Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bullshit .... meet Truth.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Stinky The Clown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-22-06 07:19 PM
Original message
Bullshit .... meet Truth.
Edited on Wed Mar-22-06 07:28 PM by Husb2Sparkly
So, ElChimpoChumpo is speaking to some ..... uh .... let's call them 'The Delusionals' ..... in West Virginia. He's yammering his usual meaningless platitudes and some guy gets up and says "Thank God you're our president." I mention that just to give a sense of this particular audience. Delusional.

So, in his yammerings, King Crack sez "The components of the more powerful IEDs the 'insurgents' are using in Iraq are from Iran." No equivocation. No shading. A flat out statement.

Now, cut to the Pentagon, where, at pretty much the same time, Joints Chiefs Chairman Peter Pace, is speaking to the press. A reporter asks him if there's proof the IED components used in Iraq are from Iran. Gen. Pace looks to his side at some aide, and then sez to the reporter, in clear, unshaded, unequivocal tones: "No sir. We do not."

This was reported by David Shuster on MSNBC, complete with video clips of both events, one after the other, with the contrast of 'truth' being the point of the story.

How can even The Delusionals believe this bullshit anymore?

And why didn't Shuster say it in a single word .... well .... two words, anyhow: 'Bush Lied'.

LIAR

LIED

LIES

LYING SACK OF DOG SHIT LIES

BIG, MEANINGFUL, IMPORTANT LIES

LIAR
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-22-06 07:30 PM
Response to Original message
1. Why didn't Shuster say it? It would have meant overtime, silly.
He would have had to make sure he could back it up and that would have meant being late for dinner.

See the press isn't merely corrupt, they are LAZY.

They can't be bothered to get a comment from the opposition, they can't be bothered to confirm a story.

That cuts into their makeup time--can't have the makeup base improperly set, can we? :sarcasm:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stinky The Clown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-22-06 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. All in all, Shuster's a pretty straight shooter ....
But yeah .... lazy's an apt adjective.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bush_is_wacko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-22-06 08:18 PM
Response to Original message
2. Lawsuit? I think at least a few of them are trying to point out his
ummmmm......inconsistencies. It does seem to me they are all flat out refusing to call him what he is. The only reason I can come up with is some obscure, unspoken media rule that says don't call him a liar unless you can prove it in a court of law.

Seriously though they have the footage that could prove that charge too, so I really don't know. Too understaffed to dig it all back up? Sure would be nice to flip through the national news channels and hear LIAR, LIAR. LIES, LIED.... though wouldn't it?

Maybe someone should have a serious discussion with them and find out?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-23-06 01:04 AM
Response to Original message
4. I am autorank and I endorse this post...
Edited on Thu Mar-23-06 01:07 AM by autorank

BIG F'ING LIAR







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skids Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-23-06 02:50 AM
Response to Original message
5. Wait, wasn't this on TDS?

Did Shuster copy Stewart? Or was that something else entirely. I have so much trouble keeping every lie and debunk straight these days.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Senator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-23-06 03:10 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. Yes, same clip. Shuster (or someone) just slipped it in. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Senator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-23-06 03:06 AM
Response to Original message
6. That wasn't "some aide," it was Rummy himself...
... clueless as usual.

But this lie is a lame attempt at NigerDocs Redux. Damning information, attributed to the British.

Too bad Pace "Joe-Wilsoned" it right out of the gate.

Fear not. They'll keep trying.

--
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 01:13 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC