Kelly the Dog Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 If they were using those "tools" to build support for the war, wouldn't they have been better used on something other than TS documents? And I'm still not using GQ as my source for top secret leaks...though if anyone can convince me that a men's style magazine is the current standard of investigative reporting (not unlikely), I'll be more than happy to trash the mainstream media for their shallow incompetence again. Well, the guy that wrote the article is far from the liberal media, and knows Bush very well. He wrote a fair and mostly favorable book on him and was granted six separate one on one interviews with the President, plus interviewed Laura and Rumsfeld and Rice and about 200 other people for it. That does make this report and article a little different, regardless of where it was published. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Well, the guy that wrote the article is far from the liberal media, and knows Bush very well. He wrote a fair and mostly favorable book on him and was granted six separate one on one interviews with the President, plus interviewed Laura and Rumsfeld and Rice and about 200 other people for it. That does make this report and article a little different, regardless of where it was published. Proving, I suspect, "...that a men's style magazine is the current standard of investigative reporting." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Proving, I suspect, "...that a men's style magazine is the current standard of investigative reporting." I didn't think investigative reporting has any standards, at any magazines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevbeau Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Well, Jules Winfield quoted the bible all the time and I think we can all agree he was a bad ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 I was thinking more along the lines of "who gives a !@#$" as the point. But keep digging up nonsense from the Bushies and trotting out the "we inherited this" excuse for everything. Up next....the Bushies used regular unleaded instead of hi-test in some of the Suburbans. The original link mentioned Bible quotes, then it was posted that the story was a hoax. My post wasn't an "attack" on Bush. I corrected the obvious error. And simce Fox News reportit it has to be true. (that was a slam). Lets all sing "Onward Christian Soldiers". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad Lieutenant Posted May 20, 2009 Author Share Posted May 20, 2009 hoax they didn't even make their top secret documents official looking enough The Bushies used a Bible for quotations in some documents. The CLintonistas used Cigars to stimulate young chunky interns. POINT????????????????????????????????? If they were using those "tools" to build support for the war, wouldn't they have been better used on something other than TS documents? And I'm still not using GQ as my source for top secret leaks...though if anyone can convince me that a men's style magazine is the current standard of investigative reporting (not unlikely), I'll be more than happy to trash the mainstream media for their shallow incompetence again. Good........but not great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts