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

Skip to comments.

Bush Never Lied to Us About Iraq ( In the L.A. Times no less! )
Los Angeles Times ^ | June 16, 2008 | James Kirchick

Posted on 06/16/2008 5:21:19 AM PDT by kellynla

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last
Pigs are flying today! LOL
1 posted on 06/16/2008 5:21:19 AM PDT by kellynla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kellynla

Well, James Kirchick, it was nice knowing ya, bud. Hope you have a good last meal.


2 posted on 06/16/2008 5:23:05 AM PDT by arderkrag (Libertarian Nutcase (Political Compass Coordinates: 9.00, -2.62 - www.politicalcompass.org))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla


Maybe we'll stop hearing "Bush Lied" now... I won't hold my breath though!
3 posted on 06/16/2008 5:27:27 AM PDT by LibertyRocks (The LibertyRocks Blog - http://libertyrocks.wordpress.com & ALL NEW: http://NObama.blogetery.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

How many times has it been posted, Clinton, Kerry, all of them, calling for the removal of Saddam? And it wasn’t all that long ago. But such events are down the memory hole now. They don’t exist. They never existed. They never have existed.


4 posted on 06/16/2008 5:27:40 AM PDT by samtheman (McCain is throwing away a landslide victory and opting for a landslide defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

the LA Times? The guy’s a writer for TNR for cripes sakes...


5 posted on 06/16/2008 5:31:29 AM PDT by God luvs America (When the silent majority speaks the earth trembles!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
Pre-War "containment" of Saddam failed more each day.
  1. The oil-for-food program was corrupt
  2. The weapons inspections were a farce
  3. US and allied planes were targeted
  4. Uninspected flights to Baghdad gutted the sanctions
  5. Terrorists were training in Iraq
  6. Saddam supported terrorism - $25,000 to each family of a suicide bomber.
  7. Saddam was thumbing his nose at decent people as he rewarded his collaborators.
Bush interrupted Saddam's staging of a comeback.
6 posted on 06/16/2008 5:34:24 AM PDT by syriacus (Democrats got THEIR "change" in Election 2006. Are YOU better off now?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

I’m thinking this is intended to be supportive of Obama (although the piece never mentions him). Many experienced Democrats (Kerry, Hillary, etc.) may claim that they were duped — but Obama was against it all from the start. HE wasn’t duped. His keen insight into these matters makes him a world-class statesman. [gag]


7 posted on 06/16/2008 5:34:39 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (Et si omnes ego non)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

The Left lied and many Died needs to be repeated over and over...


8 posted on 06/16/2008 5:35:51 AM PDT by iopscusa (El Vaquero. (SC Lowcountry Cowboy))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
Pre-war quotes from "lying" House and Senate democrats...

"In 1998, the United States also changed its underlying policy toward Iraq from containment to regime change and began to examine options to effect such a change, including support for Iraqi opposition leaders within the country and abroad.

In the 4 years since the inspectors, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaida members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001."

"It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein wiill continue to increase his capability to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East which, as we know all too well, affects American security."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
Congressional Record – Sen. Hillary Clinton

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2002_record&page=S10288&position=all

John Kerry: “I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq – Saddam Hussein is a renegade and outlaw who turned his back on the tough conditions of his surrender put in place by the United Nations in 1991.” (July 2002)

John Kerry: “I believe the record of Saddam Hussein’s ruthless, reckless breach of international values and standards of behavior is cause enough for the world community to hold him accountable by use of force if necessary.”

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
U.S. Senate - Ted Kennedy

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." -
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
Transcript of Gore’s speech, printed in USA Today

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002-09-23-gore-text_x.htm

"When I vote to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security and that of our allies in the Persian Gulf region. I will vote yes because I believe it is the best way to hold Saddam Hussein accountable." -
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9,2002
Congressional Record – Sen. John F. Kerry

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2002_record&page=S10174&position=all

John Kerry on the floor of the Senate
October 2002:

"With respect to Saddam Hussein and the threat he presents, we must ask ourselves a simple question:

Why?

Why is Saddam Hussein pursuing weapons that most nations have agreed to limit or give up?

Why is Saddam Hussein guilty of breaking his own cease-fire agreement with the international community?

Why is Saddam Hussein attempting to develop nuclear weapons when most nations don't even try, and responsible nations that have them attempt to limit their potential for disaster?

Why did Saddam Hussein threaten and provoke?

Why does he develop missiles that exceed allowable limits?

Why did Saddam Hussein lie and deceive the inspection teams previously?

Why did Saddam Hussein not account for all of the weapons of mass destruction which UNSCOM identified?

Why is he seeking to develop unmanned airborne vehicles for delivery of biological agents?

Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), October 9, 2002
Congressional Record – Sen. John F. Kerry

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2002_record&page=S10171&position=all

“The Joint Chiefs should provide Congress with casualty estimates for a war in Iraq as they have done in advance of every past conflict. These estimates should consider Saddam's possible use of chemical or biological weapons against our troops.

Unlike the gulf war, many experts believe Saddam would resort to chemical and biological weapons against our troops in a desperate -attempt to save his regime if he believes he and his regime are ultimately threatened.”
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) Oct. 8, 2002
Congressional Record - Sen. Ted Kennedy

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?position=all&page=S10090&dbname=2002_record

John Kerry: “I would disagree with John McCain that it's the actual weapons of mass destruction he may use against us, it's what he may do in another invasion of Kuwait or in a miscalculation about the Kurds or a miscalculation about Iran or particularly Israel. Those are the things that--that I think present the greatest danger. He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It's the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat." (October 2002)

John Kerry: “If You Don’t Believe . . . Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn’t vote for me.” (January 2003)

John Kerry: Saddam Hussein is a brutal dictator who must be disarmed. (March 2003)

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal."..."Iraq has continued to seek nuclear weapons and develop its arsenal in defiance of the collective will of the international community, as expressed through the United Nations Security Council. It is violating the terms of the 1991 cease-fire that ended the Gulf war and as many as 16 Security Council resolutions, including 11 resolutions concerning Iraq’s efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction." –
Sen. John Edwards, October 10, 2002
Congressional Record – Sen. John Edwards

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2002_record&page=S10325&position=all

"There is no doubt that since that time Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." –
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001
http://usinfo.org/wf-archive/2001/011207/epf510.htm

"We should be hell bent on getting those weapons of mass destruction, hell bent on having a credible approach to them, but we should try to do it in a way which keeps the world together and that achieves our goal which is removing the... defanging Saddam.." -
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Dec. 9, 2002
Online with Jim Lehrer – Public Broadcasting Service

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/july-dec02/iraq_12-10.html

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." -
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
Transcript of Gore’s speech, printed in USA Today

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002-09-23-gore-text_x.htm

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
Transcript of Gore’s speech, printed in USA Today

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002-09-23-gore-text_x.htm

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
U.S. Senate - Ted Kennedy

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." -
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
Congressional Record – Robert Byrd

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2002_record&page=S9874&position=all

"When I vote to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security and that of our allies in the Persian Gulf region. I will vote yes because I believe it is the best way to hold Saddam Hussein accountable." -
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9,2002
Congressional Record – Sen. John F. Kerry

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2002_record&page=S10174&position=all

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years .. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."-
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
Congressional Record –Sen. Jay Rockefeller

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" –
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
Congressional Record – Rep. Henry Waxman

MY SOURCE FOR ALL OF THESE QUOTES:
http://www.americandaily.com/article/4694

9 posted on 06/16/2008 5:36:40 AM PDT by ETL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: God luvs America

True, but it appears in the LA Times. I don’t know what kind of contract this writer has with them, but I’m assuming they didn’t HAVE to publish it, did they? Besides, it’s good that their subscribers are hearing this - probably for the first time ever. So, while this particular writer does work for a Conservative source, this appearing in the LA Times, is still quite amazing, IMHO.


