READER COMMENTS ON
"Gore: Gonzales Charges of 'Hypocrisy' of Clinton Administration 'Factually Wrong'"
(36 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
said on 1/17/2006 @ 4:25 pm PT...
Brad, I agree with the MSM twisting of Gore's speech, and basically not covering it.
Here's what they covered on CNN Lou Dobbs:
They covered Republicans who are saying we need to clean up the corruption in Congress. Get that? They're not covering Democrats saying the Republicans have to clean up their act in Congress. The way CNN is covering the Abramoff corruption in Congress, is to parade a bunch of Republicans on their channel saying "We have to clean up Congress' act", giving the CNN viewers the impression that it's "some other party" involved in all the Abramoff corruption. There was McCain, and standing behind him, (you won't believe it) Rick Santorum.
THAT'S CNN's coverage of widespread Republican-only corruption!!! Giving a forum to a bunch of Republicans saying that "they're going to clean up Congress"!!! THEY'RE THE ONE'S WHO ARE CORRUPT!!!!!!! CNN thinks the Republicans are now the "hero's" cleaning up the Abramoff corruption.
Is that slanted coverage, or what? So, does it surprise you that they didn't cover and/or twisted the words of Gore's speech???
I guess CNN and the rest of the MSM simply will not put Democrats on TV, or any party but the Republicans. I'm beginning to think it's a coordinated, well-planned effort. That's why I don't listen to the news on TV, because I see slanted pro-GOP crap like this.
And, next on "the situation room" with Wolf Blitzer, their headlines were: "Is Hillary Clinton playing politics with her statements?", and coverage of Ray Nagen's speech, and Lou Dobbs said he would have more Republicans on tomorrow.
Is anyone keeping track of this? It's like the Republican party is the only party that exists in the MSM. There's more here than meets the eye, I am sure of it.
Here's what wasn't covered on CNN & the MSM:
- Gore's speech
- Extensive Abramoff coverage, calling a spade a spade and saying it's a Republican-only scandal
- How Bush is breaking the law and constitution with illegal wiretaps.
I can go on and on. The MSM is dead as an unbiased source of news important to Americans. It's just a megaphone for the Republicans. And idiots still say "liberal bias" in the media. That's been dead for over a decade!
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
said on 1/17/2006 @ 4:27 pm PT...
To be well informed of real news that's not being suppressed, bookmark Brad Blog, Raw Story, and subscribe to American Free Press newspaper.
I put in a lot of time narrowing it to those 3 things.
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 1/17/2006 @ 4:48 pm PT...
It's sort of like interviewing John Gotti on how to clean up organized crime.
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
said on 1/17/2006 @ 4:53 pm PT...
Big Dan, your absolutely right. I love this site, Brad just gets it. I also blog on Raw Sotry and Crooksandliars. I would love to see Gore debate Abu Gonzales. I think Gore would eat that lying sack of shit for lunch and dinner.
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
said on 1/17/2006 @ 5:03 pm PT...
And to keep it going on CNN, "the situation room"'s big stories were Hillary Clinton's "plantation" comments, and Ray Nagen's "chocolate" comment.
I'm waiting for CNN to trampse out their rightwing "armchair" psychologists, and diagnose ala Frist/Shiavo, that Al Gore is emotionally disturbed. They won't cover Gores speech, or Bush trampling the constitution, or saying the Abramoff corruption is a Republican-only scandal...but "the situation room" is worried about plantations and chocolate. Not our country going down the tubes with a runaway administration.
CNN STINKS ON ICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
They won't be making a comeback soon.
(say this with NY/Italian accent) FUGGET ABOUT UM!!!!!!!!!!!!!
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
said on 1/17/2006 @ 5:24 pm PT...
The LA Times had a large story on the Gore speech on page A6. ABC mentioned the speech and showed Gore on the 6:30 news.
I have not given up on MSM. I remember when they said nothing about Valerie Wilson and Jack Abramoff. They are treading lightly to avoid the Dan Rather treatment. I believe there are enough good journalists out there to do the right thing. The blogs are leading but we still need the MSM to reach the masses.
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
said on 1/17/2006 @ 5:35 pm PT...
I just received a couple of e-mails from TheBradBlog@cville.com Both have attachments, and are sent as a reply (Re: ) to an untitled e-mail. Anyone else get this? Not opening them, but I wonder if those of us who are posting under a publicly available e-mail are coming under some internet attack?
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
Grizzly Bear Dancer
said on 1/17/2006 @ 5:36 pm PT...
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
said on 1/17/2006 @ 6:45 pm PT...
# 7 Soul Rebel, I have received mail like that too but from Velvet Revolution. I didn't open them either. One said "failed delivery" or something like that. They looked odd so I deleted them.
COMMENT #10 [Permalink]
said on 1/17/2006 @ 9:55 pm PT...
As far as corporate media is concerned, boycott when they don't do their job.
And when they do, do their job encourage them to do more and send them email.
COMMENT #11 [Permalink]
said on 1/17/2006 @ 11:02 pm PT...
COMMENT #12 [Permalink]
said on 1/17/2006 @ 11:46 pm PT...
AOL gave Gore the top spot all day yesterday for the entire news cycle--that's about 10-15 million viewers. The repubs also tried to stack the online poll (talk about vote fraud!) The poll had been running about 55% agreeing with Gore, and then there was a sudden rush as the conservative blogs directed their sheep over, and suddenly it became 50% against. But by day's end, with 350,000 people voting, Gore still came out on top.
Go, President Gore! Now go get General Clark and Rep. Murtha to get a posse together (the US military specifically) and throw these lying, genocidal thugs out of power and into orange jumpsuits!
Everyone should check out www.waynemadsenreport.com--fascinating story on exactly what the neocons have on McCain... here's a taste...
January 16, 2006 --- Why is John McCain so supportive of Bush and Cheney after being so viciously attacked by them in the 2000 campaign? The answer to this question may partially rest in Navy records detailing the events that took place on the USS Forrestal in "Yankee Station" in the Gulf of Tonkin at the end of July 1967. The neo-cons, who have had five years to examine every file within the Department of Defense, have likely accessed documents that could prove embarrassing to McCain, who was on board the USS Forrestal on July 29, 1967, and whose A-4 Skyhawk was struck by an air-to-ground Zuni missile that had misfired from an F-4 Phantom...
Read the rest at Wayne Madsen's terrific site.
Click here to ask Barbara Boxer to lead the fight for fair elections!
COMMENT #13 [Permalink]
said on 1/17/2006 @ 11:55 pm PT...
Soul Rebel and GWN-
I got the same suspicious e-mail today with an attachment (which I didn't open) from "TheBradBlog" . Mine was sent as a "Fwd:...". I e-mailed Brad to see if he knew anything about it but I haven't heard back from him.
COMMENT #14 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 1/18/2006 @ 2:57 am PT...
I got the same thing, supposedly from Bradblog and marked "funny" in the header. Couldn't open it.
COMMENT #15 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 1/18/2006 @ 3:06 am PT...
For Jim Cirile: Aren't polls ridiculous? If the question is, "Do you agree with Al Gore?" there isn't any way to answer "No" honestly.
Gore didn't offer opinions as much as he did facts.
FACT: Bush spied on Americans.
FACT: Bush first said (before the New York Times expose) that "Spying requires a warrant..."
FACT: After the truth was revealed, he contradcited himself and said spying without a warrant was legal.
No dispute there. No gray area. No way to deny it.
So what kind of a poll question is "Do you agree with Al Gore?" It's like asking, "Do you agree with Charles Darwin?"
Come to think of it, some idiots don't.
COMMENT #16 [Permalink]
said on 1/18/2006 @ 4:02 am PT...
COMMENT #17 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 1/18/2006 @ 5:09 am PT...
The penalty is death by lethal injection, unless the parents were found to have been abusive, in which case it's life without possibility of parole.
Good law. Having all those teenage runaways in jail makes everyone safer. But what do we do about runaway brides? Maybe CNN and Fox can tell us.
COMMENT #18 [Permalink]
said on 1/18/2006 @ 6:32 am PT...
Looks like the MSM - some of them at least - have FINALLY caught on to the fact that the White House's standard response to factual information that contradicts their talking points is to smear the messenger and spread false information.
'Bout damn time!
I watched the news conference yesterday with the specific purpose of watching body language - I wish I'd had a split screen, though I can pretty well guess what Scott McClellan was doing while the camera was on the reporter asking the question.
McClellan, when responding to a question asked about Gore's speech, had a tight smile on his face that did not reach his eyes. He looked, to me at least, obviously agitated as he repeated the talking points he'd been fed.
I'd KILL to have seen him hooked up to a lie detector during all of that, or even a blood pressure cuff or heart monitor.
Make no mistake, Al Gore's speech really got to the neo-conservatives - not just for what Gore said, but for the fact that the general public is paying attention - and they are PISSED!!
I LOVE THIS!!!
From Think Progress:
AP Reports Facts on White House Smear of Gore
COMMENT #19 [Permalink]
said on 1/18/2006 @ 7:06 am PT...
I love how the pugs are rising to the bait, don't you? Time to reel 'em all in...
COMMENT #20 [Permalink]
said on 1/18/2006 @ 7:06 am PT...
Gores speech didnt get to consveratives. You libs have this strnge fantasy that your making progress to some end. Yet when you look at the reality, you see you have lost every branch of governement and the majorities in those bodies are increasing.
That said, I take it you libs would have no problem if Bush authorized warrentless physical searches like Gore did.
