• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

OFFICIAL: Bush camp bribes media!

This guy gets paid, what does the rest of the media get for pushing the lefts viewpoint? Sounds to me like the lefties arent paying, again.

 
Originally posted by: Genx87
This guy gets paid, what does the rest of the media get for pushing the lefts viewpoint? Sounds to me like the lefties arent paying, again.
Click to expand...

You going somewhere with this?
You don't see the difference between saying what you think, and the government paying you to say what they think?
 
This takes that stupid, assinine notion that we have a "liberal" media, wads it up in a tight little ball and flushes it right down the crapper.
 
This takes that stupid, assinine notion that we have a "liberal" media, wads it up in a tight little ball and flushes it right down the crapper
Click to expand...

keep dreaming.

You going somewhere with this?
You don't see the difference between saying what you think, and the government paying you to say what they think?
Click to expand...

Yeah, the mainstream media is getting ripped off imo.

 
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: Genx87
This guy gets paid, what does the rest of the media get for pushing the lefts viewpoint? Sounds to me like the lefties arent paying, again.
Click to expand...

You going somewhere with this?
You don't see the difference between saying what you think, and the government paying you to say what they think?
Click to expand...
He could have easily just turned it down.

Do you think that if someone paid you enough, you'd start arguing for the right?
 
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
This takes that stupid, assinine notion that we have a "liberal" media, wads it up in a tight little ball and flushes it right down the crapper.
Click to expand...
actually, if the media werent liberal, they wouldn't have to do this, would they?, so it actually kinda proves that the media is indeed liberal.
 
Originally posted by: Train
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
This takes that stupid, assinine notion that we have a "liberal" media, wads it up in a tight little ball and flushes it right down the crapper.
Click to expand...
actually, if the media werent liberal, they wouldn't have to do this, would they?, so it actually kinda proves that the media is indeed liberal.
Click to expand...

Actually, the media was NEUTRAL, Bush's money has skewed it to the CONSERVATIVES.
 
Originally posted by: alchemize
Funny how all 3 threads popped up at the same time.

Can you say "DNC talking points email"?
Click to expand...

Didn't know the USA Today was owned by the DNC?

So, are you going to address the thread topic or not?
 
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Originally posted by: alchemize
Funny how all 3 threads popped up at the same time.

Can you say "DNC talking points email"?
Click to expand...

Didn't know the USA Today was owned by the DNC?

So, are you going to address the thread topic or not?
Click to expand...
No you are correct they didn't all come in at the same time. Just looked that way:

I hatemyjobs: 03:22 PM
Darkhawks: 03:43 PM
BBond: 01:48 PM

Thread topic? Sounds like they need to look into the department of education. Unless you think Bush approves every $200,000 contract. These kind of contracts should have transparency, somebody screwed up.

Oh yah IMPEACH HIM!!!
 
Originally posted by: alchemize
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Originally posted by: alchemize
Funny how all 3 threads popped up at the same time.

Can you say "DNC talking points email"?
Click to expand...

Didn't know the USA Today was owned by the DNC?

So, are you going to address the thread topic or not?
Click to expand...
No you are correct they didn't all come in at the same time. Just looked that way:

I hatemyjobs: 03:22 PM
Darkhawks: 03:43 PM
BBond: 01:48 PM

Thread topic? Sounds like they need to look into the department of education. Unless you think Bush approves every $200,000 contract. These kind of contracts should have transparency, somebody screwed up.

Oh yah IMPEACH HIM!!!
Click to expand...

Hmmm... what happened to the "Party of Personal Responsibility"? I guess that's gone, just a finger-point session now. Oh well.
 
Link
White House spokesman Trent Duffy said he couldn't comment because the White House is not involved in departments' contracts.
Click to expand...

Link

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Friday that the decisions on the practice were made by the Education Department. He did not directly answer when asked whether the White House approved of the practice, saying it was a department matter.
Click to expand...


I could be a Journalist. Heh heh..
 
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Originally posted by: alchemize
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Originally posted by: alchemize
Funny how all 3 threads popped up at the same time.

Can you say "DNC talking points email"?
Click to expand...

Didn't know the USA Today was owned by the DNC?

So, are you going to address the thread topic or not?
Click to expand...
No you are correct they didn't all come in at the same time. Just looked that way:

I hatemyjobs: 03:22 PM
Darkhawks: 03:43 PM
BBond: 01:48 PM

Thread topic? Sounds like they need to look into the department of education. Unless you think Bush approves every $200,000 contract. These kind of contracts should have transparency, somebody screwed up.

Oh yah IMPEACH HIM!!!
Click to expand...

Hmmm... what happened to the "Party of Personal Responsibility"? I guess that's gone, just a finger-point session now. Oh well.
Click to expand...

["]The Education Department defended its decision as a "permissible use of taxpayer funds under legal government contracting procedures." The point was to help parents, particularly in poor and minority communities, understand the benefits of the law, the department said.["]



 
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Originally posted by: alchemize
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Originally posted by: alchemize
Funny how all 3 threads popped up at the same time.

Can you say "DNC talking points email"?
Click to expand...

Didn't know the USA Today was owned by the DNC?

So, are you going to address the thread topic or not?
Click to expand...
No you are correct they didn't all come in at the same time. Just looked that way:

I hatemyjobs: 03:22 PM
Darkhawks: 03:43 PM
BBond: 01:48 PM

Thread topic? Sounds like they need to look into the department of education. Unless you think Bush approves every $200,000 contract. These kind of contracts should have transparency, somebody screwed up.

Oh yah IMPEACH HIM!!!
Click to expand...

Hmmm... what happened to the "Party of Personal Responsibility"? I guess that's gone, just a finger-point session now. Oh well.
Click to expand...

["]The Education Department defended its decision as a "permissible use of taxpayer funds under legal government contracting procedures." The point was to help parents, particularly in poor and minority communities, understand the benefits of the law, the department said.["]
Click to expand...

Sorry, but the GAO disagrees.
 
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Originally posted by: alchemize
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Originally posted by: alchemize
Funny how all 3 threads popped up at the same time.

Can you say "DNC talking points email"?
Click to expand...

Didn't know the USA Today was owned by the DNC?

So, are you going to address the thread topic or not?
Click to expand...
No you are correct they didn't all come in at the same time. Just looked that way:

I hatemyjobs: 03:22 PM
Darkhawks: 03:43 PM
BBond: 01:48 PM

Thread topic? Sounds like they need to look into the department of education. Unless you think Bush approves every $200,000 contract. These kind of contracts should have transparency, somebody screwed up.

Oh yah IMPEACH HIM!!!
Click to expand...

Hmmm... what happened to the "Party of Personal Responsibility"? I guess that's gone, just a finger-point session now. Oh well.
Click to expand...

["]The Education Department defended its decision as a "permissible use of taxpayer funds under legal government contracting procedures." The point was to help parents, particularly in poor and minority communities, understand the benefits of the law, the department said.["]
Click to expand...

Sorry, but the GAO disagrees.
Click to expand...
Here is another they disagree with,,, on a

Technical Detail


Videotape footage of people using drugs and interviews with federal officials discouraging their use that was produced by the White House drug control policy office, violate a legal ban on official propaganda because they were presented to the public without any indication they were produced by the government, according to a decision released Thursday by the Government Accountability Office.
 
How is this different from running adds for when some legislation is pending a vote. This kind of thing is not knew. Companies do this all the time. It is called publicity.
 
Originally posted by: piasabird
How is this different from running adds for when some legislation is pending a vote. This kind of thing is not knew. Companies do this all the time. It is called publicity.
Click to expand...

The difference is that taxpayer money is used. Is it really that hard to grasp?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top