Cheers!
marmadogg,
I notice you never answered this question:
George Stephanopoulos? I guess going the other way is okay then. Where is the outcry against ABC for hiring this needle-dick?
All of this marmacrap over the Bush Administration picking a PRESS SECRETARY that is a right winger.
How fucking evil of Bush to do something like that.
You need a life maramdouche. Seriously.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
George Stephanopoulos? I guess going the other way is okay then. Where is the outcry against ABC for hiring this needle-dick?
All of this marmacrap over the Bush Administration picking a PRESS SECRETARY that is a right winger.
How fucking evil of Bush to do something like that.
You need a life maramdouche. Seriously. [/quote]
Once a whore always a whore.
[quote]doogie wrote:
marmadogg,
I notice you never answered this question:
Do you or vroom have any criticisms of Tim Russert (chief of staff to Democratic Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan),Chris Matthews (speechwriter for Carter,aide to Tip O’Neil, on the staffs of Senators Frank Moss and Edmund Muskie),Diane Sawyer (worked for Nixon and Ford),Bill Moyers (worked in both the Kennedy and Johnson administrations),George Stephanopoulos (Clinton’s press secretary) being on the air?[/quote]
Once a whore always a whore.
The thread was stated to get the right wingnuttery’s collective panty in a bunch.
Success is SWEET!
Cheers!
Faux news rules you fuxs!
I was reading up Snow and he doesn’t seem like a bad guy (he taught in Africa and advocates on Africa), but I’ve never watched his show.
As for criticizing Bush, the admin needs more critical people bc they dont now dominate the political message like they once did.
also, journalism and pr is really a flip side of the same coin, so it seems shrewd for the admin to hire someone more from the press side than the admin side. it’s a logical hire.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
George Stephanopoulos? I guess going the other way is okay then. Where is the outcry against ABC for hiring this needle-dick?
All of this marmacrap over the Bush Administration picking a PRESS SECRETARY that is a right winger.
How fucking evil of Bush to do something like that.
You need a life maramdouche. Seriously. [/quote]
Imagine hiring a press secretary that actually worked for the press.
I think going from politics to private industry always reeks of corruption.
Going from private industry to politics isn’t as bad.
[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
rainjack wrote:
George Stephanopoulos? I guess going the other way is okay then. Where is the outcry against ABC for hiring this needle-dick?
All of this marmacrap over the Bush Administration picking a PRESS SECRETARY that is a right winger.
How fucking evil of Bush to do something like that.
You need a life maramdouche. Seriously.
Once a whore always a whore.[/quote]
You would know.
Does anyone know if there is precedent for a press secretary to come from national level journalism?
I know, as was pointed out earlier, the opposite in not uncommon.
[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
The thread was stated to get the right wingnuttery’s collective panty in a bunch.[/quote]
Then this thread is a failure.
Snow looks like a decent man for the job, from the looks. And as for him working for FOX - where else are you gonna find a conservative with journalism experience? It is not as though there are many options.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Marmadogg wrote:
The thread was stated to get the right wingnuttery’s collective panty in a bunch.
Then this thread is a failure.
Snow looks like a decent man for the job, from the looks. And as for him working for FOX - where else are you gonna find a conservative with journalism experience? It is not as though there are many options.[/quote]
I agree with you.
I just thought I would bait the wackos on this board.
Looks like it worked.
[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
JeffR wrote:
Marmadogg wrote:
Tony Snow on Bush:
George Bush has become something of an embarrassment. 11/11/05
No president has looked this impotent this long when it comes to defending presidential powers and prerogatives. 9/30/05
George W. Bush, meanwhile, talks of a pillowy America, full of niceness and goodwill. Bush has inherited his mother’s attractive feistiness, but he also got his father’s syntax. At one point last week, he stunned a friendly audience by barking out absurd and inappropriate words, like a soul tortured with Tourette’s. 8/25/00
Uh, yah…Tony Snow will make a great press sec.
Guess, like most things, Bush didn’t do any research on Snow before hiring him.
ROTFLMFAO!