COMMENT #21 [Permalink]
said on 1/18/2006 @ 7:09 am PT...
COMMENT #22 [Permalink]
said on 1/18/2006 @ 7:23 am PT...
re: funny mails..
First, do NOT use a mail program like Outlook (or express).. Bill Gates, in his breakneck bid to control all computers, did some VERY stupid things (makes life easier for those "business types" who can't figure out how to run a toaster, though). The BIGGEST problem with viruses/trojans/etc, are that they can be embeded in the mail that is "processed" by Microcrap.. Other mail apps (I use Netscape, myself) do NOT run the VBA code.. therefore MOST of the malicious stuff in mails only effects Microcrap's Outlook (in the "you're infected just by reading it" context).
Then, you have the attachments.. You guys are on the correct path here, NEVER run an attachment from a suspicious mail, ever. If it's something from someone you trust, they can tell you what it is, or get you what you need without an executable.. Have them burn it to CD and snail-mail it to you, for example.
Also.. you can expose all of the "header" information in emails as well.. that is, most mail programs just show you "to" and "from" and "subject", but all the "raw" data is still in that mail.. Most programs let you view detailed headers.. When looking at that, you can see what hosts this mail has passed through.. using that, you can see if it looks to have really started from BradBlog (cville.net, or whatever), or started from some place else (note: if his mail server was comprimised, you could still get a bad mail from his server, but not from Brad). The "to" and "from" can be spoofed pretty easily, the tracking information about where the mail came from.. that's much harder to do. In fact, there are lot of "address spoofers" out there, but they don't have the ability to "log on to a specific server" to originate the mail.
Sorry for the OT post... but it's very important to remember, as pointed out by several here who are getting junk mails, seemingly.. Don't open suspicious attachments, and get a decent mail program (one that's mostly stripped down). Don't become a victim just because you want convienence (sp).. Another GREAT idea is, go to some place like yahoo or msn or hotmail or something and create a free email account that's used just for this kind of thing (posting to blogs, etc). most times, those servers strip .exe files directly to prevent their servers from being attacked, and run virus scanners on all mails (saves you having to buy your own scanner).
COMMENT #23 [Permalink]
said on 1/18/2006 @ 8:54 am PT...
Poor lil Ricky!
The truth hurts, doesn't it darlin?
COMMENT #24 [Permalink]
said on 1/18/2006 @ 9:48 am PT...
So, when was Bonzo-Gonzo RIGHT about anything?
COMMENT #25 [Permalink]
said on 1/18/2006 @ 10:03 am PT...
"Funny Mail" Recipients 7,9,13 & 14:
To add to Savantster's comments - last November and early December I was receiving mail claiming to be from Brad which was infected with a virus that was going around at the time.
In the past I have sent messages to people who had sent infected mail. From those who replied that they had run virus scans, none had found an infection.
Since these viruses use a person's address book to send the mail to new victims, as well as using the same address book to spoof the orgin of the mail, it could be coming from anyone who has Brad in their address book.
Follow Savantster's advice and use something other than Microsoft email products. I also use Netscape and run AVG Free antivirus and have been virus free since I first started using the internet 8 years ago.
Also if you use Netscape be sure to go to "Edit" menu and open the "Preferences" menu, then choose the "Privacy & Security" folder and select "Images". Click on the "Do not load remote images etc. etc." box to place a check mark in it. This will prevent an infection by malicious code buried within a .jpg image.
Final note - if you should choose to download AVG Free - be sure to uninstall any other anti-virus program you are using first. I didn't do that, and although it all work well at first, after an update I was no longer able to start my computer except in safe mode. It took several hours of work running step by step startups until I isolated the problem as Norton Antivirus that was still on my machine. Once I uninstalled Norton everything was back to normal.
COMMENT #26 [Permalink]
said on 1/18/2006 @ 10:34 am PT...
No, I have not sent you anything. Those are indeed spoofed spam emails with attempted virus attachments.
If any President/Vice President broke the law, they should be held accountable. So far, it appears that Clinton/Gore broke no laws in their "blackbag" search of Aldrich Ames' house.
On the other hand, George W. Bush has indeed broken the FISA law, according to all respected Constitutional Law expert attorneys, and has admitted to doing so.
Your desperation is amusing.
COMMENT #27 [Permalink]
said on 1/18/2006 @ 10:34 am PT...
Speaking of sickening, not to mention dangerous, hypocrisy, there is this appalling article from Alternet:
"Whistling in the Wind
By Sam Graham-Felsen, AlterNet. Posted January 18, 2006.
It's gotten so bad for whistleblowers in the Bush era that the federal agency designed to protect them has whistleblowers of its own."
Here's one rather disturbing sentence from the article:
"...Since 1995, the Federal Court of Appeals has ruled against whistleblowers 119 out of 120 times..."
