Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

ABC's Inaugural Innuendo
Vanity | January 19, 2005 | Me

Posted on 01/19/2005 5:19:47 PM PST by Still Thinking

I was just surfing and happenned to land on Peter Jennings' biased ABC segment on the inauguration and how it was funded by private dollars. They showed some hack who was saying how inappropriate corporate funding of the event was, and basically saying the sponsors, who had been criticized for being stingy with their employees, were buying influence. They showed some lady saying how many armored hummers and bulletproof vests $40 mil could have bought.

1. Everytime Bush does anything on the taxpayers' nickel they shout and wail about how he shouldn't be paying for this or that with taxpayer dollars.

2. I don't remember an eyebrow being lifted at any ceremony honoring X42, regardless of who paid.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: abc; ball; hypocrisy; inauguration; jennings; walmart
It was just infuriating.
1 posted on 01/19/2005 5:19:50 PM PST by Still Thinking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

any time you see one of these it is nice and simple to ask them for a copy of their reports criticizing Clintoon for the same thing


2 posted on 01/19/2005 5:22:15 PM PST by Mr. K (all your tagline are belong to us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

Ann Coulter's latest column (posted somewhere here about an hour ago) is the perfect cure for this nonsense.


3 posted on 01/19/2005 5:27:13 PM PST by formercalifornian (Daschle b-gone!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
It's our party, you can cry if you want to

Here's the link to Ann's column

4 posted on 01/19/2005 5:28:17 PM PST by formercalifornian (Daschle b-gone!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
They showed some hack who was saying how inappropriate corporate funding of the event was, and basically saying the sponsors, who had been criticized for being stingy with their employees, were buying influence.

Had you surfed around a bit more. it would have become instantly clear that it is the dim talking point of the day. I ran into it everywhere there was a democrat talking head, including the insufferable Campbell Brown.

5 posted on 01/19/2005 5:28:42 PM PST by Bahbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

there's something to be said about people that know how to spend other people's money


6 posted on 01/19/2005 5:29:49 PM PST by JohnLongIsland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
from what I heard Clinton's inaugural cost 33 million, just 7 million shy of Bush's..........I would take these idiots much more seriously when the day comes they are not hypocrites and bitch about the exact same things they do. I know Repubs can be arrogant and such but I do know for sure that Dems are much bigger hypocrites any day.....their arguments are stunted and immature
7 posted on 01/19/2005 5:31:41 PM PST by NorCalRepub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

I say we take all professional football off TV.

All the stuff they advertize costs a lot of money because they have to pay the networks.

A lot of women get abused when their husbands' teams lose.
This costs hospitals money.

Also, I am sick of scheduling family meals around football.


8 posted on 01/19/2005 5:40:56 PM PST by Snapple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

Private donations are a legal funding for the inaugural.
It is proper that it be that way.


Private donations over $2000 are illegal for campaigning for office, something which ABC, CBS, and the Democrats are partners in crime in.

Ask democrats HOW MUCH Bill Clinton spent on his inaugural, and how long it lasted. And who paid for it.


9 posted on 01/19/2005 5:41:36 PM PST by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

According to Coulter, it lasted a week.


10 posted on 01/19/2005 5:42:41 PM PST by formercalifornian (Daschle b-gone!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
Agreed. Also, another thing that was infuriating during tonight's broadcast was what Jennings didn't say. He failed to mention the names of the two sore loser senators who voted against Condi's nomination!
11 posted on 01/19/2005 6:04:50 PM PST by octobersky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson