PDA

View Full Version : Joe Scarborough kicks the crap out of Bush, Republicans and critics of NYTimes...


jAZ
06-28-2006, 01:41 AM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/

Look for and click on the following at the link above...

Treason at the Times?
Did The New York Times commit treason by revealing a program to track bank records? • WATCH VIDEO

jAZ
06-28-2006, 01:50 AM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6330851/#060627a

June 27, 2006 | 3:50 p.m. ET

Spying concerns prove well-founded
(Joe Scarborough)


The Bush spy scandal took a nasty turn as the White House turns all guns toward The New York Times, accusing the most powerful newspaper in the world of aiding and abetting terrorists intent on killing Americans and harming this country.

The president’s angst was focused on the Times for revealing to the world a top-secret program that allows the feds to track Americans’ bank records and financial transactions.

As if a good scolding from the commander-in-chief wasn’t enough, the vice president also blasted the entire journalistic community for rewarding reporters for damaging national security.

Story continues below ↓
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
advertisement

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Treasury Secretary John Snow also piled on for good measure, telling the editor of the Times that his paper’s disclosure of the top-secret program was “irresponsible and harmful to the security of Americans and freedom-loving people worldwide. I am deeply disappointed in The New York Times.” Editor Bill Keller responded in kind, telling the treasury secretary that our founders rejected the idea that it is wise or patriotic to always take the president at his word or to surrender to the government important decisions about what to publish.

While being battered by executive branch types all day, Mr. Keller could list at least one former president who backed his position: Thomas Jefferson.

The sage of Monticello once wrote, “Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.”

But it seems, at least for the time being, that we are stuck with both, as well as congressmen who are now suggesting that The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and The Wall Street Journal may be guilty of treason, citing the Espionage Act of 1917, which made it a crime to reveal information regarding an armed forces operation.

Last month I warned Americans that this NSA phone records program could lead us to a point where the feds would go after bank records next. I was, unfortunately, correct.

It’s scary, more so to those of us who know how Washington works and know how power can corrupt and be abused. I believe we are in dangerous times for those of us who believe, like Jefferson, that Washington is not to be trusted with unlimited police power.

Baby Lee
06-28-2006, 09:03 AM
[url]Last month I warned Americans that this NSA phone records program could lead us to a point where the feds would go after bank records next. I was, unfortunately, correct.
You were correct, huh?
You were correct that something you commented on a month ago COULD LEAD to something that's been going on for nearly 5 years?
And why praytell, was your 'correctness' unfortunate?

Donger
06-28-2006, 09:15 AM
I kind of feel for jAZ. I remember being like this during Clinton's terms.

Let go of the hate, jAZ. It will eat you up inside.

memyselfI
06-28-2006, 11:31 AM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6330851/#060627a

June 27, 2006 | 3:50 p.m. ET

Spying concerns prove well-founded
(Joe Scarborough)


It’s scary, more so to those of us who know how Washington works and know how power can corrupt and be abused. I believe we are in dangerous times for those of us who believe, like Jefferson, that Washington is not to be trusted with unlimited police power.

Joe knows this has happened under his partiy's watch. Since Hurricane Katrina he's had one thing after another to criticize the WH over. He used to be one of their biggest, and I dare admit most level headed, supporters.

Pitt Gorilla
06-28-2006, 12:35 PM
You were correct, huh?
You were correct that something you commented on a month ago COULD LEAD to something that's been going on for nearly 5 years?
And why praytell, was your 'correctness' unfortunate?
Um, maybe you should ask Joe? (I don't believe he posts on this board.)

Baby Lee
06-28-2006, 12:49 PM
Um, maybe you should ask Joe? (I don't believe he posts on this board.)
Umm, thanks for mentoring me on the proper form and channels for responding to Mr. Scarborough's Op-Ed.

Pitty-pie, ever vigilant!!!

Pitt Gorilla
06-28-2006, 12:55 PM
Umm, thanks for mentoring me on the proper form and channels for responding to Mr. Scarborough's Op-Ed.

