Comments on: Chuck Philips Hits Rock Bottom

By: DRJ

DRJ — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 00:49:30 +0000

Dubya,

Are you being sarcastic? I thought Mary Mapes was one of the journalists who did not follow up on the John Doe #2 angle.

By: trentk269

trentk269 — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 23:57:19 +0000

The simple fact that Mary wound up at The Nation says it all: paranoid, hyperpartisan, unprofessional. Great way to end a career.

By: dubya

dubya — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 20:35:04 +0000

Oh, yeah. Mary Mapes “uncovers” stories nobody else in MSM is interested in… same as she “uncovered” the story of John Doe #2 in the Oklahoma City bombing.

What a doofus!

By: SPQR

SPQR — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 16:22:26 +0000

The critics of Bush, while claiming that we are dishonest or dumb, almost universally do two things: (1) lie about the statements the Bush administration made and (2) demonstrate that they have a poor understanding of events themselves.

It would be comical were it not going on 5 years of the same moronic act now.

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 16:08:07 +0000

I know, but I’d still like to hear one of these moonbats explain why they think anyone trying to sell a war based on documents purporting to show Saddam had purchased significant quantities of uranium would intentionally understate his case by merely stating that foreign intel had determined he “sought” them.

By: JD

JD — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 13:10:30 +0000

Xrlq – Those are the same people that believed that President Bush was linking Saddam to 9/11 by saying Saddam was not linked to 9/11.

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 10:51:05 +0000

Xrlq, you numbskull, if the documents were so insignificant, why did our Commander-in-Chief choose to use them as evidence to get us into this war (and then have to retract them later)? Maybe you should have been writing his speeches…

Psyberian, you numbskull, if anyone in the Administration relied on those obviously forged documents, as you claim, why isn't there a shred of evidence out there to prove it? Lemme guess, you're probably one of those leftards who think that President Bush's (in-)famous "16 words" from the State of the Union speech were:

Some totally not forged documents show Saddam purchasing a shitload of yellowcake in Niger, and stuff.

Not exactly.

By: SPQR

SPQR — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 02:24:47 +0000

Psyberian, the evidence of Iraq’s interest in yellowcake from Africa existed distinct from the forged documents. You are the numbskull.

By: Psyberian

Psyberian — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 01:53:54 +0000

Quite the contrary, the liberal media did its job quite admirably, by conning you into believing that the obviously forged documents have anything to do with the fact that Saddam was seeking yellowcake in Niger.

Xrlq, you numbskull, if the documents were so insignificant, why did our Commander-in-Chief choose to use them as evidence to get us into this war (and then have to retract them later)? Maybe you should have been writing his speeches…

By: fouse, gary c

fouse, gary c — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 00:00:01 +0000

Reading Mary Mapes article in The Nation reveals what a true ideologue she is-all the livid adjectives applied to Bush, the White House and conservatives in general. Her language gives her away as someone who could never be a professional, objective journalist. Mapes, Phillips and the LA Times are all part of the same cabal-people who in Mapes’ own words are those willing to “take a chance” with a story.

Take a chance on the truth? And these people have the effrontery to lament that the public no longer trusts what they write.