Still More Fake News To Slur A Deceased President.

That would be an untrue statement. WaPo couldn't bring itself to proof read the shit they initially posted as an obit for Bush41. The NYT slurred Bush41 with its FAKE NEWS lie. And the AP initially and wholly ignored Bush41's WWII service while highlighting his loss to Slick Willie in 92. Then Slate published an article attacking Bush41's service dog, Sully. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Wow one publication rushed to publish his death and didn't proof read... another brought up a factor in his 92 loss and Slate talked less than glowing about a service dog he had less than 6 months.

How egregious!:s hakehead:

That would be an untrue statement. WaPo couldn't bring itself to proof read the shit they initially posted as an obit for Bush41. The NYT slurred Bush41 with its FAKE NEWS lie. And the AP initially and wholly ignored Bush41's WWII service while highlighting his loss to Slick Willie in 92. Then Slate published an article attacking Bush41's service dog, Sully. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Maybe the Press is the enemy of the People.Remember the golden rule, the enemy of my enemy is my BFF. Ill guarantee this bullshit wouldn't happen in Saudi Arabia without heads rolling. Papa Bush was in WWII? Our President died and you want us to show respect for a fucking handicapped dog? What has Sully ever really done.? I like dogs that arent handicapped. This whole story is Fake News

Wow one publication rushed to publish his death and didn't proof read... another brought up a factor in his 92 loss and Slate talked less than glowing about a service dog he had less than 6 months.

How egregious!:s hakehead: Originally Posted by WTF

You left out how the NYT dredged up a 26 year old lie and published it as FAKE NEWS. And no matter how you spin it, no one can justify why a lib-retard, lame-stream media outlet really needed to denigrate a bond between a man and his dog.

Maybe the Press is the enemy of the People.Remember the golden rule, the enemy of my enemy is my BFF. Ill guarantee this bullshit wouldn't happen in Saudi Arabia without heads rolling. Papa Bush was in WWII? Our President died and you want us to show respect for a fucking handicapped dog? What has Sully ever really done.? I like dogs that arent handicapped. This whole story is Fake News Originally Posted by themystic

The dog wasn't handicapped. However, those denigrating the service dog as a way to take a backhand swipe at Bush41 ... that's another question.

Wow one publication rushed to publish his death and didn't proof read... another brought up a factor in his 92 loss and Slate talked less than glowing about a service dog he had less than 6 months.

How egregious!:s hakehead: Originally Posted by WTF

Going a layer deeper on the OP, Just a fun related little known fact- Norman Joseph Woodland invented the Grocery store bar code scanner. George Bush was so amazed at the invention that in 1992 he awarded him the National Medal of Technology & Innovation

Going a layer deeper on the OP, Just a fun related little known fact- Norman Joseph Woodland invented the Grocery store bar code scanner. George Bush was so amazed at the invention that in 1992 he awarded him the National Medal of Technology & Innovation Originally Posted by themystic

WaPo reports that only people duped by a lie published (repeatedly over the course of 26 years) in a FAKE NEWS article about Bush41 -- a dead former president -- by the NYTs believe what you posted. Repeating the story without explaining that it is a lie is to propagate a lie.

So is this liar of the lie is the Truth teller?

So is this liar of the lie is the Truth teller? Originally Posted by themystic

Not in the real world, as reported by WaPo, Snopes and the Daily Wire regarding the FAKE NEWS story published by the NYT about Bush41 26 years ago and again after his death. The NYT's FAKE NEWS story was a lie 26 years ago. It's a lie today. And it always will be a lie.

You left out how the NYT dredged up a 26 year old lie and published it as FAKE NEWS. And no matter how you spin it, no one can justify why a lib-retard, lame-stream media outlet really needed to denigrate a bond between a man and his dog.




The dog wasn't handicapped. However, those denigrating the service dog as a way to take a backhand swipe at Bush41 ... that's another question.

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

That's a good cartoon and true. I did say good stuff about him when he was alive but not a lot. I couldn't stand most of his Evangelical BS but I did like that he had a degree of integrity. He reminds a lot of Obama concerning integrity

Not in the real world, as reported by WaPo, Snopes and the Daily Wire regarding the FAKE NEWS story published by the NYT about Bush41 26 years ago and again after his death. The NYT's FAKE NEWS story was a lie 26 years ago. It's a lie today. And it always will be a lie. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

It is not a lie to report that it had an effect (perceived or otherwise) on the 92 election.

Whether it was a lie or not is irrelevant. The perception at the time was that it was the truth.

It is not a lie to report that it had an effect (perceived or otherwise) on the 92 election.

Whether it was a lie or not is irrelevant. The perception at the time was that it was the truth. Originally Posted by WTF

No. That's not true. The NYT's FAKE NEWS article about Bush41 was discredited as a lie in 1992, but some people enjoy being snookered if it fits their lib-retard agenda to be snookered. But per the OP, the real issue isn't that the lie was circulated in 1992, rather it is that the NYT chose to publish the FAKE NEWS lie again after Bush41's death.

That's a good cartoon and true. I did say good stuff about him when he was alive but not a lot. I couldn't stand most of his Evangelical BS but I did like that he had a degree of integrity. He reminds a lot of Obama concerning integrity Originally Posted by themystic

Odumbo had no integrity.

[COLOR="Black"]No. That's not true. The NYT's FAKE NEWS article about Bush41 was discredited as a lie in 1992, but some people enjoy being snookered if it fits their lib-retard agenda to be snookered. But per the OP, the real issue isn't that the lie was circulated in 1992, rather it is that the NYT chose to publish the FAKE NEWS lie again after Originally Posted by I B Hankering

He, partly because the perception was that he was out of touch with the common person.
If that is all the so called bad press he gets this week, you have nothing to cry about.

Wait until Carter dies and see how much misconception is spewed.

He, partly because the perception was that he was out of touch with the common person. Originally Posted by WTF

But that was a FAKE NEWS lie propagated by the lame-stream media that was the NYT against the sitting president, Bush41, then, just as it is a FAKE NEWS lie still being propagated -- 26 years later -- by the NYT this week against a dead former president.

Jimmy the Peanut? It was only in the last five years or so that I learned that Jimmy the Peanut never finished his studies in nuclear power plant operation. The lame-stream, pro-lib-retard media had everyone believing Jimmy the Peanut had a PhD in nuclear engineering when he ran for office.

Jimmy the Peanut? It was only in the last five years or so that I learned that Jimmy the Peanut never finished his studies in nuclear power plant operation. The lame-stream, pro-lib-retard media had everyone believing Jimmy the Peanut had a PhD in nuclear engineering when he ran for office. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

so, Jimmy fibbed that he had PHD in nuclear physics.


what a peanut farmer!!! lol!

[QUOTE=dilbert firestorm;1061115315]so, Jimmy fibbed that he had PHD in nuclear physics.


As IB would say, read the OP. Just kidding Dilbert

But that was a FAKE NEWS lie propagated by the lame-stream media that was the NYT against the sitting president, Bush41, then, just as it is a FAKE NEWS lie still being propagated -- 26 years later -- by the NYT this week against a dead former president.

Jimmy the Peanut? It was only in the last five years or so that I learned that Jimmy the Peanut never finished his studies in nuclear power plant operation. The lame-stream, pro-lib-retard media had everyone believing Jimmy the Peanut had a PhD in nuclear engineering when he ran for office. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Your blantant partisanship is showing under you outfit IB.

99.99% good press for Bush in the last week and you're crying about a fucking dog and scanner!

How about you cry about Trump making fun of GHWB not even 6 months ago.