Nice to see that as long as you repeat the party line, and ask the right questions even a gay escort can be given full press credentials and be welcomed into White House press conferences:
salon.com/news/feature/2005/ … index.html
Bring on the obfuscating and back-pedalling, Washington Times, Fox News and Bill O’Reilly.
I find the homophobia exhibited by the Left, hypocritical at best.
Nice joke Comrade. You’re very funny. :bravo:
The article, and my post had nothing to do with homophobia. It had everything to do with the hypocritical Bush administration.
I see that the term ‘Republican Media Whore’ has ceased to be an insult and simply become a straight-forward job description…
And how it ties into the religion thread: (more than one paragraph, but theyre short.)
[quote]Everyone is still missing the point of the story. The story is not, as nitwits like Howie Kurtz maintain, that people are being mean to someone just because he’s conservative. The story is not that Gannon is a hypocrite for promoting an anti-gay agenda. The story is not even that the White House gave such access to a reporter for a dummy news service operating under an assumed name, and may have used him to expose Valerie Plame. This is not the story.
The story is that God exists.
Think about it: what are the chances that a media whore like Gannon would turn out to be an actual whore? It’s impossible. It boggles the mind how infinitely unlikely this is. It’s like if you found someone pirating CDs, and it turns out he actually had a peg leg and a parrot on his shoulder and sailed around the Caribbean saying “arrrrrr!” and plundering booty. You wouldn’t believe it. But there it is: impossible, but true. Impossible truths are miracles, and only God can work miracles. Ergo, God exists. Q.E.D.[/quote]
yes, the bush administration should definitely screen better to keep gay men with deviant sexual tastes away from press conferences. 
Ah, a fine opportunity for some Forumosan prejuduce to be aired…
There seem to be certain predictable responses missing here. With Mapo and Mod banned, that only leaves one more that I can think of.
[edit: sorry, didn’t mean to imply there was a collective prejuduce of any kind going on. I was referring to Bush-luvin posters focussing on the “gay” aspect of this story, whereas in fact, the greater question is how this man got full press credentials, was allowed into White House press conferences and was chosen to ask questions – which coincedentally(!) were softballs to a one. But, thanks for the phobia voacb tip Chaon! 
]
Would that be the Forumosan prejudice against journalists, or the prejudice against manwhores? And is there a corresponding phobia? Gigolophobia? Heebitchitus? I mean, there is Cypridophobia for fear of prostitutes, but I’m not sure that applies to gay hookers.
maybe we reference the “gay” aspect of the story because the thread is titled “gay escort”?
aren’t YOU the one focusing needlessly on the “gay” aspect of the story? :help:
without the gay aspect, what do you have? some guy asks softball questions at press conferences. omg! stop the presses! 
Well, what do we have? Bending of nearly all normal press-accreditation rules by the White House to let in a “journalist” who seems to be working as a whore. Last I knew, working as a whore (gay or straight, it doesn’t particularly matter to me) wasn’t exactly legal work.
Reporters normally have to undergo a couple of levels of scrutiny before they’re allowed to attend White House press briefings: 1) to be accredited for Capitol Hill work (requiring its own checks); 2) an extensive multi-month background check. Normally, journalists also have to work for independent news media – cited as a problem with Gannon when he was refused Capitol Hill press credentials. Normally, journalists reporting from the White House don’t work under false names, as Mr. Guckert apparently felt he needed to when he started working as “Gannon”.
The White House apparently let Gannon in for briefings before his “news organization” even existed – CSPAN screenshots show him on Feb. 28, 2003.
Add in the Gannon/Guckert’s emerging role in the Valerie Plame matter, and we’re left wondering why on earth the Bushies were showing CIA documents to a “reporter”, working under a fake name, who had not undergone a background check. For that matter, one may wonder why any reporter is being shown secret documents about Plame, but given how the Bush investigation and jailing of almost everybody but Novak and “Gannon” has proceeded, I don’t expect any answers soon.
Now, one might think the Bush administration had simply screwed up (common enough in this administration) without partisan motives, except for the fact that the rules have been bent for someone who parrots the administration line, copying text directly from White House press releases into his own reports. This isn’t a matter of getting mad at a softball-question reporter, this is the Bush administration going to wacky lengths to get a sycophant in the room.
I guess an independent press and the free flow of information is too much for Republicans to handle. The “whore” part simply clarifies the qualities that Bush prefers in his reporters – a man who is willing to bend over backwards (or forwards) to ensure White House spin is given unquestioning coverage.
