"MnMikew" wrote in message
...

"yojimbo" wrote in message
.. .
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007148.php

As we know now from the LATimes and the NYTimes,

Now there's some non-partisan sources. NOT!

True enough! Both editorialized in favor of war. And no-one is more
responsible for giving voice to Bush & Cheney's lies than the front page of
the New York Times, so, yeah, they are indeed very partisan. Which makes
their turnabout all the more remarkable. Thanks for putting into context and
reminding us that we should always be skeptical of anything that comes out
of the White House and their stenographic press corps.

"yojimbo" wrote in message
.. .
True enough! Both editorialized in favor of war. And no-one is more
responsible for giving voice to Bush & Cheney's lies than the front page
of
the New York Times, so, yeah, they are indeed very partisan.

BWHAHAHA, you can't be serious. The NYT a mouthpiece for Bush, that's just
plain stupid. Show me ONE pro-war editorial.

"MnMikew" wrote in message
...

"yojimbo" wrote in message
.. .
True enough! Both editorialized in favor of war. And no-one is more
responsible for giving voice to Bush & Cheney's lies than the front page
of
the New York Times, so, yeah, they are indeed very partisan.

BWHAHAHA, you can't be serious. The NYT a mouthpiece for Bush, that's just
plain stupid. Show me ONE pro-war editorial.

You can look at their editorials from February to April 2003. It's all
there. As far as their front-page coverage, it's remarkable -- and somehwat
peculiar, don't you think? -- that Condi Rice and Dick Cheney would spend
every Sunday morning talk show trumpeting the librul New York Times in-depth
weapons reporting to push their drive to war. It's all on record.

"yojimbo" wrote in message
...

"MnMikew" wrote in message
...

"yojimbo" wrote in message
.. .
True enough! Both editorialized in favor of war. And no-one is more
responsible for giving voice to Bush & Cheney's lies than the front
page
of
the New York Times, so, yeah, they are indeed very partisan.

BWHAHAHA, you can't be serious. The NYT a mouthpiece for Bush, that's
just
plain stupid. Show me ONE pro-war editorial.

You can look at their editorials from February to April 2003. It's all
there. As far as their front-page coverage, it's remarkable -- and
somehwat
peculiar, don't you think? -- that Condi Rice and Dick Cheney would spend
every Sunday morning talk show trumpeting the librul New York Times
in-depth
weapons reporting to push their drive to war. It's all on record.


Connecticut Democrat Joe Lieberman, who just returned from Iraq, defended
U.S. efforts there in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal and a subsequent news
conference on Capitol Hill, saying the military has "a good plan" for
victory in Iraq, that progress is "visible and practical" and warning that
such progress could be turned back by a premature withdrawal.
But the major media that played up Democratic Rep. John Murtha's call for
withdrawing U.S. troops largely ignored Lieberman's remarks. Neither ABC nor
CBS mentioned the senator in their nightly newscasts while NBC aired a short
sound byte. And The Washington Post, New York Times, and USA Today ran not a
word of Lieberman's praise for U.S. efforts in Iraq.

"MnMikew" wrote in message
...

Connecticut Democrat Joe Lieberman, who just returned from Iraq, defended
U.S. efforts there in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal and a subsequent news
conference on Capitol Hill, saying the military has "a good plan" for
victory in Iraq, that progress is "visible and practical" and warning that
such progress could be turned back by a premature withdrawal.
But the major media that played up Democratic Rep. John Murtha's call for
withdrawing U.S. troops largely ignored Lieberman's remarks. Neither ABC
nor
CBS mentioned the senator in their nightly newscasts while NBC aired a
short
sound byte. And The Washington Post, New York Times, and USA Today ran not
a
word of Lieberman's praise for U.S. efforts in Iraq.

Oh, so now we want to endorse the radical views of Joe LOSERman???

Har-har, LMAO!!!

In article ,
"MnMikew" wrote:

"yojimbo" wrote in message
...

Snip BS

Connecticut Democrat Joe Lieberman, who just returned from Iraq,
defended U.S. efforts there in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal and a
subsequent news conference on Capitol Hill, saying the military has
"a good plan" for victory in Iraq, that progress is "visible and
practical" and warning that such progress could be turned back by a
premature withdrawal. But the major media that played up Democratic
Rep. John Murtha's call for withdrawing U.S. troops largely ignored
Lieberman's remarks. Neither ABC nor CBS mentioned the senator in
their nightly newscasts while NBC aired a short sound byte. And The
Washington Post, New York Times, and USA Today ran not a word of
Lieberman's praise for U.S. efforts in Iraq.

Joe Lieberman appears to be one of a handful of elected Democrats that
will stick to principle over party. He is one of the few Democrat
Senators I trust to speak the truth or do the right thing.

I trust ABC, NBC or CBS News will spin the story just like the East or
West coast Times. These organizations are all of the same liberal ilk,
which is why they are on the decline.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

Joe Lieberman appears to be one of a handful of elected Democrats that
will stick to principle over party.

....And the facts!!

Time magazine Baghdad Bureau Chief Michael Ware, just the other day:

"I and some other journalists had lunch with Senator Joe Lieberman the other
day and we listened to him talking about Iraq. Either Senator Lieberman is
so divorced from reality that he's completely lost the plot or he knows he's
spinning a line. Because one of my colleagues turned to me in the middle of
this lunch and said he's not talking about any country I've ever been to and
yet he was talking about Iraq, the very country where we were sitting."

He is one of the few Democrat
Senators I trust to speak the truth or do the right thing.

Yeah, he speaks the Bush truth (ie. "There can be no doubt") and the Bush
right thing (ie. "We must not be nation-builders," Mr. Bush told LOSERman's
running-mate in the 2000 election debates).

I trust ABC, NBC or CBS News

There ya go again, putting your trust in the librul media. How many times
can they trot out Mr. Bush's war lies and excuses before exercising some
skepticism??


will spin the story just like the East or
West coast Times. These organizations are all of the same liberal ilk,
which is why they are on the decline.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Enchanted Way in Dublin,Ireland actually does exist.I was in
Dingle,Ireland about sixty three years ago (funeral thingy) I saw a
trail cutting through the tall green grass,, it was a Leprechaun.I
wanted to run after it.
cuhulin

Telamon wrote:
Joe Lieberman appears to be one of a handful of elected Democrats that
will stick to principle over party. He is one of the few Democrat
Senators I trust to speak the truth or do the right thing.

There was a period when it looked like Joe might have had a shot at the
title match, and I have to say that I could well have voted for him
under the right circumstances.

--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.

"clifto" wrote in message
...
Telamon wrote:
Joe Lieberman appears to be one of a handful of elected Democrats that
will stick to principle over party. He is one of the few Democrat
Senators I trust to speak the truth or do the right thing.

There was a period when it looked like Joe might have had a shot at the
title match, and I have to say that I could well have voted for him
under the right circumstances.

Right circumstances...you mean, if he had've come right out and said:]

Vote For Me, I'm A Neo-Con Too, I'll Use Your Tax Dollars and Our National
Defense to Protect Israel.