Pitty-pie, ever vigilant!!!Just trying to help!
:)

Baby Lee
06-28-2006, 12:57 PM
Just trying to help!
:)
Yeah, well there's a 'Media Center' subforum where you're supposed post things intended to help other posters. ;)
I suggest you create a Powerpoint presentation on the subject, and post it over there.

BucEyedPea
06-28-2006, 12:59 PM
I suggest you create a Powerpoint presentation on the subject, and post it over there.

That's allowed?
Cool!
I have lots of PP's I could put up there. :p

Baby Lee
06-28-2006, 01:01 PM
That's allowed?
Cool!
I have lots of PP's I could put up there. :p
No, that privilege is reserved for CP's own Judith Martin.

BucEyedPea
06-28-2006, 01:03 PM
No, that privilege is reserved for CP's own Judith Martin.
:( :mad:

penchief
06-28-2006, 05:18 PM
I kind of feel for jAZ. I remember being like this during Clinton's terms.

Let go of the hate, jAZ. It will eat you up inside.

There's a huge difference between a blow job and a political coup.

Donger
06-28-2006, 07:51 PM
There's a huge difference between a blow job and a political coup.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'coup' and even if I did, undeserved hatred is just that. Being so blindly partisan that you forgoe any semblance of rationality is what I was, and what I see jAZ as.

penchief
06-28-2006, 08:28 PM
I'm not sure what you mean by 'coup' and even if I did, undeserved hatred is just that. Being so blindly partisan that you forgoe any semblance of rationality is what I was, and what I see jAZ as.

Coup d'etat - change of government illegaly.

At this point, I'll confess to using hyperbole. But, considering the suspicious nature of the last two elections, the supreme secrecy that Cheneyburton employs while simultaneously undermining our privacy, and the shameless way with which they manipulate the public soley for the fulfillment of their narrow ideological agenda and it's easy to see why people are becoming highly concerned. The "coup in progress" is exemplified by a more subtle power grab than the violence that usually accompanies a coup d'etat.

Donger
06-28-2006, 08:34 PM
Coup d'etat - change of government illegaly.

At this point, I'll confess to using hyperbole. But, considering the suspicious nature of the last two elections, the supreme secrecy that Cheneyburton employs while simultaneously undermining our privacy, and the shameless way with which they manipulate the public soley for the fulfillment of their narrow ideological agenda and it's easy to see why people are becoming highly concerned. The "coup in progress" is exemplified by a more subtle power grab than the violence that usually accompanies a coup d'etat.

Yeah, on that note, I think I'll go talk to my dog about what he thinks about Special Relativity. Should be about as rewarding.

penchief
06-28-2006, 08:52 PM
Yeah, on that note, I think I'll go talk to my dog about what he thinks about Special Relativity. Should be about as rewarding.

Heh.....

At some point the cumulative effect of their policies and conduct will be too much to ignore.

Bush wasn't kidding when he said he wanted to establish a "permanent" republican majority. And they've shown they're willing to accomplish that by hook or by crook.

Donger
06-28-2006, 08:58 PM
And they've shown they're willing to accomplish that by hook or by crook.

No, they haven't. But good luck with that hatred.

If you have some evidence that either 2000 or 2004 was a crooked election, post it. Sans that, we're done.

penchief
06-28-2006, 09:12 PM
No, they haven't. But good luck with that hatred.

If you have some evidence that either 2000 or 2004 was a crooked election, post it. Sans that, we're done.

I said it was unclear. I don't think it is clear anymore what happened in Florida or Ohio. I'm less certain now than ever before. Clearly, there was a lot funny stuff that appeared to favor Bush.

Stating the obvious is not hatred. The fundamental dishonesty that permeates everything they do offends me. I'm not as stupid as they think I am. And it's discouraging to me that so many people are willing to overlook the obvious.

Just look at how they approach everything. They're never wrong. Anyone who disagrees with them is unpatriotic. Anyone who exposes them is a traitor. They operate in extreme secrecy (even before 9/11). They misrepresent the truth to promote their agenda. They employ the seediest tactics to win elections. And they're robbing us of our civil liberties and our privacy while bin Laden and Haliburton are living large.

