SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (96423)2/23/2005 8:51:29 PM
From: epicure  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 108807
 
ROFL
"the problem with Gannon/Guckert was he was pro-Bush and not anti-Bush "

I can't decide if you believe the stuff you post, or if you are really a democratic hack, out to make republicans look silly.

I'm leaning toward democratic hack, at the moment.



To: Brumar89 who wrote (96423)2/23/2005 10:30:27 PM
From: The Philosopher  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 108807
 

The guy wasn't a spurious reporter.

On the contrary. Now that Izzy Stone and Jack Anderson are dead, EVERY reporter is a spurious reporter.



To: Brumar89 who wrote (96423)2/24/2005 8:31:20 AM
From: Bill  Respond to of 108807
 
POST OF THE WEEK.

Thanks, Brumar.



To: Brumar89 who wrote (96423)2/24/2005 10:29:41 AM
From: cosmicforce  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 108807
 
<the way the liberals got him.> Pure hypocrisy.

No, he did it all himself. Ignores the question about how security is so lax at the WH. Gannon got himself with lame-ass softball Rush Limbaugh-derived questions that made everyone go "Who is this guy?"


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News