10 posted on 06/16/2008 5:37:55 AM PDT by LibertyRocks (The LibertyRocks Blog - http://libertyrocks.wordpress.com & ALL NEW: http://NObama.blogetery.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

Party of Defeat: How Democrats and Radicals Undermined America's War on Terror Before and After 9-11
By David Horowitz and Ben Johnson
FrontPageMagazine.com | Friday, April 11, 2008

The following [link] is the introduction from the new book Party of Defeat by David Horowitz and Ben Johnson. The introduction lays out the book's thesis: that the opposition to the war in Iraq has crossed a troubling boundary. For the first time, a large number of national leaders have not merely opposed a war; that would be their inalienable right under the U.S. Constitution. Instead, they have actively sabotaged an ongoing war they voted to authorize and which our troops are currently winning. Party of Defeat is available from the FrontPage Magazine Bookstore for $15, less than Amazon.com. -- The Editors.

http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=28679004-6C63-4119-97F6-96A2C5F64E84

___________________________________________________________

"David Horowitz talked about his book Party of Defeat: How Democrats and Radicals Undermined America's War on Terror Before and After 9-11, published by Spence. In his book he criticizes members of the Democratic Party that, he says, are undermining the U.S.'s efforts in Iraq. This event was held at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C."

Watch now on c-span video! (FREE)

Party of Defeat: How Democrats and Radicals Undermined America's War on Terror Before and After 9-11 (on streaming video - length: apprx 90min)[Windows Media Video or C-Span Video Player(Flash) -additional details at site]
http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/index.php?main_page=product_video_info&products_id=205154-1&highlight

11 posted on 06/16/2008 5:39:24 AM PDT by ETL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

I have the feeling that the author knows some “new find” about Saddam’s Iraq is about to be revealed.


12 posted on 06/16/2008 5:40:40 AM PDT by syriacus (Democrats got THEIR "change" in Election 2006. Are YOU better off now?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: God luvs America

“the LA Times? The guy’s a writer for TNR for cripes sakes...”

And the article appears in the .... LOS ANGELES TIMES “for cripse sakes”...

gezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz....


13 posted on 06/16/2008 5:40:58 AM PDT by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Comment #14 Removed by Moderator

To: mkjessup

The latest “report” is just propaganda for the moonbat base.

I hope there is a trial where the left’s baseless charges are shredded.


15 posted on 06/16/2008 5:44:08 AM PDT by y6162
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ETL; jveritas

Hi, ETL, the following isn’t in reference to you specifically... Just thoughts after reading your post. JVeritas - just a courtesy ping as I’ve mentioned you in the following...
**********************

I really wish this writer had gone further... Our own JVeritas in translating the Iraq Docs [ http://iraqdocs.blogspot.com ] has proven that Saddam WAS linked to terrorists (Al Qaeda, etc...), and there was WMD in Iraq, contrary to popular opinion (at least among the Dems/Libs/Anti-War folks).

While there’s nothing wrong with pointing out to people that many Dems were saying the same things, it would be nice if people could be educated regarding the truth of these matters. Our intelligence agency wasn’t THAT far off. This only shifts the blame to the CIA and other sources and really does nothing to inform people of the real truth...

Again, this isn’t to say that it isn’t important to point these things out.


16 posted on 06/16/2008 5:44:44 AM PDT by LibertyRocks (The LibertyRocks Blog - http://libertyrocks.wordpress.com & ALL NEW: http://NObama.blogetery.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

And I believe Kirchick writes for New Republic as well...


17 posted on 06/16/2008 5:45:13 AM PDT by johnny7 (Don't mess with my tag-lines!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnny7

yes he does...as noted in the end of the piece


18 posted on 06/16/2008 5:46:34 AM PDT by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
Bush interrupted Saddam's comeback on the world stage.
A beneficial side effect was the dismantling of Libya's WMD program.

Containment of Iraq was failing more each day.

1. The oil-for-food program was corrupt
2. The weapons inspections were a farce
3. There are indications that Saddam was co-operating with Qadhafi on programs to develop weapons in Libya
4. US and allied planes were targeted
5. Uninspected flights to Baghdad gutted the sanctions
6. Terrorists were training in Iraq
7. Saddam supported terrorism - paying $25,000 to each family of a suicide bomber and $10,000 to the families of other Palestinians killed in the intifadah.
8. Saddam created the Jerusalem Army [the Jaysh al-Quds] to "liberate" Jerusalem
9. Saddam refused to destroy his Samoud 2 missiles which violated the UN mandate
10. Saddam brutalized our fellow human beings

Saddam was thumbing his nose at decent people as he rewarded his collaborators.

Analysis: Saddam steps up defiance, 1 December, 2000, By BBC Middle East analyst Roger Hardy

19 posted on 06/16/2008 5:46:38 AM PDT by syriacus (Democrats got THEIR "change" in Election 2006. Are YOU better off now?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
I have the feeling that the author knows some “new find” about Saddam’s Iraq is about to be revealed.

Oh, do tell.

20 posted on 06/16/2008 5:47:47 AM PDT by numberonepal (Don't Even Think About Treading On Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
I’m thinking this is intended to be supportive of Obama

I agree and add to that, a shot against Romney as McCains VP on the theory that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

21 posted on 06/16/2008 5:47:47 AM PDT by fso301
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibertyRocks

When did the New Republic become a Conservative source? Who were the Republicans that signed off on the senate report?


22 posted on 06/16/2008 5:49:39 AM PDT by mimaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: mimaw

Apologies, I was confusing it with another site...


23 posted on 06/16/2008 5:59:04 AM PDT by LibertyRocks (The LibertyRocks Blog - http://libertyrocks.wordpress.com & ALL NEW: http://NObama.blogetery.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: God luvs America

If you mean by TNR The National Review then its a conserv. publication.The New Republic is liberal and left.


24 posted on 06/16/2008 5:59:59 AM PDT by Clint Lippo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

Bump!


25 posted on 06/16/2008 6:00:39 AM PDT by Incorrigible (If I lead, follow me; If I pause, push me; If I retreat, kill me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fso301
I’m thinking this is intended to be supportive of Obama

I agree and add to that, a shot against Romney as McCains VP on the theory that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree

That's pretty much the way I see this... this op-ed is more about painting George Romney (and thus his son) as a cowardly flip-flopper. This New Republic writer has the foresight to see that Bush is history so it's no big deal to admit that he might have got some things right. This is more about reviving anti-Romney mistrust among conservatives than cutting Bush any slack.

26 posted on 06/16/2008 6:01:25 AM PDT by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

More than that. Saddam wanted to destablize the entire region and try to take over Saudi.


27 posted on 06/16/2008 6:07:36 AM PDT by Mere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: LibertyRocks
this particular writer does work for a Conservative source

The New Republic is classified as liberal, or, on some issues (such as support for the initial invasion of Iraq), as "center left." It definitely can't be classified as conservative.

28 posted on 06/16/2008 6:11:50 AM PDT by browardchad ("We are all mavericks now." -- Rush Limbaugh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

bttt


29 posted on 06/16/2008 6:14:48 AM PDT by kalee (The offenses we give, we write in the dust; Those we take, we write in marble. JHuett)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: browardchad

Yep, that was my mistake. I was confusing it with a different site - sorry about that!


30 posted on 06/16/2008 6:22:51 AM PDT by LibertyRocks (The LibertyRocks Blog - http://libertyrocks.wordpress.com & ALL NEW: http://NObama.blogetery.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

The writer is from the New Republic, not the LA Times, although printed.

The pieces’ content will be ignored due to the usual anti-rationalism, or truthism for you gen Xers.


31 posted on 06/16/2008 6:23:42 AM PDT by School of Rational Thought (Truthism Watch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
I would add that Saddam harbored terrorists in Baghdad (was it Abu Nidal?) and he plotted to kill an ex-president on his trip to Kuwait.

I think the congress came up with 23 charges to grant the president war power.

32 posted on 06/16/2008 6:33:36 AM PDT by purpleraine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: School of Rational Thought

“The writer is from the New Republic, not the LA Times, although printed.”

I never said the writer was from the L.A. Times now did I...
let me know when you people complete your reading comprehension course...

Now can we get to the subject matter of the article which is that BUSH DID NOT LIE ABOUT THE WAR AS CLAIMED BY THE LEFT AND ADMITTED IN THIS ARTICLE BY A LEFTIE...FINALLY... SEVEN YEARS AFTER THE FACT!

shezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


33 posted on 06/16/2008 6:47:25 AM PDT by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

bookmark


34 posted on 06/16/2008 6:47:43 AM PDT by DocRock (All they that TAKE the sword shall perish with the sword. Matthew 26:52 Gun grabbers beware.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

bttt


35 posted on 06/16/2008 6:54:56 AM PDT by jackv (DEMOCRATS HATE BUSH MORE THAN THEY LOVE THEIR COUNTRY!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

bump


36 posted on 06/16/2008 6:56:08 AM PDT by Skooz (Any nation that would elect Hillary Clinton as its president has forfeited its right to exist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ETL

excellent post.......excellent


37 posted on 06/16/2008 7:04:01 AM PDT by The Wizard (DemonRATS: enemies of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: The Wizard

Thanks. I got the quotes off the site I mentioned at the bottom, but had to do quite a bit of reorganizing to post it all here in html.


