a T-shirt and sweat pants. He was awarded a Purple Heart but had no underwear.”
February 19th, 2007 at 7:47 pmf*ck you paul.
;)
Comment by Wayne
I’m glad you didn’t go the “f*ck you paul” route.
Heh.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:48 pmHitler only accepts poto ops with whole men. Except when he needs you.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:52 pmHitler only accepts poto ops with whole men. Except, when he needs you.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:55 pmHow about another tour in Iraq or an adventure in Iran? He might recognize you then.
Nat, I agree. There were many other disturbing aspects of the story. I was more than a little ticked that the Army is finding ways to not pay disability to the soldiers.
Why is it the government will do everything in its power to prevent a wounded war vet from receiving a few hundred dollars a month in disability, yet turn a blind eye to the obscene multi-billion dollar rip-offs by the War Profiteers?
February 19th, 2007 at 7:55 pmWhat happened with the last sentence of my last post? I’m missin something here.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:56 pmf*ck you paul. ;)
less eloquent, also less of a stretch. you all make conservatives look descerning and open minded. You do, however, get the blue ribbon for cheerleading; Bush could use some supporters as loyal as you are.
Gotta go. Trains pulling out of the station. Zooey, you on board yet?
February 19th, 2007 at 7:57 pm#84 theswan
in addition, Kinder und Fraulein who only have wonderful things to say about der fuhrer, and will cheer and heil him every chance they get. at least we are not yet at the point where all opposed end up in camps.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:58 pmZooey, you on board yet?
Comment by paul
I only f*ck men I respect. So, that would be a no.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:00 pmPaul,
You fu*cking little piss soaked troll/weasel, come get some of rachel you little fu*k twat.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:05 pmTruth and reality are terrarists, & we don’t side with terrarists.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:06 pmWhy is it the government will do everything in its power to prevent a wounded war vet from receiving a few hundred dollars a month in disability,
They have to deny them their claim. How else will Bush sustain his tax cuts for the rich?
yet turn a blind eye to the obscene multi-billion dollar rip-offs by the War Profiteers?
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — February 19, 2007 @ 7:55 pm
The War Profiteers are their buddies. Most of the administration will probably seek jobs with these them once Bush’s presidency (our long nightmare) is over.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:10 pmAnyway,
“Iraq war amputee denied photo-op with Bush.”
Then in the Hannity thread, we got bimbo-ettes galore flaunting risque lingerie!
This country has lost it’s journalistic as well as it’s moral compass.
Ever since the election of 2000.
See how fu*king backwards it is folks?
An AMPUTEE can’t even get a “mention” with Bush yet these sluts can show and bare near all to the world.
How’s that for “Fair and Balanced” and “We Report, You Decide”
Well I have decided FoxNews, and you are a network of paid shills and propagandists for wherever the almighty buck leads you.
Your “say anything, do anything” style of reporting to puroposefully keep the people who dare even watch your station “out of the loop” of logical thinking will bring your station down in a heap of rubble come 2008.
I wonder how hard FoxNews will “pander” to the majority of democrtas who are amassed to take TOTAL CONTROL of Washington DC in 2008.
I am guessing not very hard.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:14 pmOne two
three four five
my neighbors so fat his ride
has shocks worn on one side
spends half the day in taco bell line
trying to make sense of time
loser, loser of the worstest of his kind
sittin sittin in the taco bell line
driving in diapers thru the line
big one aint wasting no time.
gimme 10 bean burritos with xtra cheese
February 19th, 2007 at 8:27 pmextra etxra cheese n’ hot sauce pleeze!
I am guessing not very hard.
Comment by rachel kinnardi
Heh. I bet you hear that alot.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:29 pmHappy Unitary Executive Day everyone!
February 19th, 2007 at 8:31 pmWell I have decided FoxNews, and you are a network of paid shills and propagandists for wherever the almighty buck leads you.
I so hope that’s true, but given the horses ass it came from I wonder.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:33 pmBush could use some supporters as loyal as you are.
Comment by paul
Current Bush supporters are now all big business shills or mental midgets who have no concience.
like the old saying goes.
“A working man voting for a Republican is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders”.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:34 pmBush could use some supporters as loyal as you are.
