“lacksadascial?”
Yes. Lacksadascial. Much like my attention to my spelling.
The word is lackadaisical. This email story is upsetting, but let’s not forget what really counts: spelling and grammar. 
The scandal is that the Republicans in Congress saw the originals of these emails two months before Jon Karl revealed them. Of course Jon Carl should have known they were shown to many members of Congress who could take notes.
Did Carl go to a Dem Congressman to see their notes.
Nope, Karl jumped on the Scandal Mongering when he chose a headline something like… Whites House Talking Points were Scrubbed… One of the big ‘buzz words’ of scandal.
12 times… 12 times… My GOD the white House scrubbed the talking points 12 times.
Some Republicans know that is a lie… but remain silent..
hey know it was the CIA that drafted statement about the spontaneous demonstration and Victoria Nuland did not force those words in.
HERE IS THE PROOF:
This was reveled to the public when the White House released the emails:
I wish I had time to study the transcripts of all the right wing pundits and politicians like Rush who was specific enough to declare that the original CIA talking points did not contain the word “MOVIE”..
That is because he knows that the CIA wrote what they have blamed on Obama’s people for 8 months.
To a ditto head… .that is proof that the White House scrubbed it.
Of course the CIA gave the Obama Administration the stuff about the spontaneous demonstration and all that.
What is a “dittohead” and can NFBW please decide on whether he’s attacking “Karl” or “Carl”?
Do you have an opinion or something to add to the discussion?
Of course I do. Anyway, are you attacking “Carl” or “Karl” and what is a “dittohead”?
A dittohead is the name for someone who watches Rush Limbaugh’s show. It’s their own term, BTW. It comes from Limbaugh’s fans’ use of the word “ditto” to avoid wasting airtime on banal pleasantries, like “How are you,” “I love your show,” “I want to ask you a question,” etc. This came from one guy who once said “Ditto what the other caller said.”
It’s also used as a pejorative against people who watch the show and just “ditto” (i.e. parrot) what Limbaugh says. And it’s gotten broader to cover any right wing host or even some politicians.
Do we get to see what it is?
Well, I never watch ABC news and rarely watch CNN. The only real local channel in the South Bay is NBC, so they get my business even if I’m watching the national news.
I get my news mostly from the newspaper, PBS and the internet. I don’t need to know who JK is to be well informed, and maybe people have seen him but his name didn’t stick. Rather was old school, before the 24 hour news cycle and the internet, plus he was on 60 Minutes.
I’d never heard of Jonathan Karl either. If you asked me to guess I would have said he was a celebrity psychic.
The error in the Rather thing wasn’t just Rather’s; lots of people shared the blame, but it was his face on the story and he was in charge. Karl’s error appears to have been his alone.
Whether that makes it a smaller or larger scandal is open to debate I suppose.
Plus CBS put their story out even after several of their experts refused to vouch for the authenticity of the documents. They were pretty obviously hoping to swing the election before their fraud was found out.
Burkett only agreed to hand over the forged documents if the network would arrange a conversation with the Kerry campaign. Cite. So it was much more clearly an effort to try to unseat a President, thru foul means.
Regards,
Shodan
I’m sure this is obvious to you, but what they were actually hoping to do was report a big story.
I agree with Marley. CBS was mostly interested in getting a scoop, which would mean beating the other networks and getting more advertising dollars. Swinging the election in favour of the candidate their anchorman preferred was just gravy.
I don’t watch ABC or CNN or local news myself, or even read the local newspaper. I get my news from the internet, but I guess I read so many blogs that link to ABC, or that include regular critiques of mainstream media reports that I’ve seen his name a lot.
I probably wouldn’t have been able to pick him out of a lineup, but I’m familiar with his name. Again, I’m not saying he’s of the status of Dan Rather, but I do object to the attempt to diminish the story by pretending that he’s some no-name guy.
Because the anchorman runs the news division and therefore the network, or something. It would’ve been a significant story but the assumption that it would have thrown the election - or that anybody involved believed it could do so - doesn’t hold up in my opinion.
As long as the story hurt Bush, sure.
[QUOTE=Andy Rooney, in a speech at Tufts University, ]
There’s no question they wanted to run it because it was negative towards Bush.
[/QUOTE]
Cite.
Regards,
Shodan
Andy Rooney? He once did a story about how he falls asleep on the bus. I’m not sure he’s the go-to authority on the goings on in the news division.
Your cite is Andy Rooney, the guy who got paid to spout off about irrelevant nonsense and had nothing to do with the story?