Ironic comparison

[Sparx]

Dan Rather, CBS News Anchor

1) given documents he thought were true
2) failed to thoroughly investigate the facts
3) reported documents to the American people as true to make his case
4) when challenged, launched an investigation, quickly apologized
5) substance of the bogus documents appears to have been true anyway
6) cost to the world in lives and money: ZERO
7) Bush camp conclusion: should be fired as CBS News Anchor

George W. Bush, President of the United States

1) given documents he thought were true
2) failed to thoroughly investigate the facts
3) reported documents to the American people as true to make his case
4) when challenged, stonewalled an investigation, never apologized
5) substance of the bogus documents appears to have been . . . bogus
6) cost to the world in lives and money: INCALCULABLE
7) Bush camp conclusion: four more years

 

[UrbanPancake]

That is to funny (and true). I needed a smile this morning.

 

[ylexot]

Dan Rather, CBS News Anchor

1) given documents he thought were true
2) failed to thoroughly investigate the facts
3) reported documents to the American people as true to make his case
4) when challenged, launched an investigation, quickly apologized

Quickly? It was at least two days before he launched and investigation or apologized. Actually, I still haven't seen an apology. Got a link?

5) substance of the bogus documents appears to have been true anyway

And this is based on...????? Got a link?

6) cost to the world in lives and money: ZERO
7) Bush camp conclusion: should be fired as CBS News Anchor

I don't recall the Bush camp calling for Dan to be fired. Got a link?

Lots of claims there...

 

[Llwynog]

Dan Rather, CBS News Anchor

5) substance of the bogus documents appears to have been true anyway

7) Bush camp conclusion: should be fired as CBS News Anchor

This is the first I've heard of either of these. Where did you get you "info"?

 

[Ken King]

1) Rather’s documents came from a person bent on discrediting the President.
Bush’s documents came from the intelligence machinery that he was left with when taking office, from UN sources, and many other nations.

2) Rather didn’t investigate because there would be no harm to anyone other than the President and his intent was to do that damage.
Bush didn’t need to investigate further the 12 year continuous plan to thwart world demands.

3) Rather was doing this for his gain.
Bush did this to make us safer, as it is his job.

4) Rather never apologized for his intent only for the fact that he was caught using bogus documents.
Bush doesn’t need to apologize as he was authorized to act by Congress on this matter and if he didn’t you would be crying negligence.

5) Nothing in Rather’s documents can be claimed to be true, except by a person that has no idea of what the truth is.
The Bush information was the known truth by the intelligence community and the world up to the date of attack.

6) This is a ludicrous claim at best. As to the war, every single one of our losses has been for our protection whether you care to acknowledge that or not.

7) Another ludicrous claim. Rather is tasked with factual reporting which he failed miserably at.
Bush is tasked with protecting our safety and security and after being attacked once wasn’t waiting around for it to happen again.

 

[Penn]

I'm gonna confess: I just gave Sparx some ju-ju, and he ain't gonna like it.

However, you all justified my karma with your replies.

Dan Rather DID NOT "quickly apologize", he stonewalled for over a week on this issue.

He still has not issued an earnest apology that I know of.

 

[SamSpade]

Dan Rather, CBS News Anchor

4) when challenged, launched an investigation, quickly apologized

---- "Quickly"? He was still claiming it was genuine after his own network stated they were bogus. He apologized only when he had no choice - and his APOLOGY appears to have been bogus also, from recent grumblings from him

5) substance of the bogus documents appears to have been true anyway

---- And this is established by - what? Wishful thinking? These documents WERE the evidence.

7) Bush camp conclusion: should be fired as CBS News Anchor

---- Bullsh!t. Let him keep his job. I just won't watch him.

There is a huge difference between the two sets of "evidence". Rather's was regarded as spurious by his own people before he went to press with it, and they appear to have been *fabricated*, substance notwithstanding. Got it? Someone MADE IT UP.

