Sunday, September 24, 2006

Reuters Reporter Fails To Cite 9/11 Commission Report, Creates False Debate On Clinton

Joanne Morrison of Reuters, please get your story right.

In your article about Bill Clinton you say the following: "Earlier this month, Clinton dismissed as 'indisputably wrong' a U.S. television show that suggested (he) was too distracted by the Monica Lewinsky scandal to confront the Islamic militant threat that culminated in the September 11 attacks."

Bill Clinton didn't "dismiss" the allegations. The September 11 Commission Report dismissed the allegations, and had you read even one single story about that entire debacle you'd have known this. The way your story is currently written presents the issue as he-said she-said, when in fact, Clinton wasn't the one rebutting the allegations, the 9/11 Commission Report states categorically that the allegations have no basis in fact. You set up a false equivalence that lessens Clinton's claim and strengthens those who defamed him. Which is more than ironic since the story itself is about FOX News trying to defame Clinton by rewriting history.

Ms. Morrison, what you wrote is not fair, it's not correct, and it misleads the reader into thinking the issue is somehow murky when it definitively is not. Please correct your article.

-- AMERICAblog, Sept. 23

9 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hakuna Makaka lunatic left. I thought BJ dismissed the fact he had sex with that woman. As we all know a BJ on BJ is not sex. Therefore it cannot be called oral sex. Its oral something, we just don't know what that something is. And as soon as we find out what the definition of is is, everything should make sense. I would also like to know if you smoke pot and don't inhale are you really smoking pot? I know guys who smoke cigars and don't inhale so are they really smoking cigars. Yet if you pass that cigar through a set of lips that don't have a tongue or teeth is it really in a mouth? Lastly, I would like to know why you libs have such a fascination with adulterers. You prop scumbags like Klinton and McGreevey up high enough to kiss their ass when you should kick them in the balls. Figuratively speaking of course. Well, maybe not.

9:25 AM  
Blogger Crystal said...

Presidents are human too. If you would like to be so hard-nosed about your own questionable personal actions, then by all means. To be forgiven you must forgive. We all do things we wish we hadn't to fulfill some need we feel important in some way or another. It is what it is.
I've found that those the most intolerant of other's weaknesses, are the most guilty.
He lied about screwin around on his wife... how many men would be crusified for that? Plenty. We're all human.

1:56 PM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

The issue, of course, has nothing to do with Clinton/Lewinsky.

It has to do whether a reporter chooses to use an authoritative source, the 9/11 commission report, or whether the reporter would prefer to make it a he-said/she-said event.

The reporter screwed up. Your blind hatred of all things Clinton prevents you from understanding the subtlety, Mr. Anonymous.

2:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

rob you blinded misguided fool. If it has nothing to do with Klinton/Lewinsky then why did the webmaster decide to put a picture of the two of them on this subject. Did he just want to remember the good old days?

Crystal when we all just say "presidents are human too" you are justifying bad behavior because this person is in public office? Its wrong to cheat on your spouse. I realize you libs hate everything God, the commandments and morality stands for, but when you go before God and take the vows, you are expected to uphold the vows. If a man is lead into temptation by another woman he is not a man. But you libs will justify any form of adultery. Clinton gets a blowjob, you libs say oh come on, everyone does it. McGreevey cheats on his wife in a sick and twisted way and you libs say he is just being honest with himself. Here is another interesting article. See if you can get through it to the end.

Liberals are always cheering for the wrong people.

Have you ever noticed?

In our war on islamo-facism they ask America to withdraw. When Hugo Chavez smells sulfur at the United Nations, liberal democratic Senators "understand" him (i.e. Tom Harkin). But no one is a liberal's hero the way an adulterer is.

You would think in a world shaped by modern liberal feminists that liberal media types and liberal politicians would be rushing to the aid of the poor wife and kids offering them welfare and state-funded counseling and beating the offending man to within an inch of his life. But not so.

The original love affair with adultery happened with the former President who to this day can not be offered a cigar without a range of comments flooding through people's minds. Yet by comparison William Jefferson Clinton's adultery was a little bland, even unimpressive by the new superhero, extra-marital fornicators of our time.

Who are they? Men who engage in same-gender sexual activities!

This is why Bishop Eugene Robinson of the now nearly defunct Episcopal church is revered by those on the political left. "He was true to himself," they say with almost breathless whisper - as if this act of discovering his belly button was some form of epic courage.

Forget the fact that he has ruined an entire denomination of Christian faith, the fact that he can go home at night and engage in sick sexual perversion makes him a legend amongst the political left.

But now there's a new kid on the scene. Having done all he could to ruin the state of New Jersey - a state he took a solemn oath to protect and serve - the new adulterer that liberals all love is Jim McGreevey. Just in the last week alone he's held hands with Oprah, and shared New Jersey rest area secrets with Matt Lauer.

He's also invoked God's name about three hundred times.

