Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

A very nasty piece of work.
1 posted on 09/12/2004 3:45:36 PM PDT by Colosis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Colosis
But do they both do it in the same sentence. Or the same day?
2 posted on 09/12/2004 3:47:25 PM PDT by Brimack34
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colosis

I didn't know the AP was in the business of editorializing.


3 posted on 09/12/2004 3:48:33 PM PDT by VegasBaby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colosis
>"One moment they say the president's too stubborn and the next day accuse him of being a flip-flopper. It's generated to a point of incoherence," said Bush campaign spokesman Steve Schmidt.<


No truer statement has ever been made.
Kerry's campaign is incoherent!
4 posted on 09/12/2004 3:53:13 PM PDT by snarkytart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colosis
They're trying to muddy the waters.

The steel tariffs issue is lame. Bush didn't flip flop - foreign states lodged a successful complaint against the tariff.

5 posted on 09/12/2004 3:53:30 PM PDT by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colosis; Green Knight

Is this a wire story or an editorial?

Sounds like AP's really getting desperate these days ...


6 posted on 09/12/2004 3:55:02 PM PDT by Angelus Errare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colosis

An event called 9-11 happened that shifted Bush's position that nation building for countries that harbor terrorists. I think it is a noble shift in the President's plan to protect us and the world.

The only issue I can't defend Bush on is McCain/Feingold. A very big mistake there, but now I think the President knows he made a mistake signing it into law.


7 posted on 09/12/2004 3:57:16 PM PDT by presidentbowen (God Bless Ronald Reagan!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colosis

Holding out on steel until WYO 'court issues an adverse ruling, and oders imposition of sanctions is a 'flip-flop'.

Wonder what they would have said if he had continued to hold out?

Kerry = "nuanced"
Bush = "damned if you do; damned if you don't"


8 posted on 09/12/2004 3:57:59 PM PDT by ApplegateRanch (The world needs more horses, and fewer Jackasses!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colosis

For example George Bush went to Pennsylvania yesterday, is in New York today, and will be in Maryland tomorrow. He shifts his positions almost as much as Kerry.


9 posted on 09/12/2004 3:59:59 PM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colosis
"One moment they say the president's too stubborn and the next day accuse him of being a flip-flopper. It's generated to a point of incoherence," said Bush campaign spokesman Steve Schmidt.

Kerry even flip-flops on the flip-flop charge.

10 posted on 09/12/2004 4:04:12 PM PDT by sinkspur ("Can someone tell me where to find an ordained archpriest?"--Cardinal Fanfani)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colosis
Is this your title? Because I have the very same story in front of me on page A6 of The Columbus Dispatch. But the headline in the paper is:

GOP Ignores Bush Flip-Flops in Pinning Label on Kerry.

Please tell me you're using the original AP title so I can stick it to the Dispatch.

11 posted on 09/12/2004 4:09:35 PM PDT by buccaneer81 (Rick Nash will score 50 goals this season ( if there is a season)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colosis

What in the WORLD is going on at FoxNews? This piece of garbage was actually posted right under their banner about 1/2 an hour ago.


15 posted on 09/12/2004 4:31:29 PM PDT by FredZarguna (Wearing BLACK Pajamas, in honor of Hanoi John)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colosis

Since the AP is objective and balanced, I'm sure they will also hit Kerry to offset this attack on Bush.

In fact, by the time the election is here, I exepct there will have been an exactly equal number of anti-Bush and anti-Kerry hit pieces from the AP.

(Yeah right.)


17 posted on 09/12/2004 4:35:50 PM PDT by nsc68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colosis

Is the AP a registered 527?


21 posted on 09/12/2004 4:53:45 PM PDT by Ken K (kenk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colosis
I have one word for AP.......

BBBBBBBBBBBBOOOOOOOOOOOO

22 posted on 09/12/2004 4:56:03 PM PDT by OldFriend (It's the soldier, not the reporter who has given US freedom of the press)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Colosis
_A week after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Bush said he wanted Osama bin Laden "dead or alive." But he told reporters six months later, "I truly am not that concerned about him." He did not mention bin Laden in his hour-long convention acceptance speech.
That's not a flip-flop. Bush still wants Usama dead or alive, he's just trying to tear down the rest of al-Qaida and work to stabilize Pakistan as best as one can.
"I'm a war president," Bush told NBC's "Meet the Press" on Feb. 8. But in a July 20 speech in Iowa, he said: "Nobody wants to be the war president. I want to be the peace president."
No flip-flop here either. Nobody wants to lead a nation into war. But some pea-brained reporter seems to have forgotten about 11 September 2001 and the significance of that day. I'll clue you into reality here: three thousand Americans perished, killed by terrorists. Of course Bush would prefer peace, but the terrorists shattered that peace, and Bush will commit to fight the war until the enemies cease to exist, at which time we shall have peace. Simple, pea-brain, simple.
Bush keeps revising his Iraq war rationale: The need to seize Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction until none were found; liberating the Iraqi people from a brutal dictator; fighting terrorists in Iraq not at home; spreading democracy throughout the Middle East. Now it's a safer America and a safer world.
More evidence that media personnel have pea-sized brains--and don't even engage them. Bush had several reasons for going to war in Iraq. None of the reasons given contradict any other reason. Just because Bush emphasized one reason or the other on one particular day didn't mean that he ever abandoned any previously-emphasized reason.

"Fighting terrorists in Iraq and not at home," makes "a safer America and a safer world" because it "liberates the Iraqi people from a brutal dictator," which in turn enables the "spreading [of] democracy in the Middle East" and would have enabled the "seizing [of] Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction," had they been found. See, I've just combined all of your reasons into one succinct, rational sentence that does not contradict itself.

Try doing that with John F. Kerry's positions on Iraq that he emphasizes on successive days this week. Once you've reduced them into a succinct, rational sentence that does not contradict itself or betray the candidate as a purveyor of sedition or cheerleader of traitors, then you can start whining. Meanwhile, I don't want to hear anymore from you, pea-brain.

25 posted on 09/12/2004 6:04:16 PM PDT by dufekin (President Kerry would have our enemies partying like it's 1969, when Kerry first committed treason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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