Comment by paul
My car gets me to work and back. My dog does more for me than boy blunder and his cold war reigniters.
Yeh, you heard me, you have help restart the cold war, Idjut.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:38 pmWhy the Corporate Media refuses to mention the name Dennis Kucinich:
Speaking Sunday afternoon in New Hampshire, the six-term Congressman from Ohio railed against his opponents for the Democratic nomination who voted for the war and now say they were fooled.

“What a recommendation that is. Vote for me. I was fooled by George Bush,” said Kucinich to laughter and cheers.

Making reference to Democratic presidential candidates Sen. Hillary Clinton, Sen. Barack Obama, and former Sen. John Edwards, Kucinich said he has the kind of independence to stand up to and people that he can’t be fooled.

“Hillary voted to fund the war 100 percent of the time. Barack voted to fund the war 100 percent of the time. Edwards voted to fund the war 100 percent of the time,” he said. “I opposed this war and opposed funding it.”

He said every member of Congress at the time had the opportunity to learn the facts and vote against the war and its funding. He said the information was there for anyone, the Democrats controlled the Senate, and yet every other candidate voted for it.

“I am opposed to war as an instrument of policy,” he said outlining his 12-point plan for ending what he calls an occupation.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:41 pmRachel Chickennardi = PISS SOAKED TROLL USING MY NAME.
Rachel teen Hoodlum = PISS SOAKED TROLL USING MY NAME.
PLEASE DO NOT RESPOND TO IT
February 19th, 2007 at 8:44 pm“A working man voting for a Republican is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sandersâ€.
Comment by Wayne
Vote for me Rachel Chickennardi!
I promise never to send your kids or my kids to war, but only the democrat kids, why?
Because they never wanted war you big sillies you!
And how else could we have war without wealthy inbreds that have never worry of battle?
Like me!
February 19th, 2007 at 8:45 pmRachel Chickennardi = PISS SOAKED TROLL USING MY NAME.
Rachel teen Hoodlum = PISS SOAKED TROLL USING MY NAME.
PLEASE DO NOT RESPOND TO IT
Comment by rachel rj kinnardi
No, it’s me, you know – I’m a troll, just perfected.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:47 pmRachel teen Hoodlum,
Look at the title to this thread and tell me you still feel good about yourself and your conscience, if you even have one.
You need to learn to forgive and forget, or you just aren’t worth talking to in my book sport.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:58 pmComment by Rachel teen Hoodlum
Comment by Rache Chickennardi
Whoever you are, you are posting troll crap all over a serious thread.
I guess you don’t really give a damn about the plight of veterans.
what an ass.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:01 pm102, I figured as much. Keep up the good work, Rachel.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:21 pmIn reality, what amputee would want to have his picture taken with this mental cripple?
I did see lots of photos today of a real live actor playing George Washington along side of this phony President today. Would be laughable, if it weren’t so true.
66% of those seeingthese photographs thought that the actor was plausible as Washington. The same 66% didn’t find anything believable about GW except his gall.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:21 pmImagine! President Codpiece on a PR and photo-op campaign cannot possibly be photographed with a maimed soldier. This guy actually insisted on wearing shorts rather than long pants! And show his stumps! Heavens to Betsy! How could he embarass the President when we have had such “enormous successes” in Iraq? I bet this guy won’t get a cent in disability from the Army because he had the nerve to defy them.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:27 pmThese wounded are still in the military — they aren’t veterans until they are discharged. So they are still part of the DoD — think Rumsfeld — Americablog has additional information on this cover up that appears to be a way to hide a true cost of war.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:37 pmLetting the maimed soldier appear with Bush might upset the prez mother who does’t like to bother her beautiful mind with nasty details.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:42 pmApples don’t fall far from the trees.