When considering how they've employed dishonesty and contempt to railroad our country into it's current predicament, I don't see how you or anyone else doesn't believe that they'll do whatever it takes, honestly or dishonestly. They've already proven it.

Donger
06-28-2006, 09:19 PM
I said it was unclear. I don't think it is clear anymore what happened in Florida or Ohio. I'm less certain now than ever before. Clearly, there was a lot funny stuff that appeared to favor Bush.

Stating the obvious is not hatred. The fundamental dishonesty that permeates everything they do offends me. I'm not as stupid as they think I am. And it's discouraging to me that so many people are willing to overlook the obvious.

Just look at how they approach everything. They're never wrong. Anyone who disagrees with them is unpatriotic. Anyone who exposes them is a traitor. They operate in extreme secrecy (even before 9/11). They misrepresent the truth to promote their agenda. They employ the seediest tactics to win elections. And they're robbing us of our civil liberties and our privacy while bin Laden and Haliburton are living large.

When considering how they've employed dishonesty and contempt to railroad our country into it's current predicament, I don't see how you or anyone else doesn't believe that they'll do whatever it takes, honestly or dishonestly. They've already proven it.

No. You said "a political coup." That sounds like you are rather certain.

Perhaps you should revise that to "what I consider to be a political coup, even though I have no demonstrable evidence to support my claim"?

jAZ
06-28-2006, 09:26 PM
No, they haven't. But good luck with that hatred.

If you have some evidence that either 2000 or 2004 was a crooked election, post it. Sans that, we're done.
Donger has completely abandonded his own identity on this board.

At one time or another over the last few months' Donger has adopted...

* Brock's & Latt's rock throwing from the sidelines
* Kotter's "God, I can't believe you thought I was serious" claims after spending dozens and dozens of posts defending a helpless point
* RINGLEADER's deliberate misinformation
* stevieray's assertions that all objections are just about "hate"

There was a time when Donger's greatest "fault" was his faux-Socratic method of discussion.

penchief
06-28-2006, 09:33 PM
No. You said "a political coup." That sounds like you are rather certain.

Perhaps you should revise that to "what I consider to be a political coup, even though I have no demonstrable evidence to support my claim"?

I also said I was using hyperbole......but since you're pressing the issue...... yes......all things considered, I would say that they're doing too many things that undermine the constitution, whether it be civil liberties or it's checks and balances. They have proven themselves not to be straight-shooters. When everything they do points in the same direction it's time for people to start looking in that direction.

Signing statements are just the most recent example. And they continue to consolidate wealth and power!!!!! The consolidation of power via dishonest or illegal means is essentially a coup d'etat.

I'm afraid we're quickly arriving at the point of no return. I am not optimistic.

Donger
06-28-2006, 09:38 PM
Donger has completely abandonded his own identity on this board.

At one time or another over the last few months' Donger has adopted...

* Brock's & Latt's rock throwing from the sidelines
* Kotter's "God, I can't believe you thought I was serious" claims after spending dozens and dozens of posts defending a helpless point
* RINGLEADER's deliberate misinformation
* stevieray's assertions that all objections are just about "hate"

There was a time when Donger's greatest "fault" was his faux-Socratic method of discussion.

As you know, I don't hold your opinion in much regard, but if you insist...

1) Penchief seemed to be stating that Bush has gained power through a coup or coups.

2) I asked for some evidence of that.

3) Penchief cannot, so I'm merely pointing out that is his own opinon which is not substantiated by fact.

Simple stuff, if you're not blinded by hatred. But then, as one of those afflicted, I wouldn't expect you to understand.

penchief
06-28-2006, 09:47 PM
As you know, I don't hold your opinion in much regard, but if you insist...

1) Penchief seemed to be stating that Bush has gained power through a coup or coups.

2) I asked for some evidence of that.

3) Penchief cannot, so I'm merely pointing out that is his own opinon which is not substantiated by fact.

Simple stuff, if you're not blinded by hatred. But then, as one of those afflicted, I wouldn't expect you to understand.

Again, you seem to be ignoring the fact that I confessed to hyperbole from the start. Yet I went on to point out why I feel comfortable referring to the neocon coup d'etat as a coup d'etat. Yet, you seem intent on making an issues out of nothing for whatever reason.

However, I don't think you should count your chickens before they hatch. The revelations about Cheneyburton are being peeled back one by one. I doubt we've seen the last and maybe not even the worst. Considering the list already includes aggressive war, domestic spying, and torture I'd say this administratin has already started building it's legacy.

Donger
06-28-2006, 09:49 PM
Again, you seem to be ignoring the fact that I confessed to hyperbole from the start.

No, you didn't. You did only after I called you to present some evidence.

penchief
06-28-2006, 10:05 PM
No, you didn't. You did only after I called you to present some evidence.

I think you should go back and look at posts 14, 15, 16.

You called me out about being a blind partisan but you didn't press me for details.

Then when I responded to you I confessed to using hyperbole while also taking the opportunity to state my observations about the similarities between the "coup in progress" and a real coup d'etat.

Then you said you'd rather talk to your dog.

Then I made a comment about the "permanent republican majority" and how Cheneyburton has proven to make things happen by hook or by crook.

Then you accused me of hatred.

Then you pressed me for evidence of the elections being fixed.

Your pressing me came a long time after I confessed to using hyperbole.

Donger
06-28-2006, 10:09 PM
I think you should go back and look at posts 14, 15, 16.

You called me out about being a blind partisan but you didn't press me for details.

Then when I responded to you I confessed to using hyperbole while also taking the opportunity to state my observations about the similarities between the "coup in progress" and a real coup d'etat.

Then you said you'd rather talk to your dog.

Then I made a comment about the "permanent republican majority" and how Cheneyburton has proven to make things happen by hook or by crook.

Then you accused me of hatred.

Then you pressed me for evidence of the elections being fixed.

Your pressing me came a long time after I confessed to using hyperbole.

All of which could have been averted by simply saying "There's a huge difference between a blow job and a political coup, which is hyperbole on my part."

penchief
06-28-2006, 10:14 PM
All of which could have been averted by simply saying "There's a huge difference between a blow job and a political coup, which is hyperbole on my part."

But that would take all the fun out of it.

Donger
06-28-2006, 10:17 PM
But that would take all the fun out of it.

ROFL

Indeed. Honestly, I was the same way with Clinton, and I now see the error of my ways. And, I can only imagine if I'd had the Internet back then; I would have been a freak like jAZ. But, probably worse.

penchief
06-28-2006, 10:19 PM
ROFL

Indeed. Honestly, I was the same way with Clinton, and I now see the error of my ways. And, I can only imagine if I'd had the Internet back then; I would have been a freak like jAZ. But, probably worse.

No, but really.......there is a big difference between a blowjob and a corporately financed coup d'etat.

Donger
06-28-2006, 10:20 PM
BTW, jAZ, if you can spare the time, could you address the questions posed in the other thread you started?

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=142888

Donger
06-28-2006, 10:22 PM
No, but really.......there is a big difference between a blowjob and a corporately financed coup d'etat.

ROFL

Whistle, whistle. Come here boy! So, you're in a spaceship traveling at nearly the speed of light....

penchief
06-28-2006, 10:23 PM
ROFL

Thank you. Don't forget to tip your waitress.

Donger
06-28-2006, 10:24 PM
Thank you. Don't forget to tip your waitress.

I never do. 20%, regardless of whether or not he/she did a good job. Hey! That's how liberals do it, right?

penchief
06-28-2006, 10:27 PM
I never do. 20%, regardless of whether or not he/she did a good job. Hey! That's how liberals do it, right?

Absolutely.

penchief
06-29-2006, 11:42 AM
No. You said "a political coup." That sounds like you are rather certain.

Perhaps you should revise that to "what I consider to be a political coup, even though I have no demonstrable evidence to support my claim"?

If I do revise my comments does that mean you'd be more apt to agree with me?