[quote=“Flipper”]
without the gay aspect, what do you have? some guy asks softball questions at press conferences. omg! stop the presses! [/quote]
Uh, no, you also have a phony reporter working for a phony news agency who lies and hypocritically blasted gays on his Web site while working as a gay prostitute. I can only laugh and laugh at this whole mess. Sorry Christian fundamentalist GOP voters–you’ve been used and had.
The hard-core Republicans who post in the IP thread are so noticeably silent about this big pink elephant. What’s the matter boys?
[quote=“Flicka”][quote=“Flipper”]
without the gay aspect, what do you have? some guy asks softball questions at press conferences. omg! stop the presses! [/quote]
Uh, no, you also have a phony reporter working for a phony news agency who lies and hypocritically blasted gays on his Web site while working as a gay prostitute. I can only laugh and laugh at this whole mess. Sorry Christian fundamentalist GOP voters–you’ve been used and had.
The hard-core Republicans who post in the IP thread are so noticeably silent about this big pink elephant. What’s the matter boys?[/quote]
Pink elephants are the rarest of the elephant breeds. They are highly sought after by royalty as a good omen and are very expensive. The Thai Royal Family keeps hundreds in their palace grounds.
[quote=“Flicka”]
The hard-core Republicans who post in the IP thread are so noticeably silent about this big pink elephant. What’s the matter boys?[/quote]
Funny how the only people here who attack others for being gay are Democrats. You want it to be open season on queers at Forumosa?
Comrade,
I believe you may be very ably demonstrating the trick that the Bushies used to excellent effect against John Kerry.
Make accusations, force the Democrat into a corner (and if he’s pompous and rambling like Kerry) watch himself try to defend his record on the question and make an ass of himself while the important issue/question is lost.
Mafogongren as well as Flicka have written why this case matters, and it is up to the Republicans to explain this. The important issue here is not whether or not homophobic Democrats are trying to turn Forumosa into a free-for-all but that the White House gave carte blanche to a fake reporter who also happened to be a whore, and a gay whore. Need I remind you that Bush hasn’t exactly been the best friend of gay rights advocates.
[quote=“rooftop”]
Mafogongren as well as Flicka have written why this case matters, and it is up to the Republicans to explain this. The important issue here is not whether or not homophobic Democrats are trying to turn Forumosa into a free-for-all but that the White House gave carte blanche to a fake reporter who also happened to be a whore, and a gay whore. Need I remind you that Bush hasn’t exactly been the best friend of gay rights advocates.[/quote]
Has it proven he was a whore? Is he really a “fake” reporter? If so,is he any more fake than Dan Rather, Eason Jordon or Peter Arnett? Funny how you guys are so quiet about the REAL whores.
yes, the white house should employ more stringent standards for accreditation. intensive background checks and maybe even ask the fbi to look into the prospective “reporter’s” past.
ok, now we’re agreed.
now what were you guys going ballistic over? oh yeah, the guy’s a gay whore!!!
rooftop, your posts on this thread are really hypocritical. you admonish republicans for focusing on the “gay aspect”, don’t say anything when flicka focuses on the “gay aspect”, and then spend a whole post…you guessed it…focusing on the “gay aspect”.
yeah, used and snookered by a sneaky gay deviant. that’ll teach them to be homophobic! oh wait…
democrats take such delight in outting homosexuals and celebrating their downfall. i think republicans quite enjoy just sitting back and watching.
Flipper,
Did I spend a whole post focussing on a the gay angle? I thought I was writing about something different.
Sorry. I must be homophobic. That’ll be news to quite a few people, including myself.
Admittedly, the title of this thread is tabloid-esque (what homophobe would use that suffix, I ask you?) but my intention was to show the contrast between a very sanctimonious, religious administration that on one hand, treats gays and lesbians as the spawn of Satan and yet, on the other, will take a manwhore (who’s gayness – to me anyway isn’t all that important) and dress him up as a legitimate correspondent. Then, they give him full credentials and access, etc. But, this has been said before by me and others on this very thread.
It bears repeating though, that it’s the LIE, the hypocrisy that alarms me, not the man and those he’s serviced, though it does all seem rather Shakesperean/nemesis-like in just HOW extreme the man’s professional and private live are opposed to the Bush Admin’s position.
[quote=“Flipper”]yes, the white house should employ more stringent standards for accreditation. intensive background checks and maybe even ask the fbi to look into the prospective “reporter’s” past.
ok, now we’re agreed.
[/quote]
Not so fast there, Flipper.
This wasn’t a simple case of oversight. It was planned. They’ve been caught. Explanations please.
I’m sorry how was all this planned? Did I miss something? And how is all this connected to Valerie Plame? I am totally lost. What is the big beef (intentional) about this?