Did it ever occur to anybody that shorts might not be the most flattering garb for our President? Might as well ask him to wear a wrestling uni. Not everybody is lucky enough to have an average sized penis. And clearly, with this war, we already know the poor guy has size issues. I say we pool our resources and give the lacking one a Porsche.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:53 pm#54 Innocen Bystander,
“Paul, point us to a picture of Bush having a photo-op with an amputee. ”
http://urbanlegends.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/04/images/20040414%2D7%5Fp25788%2D27%2D1%2D515h.html
February 19th, 2007 at 9:55 pm#54 Innocen Bystander,
“Paul, point us to a picture of Bush having a photo-op with an amputee. â€
http://urbanlegends.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.whitehouse.gov/ news/ releases/ 2004/ 04/ images/ 20040414%2D7%5Fp25788%2D27%2D1%2D515h.html
Comment by Exley — February 19, 2007 @ 9:55 pm
That’s an amputee? How do you know, the picture doesn’t show he’s an amputee. If anything, the camera angle goes out of the way to avoid the possibility this might be the case.
Another failure from Exley, with a link that doesn’t show what he claims, and in fact disproves his theory. It’s nice for you to admit that you were wrong again.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:59 pmBush could use some supporters as loyal as you are.
Um, Paulie, he has them. You are one.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:04 pmWow, Exley. Thanks. That was touching. Now find 5 more.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:05 pm#78 – JaneESchneider,
February 19th, 2007 at 10:07 pmJane,
I meant to say exactly what I stated in the update. ‘Tremor’ indicates a state of instability, not in line with reality. Tenor would do as well, but does not fit my style as it indicates ’style’. I am obscure at times which comes from my Prussian and Danish roots.
Wow, Exley. Thanks. That was touching. Now find 5 more.
Comment by JPark — February 19, 2007 @ 10:05 pm
How about find one picture, where you can actually see that the soldier is an amputee?
February 19th, 2007 at 10:12 pm#54 Innocent Bystander,
“Paul, point us to a picture of Bush having a photo-op with an amputee”
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-06-27-bush-jog_x.htm
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/04/images/20040414-7_a5bu9736-1-677v.html
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Nov2004/2004111006a_hr.jpg
February 19th, 2007 at 10:13 pmExley,
In every case the limbs of the amputee are covered up. That was the point of the recent photo-op, silly child. That the soldier wouldn’t cover up his limbs, and therefore was uninvited.
Thanks for proving this is in fact a deliberate situation that the whitehouse is engineering for political purposes. Thanks for proving yourself wrong skippy! Good work, and you’re welcome for my assistance in showing you how you are wrong.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:20 pmExley, I would like to see your comment on the story in the link above as well as the ” Injured U.S. troops held in revolting conditions.” thread that you never commented on, instead of defending your fellow Bush appologist paul.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:25 pm#120 It would be interesting to see Exley’s reaction to seeing how veterans are treated by the Bush administration.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:28 pmYes Exley, do read the 2 part WaPo article by Dana Priest about how our the troops are treated. I would love to see you weave a tale of pardon for your favorite prez et al.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:32 pmAnd here’s one more…
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/12/images/20041221-7_122104-sgtdalebeatt-515h.html
So, now we see that idea that Bush will not be seen or photographed with members of our military who have had limbs amputated as a result of combat wounds is a canard and 100% false.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:33 pmExley, how about you dig into the Republican votes on veterans issues? You won’t do that, will you?
February 19th, 2007 at 10:34 pmAnd here’s one more…
Comment by Exley — February 19, 2007 @ 10:33 pm
Now find one that’s happened in the last 3 years, skippy.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:37 pmExley,
So you found a few recent pictures of the President with soldiers that are amputees that make this whole thread irrelevant and actually makes the counter argument effectively without saying a word. Now try finding 1000 pictures of Bush with amputees. (Just kidding). I knew this whole discussion was idiotic, but was obviously unable to shed any light. Nice work.
I imagine the Bush haters have gone to track down some more caseworkers to help them spread there message of hate. If the left spent half that energy supporting the war on terror, the troops they claim to be concerned about, would probably be home by now.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:40 pmPaul, how about you? Would YOU like to dig into the Republican votes on veterans’ rights?
February 19th, 2007 at 10:43 pmIf the left spent half that energy supporting the war on terror, the troops they claim to be concerned about, would probably be home by now.
Comment by paul
The war in Iraq is not the war on terror. Wise up, paul.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:44 pmAnd by the way, your retarded Vietnam era excuse that the public lost the war isn’t going to fly. You neo-con losers lost the war because you can’t even wipe your own asses.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:44 pm#127
VVGFU wrote: “Now find one that’s happened in the last 3 years.”
Well, VVGFU, you might want to take a more careful look at the USA Today article. It is from June 2006. Here is another photo of Bush and that vet:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/06/images/20060627-5_d-0318-1-755v.html
February 19th, 2007 at 10:52 pmIf the left spent half that energy supporting the war on terror, the troops they claim to be concerned about, would probably be home by now.
Comment by paul
War on terror?
You mean like going after Osama bin Forgotten?
Please, please ,explain these comments by your Codpiece in Chimp.
“The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him.â€
- G.W. Bush, 9/13/01
“I want justice…There’s an old poster out West, as I recall, that said, ‘Wanted: Dead or Alive,’â€
- G.W. Bush, 9/17/01, UPI
“I don’t know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don’t care. It’s not that important. It’s not our priority.â€
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02
“I am truly not that concerned about him.â€
- G.W. Bush, repsonding to a question about bin Laden’s whereabouts, 3/13/02
and lest we forget what kind of Einstein your favorite President is:
“That makes sense to me, don’t it?â€
February 19th, 2007 at 10:53 pm~ George W. Bush 6-6-06
Comment by katy #30
I sure hope you emailed that link to Bushiva and L’il Dick @ the WH…
February 19th, 2007 at 10:56 pmExley, don’t ignore me, it isn’t polite. Wanna check out what party is cutting VA benefits?
February 19th, 2007 at 10:58 pm#126, Paul,
Thank you. Well, you know what they say — “A picture is worth a thousand words.” Accordingly, this myth that Bush will not be photographed with military amputees has been dismantled with about 5,000 words.
(You will also note that Sergeant Christian Bagge and Sergeant Michael McNaughton are both wearing shorts).
Now, Wayne and Zooey (#s120 and 122), I have not yet read the Dana Priest articles. I will do so. But, I will say even before reading them, that if the vets are not receiving the finest care in the U.S, that is a disgrace. Our governments first responsibility should be to the men and women of our armed forces, whether they be on active service, in the reserves, or veterans.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:07 pmExley, don’t ignore me, it isn’t polite. Wanna check out what party is cutting VA benefits?
Comment by JPark
Not only that, I want his explaination of his support for a party and President presiding over this.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:07 pm#135 Wayne, they have no explanation for it. Or not one they are willing to go public with. I think it is because they are scum but that is just my opinion.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:09 pm#135 Actually, the explanation is it comes from the left wing press!!!
February 19th, 2007 at 11:10 pm#126 paul
If the left spent half that energy supporting the war on terror, the troops they claim to be concerned about, would probably be home by now.
If, by “the left”, you mean the Democrats in Congress, then you need to pay closer attention. The Dems have always been 100% supportive of our efforts to fight terrorism. In particular, the Dems have been as supportive as anyone in this country of the efforts to go after Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, and the Taliban in Afghanistan. It was Bush and the GOP who decided to abandon that and go after Saddam Hussein instead. So, it’s clear that the Democrats, or “the left”, want to fight terrorists more than Bush and the Republicans.
Why don’t you want to fight terrorism? Why do you want bin Laden to get away with the attack on 9/11? Why do you want al Qaeda to grow stronger? Why do you want the Taliban to grow stronger and take over Afghanistan again? Why do you want the troops to be stuck in Iraq, getting shot at and blown up by insurgents and militia on all sides, instead of fighting real terrorists where they are? What the hell’s the matter with you anyway?
February 19th, 2007 at 11:14 pmExley, while you are at it look at the last link of the story in this thread.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:19 pmI have been protesting this crap for years, it’s just now the coverup of the absoloutly horrid treatment of our veterans and wounded is starting to fail and reach the MSM.
Wayne,
Actually, I saw that story. I agree with you. It is shameful. I do believe, however, that they are closing Walter Reed because it is so delpaidated and inadequate. As I said, our soliders and vets should receive the best, most modern care.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:23 pmExley, that isn’t going to happen unless the Dems do it. You know this yet you are still a Bush disciple. Disgusting.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:29 pmExcuse me but,
February 19th, 2007 at 11:36 pmDon’t bag the Ex this time around, you asked for links to photos, and he came through – much better than usual.
