Secret Service observations and impressions

[ceo]

Read the OP again. You think no one had anything bad to say about any Repub or his wife, and had only bad to say about every dem and his wife, because that's the way it really is???
Or perhaps, that is just selectivity of quote selection (if not fabrication) to paint a picture the author wants to paint?

You think if you could find 10 SS guys from Jimmy Carter's era, not one guy would say one good thing about him? Not even he was kinda nice, he loved his wife, anything??????

And not one guy would say one bad thing about Bush? that he was kinda dumb, anything???????

Etc.

Dude you even noticed the bias in the piece and brought up Spiro Agnew. No one mentioned he was a convicted felon? No one mentioned Nixons cover up, his disgrace, only that he had a bad relationship with his family??????

Lets not quibble over the obvious.

Why don't you do a little independent investigation, or hell, read the book yourself. You don't have to buy it, I'm sure the library would have a copy. From what I've read it's not all bad for Dems and all good for Repubs.

What about:
"Nancy Reagan's cold, controlling habits." <--I'd call that "something bad to say about a repub's wife"

Or:
"Miss Lillian Carter delivering a six-pack to the Secret Service boys (dutifully refused)" <--That sounds like something pretty cool said about a Dem's wife.

What about this:
"When agents refused to drive friends of Dick Cheney’s daughter Mary to restaurants, she got her detail leader removed." <--Sounds like a real bitch to me.

The book tells of the Bush girls ditching SS Agents and going bar hopping (not exactly positive behavior for presidents daughters). But we all knew that. A lot of the stuff told was known already JFK and LBJ's philandering especially.

President Ford was apparently, "the cheapest guy they ever saw."

Agents "considered Nixon's son-in-law David Eisenhower, grandson of former President Dwight Eisenhower, the most clueless person they had ever protected."

The book is a collection of opinions. It's like looking at a gossip column in "Us Weekly" or some similar magazine. If you like to read that sort of stuff, great. If not, that's cool too. But you should probably read it before you speak so definitively and absolutely about it.

The author perhaps is politically biased, but who cares? Most everyone is anyway. But you are getting all bent out of shape over this and it's laughable. Take it for what it is.

 

[machine23]

CEO no one does independent investigations or research. That's the sad truth. Ppl get their info from the media. If they don't hear it on tv it's not true.

 

[Headholio]

But you should probably read it before you speak so definitively and absolutely about it.

I made it clear I commented on the post, not on the book. Read my last entry.
The OP is totally slanted. Whether or not it represents the book, I don't know and I'm not really interested.

Hansel's comment on the excepts in the OP are this:

I personally can't say I'm surprised by the contrast of liberal vs. conservative-

Too bad, I called out the obvious bias, not only in the quotes selected from the book, but in Hansel based on that comment.

The author perhaps is politically biased, but who cares? Most everyone is anyway. But you are getting all bent out of shape over this and it's laughable. Take it for what it is.

I'm not getting bent out of shape, I just called the OP what it is, biased. The author of the book probably is too, and I do not care. I did take it for what it is - biased. It seems the righties are the ones having the problem accepting it for what it is, not me.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

Read the OP again. You think no one had anything bad to say about any Repub or his wife, and had only bad to say about every dem and his wife, because that's the way it really is???
Or perhaps, that is just selectivity of quote selection (if not fabrication) to paint a picture the author wants to paint?

You think if you could find 10 SS guys from Jimmy Carter's era, not one guy would say one good thing about him? Not even he was kinda nice, he loved his wife, anything??????

And not one guy would say one bad thing about Bush? that he was kinda dumb, anything???????

Etc.

Dude you even noticed the bias in the piece and brought up Spiro Agnew. No one mentioned he was a convicted felon? No one mentioned Nixons cover up, his disgrace, only that he had a bad relationship with his family??????

Lets not quibble over the obvious.

Once again, because thanks to the *vast majority* of media coverage everyone already knew about their flaws. Obviously that wasn't the same for the Dem's as pointed out by their guards. The whole point about its "bias" was to see the side of them that no one seemed to know about. Once again, for obvious reasons.

Denying the liberal slant present in mainstream media is akin to denying the liberal slant in Hollywood or the music industry. You could fill a book with all their libs. Conservatives have Fox News, Clint Eastwood and Ted Nugent.

 

[EnderJE]

I don't really feel like reading the book. Who is secretly gay?

 

[ceo]

Obviously we critiquing the post, not the book. For all I know, the book could be completely left leaning, and the OP just took quotes to give it a rightward slant.

How dumb was Bush could be a whole new thread.
He read 200 books a year? You believe that? That's 4 per week dude. That would be a complete deriliction of duty even if it was true. I hope he didn't have that much free time on his hands, but that might explain a lot actually.

Maybe he is a very fast reader? My dad could read through a book in a couple hours. He could read 4 or 5 books in a day. You may not believe me but I don't have any reason to lie. You read enough and you get very good, and very fast at it. My dad was a very fast reader with a very high comprehension percentage rate.

You made it clear you commented on the post, not the book in the post you made that was posted 11 minutes before mine. Problem is you didn't make it clear before that, and I actually started my post well before you posted yours, but I got distracted and had to leave and come back to it. So by the time you made it so clear, I basically had already written my post telling you you are getting bent out of shape (IMO).

I based my opinion on the fact you were saying hansel is brainwashed by Fox News, and devaluing the entire United States Secret Service, among whom are some of the most elite of the military by asking (rhetorically?) if they are "a suitable source for judging a President's morality or competence anyway?"

You just seem so angry about all of this.

 

[EnderJE]

Maybe he is a very fast reader? My dad could read through a book in a couple hours. He could read 4 or 5 books in a day. You may not believe me but I don't have any reason to lie. You read enough and you get very good, and very fast at it. My dad was a very fast reader with a very high comprehension percentage rate.

You made it clear you commented on the post, not the book in the post you made that was posted 11 minutes before mine. Problem is you didn't make it clear before that, and I actually started my post well before you posted yours, but I got distracted and had to leave and come back to it. So by the time you made it so clear, I basically had already written my post telling you you are getting bent out of shape (IMO).

I based my opinion on the fact you were saying hansel is brainwashed by Fox News, and devaluing the entire United States Secret Service, among whom are some of the most elite of the military by asking (rhetorically?) if they are "a suitable source for judging a President's morality or competence anyway?"

You just seem so angry about all of this.

 

[nangiggles]

CEO no one does independent investigations or research. That's the sad truth. Ppl get their info from the media. If they don't hear it on tv it's not true.

Not all of us are dumbasses who watch reality shows all day and never pick up a paper or do a search online... Good Lord you must hang out with really stupid people if you have this opinion

 

[canadianhitman]

Michelle Obama: RACIST!

Michelle Obama 'Distressed' About Power Held in IL by 'White Irish Catholic' Families - Michelle Obama - Fox Nation

 

[brownbrown]

Michelle Obama: RACIST!

Michelle Obama 'Distressed' About Power Held in IL by 'White Irish Catholic' Families - Michelle Obama - Fox Nation

Fucking Racist Michelle Obama! Going off and marrying a half white blackguy and having kids with him!
Shes a hidden Black panther member!!!!


btw: Foxnation?

DrOiD BioNiC EF App!