8 Responses to BBC Shilling For the Dems

  1. dave t says:
    August 24, 2004 at 1:27 pm

    I emailed them this morning asking them the same question. Not changed on the website yet!

       0 likes

  2. Susan says:
    August 24, 2004 at 8:07 pm

    Submitted to “Don’t Have Your Say”:

    “How hypocritical can the BBC get? You covered the so-called “Bush AWOL” scandal extensively, but only focused on the Swift Boat Veterans’ story after Kerry came up with a good offense. The story’s been running over here and on the Internet for weeks. As for the MoveOn.org ads comparing Bush to Hitler, you didn’t cover them at all. Your bias is truly something else — you don’t even pretend to be objective. Regarding the subject of negative advertising, I hate it and don’t watch it from either camp. I save my ire for foreign media like the BBC trying to become an active participant in the American political process by openly choosing one side against the other. Now THAT’s something that’s more frightening to me than a little mud-slinging.”

    In response to THIS hypocritical “question” designed solely to elicit Bush-bashing:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/3594070.stm

       0 likes

  3. PJF says:
    August 25, 2004 at 12:52 am

    Searching the web over related items, I came across this page:

    http://freeinternetpress.com/article.pl?sid=04/08/24/0610231&mode=thread

    It makes you wonder if the reason the BBC story hasn’t been corrected is that is has already been, er, ‘corrected’.

    This is the type of occasion where we really miss the Google cache.
    .

       0 likes

  4. Angie Schultz says:
    August 25, 2004 at 1:13 am

    There’s a “Have Your Say” topic entitled Is political advertising in the US getting dirty?

    The general response, of course, is a resounding YES, but the particular responses are very amusing. To summarize:

    1) Bush is a stupid meany!

    2) Why is Bush harping on Kerry’s war record when he was a shirking AWOL deserter?

    2a) Why does *anyone* care about what happened 35 years ago?

    3) The SBVT are a bunch of liars!

    3a) Fahrenheit 9/11 was OK because Michael Moore tells the truth! Whereas the SBVT are liars!

    4) We should promote the cause of Free Speech by banning it! (I particularly commend the detailed plan of Abraham of Oxford, USA. That might be Oxford, Mississippi, if they have one in his universe.)

       0 likes

  5. StinKerr says:
    August 25, 2004 at 8:42 am

    It could also be Oxford, Ohio. There is a swarm of moonbats there.

    They seem to be featuring that picture of Kerry being decorated. Every article seems to have that one at the top. I’m wondering if that’s Elmo Zumwalt hanging the medal on him.

    Still no results on the Christmas in Cambodia story.

       0 likes

  6. JohninLondon says:
    August 25, 2004 at 1:15 pm

    Nowhere has the BBC reported that Kerry has had to back down on three of the Swiftees’ claims – the first Purple Heart, the Silver Cross and Cambodia. Let alone his monstrous slur on Vietnam comrades back in 1971.

       0 likes

  7. rob says:
    August 25, 2004 at 8:26 pm

    Kerry appears incredibly arrogant or stupid. With his track record of returning from Vietnam & accusing vets of atrocities, he now addresses the vets with this –

    “Like veterans of all wars past, today’s fighting men and women deserve our prayers and support, and then when they come home, they deserve the respect and welcome of a grateful nation.”

    Must be enough for some of his audience to give him a lukewarm response.

       0 likes

  8. StinKerr says:
    August 27, 2004 at 3:36 am

    That lukewarm response would include some vets standing with their backs to him when he spoke at the VFW (Veterans of Foreign Wars) convention. Some of the vets on the stage refused to shake his hand and many sat on their hands when applause was expected. According to the news sources that reported on this “Kerry was visibly shaken” backstage after his speech.

       0 likes