I do believe, however, that they are closing Walter Reed because it is so delpaidated and inadequate. — Exley
it’s more than Walter Reed. It’s the whole VA system, under the thumbs of Bush Political appointees, that seem to be the ones behind it all, whether out of malice or just plain incompentecy. They are more interested in cutting costs than providing the services that the government has promised to it’s servicemenand women.
Research a bit for your own concience if nothing else.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:39 pmHere is another veteran rights group, to check out, for anyone interested in veteran issues.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:49 pmThe 21st Century GI Bill of Rights includes the following tenets:
Makes Health Care Accessible and Affordable for Our Veterans
• Improves veterans’ health care.
• Improves mental health for returning soldiers.
• Blocks increases in prescription drug co-payments and enrollment fees for veterans.
Provides the Benefits Our Veterans Have Earned and Deserve
• Ends the Disabled Veterans’ Tax.
• Reduces waiting times on disability claims and expands outreach to veterans.
Honors the Families of Those Who Made the Ultimate Sacrifice for our Country
• Ends the Military Families Tax.
• Increases survivor benefits for families with minor children.
Strengthens Our Support for Our Men and Women in Uniform
• Provides $1,000 Bonus for those serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.
• Ensures an adequate number of troops and adequate equipment for our troops.
• Improves military pay for senior enlisted personnel and warrant officers.
Honors Our Debt to Our Servicemen and Women
• Modernizes and enhances the GI Bill Education and Job Training Programs.
• Provides additional funds to assist homeless veterans with employment.
• Protects bonuses and special pay for the permanently injured, and continues combat pay or additional compensation for those recovering from combat injuries.
Improves Health and Education Benefits for Our National Guard/Reservists
• Expands military health care (TRICARE) for National Guard/Reservists.
• Protects the income of activated National Guard/Reservists.
• Ensures recruitment incentives and bonuses for National Guard/Reservists and improve educational benefits.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:58 pmStiffing veterans
The underfunded V.A. is being overwhelmed by injured soldiers — and the administration that sent them to war won’t pay to take care of them.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:58 pm
Support the Troopsâ„¢
February 20th, 2007 at 12:11 amWhat a goddamn farce the Bush administration is. Luckin Fosers!~
February 20th, 2007 at 12:35 amRachel Chickennardi = PISS SOAKED TROLL USING MY NAME.
Rachel teen Hoodlum = PISS SOAKED TROLL USING MY NAME.
PLEASE DO NOT RESPOND TO IT
February 20th, 2007 at 12:37 amThis is so sad. So very sad indeed. PR comes before human lives, according to this President.
February 20th, 2007 at 1:05 am46: Said it all.
February 20th, 2007 at 1:20 amThis shows how cowardly the Bush administration is. Way to betray the troops, Bush. And also the f*cking cowardly, hypocritical Republicans in Congress who lie that the Democrats are betraying the troops. Republicans are lying cowards.
February 20th, 2007 at 1:50 amComment by Exley — February 19, 2007 @ 9:55 pm
Sorry, loser. The photo didn’t clearly show the wonded soldier to be an amputee, nor did the caption indicate the soldier to be an amputee.
And, is this the most recent photo you could come up with, 2003? Has your fuhrer avoided photo ops with wounded soldiers for the past FOUR YEARS?!?
February 20th, 2007 at 1:56 amComment by Exley — February 19, 2007 @ 10:33 pm
Then why the sudden change in policy now? How come no photos of flag-draped coffins? How come your fuhrer doesn’t go to the funerals of women and men he sent into harm’s way?
Why do you still support someone who commits War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity?
February 20th, 2007 at 2:02 amComment by paul — February 19, 2007 @ 10:40 pm
OK. STOP THE TRUCK.
The “Right” had a blank check for 6 years. Now your saying that the left could have had the troops home in 6 weeks?
Are you saying that the “Right” has been totally incompetent in prosecuting the War on Terror? After all, the “Right” has dumped everything it could into the effort, for 6 years, to no avail.
February 20th, 2007 at 2:08 amHere is the link that so many of you apparently couldn’t find.