It's one thing to get a piece of information wrong, even if intelligence agencies around the world corroborate it. We had intelligence agencies and heads of state around the world confirm what we believed then. It was mistaken, but certainly not groundless.

The Rather-gate situation - they created a false document out of thin air and claimed it as genuine. I don't see the connection, but I will say this much -

The "liberal" camp - Rather got it wrong, give him a pass.
- Bush "lied", kick him out.

How does that grab you?

-------

 

[Penn]

Wow!! Looks like I wasn't the only one to send Sparx some karma!

When I clicked on the link to send the karma, I noticed he only had about a minus16oo points; now he's sporting a minus 2067, last count.

Sparx, you are a great example of how people react when you display outright on these forums. :luvyameanit"

 

[aps45819]

Where's the irony?

 

[SamSpade]

Where's the irony?

This

At least I was original.

I found at least a dozen web pages with the above written on them, verbatim.

 

[Llwynog]

To Ken

Bush doesn’t need to apologize as he was authorized to act by Congress on this matter and if he didn’t you would be crying negligence.

This reminds me Clinton didn't even ask Congress for permission to go fighting in Kosovo. That was based on bad info too. I get so when people try to compare Iraq with something like Monica L. or Rather.

 

[Sparx]

10 negative replies....no cost

152 views................priceless

 

[2ndAmendment]

10 negative replies....no cost

152 views................priceless

They were viewing, for the most part, your ignorance of the facts and the replys refuting your poor comparisons as evidenced by the 10 negative replies.

 

[Penn]

10 negative replies....no cost

152 views................priceless

You don't seem to understand son, people check in and out just to see who's trashing your latest BS rants.

That's what I get a kick out of; you and Spoiled are out of the mainstream, not only on here, but with the rest of the nation.

It's amazing how you don't pick up on this! You post a bunch of lies, and then the learned ones(that does not include you) around here pick your arguement to shreds!

But, by all means, keep it up - it's a perverse sort of entertainment.

 

[Llwynog]

10 negative replies....no cost

152 views................priceless

0 support for Sparx..........

 

[Penn]

0 support for Sparx..........

Uh, he missed that one too! But, no matter, right?

 

[ylexot]

He does have the "support" of UrbanPancake...not that that support is worth anything.

 

[Penn]

He does have the "support" of UrbanPancake...not that that support is worth anything.

No, I think you're right; he's hovering around "0" too.

Do you think there might be a connection here?

 

[FromTexas]

Dan Rather, CBS News Anchor

1) given documents he thought were true
2) failed to thoroughly investigate the facts
3) reported documents to the American people as true to make his case
4) when challenged, launched an investigation, quickly apologized
5) substance of the bogus documents appears to have been true anyway
6) cost to the world in lives and money: ZERO
7) Bush camp conclusion: should be fired as CBS News Anchor

George W. Bush, President of the United States

1) given documents he thought were true
2) failed to thoroughly investigate the facts
3) reported documents to the American people as true to make his case
4) when challenged, stonewalled an investigation, never apologized
5) substance of the bogus documents appears to have been . . . bogus
6) cost to the world in lives and money: INCALCULABLE
7) Bush camp conclusion: four more years

I got another one for you..

Intelligence has haphazard and sparse information collected by multiple agencies that in hindsight could have pieced together what would have happened on 9/11. This intelligence was minimal and sparse, but democrats state it should have been jumped on to prevent 9/11. The president was wrong in not finding this minimal intelligence information and rushing forward to prevent 9/11.

Intelligence agencies provide mounting evidence that Iraq has WMD. The intelligence agencies provide their evidence that Iraq has ties to Al-Qaeda. Bush should have not listened to the intelligence, taking very slow action, and let things be. He rushed forward on massive intelligence and shouldn't have according to Democrats.

 

[Toxick]

10 negative replies....no cost

152 views................priceless

So .. Views = Support?

Interesting.


*pondering*

*pondering*



No... I think I'll stick with my belief that the number of views is neutral and irrelevant.