It is not the Republican slime machine. ------- You guys bask in the slimelight continually.
On Jun 25, 3:11 am, dick thompson <[email protected]> wrote: > It is not the Republican slime machine. That belongs solely and > completely to the Dems. They own it anduse it constantly. What was > alleged? nothing alleged about it. > > > > euwe wrote: > > Uh huh. "Alleged" The Republican slime machine lives under a rock with > > that word on it. I'm reminded of Gomez: > > > Reporter: "I hear you're quite a lady killer" > > Gomez: "Never convicted!" > > > On Jun 25, 2:13 am, dick thompson <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> And just what is that in aid of. Are you saying that McChrystal did > >> these things or that members ofhis staff did these things? The > >> question was whether the reporter wrote his article truthfully about > >> what the general said and did and not about what his staff may have > >> believed. What you wrote is strictly out of a rule book and has > >> nothing to do with the article or McChrystal unless you have proof that > >> he did those things. > > >> Incidentally just apply those same rules to our Congress and Senate > >> including the late Teddy Kennedy - also include the VP in that one since > >> he was shown to be a plagiarist. > > >> euwe wrote: > > >>> Examples of offenses. Instances of violation of this article include > >>> knowingly making a false official statement; dishonorable failure to > >>> pay a debt; cheating on an exam; opening and reading a letter of > >>> another without authority; using insulting or defamatory language to > >>> another officer in that officer�s presence or about that officer to > >>> other military persons; being drunk and disorderly in a public place; > >>> public association with known prostitutes; committing or attempting to > >>> commit a crime involving moral turpitude; and failing without good > >>> cause to support the officer�s family. > > >>> On Jun 25, 1:30 am, dick thompson <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>> That does not answer the question of the reporter writing his story > >>>> based on what the staff said and then stating that the general agreed > >>>> and doing so without actually knowing what the general thought on the > >>>> subject. To me it was a clear case of misreporting and dereliction of > >>>> the reporter's duty to check and then double-check his story. That is > >>>> apparently a common trait of our modern journalists. > > >>>> euwe wrote: > > >>>>> I guess the guy never heard of chain of command, and the phrase > >>>>> "officer and a gentleman." > > >>>>> On Jun 24, 12:15 pm, dick thompson <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>>>>http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/06/24/2010-06-24_mcchry... > > >>>>>> Just what did the reporter think would happen when a touchy egomaniac > >>>>>> like Bambi read what the reporter wrote. Guess he didn't think at > >>>>>> all. -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