And now he says, "it's all about telling the truth."

But I'd like to know, "since when?"

It wasn't important enough for the Governor to keep his pants zipped after pledging to do so before God and man... with his wife... twice!

There was no commitment to "telling the truth" or "confessing" (a reference to the poorly titled book the ex-governor is now pimping) when he's arriving home from the busy day in Trenton and telling his wife and child everything but the truth - only then to whisk himself away under the late night guise of more work to go have an anonymous tryst with psychopaths along turnpike hide-a-ways.

Enough!

There is no need to tell us about the prayer cards you read before you made your big press conference announcing your resignation.

While Oprah, Lauer, McGreevey, and the throngs of democrats who "support" him may be holding hands singing Kumbayah - some adult needs to come along and ask a few serious questions.

Questions like why should you be praised for your "honesty" now when you are putting sexual pleasure ahead of the security of the state you served? Who can trust you after you named a lover to the post of homeland security czar who was neither an American citizen, nor was qualified to even attend homeland security meetings?

But what about the deeper questions that no one ever asks these jokers?

Robinson, McGreevey, and even Clinton to a certain degree became sympathetic figures because of this "true to your self" mantra. But in the grown-up world don't we try to instruct our boys that the definition of a hero is someone who overcomes his own natural fears to accomplish more, and be more, and do more than they think is possible? Isn't it good to teach our young men that when they enter into a marriage that they should strive to be their family's superhero?

Isn't it a healthy thing for a father to leave the home in the morning thinking, "I'm going to go slay the dragons of this world so that my family, and the sacredness of my home won't be victimized by the evil in the world?"

One of McGreevey's actual excuses, as relayed on Lauer's interview was to blame his parents for being bad role models - because they themselves did not engage in homosexual activity.

Is he listening to himself? Did he want them to?

If they had - HE would not even be here!

In the whole spin cycle of garbage about sexual behavior and why we're "made a certain way" we forget that choices are made for every single action taken. With Clinton the issue was "come on every body does it." With Robinson and McGreevey its simply, "I'm being true to myself."

In truth its selfishness coupled with the refusal to curb their sexual appetite. Its the refusal to make the choice to not be a slave to their impulses. Basically they are still little boys who do not know how to discipline themselves - only now they wish the world to feel sorry for them. And in McGreevey's case he's openly seeking to work with kids for his life's mission now.

Uh... no thank you!

I don't understand the attraction. But one thing is true - liberals love adulterers.

And today, if you break your vows of commitment to your wife and children, abandon them, and get kinky with rest stop lowlife, while simultaneously endangering the most populous state in the union - in the midst of a war on terror - you're a rock star!

2:38 PM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

The photo is there because the story references Clinton and Lewinsky. Duh.

But the issue is not whether Clinton had a BJ, was wrong to lie about his BJ, etc.

The issue is whether the reporter should have cited the 9/11 Commission Report, or made it unnecessarily into a he-said/she-said.

The rest of your rant appears to be your own fantasies of what the left is. Doesn't have much to do with the question at hand, either. You really don't need me to argue with. You can just create fictional liberals to knock down.

3:39 PM  
Blogger Crystal said...

Your opinion is very extensive I see, but it doesn't make everyone in the political spectrum subject to your religious, or be it even general beliefs. Every person is subject to his/her own convictions when it comes to personal matters such as whom they become intimate with. It's between you, yourself and god. (Yeah... I said it. God. Wow! Did I impress you with my progressive belief in God! It's a crazy idea I know.)
Understanding is the most important human trait you can nurture and intolerance breeds fanaticism. If god is whom you are trying to appease with your logic, then care to look at Christ's company? Was he wrong to hang out with prostitutes, and oh I don't know, "justify" their actions (as you claim I'm doing) by say... forgiving them?! If he is the model you are trying to portray, then do it. (Can you see this logic... or do you have a plank in your eye?)
I'm personally very proud that the country I live in doesn't stone people who deviate from their original decisions, including marriage. There are plenty of people who have divorced... maybe even you and/or people you love? That's their personal choice. Forgiveness is paramount for growth of each individual person. I don't believe I have any right judging it, even with someone in office! (God forbid.) Maybe you do?

4:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Crystal, I am not judging anyone. I am saying Clinton is a morally corrupt piece of human excrement in my eyes and I have no respect for someone who cheats on their spouse. The left loves adulterers the right calls them what they are...scumbags. And robbie, my “rant” is factual, something the libs hate.

7:59 PM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

Anonymous, you still don't get it. Your blind hatred of Clinton prevents you from actually understanding and processing the original JABBS post.

Let's try one more time: Regardless of how you feel about Clinton, the reporter should have quoted the 9/11 Commission Report as an authoritative resource, rather than suggesting there were two sides to the debate.

1:07 AM  
Blogger Crystal said...

The Clinton years were golden years and we didn't even know it. These days scare me.

2:48 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Listed on BlogShares