It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bush rejects bad news

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 02:56 PM
link   
In the interests of public education reform it is timely to roll out the "NO PRESIDENT LEFT BEHIND" remedial program.




posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71
He did not ride the short bus, and he did go to a nice college, no?

His daddy bought Dubyas way into the Skull and Bones colllege




May I ask what you Bush bashers do for a living.

I am an Investor. And I can tell you that ALOT of investors are VERY nervous about Bushs voodoo economic policies(ie 13 trillion $ dept and the HUGE trade gap(which is getting some help by the low dollar but its not gonna save you yanks from the upcoming geopolitical power shift to the Pacific Rim countries)

[edit on 11-1-2005 by sardion2000]

[edit on 11-1-2005 by sardion2000]



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 03:00 PM
link   
The more people who are driven into poverty, the more people (BushCo. thinks) will be driven to join their war machine. Guns and butter! Woohoo!



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 03:02 PM
link   
What I do for a living I am a professional "Bush basher"


Actually I have a degree on business and have worked for many years as a Spanish teacher.

And now I am just a housewife with nothing to do but to support my ATS.



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Hello?!

as posted by EastCoastKid
It's common knowledge that Bush avoids reading the newspapers.

It steadily amazes me, day in and day out, that you continue to make these unsupported and fallacious assertions and claims. You may not like the man, but your disrespect for his OFFICE is beyond absurd and quite unfounded!
seekerof



Some one asked about Bush not reading News papers and watching the news on TV, excerpt taken from the Media Reserch Center



Bush Tells Hume He Avoids Media Bias
By Avoiding News Media

President George W. Bush has discovered a way to avoid being influenced by liberal media bias: He avoids reading newspapers or watching television news. During Brit Hume’s interview with Bush aired Monday night on Fox and FNC, Bush revealed how he relies on his staff for “objective” news summaries since “a lot of times there's opinions mixed in with news” from the usual media outlets. “We won't disagree with that sir,” Hume quipped in response
Link #5







[edit on 11/1/2005 by Sauron]



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sauron
Bush Tells Hume He Avoids Media Bias
By Avoiding News Media

Bush revealed how he relies on his staff for “objective” news summaries since “a lot of times there's opinions mixed in with news” from the usual media outlets. “We won't disagree with that sir,” Hume quipped in response


So in other worlds Bush surrounds himself with "rump kissers" and only get what he wants to hear.

What a president


I tell you he is full of himself.



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 03:27 PM
link   
It's the news that George Bush rejects that makes George Bush the best.

The "man" who claims to be "president" has denigrated the "office" to FUBAR level.



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 03:36 PM
link   
Once again he proves he's the puppet.


Will we ever go back to a real America and a real president?



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 03:45 PM
link   
I can't wait until the next guy is in office..

I hope it's someone that all you President Bush haters want in office and when things get worse.... and they will, I'll be the first to jump up and remind you all.....

and just to piss you all off.... I really hope it's Jeb in 2008 !!!



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by elevatedone
I can't wait until the next guy is in office..

I hope it's someone that all you President Bush haters want in office and when things get worse.... and they will, I'll be the first to jump up and remind you all.....

and just to piss you all off.... I really hope it's Jeb in 2008 !!!


Yeah things got SOOO much worse under Clinton right?
You want Jeb in 08 huh? Well if he does get elected then we are gonna see another 4 more years of saber rattling, Gunship Diplomacy and Voodoo Economics.



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by elevatedone
and just to piss you all off.... I really hope it's Jeb in 2008 !!!



1. Why is your motive to "piss everyone off"?

2. It didn't seem to work on me. The performance of this instalment of the Bush "dynasty" speaks for itself.

3. Have you learned much about developments in US and global politics while reading contributions at ATS?



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 04:00 PM
link   


3. Have you learned much about developments in US and global politics while reading contributions at ATS?


Apparently not
He probably believes everything Newsmax.com tells him and nobody can tell him different. Thats how bu#es think(clintonites think like that as well so its not confined to the right), its just with clinton you had to get a bit imaginative to Bash him, with Bush its soooo easy and its quite fun too.