Read the whole thing, please:
SO YOU'VE MADE US SAFER, HAVE YOU GEORGE??!
COMMENT #28 [Permalink]
said on 1/18/2006 @ 11:03 am PT...
Desperation isnt felt by the party who control every facet of governement. The desperation belongs to your ideology who just lost the only branch of government they had an power over.
You really do live in fantasyland.
COMMENT #29 [Permalink]
said on 1/18/2006 @ 11:18 am PT...
Gee medium #28 - I remember in the late 50's when the main talk of the day was the communist threat. As I recall Single Party Rule was one of the big points of how bad it was. It was driven into us how having a government of only one party denied the populace freedom. It was also shown how the one party rule was easily corrupted and only those in charge of the government prospered at the expense of the populace.
These were things to be feared above all fears, and anyone expousing those tennents was to be condemmed and censured.
Does any of this sound familiar?
No? You are so blind you can't see the light of day!
Posters here have been pointing out to you over the last several weeks that what Cinton did regarding spying was in all case within the law. In fact regarding the "Black Bag" spying Clinton changed the law to make that type of search illegal in the future. All other spying was under the guidence of FISA. Bush has ignored the law and circumvented FISA - THAT is the issue. Yet you continue your feeble excuse - "Clinton Did It"
When it comes to the freedoms and quality of life of the populace there is no difference between communism and fascism
COMMENT #30 [Permalink]
said on 1/18/2006 @ 11:24 am PT...
Oops - I meant to say:
Ricky: Posters here have been pointing out to you etc. etc.
COMMENT #31 [Permalink]
said on 1/18/2006 @ 11:25 am PT...
C'mon now, all! I like Ricky (#20)!
He doesn't sound to me to be a bad guy... just severely misinformed.
Ricky: Do YOU even believe the crap you're repeating from the Republican talking points???
Ricky, this time, it's so easy to dispute this garbage your people are spewing. First of all, look at the polls... Bushit dropped to below 40% this week... and the public is asking for Dems to take control of Congress in November. (Do you even look at the numbers?) If the answer is no... like what Bush himself says... then you cannot tell me that the neo cons are acting in the public's best interest! Republican scandals and getting us out of Vietn.... erm... IRAQ... are the top concerns of Americans!
Warrantless physical searches were added to FISA bans in 1995 (two years after Clinton's Justice Department made the search... and never did so again afterward. That was in 1993.) And, the report to Congress indicating that it was legal to do so was in 1994, one year before the law was changed!
And yet, I hear no response to these facts from your precious, precious neo CON side!
What's the matter? Can't think up a good lie? Well... keep trying... you and your neo CON ilk will cook up a WHOPPER of a lie soon!
But, when you are ready to hear the truth (e.g. that 53% of the country think Bush should be impeached for illegal wiretaps, then feel free to listen to the truths that Brad and his Bloggers are issuing here. Open your ears (and mind and heart) and close your mouth... and you will learn a lot... specifically that the lies you have been fed are pure unadulterated BULLPLOP.
COMMENT #32 [Permalink]
said on 1/18/2006 @ 2:41 pm PT...
Just as has been stated, the Clinton administration did not break the law in conducting the search of Aldrich Ames' house. At the time of the search, and at the time Jamie Gorelick testified before congress (1994), the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) did not cover physical searches. The FISA was later amended in 1995 to cover physical searches, with Clinton's support. In contrast, the Bush administration violated clear restrictions of the FISA. This can be verified here:
COMMENT #33 [Permalink]
said on 1/18/2006 @ 6:51 pm PT...
COMMENT #34 [Permalink]
said on 1/18/2006 @ 9:05 pm PT...
I was in Nashville for Gore's power-point on global warming the other day, and I'm here to tell you, he was GRRR-EAT!!! We were watching his show, sitting on the edge of our seats, leaving wondering, "Why isn't this a movie?"
Glad to know it will be.
And, he speaks the truth. Those who know the guy here in Music City say that environmental ideas are what drives the man today, and the only way he'll ever run again is if this is his central issue...
COMMENT #35 [Permalink]
said on 1/19/2006 @ 5:43 am PT...
The people who ask me how many of my rights I am willing to give up instinctively get a response asking them how many of their wrongs they are willing to give up.
COMMENT #36 [Permalink]
said on 1/19/2006 @ 5:53 am PT...
I wonder what little Ricky and Medium [has his head]Right[up his ass] and Paul are gonna do when the election system is fixed (meaning, no more easy rigging of elections with electronic only voting machines) and there is a sweeping change in the House and Senate and almost all the seats are filled with Dems (and Indipendants and the like)..
I sure hope they come back and say "Look, we're kooks cause our party is not in power.. just ignore everything we say because we're just pissed we aren't controlling everything.. none of our grievances will ever be valid, just us bitching about not being in power.. besides, it's clearly the will of the people".