38 posted on 06/16/2008 7:13:33 AM PDT by ETL (uite)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

FReepers are amazed by the LA Times getting things right so often that it should cease to be a cause of amazement.

Truth be told, because of their penchant, both on the opinion page and in news reporting, for getting things right on a fairly regular basis, the LA Times has become my favorite old media outlet. (Yes, I know they are reliably in the tank for the CA demonRAT party, but they seem to have some of the last journalists who actually believe in objectivity working for them, and an editorial page editor that thinks something more than a token ‘conservative’ columnist is needed for balance.)


39 posted on 06/16/2008 7:33:05 AM PDT by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

FReepers are amazed by the LA Times getting things right so often that it should cease to be a cause of amazement.

Truth be told, because of their penchant, both on the opinion page and in news reporting, for getting things right on a fairly regular basis, the LA Times has become my favorite old media outlet. (Yes, I know they are reliably in the tank for the CA demonRAT party, but they seem to have some of the last journalists who actually believe in objectivity working for them, and an editorial page editor that thinks something more than a token ‘conservative’ columnist is needed for balance.)


40 posted on 06/16/2008 7:38:41 AM PDT by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ETL

BUMP


41 posted on 06/16/2008 7:39:26 AM PDT by MileHi ( "It's coming down to patriots vs the politicians." - ovrtaxt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: The_Reader_David
As a CA native and a previous subscriber for almost 30 years to the L.A. Times, I have to disagree with you.

After the LAT published the “doctored” picture of a U.S. soldier in Iraq standing over someone with his weapon pointed at the person as opposed to the weapon being pointed away from the person as it actually was and numerous anti-military and antiwar articles over the years; I canceled my subscription.

One token piece SEVEN YEARS AFTER THE FACT doesn't change my mind about the Times...in fact, because it took the Times SEVEN YEARS to print such an article only reinforces my opinion of the LAT!

Semper Fi,
Kelly

42 posted on 06/16/2008 7:45:19 AM PDT by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

After Bill O’Reilly pressed the LA Times several years ago, they apparently hired one or two right-wing journalists.


43 posted on 06/16/2008 7:48:43 AM PDT by ETL (uite)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: ETL

“After Bill O’Reilly pressed the LA Times several years ago, they apparently hired one or two right-wing journalists.”

Well this is not one of them! LOL

I didn’t know that they had hired any...
in fact they fired Michael Ramirez who is a conservative cartoonist and the only reason I even bothered for years to look at the op/ed page of the LAT.


44 posted on 06/16/2008 7:51:54 AM PDT by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
...the notion that the Bush administration deceived the American people has become the accepted narrative on the left of how we went to war.

Fixed it.

45 posted on 06/16/2008 7:55:29 AM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

not my point...the new republic is far more leftist than the times; hence your point is magnified....


46 posted on 06/16/2008 8:27:28 AM PDT by God luvs America (When the silent majority speaks the earth trembles!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: God luvs America

gotcha...


47 posted on 06/16/2008 8:35:01 AM PDT by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

You add “In the L.A. Times no less!” implies attribution to the LA Times. If not, the comment has no relevance, since the paper does print opposing views.

And no, you didn’t say it, you wrote it. Let me know when you complete your English composition course.


48 posted on 06/16/2008 8:48:45 AM PDT by School of Rational Thought (Truthism Watch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: School of Rational Thought

run along and quit bothering me with your blather...

gezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...you need to change your screen name. LMAO


49 posted on 06/16/2008 9:21:13 AM PDT by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

I don’t think we should even concede that the intel was faulty. No, it wasn’t. He had WMD, he used WMD, then he hid the WMD. Since the stash the UN was looking for was small enough to be hidden in MY APARTMENT... it’s no wonder we haven’t had that wondrous moment where you open Al Capone’s vault and there’s actually something in there. It’s rather like saying that since we’ve never found Osama bin Laden, maybe he doesn’t really exist either.


50 posted on 06/16/2008 9:29:46 AM PDT by A_perfect_lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last

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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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