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 05:41 PM
link   
I think the not wanting to hear bad news is quite a sensible path for a conviction politician. Hitler had a similar idea - he had decided he was right in his decisions and his only duty was to tell others to implement them and make sure the decisions stayed "on track"; he refused to hear any information that countered his conviction. He was a strong believer in the power of the will; that if you believed something hard enough you could actually make it happen (I guess it's called positive thinking these days); so the refusal to hear bad news was sensible because it could sap his will and therefore endanger the success of the project. This actually worked for Hitler in 1941 when he refused to let the German army retreat back to Poland after they failed to get Russia to surrender before the winter set in. His generals all advised him to go back along his supply lines. He refused saying not one step back. Military historians now believe he was right - a rereat would have been shambolic and destroyed the cohesion of the German army. Unfortunately as with any single minded approach it ultimately fails - the Germans should have retreated from Stalingrad the following year. Now Bush is operating on similar principles - he made up his mind to invade Iraq and he ain't going back on it, so why listen to bad news, it will only sap his willpower and endanger the project. In a sense Bush has an added dimension in that he believes he has God backing his convictions up whereas Hitler was a lot less into all that, only into a vague notion of destiny.



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 06:20 PM
link   
And now, three pages into this, still based on a link to a blog, commenting on a suppossed report..... we disuss the as fact that Bush doesn't like to hear bad news or read the papers.

Oh well, has anyone found a real source to confirm this information? I can't.

As for the importance of the reading the newspaper, are these better sources than the Whitehouse staff? I think not. How many of you have ever been quoted in an article regarding a serious issue and can say that your information was accurately portrayed? How many of you have ever been involved in a matter of public concern that you were in the know on, read an article in a newspaper and found the information accurate? How many of you have even ever sent a letter to the editor and not seen it edited to almost miss the point?

Newspapers are not worth the paper they are printed on. This is a non-issue when you have first hand information at your fingertips. I will not trash the entire industry, but with the amount of false and misleading information you are subjected to, how can you trust any of it?

[edit on 1/11/2005 by Relentless]



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 06:23 PM
link   
As many posters have stated, many articles in the past have said this. I cant find any current ones but i will try since one source isnt enough



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Relentless
As for the importance of the reading the newspaper, are these better sources than the Whitehouse staff?

It largely depends on the newspaper. For many issues, the answer would be "yes", because the Whitehouse has become little more than an internal and external spin department, worse than the "Office Of Special Plans" established by Cheney to filter and bastardize intelligence services information.

How many of you have ever been quoted in an article regarding a serious issue and can say that your information was accurately portrayed? How many of you have ever been involved in a matter of public concern that you were in the know on, read an article in a newspaper and found the information accurate? How many of you have even ever sent a letter to the editor and not seen it edited to almost miss the point?

I can answer "yes" to these questions, many times over.

The purpose of Bush saying he doesn't read papers is to cast aspersions on the medium and get his sycophantic supporters to do the same, lest they discover the truth.

Bush the man is a public relations disaster. It takes large scale teams of full time paid spin merchants (some of these rotters who work for newspapers coming out of the woodwork recently) to maintain any semblance of the appearance that this ingrate can lead anything positive.



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
The purpose of Bush saying he doesn't read papers is to cast aspersions on the medium and get his sycophantic supporters to do the same, lest they discover the truth.



Just curious, but would this be first hand knowledge, a fact (or both) or just an opinion.

By the way, I would hope you don't use words like that (aspersions, sycophantic) when being interviewed by a reporter or writing a letter to the editor, since your average person wouldn't have a clue what you are saying and it is not a very effective way to communicate with the masses. (Sorry - couldn't resist
) Although, it may be very effective when dealing with the media, since they would have no choice but to use a direct quote, since so many wouldn't be able to reword it.

(No offense intended, just brought a smile to my face to see those words.)



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 06:58 PM
link   
Very few bits of newspapers communicate with your so-called "masses".

Nothing I have ever said about George W Bush is untrue. Ask him yourself on one of his sober days.



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
Very few bits of newspapers communicate with your so-called "masses".


Then what's the point and or issue over reading them?


Originally posted by MaskedAvatar


Nothing I have ever said about George W Bush is untrue. Ask him yourself on one of his sober days.



Aha! So you do have first hand knowledge. Spill it!



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 07:17 PM
link   
I beg to differ with you. English is my third language and i know exactly what Masked Avatar means.




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join