The interesting thing is that one of the images shown in the search results is linked through another liberal blog site that condemns Bush for allowing publication of a picture showing him with a war amputee. Between that site and this one, it sounds like he’s damned no matter what he does.
http://images.google.com/images?svnum=10&hl=en&q=President+Bush+run+jog+amputee
February 20th, 2007 at 6:07 amhttp://www.eff.org/
EFF: Legal Guide for Bloggers
Updated April 20, 2006
Whether you’re a newly minted blogger or a relative old-timer, you’ve been seeing more and more stories pop up every day about bloggers getting in trouble for what they post.
Like all journalists and publishers, bloggers sometimes publish information that other people don’t want published. You might, for example, publish something that someone considers defamatory, republish an AP news story that’s under copyright, or write a lengthy piece detailing the alleged crimes of a candidate for public office.
The difference between you and the reporter at your local newspaper is that in many cases, you may not have the benefit of training or resources to help you determine whether what you’re doing is legal. And on top of that, sometimes knowing the law doesn’t help – in many cases it was written for traditional journalists, and the courts haven’t yet decided how it applies to bloggers.
But here’s the important part: None of this should stop you from blogging. Freedom of speech is the foundation of a functioning democracy, and Internet bullies shouldn’t use the law to stifle legitimate free expression. That’s why EFF created this guide, compiling a number of FAQs designed to help you understand your rights and, if necessary, defend your freedom.
To be clear, this guide isn’t a substitute for, nor does it constitute, legal advice. Only an attorney who knows the details of your particular situation can provide the kind of advice you need if you’re being threatened with a lawsuit. The goal here is to give you a basic roadmap to the legal issues you may confront as a blogger, to let you know you have rights, and to encourage you to blog freely with the knowledge that your legitimate speech is protected.
Please note that this guide applies to people living in the US. We don’t have the expertise or resources to speak to other countries’ legal traditions, but we’d like to work with those who do. If you know of a similar guide for your own jurisdiction or feel inspired to research and write one, please let us know. We can link to it here.
Table of Contents
or, see an index of all the questions » http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/questions.php
Blogger Legal Liability Issues
The Overview of Legal Liability Issues FAQ briefly addresses some common legal issues that affect you as a publisher, especially situations where you may face legal claims or threats based on the information you published on your blog.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Intellectual Property addresses issues that arise when you publish material created by others on your blog.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Online Defamation Law provides an overview of defamation (libel) law, including a discussion of the constitutional and statutory privileges that may protect you.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Section 230 Protections discusses a powerful federal law that gives you, as a web host, protection against legal claims arising from hosting information written by third parties.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Privacy addresses the legal issues surrounding the privacy rights of people you blog about.
Bloggers As Journalists
The Bloggers’ FAQ on the Reporter’s Privilege is useful to bloggers who report news gathered from confidential sources.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Media Access can help bloggers who need to get access to public records and government meetings, as well as secure press passes to help with newsgathering.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on the Freedom of Information Act can help bloggers use open government laws to get information from the government.
Other Legal Issues for Bloggers
The Student Bloggers’ Legal FAQ addresses legal issues arising from student blogging. It focuses on blogging by high school (and middle school) students, but also contains information for college students.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Election Law addresses the legal issues you may face blogging about political campaigns.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Labor Law addresses legal issues with workplace blogging, including union organizing, protections for political blogging away from the workplace, and whistle blowing.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Adult Material addresses the legal issues arising from publishing risque adult-oriented content, including obscenity law, community standards on the Internet, and the new 2257 regulations.
February 20th, 2007 at 6:22 amRunning with an amputee who has recovered to the point that he has a prosthesis that fits and allows him to run and s terefore approaching whole is OK. Appearing with an amputee who can’t walk and is therefore not whole or the equivalent is not OK. We all know what Bush is like, sweeping truth under the carpet. This is just one more example.
February 20th, 2007 at 6:23 ambig papa says that Bush only does photo ops with those still able to do his dirty work. Add to that, and still support him.
February 20th, 2007 at 6:35 amcase workers are NOTHING, unless they hold a BSW or MSW. Caseworkers such as the Bush Administration’s DOD employ are probably just people they stuck in those positions with no real education on the subject matter.
