another friday night 'record release party'

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Sep 17, 2004.

  1. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #1
    CNN is carrying this story

    the article asserts this...
    ...though i've yet to hear any media outlet mention this, ever, nor render the "embarrassing" judgement. has anyone seen such an admission?
     
  2. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #2
    Whoops.
     
  3. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #3
    From the White House, you mean? No, but would you seriously expect them to admit they'd fudged on the meaning of "all documents?"

    FWIW, the LA Times made a similar observation about the inconsistencies in the administration's statements in a story that ran in today's edition, though it was kind of buried in the story.
     
  4. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #4
    not from the WH, but from media outlets other than the AP mention and your LA Times mention. i'd like to see one of Peter Jennings' crew, for example, report a document release then remind viewers how, several times, the WH has said all docs have been released.

    i've not seen that happen.
     
  5. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #5
    Well if they did, that would be an example of "media bias," of course.
     
  6. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #6
    Perhaps it depends on what the meaning of "all" is. :rolleyes:

    The only thing I heard on a media outlet was the WH claim that the new release "proves the WH is releasing all the relevant documents and doing all they can to try to dig them up."

    The programme failed to observe that the WH has repeatedly claimed that all such documents were already released.

    Perhaps it depends on what the meaning of "release" is?

    I suspect the Rove plan is to keep feeding us trivial, marginal and inconsequential documents, one or two at a time, trying to ensure these documents contain no damning evidence (as did the successfully discredited but accurate batch released last week), until interest wanes and the media sniffer dogs go on to the next scandal.
     
  7. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #7
    Or the meaning of ing or ed. This is how the LA Times phrased it:

    In this election year, the White House has repeatedly released new documents despite its insistence earlier that all available material had been made public. ​
     
  8. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #8
    "When we said all documents were released, we meant all documents were being released as we stumbled upon them. Honest. Look! A Goodyear blimp!! <footsteps running away>"
     
  9. trebblekicked macrumors 6502a

    trebblekicked

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago, IL, USA
    #9
    just wanted to add <door slams><tires squealing>
     
  10. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #10
    You mention a point that i wonder about.

    How much of the "reserve" from the media is due to their feelings that the public at large sees them as being biased towards the liberals.
     
  11. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #11
    Well.... If you want to get technical....

    Cocaine isn't a Narcotic... It's a stimulant. So if we're to extrapolate from this that Dubyaw never did NARCOTICS we can list everything under Stimulants and Psychotropics as potential substances of choice for the young leutenant.

    so it would list something like:

    Cocaine
    Dexedrine ("crank", not "speed" which refers to Methamphetamine)
    PCP
    Acid


    Hmm.... not a list of things I'd want in a potential commander in chief. In fact all but one of these is on the list of substances that will disqualify applicants to Millitary service from access to Classified projects and duties on Submarines or involving Nuclear weapons. So, in effect we have a CiC that's in direct violation of Millitary Psych background regs with his finger on "the button".
     
  12. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #12
    This is the strongest argument that I have heard. Living in the DC area i know of many people that have been denied jobs based on past drug use or other factors (being Gay as one - a former lover was profiled in the Puzzle Palace).

    I think that things will only get worse as time marches on. Of the 20 somethings today that goes to raves and the sort; how many will see political office in the future?
     

Share This Page