judicialwatch. Now that's a nice objective source for ya. As for
Rush... yeah, DT's is about right. Pshaw I say. If Bush was my kid's
Sunday school teacher I might ask him to dinner. Since he's the
president that is screwing around with the first amendment, I condemn
him in the same terms I would condemn any other president doing the
same thing.

Dana
 
On 6/2/05, Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://www.judicialwatch.org/archive/1999/277.shtml
> http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/news/9607/25/livingstone.hrc/index.shtml
> 
> Funny you should mention Rush :)
> I was just reading this and wanted to sher:
> http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_060105/content/america_s_anchorman.member.html
> 
> Move forward to Nixon, '72. The second powerful template created made
> media able, in their minds, to get rid of what they considered to be a
> corrupt president. Why was Nixon corrupt? They hated Nixon for two
> reasons. They actually should have loved Nixon. Nixon gave them a
> domestic agenda that JFK never gave them. Nixon gave them OSHA, he
> gave them the EPA, he gave them affirmative action, he gave them all
> kinds of liberal domestic agenda items. Nixon set up his domestic
> agenda. They should have loved him, but they hated Nixon for two
> reasons. He defeated Helen Gahagan Douglas in a California race and he
> exposed Alger Hiss as a traitor. Hiss was their fair-hired boy and
> they to this day have not gotten over that and Nixon was still to
> blame. So they were laying in wait for Nixon. They thought that
> Kennedy had dispatched him in 1960. Nixon comes back. They were laying
> in wait for him because of Helen Gahagan Douglas and Alger Hiss, and
> bammo, here you have this Watergate break-in that nobody to this day
> can explain why that break-in took place. Nobody knows. I mean, the
> people that know aren't talking. And of course that break-in is what
> led to all these other things that were going on and the press now is
> orgying on the memory and the legacy of that era in Watergate and to a
> secondary level the war in Vietnam era, and so they try to get this
> president. But there's a difference today, folks. Even Tom Brokaw
> acknowledged it last night on MSNBC on a one hour special that Chris
> Matthews did after a one hour show on this. And it is that they don't
> have the power to totally dominate and influence American culture
> anymore. Their monopoly is gone. They haven't the power and that's
> another reason why they're frustrated.
> 
> Were this 1972, George W. Bush would have been gone with that National
> Guard story. George Bush would have been gone before the National
> Guard story were it not for the fact that an alternative media has
> sprung up. So they don't have the power. This frustrates them. So they
> try even harder, and that's what Gitmo is about, and that's what Abu
> Ghraib is all about, getting George W. Bush. It's not about making
> America the best shining city on a hill. It's not about making sure
> America never tortures and never breaks the rules or America doesn't
> do anything wrong. It's about getting Bush. And this whole orgy of the
> last 24 hours since Felt identified himself as Deep Throat is
> evidence, proof positive, that the effort to get Bush is the son and
> father, the daughter, the children, the child -- if you will -- of the
> Watergate scandal. The media has given birth to Watergate here in 2000
> and 2001 and, '2, '3, '4 and now '5 in their attempts to get Bush.
> 
> 
> On 6/2/05, Dana wrote:
> > A conspiracy in the White House? To impede a crimininal investigation?
> > Is NOT bad?
> >
> > I suppose I need to ask for a reference on the bar bouncer -- don't
> > recall anything of the kind and suspect the story is Rush having DT's.
> > Bring on the link, let's have a look at it. But it won't make
> > Watergate OK, you know, even if it turns out to be actual fact.
> 
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support 
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:159501
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to