Hey marmaprick!!!
So which is it? Is FOX a Republican mouthpiece or not?
I thought Tony Snow was a rather large figure on that network. If I understand the premise correctly: Murdoch tells everyone to parrot the Administration. Therefore, if Snow isn’t going along with his boss’ supposed edict, what does that say?
Help me marma-prick, I must know. If Fox isn’t 100% supportive of the administration, I cannot watch it!!!
Please help me stay current on the latest liberal scheme. I cannot fall behind in my mastery of liberal mud-slinging.
In all seriousness, I implore you and other liberals to be consistent. I like the other side to have a baseline of competence. It’s no fun kicking around clowns.
JeffR
P.S. Spare me the “I’m an independent crap.” You aren’t. You are a liberal democrat.
FYI - None of Snow’s comments were piped through Faux.
Townhall.com was started by the Heritage Foundation not News Corp. and townhall.com is currently funded by its readers.
Aren’t you tired of playing the AWM caricature yet?
[/quote]
Hey marmaprick!!!
I have to admit, you are one of my favorite liberal democrats.
Here is a nice link: www.foxnews.com/tonysnow/
From it, it links directly townhall.
I think you were trying to say that Fox News doesn’t have any affiliation to Townhall. Further, you are saying that Fox “didn’t pipe it” through.
That’s funny. When you go to the link above, you will see foxnews.com all over it.
Then you can link directly to the townhall.
Therefore, they obviously aren’t trying to distance themselves from his opinions.
Therefore, GASP!!!, they must not remove criticism of MY ADMINISTRATION from their sponsored employees and sites.
The first link I clicked on to prove this was in reference to Bush’s State of the Union. If your kerry loving mind can be opened .0001 cm, you can try that link. In it you will find plenty of criticism of W.
I have to write Murdoch a letter!!!
Apparently his missive is being ignored.
marmaprick, I must ask you to refrain from bringing it weak again. I prefer that you have a bare minimum of competence.
It’s more fun that way!!!
JeffR
P.S. What is awm?
[quote]JeffR wrote:
Here is a nice link: www.foxnews.com/tonysnow/
From it, it links directly townhall.
I think you were trying to say that Fox News doesn’t have any affiliation to Townhall. Further, you are saying that Fox “didn’t pipe it” through.
That’s funny. When you go to the link above, you will see foxnews.com all over it.
Then you can link directly to the townhall.
Therefore, they obviously aren’t trying to distance themselves from his opinions.
Therefore, GASP!!!, they must not remove criticism of MY ADMINISTRATION from their sponsored employees and sites.
[/quote]
I’ve been a big fan of your mental midgetry for quite a while and am finally compelled to speak to that end for cause of your above remarks.
Look up the verb “pipe” in the dictionary for christ’s sake, you might not look like such a jackass.
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary
the only definitions applicable to this usage of the verb pipe are:
2 a : to speak in a high or shrill voice b : to emit a shrill sound
or
5 : to convey by or as if by pipes; especially : to transmit by wire or coaxial cable
Accordingly, your comments do not address the point. Linking to a page, being affiliated with a person or the Heritage foundation’s Townhall.com project does not constitute conveyance or transmittal of these viewpoints, only association with the pundit and the forum in which the opinions were voiced.
To paraphrase your words:
I must ask you to refrain from bringing it weak again. I prefer that you have a bare minimum of competency in the english language.
Well!!! Well!!! Well!!!
It’s amazing what happens when you beat the grass.
The snakes (pauley) stir.
[quote]
I’ve been a big fan of your mental midgetry for quite a while and am finally compelled to speak to that end for cause of your above remarks.
Look up the verb “pipe” in the dictionary for christ’s sake, you might not look like such a jackass.
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary
the only definitions applicable to this usage of the verb pipe are:
2 a : to speak in a high or shrill voice b : to emit a shrill sound
or
5 : to convey by or as if by pipes; especially : to transmit by wire or coaxial cable
Accordingly, your comments do not address the point. Linking to a page, being affiliated with a person or the Heritage foundation’s Townhall.com project does not constitute conveyance or transmittal of these viewpoints, only association with the pundit and the forum in which the opinions were voiced.[/quote]
Seriously, I want to thank you for being consistent. It seems that most lefties who accuse others of being ignorant or mispronouncing words, are guilty of it themselves. Usually, it’s within the same sentence or article.
This is a case in point.
Did you, by chance, notice that I included quotation marks around “pipe.”
Perhaps in your rush to make an ass out of yourself, you missed that minor detail.
I was, of course, quoting marma-prick’s questionable usage of the term.
Second, did you, by chance, go to the link on Fox?
I believe that marma-prick was saying that Snow’s criticism was not on Fox.
Therefore, I believe the thrust of the peanut galleries’ argument (you) is you claiming that the links aren’t part of accepted Fox practice?
In other words, Fox didn’t approve the links.
Right?
Oh, did you notice that the LINKS were the majority of the substance on the page?
If Fox was as blinded by loyalty to the Administration as you and the other 160 pound weenies claim, DO YOU SERIOUSLY THINK THAT THEY WOULD ALLOW THOSE LINKS?
Wouldn’t they remove funding or support? Would they be claiming him with pride today?
In summary, I think you need to worry about avoiding mudslides, paying for cable for the homeless, and figuring out how to power your state, before you move on to advanced political dogma.
I’ll see you in 76 years!!!
JeffR
[quote]JeffR wrote:
It seems that most lefties who accuse others of being ignorant or mispronouncing words, are guilty of it themselves. Usually, it’s within the same sentence or article.
[/quote]
Please, point out where exactly I accused you of being ignorant, mispronouncing something or where I did one of the two, otherwise your point is moot.
I did notice this, your exact words were:
It’s this little thing called context. Within the context of your statement most would take your quotes to be a quotation or rough (ergo the quotes) paraphrase of the foregoing remarks (which I believe your last paragraph above indicates). There is nothing in the statement or surrounding statements that would indicate that you thought marma’s use was questionable or that you would interpret the verb in an unconventional manner.
I did go to the Fox page, I surely did not see any criticism of the President there, let alone those examples discussed above. But perhaps that was a different www.foxnews.com/tonysnow/ than you went to. This is part of the reason that I used such general language in addressing your assertions - I thought the idea being advanced was incorrect to an extent that it needed to be addressed.
Wrong.
This is where we come to an impasse with respect to our interpretations of the word “pipe” (yes, it is proper english for one to put a word in quotations when referring to it as a specific word - just thought I would make that clear first) and the respective definitions that we were working from. If I had been using the same definition as you this might be true, however, using the commonly accepted definition as applicable here - it is not.
I did notice that the links were the majority of the page.
I have NEVER made any claims about Fox News, none whatsoever, let alone that which you propose above. So again your point is irrelevant.
I like your 160 pound weenies remark though.
And this has relevance how exactly? You might want to note that I did not bring up anything political, let alone dogma, in my comments.
[quote]BigPaul wrote:
Does anyone know if there is precedent for a press secretary to come from national level journalism?
I know, as was pointed out earlier, the opposite in not uncommon.[/quote]
Apparently a fellow who worked at NBC went to be press secretary for the Ford administration and then back to NBC afterward. I just found this one out - not that anyone other than myself cares.
[quote]BigPaul wrote:
BigPaul wrote:
Does anyone know if there is precedent for a press secretary to come from national level journalism?
I know, as was pointed out earlier, the opposite in not uncommon.
Apparently a fellow who worked at NBC went to be press secretary for the Ford administration and then back to NBC afterward. I just found this one out - not that anyone other than myself cares.[/quote]
I am aware of this also but the right wingnuttery is not.
Just fun and games.
Scott McClellan gets the S end of the stick on this one.
The guy went out and did his job and while I expect the press corp to try and make the press sec look like a clown I did not expect Rove and Libby to lie to Scott. The worst part is Scott has continued to be loyal and back them up.
I hope Scottie lands a high paying job somewhere because he deserves it.