Rachel, you dingbat, this thread is about amputees and the Bush Administration’s treatment of them. Which is horrendous as expected. Why do you try to dismantle threads and such in this manner? We already know that is the message given to many of you trolls, disrupt the threads. It shows how desperate the right wing is, they’ve been wrong about everything and now that it has been shown, just pretend everything is going swimmingly and keep fooling the masses by disrupting threads with nonsense or topics that have nothing to do with the thread at hand. People who help them do this are the REAL TRAITORS TO OUR COUNTRY–just like you Rachel.
February 20th, 2007 at 10:45 ambig papa says that Bush only does photo ops with those still able to do his dirty work.
Comment by KmnM #160
KmnM,
Exactly WHERE did I say that?
February 20th, 2007 at 12:27 pmThe no-amputee-photos issue, Bush freaking out over men not wearing ties, his bullying, condescending treatment of the press (remember the guy with eye problems Bush gave so much grief to for wearing sunglasses?) … It all adds up to the fact that he’s a very scary control freak who only feels comfortable when everyone else in the room acknowledges that they are powerless before him. One more sign of a deranged alcoholic with an out-of-control ego and serious personality disorders.
February 20th, 2007 at 2:15 pmI really find it hard to believe that anyone can be as unaware about the defective nature of this entire administration not just president “Gorge”.
February 20th, 2007 at 2:29 pmTheir propaganda machine is quite sickening in it’s obvious MO’s and ulterior motives…Truly corporate super A-holes are running america.
CHIMPya should be whipped to within a centimeter of his miserable life for his SHODDY TREATMENT OF OUR BRAVE AMERICAN TROOPS WHO WENT WILLINGLY INTO HIS FIASCO CALLED Iraq…EVEN HITLER TREATED HIS NAZI TROOPS BETTER THAN THIS FASCIST NAZI CHIMPya Bush, the narcissistic personality disorder wracked sociopath and cowardly sadistic bully, murdering International War Criminal and tin-pot despot!!!!!
February 20th, 2007 at 8:22 pm#143, Wake-n-bake…Thank you.
February 20th, 2007 at 9:34 pm#154,
BnF wrote: “And, is this the most recent photo you could come up with, 2003? Has your fuhrer avoided photo ops with wounded soldiers for the past FOUR YEARS?!?”
Well, BnF, you might want to take a more careful look at the USA Today article linked at posting 119 . It is from June 2006. Here is another photo of Bush and that vet:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ news/ releases/ 2006/ 06/ images/ 20060627-5_d-0318-1-755v.html
Again, you will note it is from June 2006.
How embarassing for you, Bnf. Your previously displays of ignorance of law and journalism were embarassing enough for you. Now, you have demonstrated a lack of basic reading skills.
February 20th, 2007 at 9:41 pmI’ll be the liberal who says this in the gentlest terms I can think of: This “Hero” is part of a demographic that can be exploited by a pussy president with no war experience, not for the purpose of looking strong but to throw a war in the first place, because for the mere price of throwing a war, the war president now gets unlimited power with which to destroy this country (the U.S.) to whatever degree he wants to, without any checks and balances. For the last thirty years in America a standing Army has guaranteed it’s own misuse. If the working class were educated, critical thinking would take the place of gung-ho, proud patriotism and the xenophobia that allows us to run roughshod over other nations for their resources.
Explain to me how you can be against the war but call this guy a hero.
I’m sorry his education cost so much but he was just duped into destroying another country.
February 20th, 2007 at 10:19 pmAre you people ready yet to tear this government down or are you content to be spineless cowards and sheep?
February 21st, 2007 at 12:12 pmI am the mother of a US Army soldier who has served one tour in Iraq. He returned safely. I am sick and tired of the blame game. If you dont understand history and wars, it is evident here by the comments left. By the way, many of you cant even stick to the subject of this article.
March 2nd, 2007 at 3:20 amMy soldier has risked his life to give you the freedom to say the things you have said. There are always going to be wars, and there are always going to be those who volunteer to go. All is not fair in war.
Some are going to get hurt, and some are going to die. There is such evil in this world that there will never be peace. The United States of America has always fought for the oppressed, the less free.
As far as the injured soldier who lost his legs, and wanted to wear shorts, number 10 above could not have said it better. What war hero wants to show off the nubs of his injuries. It was just a matter that he could not wear shorts, and did not want to dress like everyone else would be dressed.