Peter_Puget Posted March 4, 2004 Share Posted March 4, 2004 A number of individuals who exploit their status as relatives of 9/11 victims to further their own political agendas seem upset to find George Bush is doing something similar . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chucK Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 Maybe some of those people want it both ways. Surely Bush wants it both ways too. He wants to use 9/11 to further his political ambitions, yet at the same time wants to ignore it with respect to the commission to investigate what went wrong. I don't get a chance to vote for those victims that you are calling hypocrites Peter, but I do get to decide whether I'm gonna vote for that sleazeball Bush. Clear choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EWolfe Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 Bush said that he would not use 9/11 to further his political agenda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willstrickland Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 Don't get me wrong, I won't be voting for him, but I think he's doing what any sitting president would do. He is emphasizing his leadership during a time of crisis. Not "what I would do" or "what should be done" but what he actually did. I'm still voting for Kerry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EWolfe Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 Heard a poll today: Bush: 46% Kerry: 45% Nader: 6% I hope Ralph takes a good look at those numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chucK Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 Yah, well it seems pretty weak that he parades the 9/11 shit on his TV adds, to emphasize his "leadership", but then hides from people trying to get to bottom of what actually happened. Fine leadership there. He is doing what any sitting president would do, using his privilege, to avoid making his presidency and the office of the president look bad. That part's sorta excusable, or at least understandable. But it just grates to have him pulling that card while at the same time parading the 9/11 dead on TV as a reason to re-elect him. He has no shame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EWolfe Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 The use of the event makes it fear-based, which is weak shit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter_Puget Posted March 5, 2004 Author Share Posted March 5, 2004 Maybe some of those people want it both ways. Surely Bush wants it both ways too. He wants to use 9/11 to further his political ambitions, yet at the same time wants to ignore it with respect to the commission to investigate what went wrong. I don't get a chance to vote for those victims that you are calling hypocrites Peter, but I do get to decide whether I'm gonna vote for that sleazeball Bush. Clear choice. From Amazon.com: Many of the relatives of September 11th victims who disagree with the U.S.'s military response to the terrorist attacks formed an activist group named Peaceful Tomorrows. In this enlightening volume, Potorti, a journalist and member of the organization, offers a history of the little known group. Oddly when I linked the Yahoo AP story it included a quote from Potori but did not disclose his affiliation with the group he wrote a book about. I just looked at the link and his name appears to have been removed. His name was the reason I posted the links - another example of media bias. Weird. Maybe I just reread the link too fast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 This just shows again how the Shrub has no policy to stand on other than continuing to try and scare the public. Let's not elect this guy, we didn't the first time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter_Puget Posted March 5, 2004 Author Share Posted March 5, 2004 Exceprt from an email I sent to the AP: 1. Isn't Ms. Sidoti's ommision of his asociation indicative of either biased reporting or simply non-professional conduct? 2. Once a story has been modified, is it possible to access the story in the original form? 3. Are these changes recorded in such a way that an interested reader can track them or at least become aware that the presentation of a stories facts has been chaged - possibly in such a way as to materially impact how the story is evaluated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.