Finally, the Corporate Media Calls Bush a Liar

Finally, the Corporate Media Calls Bush a Liar

www.afterdowningstreet.org

JOE SCARBOROUGH: Does Congress need to subpoena Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Steven Hadley and the Director of the CIA and the Secretary of Defense and ask them what they knew and when they knew it?

PAT BUCHANAN: Exactly. And the President of the United States should tell us what he knew and when he knew it, what he said yesterday is noncredible. If the head of the CIA walks in and says we've got new intelligence on Iran and Bush doesn't ask him what exactly are you talking about "new intelligence"; that's not credible.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.foxnews.com
news.yahoo.com

Imagine that, the mass media beginning to question the "truthiness" of what the "decider" has to say.

Could this be a sign of good things to come?

Or a sign that things are about to turn decidedly worse?

www.afterdowningstreet.org
(visit the link for the full news article)

MSNBC talking heads called him a liar on the Iran waffling. I'll try and find a link.

Administration changing its story on Iran on cflicting statements about the N.I.E. report that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program years ago. Dan Abrams debates political analyst Pat Buchanan, Salon.com’s Joan Walsh and columnist Tony Blankley.

he was "truthful" or was he "telling the truth" ?

Buchanan, "the President misled us"

link

[edit on 7-12-2007 by x-phile]

Uhm... idiots have been calling the President a liar ever since December 13th, 2000.

I don't know if he intentionally relates the facts he is presented with incorrectly, if he has given instructions to various agencies to present him with inaccurate data, or if he really is clueless and all the bad intelligence is just that: bad intelligence. But I do know not a day has gone by over the past seven years where someone somewhere hasn't called him a liar on national television.

What else is new? His paws should be effectively tied for the next year. Then we've got another cat to worry about. Although dog might be a more appropriate metaphor.

reply to post by apc


Calling Bush a liar hasn't been confined to just "idiots," IMHO, and it goes back to looong before December 13th, 2000.

It's just interesting to see the corporate MSM picking up the cry, the question is: why?

Is it a foreshadowing, calculated ploy to lend credence to the right-wing's endless bleating refrain of being "victimized" by the MSM's supposed "liberal" leanings?

To allow the appearance, once again, of being the "underdog."

When in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

We all know the MSM only report what their corporate masters approve.



Actually, as it turns out, it's been the American people who've been played for idiots by the Bush administration.

Looks like it's worked pretty good for them, eh?

In truth, his "paws" are now the least restrained they've been since the initial days following 9/11.

He is now at his most dangerous:

He no longer needs to act like he cares about his popularity numbers.

He's leveraged the balance of power to the Executive Branch to an unprecedented and un-Constitutional degree.

And he's under the gun to get the ball rolling in Iran, saving the next administration the onus of having to begin the thing.

Or not.

Keep that in mind if/when Hittlery's ordained.

All the power that Bush has succeeded in drawing to the Executive Branch, will now be in the hands of another two-faced criminal liar.

If you believe in a god, now would be a good time to cry: "God help us all!"

It doesn't really matter, right or left, since all these politicians are simply lap-dogs on the leash to their greedy corporate masters.



Edit to add:

Keith Olbermann's Special Comment: Deceiving the U.S. on Iran | Video

[edit on 8-12-2007 by goosdawg]