.."can somebody read back to me what he said to me yesterday? I left my pad in what I thought was the ladies room, it turn out to be a hall closet, but I can't remember what hall, or even if I wiped"
Posted on 03/22/2006 10:44:07 AM PST by Alas Babylon!
Perhaps she is familiar with the phantom favorite of Democratic talking heads which begins with, "The American people (fill in the blank with whatever criticism of Bush the speaker wants to make)."
What a hatchet piece she has come up with! Her "clever" attempt to delegitimize Bush's rebuttals to critics simply serve to reinforce their validity.
Loven's problem is that her political blinders keep her from seeing that us real "American people" out here know exactly who the President is talking about, because we have heard and read their criticisms.
Those AP-Holes at the AP can't figure out that they are the LEGITIMATE Targets???
.."can somebody read back to me what he said to me yesterday? I left my pad in what I thought was the ladies room, it turn out to be a hall closet, but I can't remember what hall, or even if I wiped"
Same with the Clinton rhetoric device of "reasonable" people. Disagree? You're unreasonable!
Never one mention in the whole article about any other politicians using rhetoric. I can think of a whole host of BS phrases used by other folks. Clinton was just one example. Loven never wrote such an article in 8 years of his silvered tongue wagging. I guess she found more uses than speaking for that!
Never a mention about any others. Just Bush. Pathetic. It's not as if politicians don't use rhetoric a thousand times a day. Loven acts as if Bush is the first person to do so. And get her "expert" professor, too. "It's such a phenomenal hole in the national debate that you can have arguments with nonexistent people," Fields said. "All politicians try to get away with this to a certain extent. What's striking here is how much this administration rests on a foundation of this kind of stuff." How much THIS administration? Was he sleeping from 1992-2000?
If other folks can't see the bias in that, there just ain't no such thing as bias.
At least we no longer have to listen to our President say things to us like, "I never had relations with that woman...not once" on a semi-annual basis. *Rolleyes*
I agree. President Bush needs to keep talking to us and not shut up...not once! :)
Oops.
Left out a couple of paragraphs about what the professor missed:
Did he not hear how many democrats cried "Bush Lied!" and Bush mislead us!" Algore's spitting roar of "He betrayed us! He played on our fears!!!!"????
Calling the President of the United States a liar, a betrayer of our people and such isn't as much of a "whole in the national debate" as the Katie Couric "some people same" rhetoric?????
PULLEASE!
Fat chance. But how funny that she attacks this when all of her colleagues use the exact same device, daily!
awwww is this little jennifer snit got her nose out of joint because the Pres has the cohunas to tell the truth???
awwww poor, poor little jennifer....go home to mommy and she will dry your tears.
Ruh Ro! Jennifer Loven is in a bit of trouble now. She went too far with her bias this time, and Editor and Publisher did a story on it.
The worst part for her is that it is linked via Drudge’s page. The AP will be forced to marginalize and muzzle her for awhile – and hope this doesn’t get too much coverage. They better hope no one discovers that her husband is a DNC insider and advisor to John Kerry.
AP's Bush 'Straw Man' Story: News Analysis Or Unlabeled Opinion?
NEW YORK Did a recent Associated Press story examining President George Bush's alleged tendency to use a "straw man" approach in his speeches cross the line from news to biased opinion? Or was it just a long-overdue, in-depth review of the president's public speaking approach? The viewpoint, as often happens in Washington, depends on whose blog you are reading, and what you consider opinion and analysis. Still, the article by reporter Jennifer Loven sparked an interesting debate on the blogosphere, and in some newsrooms, over how such an examination of a public figure can cross the line from reporting to opining. Since the piece was not labeled a column, or even analysis, it raised some eyebrows as it veered into a sharp attack on Bush's use of such tactics.
Check this out!
Totally biased smear!
Jennifer Loven is married to a former Clintonite and DNC Bigwig. She is merely writing what she was told to by the DNC
Oh dear. Did AP get caught with their pants down AGAIN?
So JENNIFER LOVEN is confused?
Keep them confused, President Bush! They'll follow you around like puppies:):)
Yet even the speediest plan, as advocated by only a few Democrats, suggested not an immediate drawdown, but one over six months. Most Democrats were not even arguing for a specific troop withdrawal timetable.
Dumb and arrogant is no way to go through life, Jennifer.
Hah! And then they end the article by saying so far the Powerline request for comment only came up with 2. They end an article about a smear with a smear.
Will a reporter try to fact-check the AP's biased hit piece? I would say probably not. Once again, it's up to the alternative sites to do it. Thanks "reporters" or as I call you, idiots. I'm glad Moveon is happy with the AP, when are they not? When ever have conservatives agreed with what the AP has written? Does this raise ANY flags?
Thanks for the ping SkyPilot. This story has gotten to me, especially after the media's defense of its reporting as unbiased all day.
i noticed you can never email AP writers as theyre never braves enough to give out their email addresses.
bttt
Ruh Ro! Jennifer Loven is in a bit of trouble now. She went too far with her bias this time, and Editor and Publisher did a story on it.
The worst part for her is that it is linked via Drudge’s page. The AP will be forced to marginalize and muzzle her for awhile – and hope this doesn’t get too much coverage. They better hope no one discovers that her husband is a DNC insider and advisor to John Kerry.
AP's Bush 'Straw Man' Story: News Analysis Or Unlabeled Opinion?
NEW YORK Did a recent Associated Press story examining President George Bush's alleged tendency to use a "straw man" approach in his speeches cross the line from news to biased opinion? Or was it just a long-overdue, in-depth review of the president's public speaking approach? The viewpoint, as often happens in Washington, depends on whose blog you are reading, and what you consider opinion and analysis. Still, the article by reporter Jennifer Loven sparked an interesting debate on the blogosphere, and in some newsrooms, over how such an examination of a public figure can cross the line from reporting to opining. Since the piece was not labeled a column, or even analysis, it raised some eyebrows as it veered into a sharp attack on Bush's use of such tactics.
I was so out of touch with all those "American people think." statements. Thankfully, I found FreeRepublic.
That is why the left makes films like the recent biography of President Reagan and the Ted Turner series "The Cold War", with its They-had-the-gulag; we-had-Kent-State equivalence. I don't think they care if anyone watches it the first time it runs on TV. It gets into school libraries to propagandize a generation.
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.