Laura Bush Takes Swipe at Media Coverage

[Jason T.]

<font face="Tahoma" size="-1"><hr>WASHINGTON (Aug. 4) - First lady Laura Bush thinks the news media is increasingly filled with opinions instead of facts, and suggested Tuesday that journalists are contributing to the polarization of the country.

"I think there are a lot of reasons to be critical of the media in America," she said in an interview Tuesday with Fox News Channel's "The O'Reilly Factor."

"I think that a lot of times the media sensationalize or magnify things that aren't -that really shouldn't be," she said.

"I do think there's a big move away from actual reporting, trying to report facts," the first lady said. "It's in newspapers and everything you read - that a lot more is opinion."

When her interviewer suggested that journalists were out of sync with most of the country, she said with a laugh: "You just gave me a really great idea. Maybe it is the media that has us divided."

President Bush's mother had famously bitter relations with the news media during his father's term in office.

After the 1992 election, as Barbara Bush gave Hillary Rodham Clinton a tour of the White House she pointed to nearby reporters and told her successor: "Avoid this crowd like the plague."

<i>2004 AP</i>
<hr>
I have to say that I agree with her. I mean, I'm someone who has had a extreme-left view for quite a while, but now it seems that more and more people are trying to adopt extreme-left/right views as well. There's hardly any more 'undecided.' There's no reason for politicians to move more to the center anymore, and that's never good. :(

The Media needs to be more responsible for the influence it has. Who knew I would ever agree with a Bush? I guess there's a first time for everything. ;)</font>

[Tango]

While she declined to get into it, she did answer, when probed, that there are areas of politics that she doesn't agree with her husband on. She also avoided taking shots at anyone, when it seemed O'Reilly was looking for it. While it was a short interview, she came off as careful, thoughtful, just as Clinton did on Letterman.

[ShangriLaTroubl]

<font face="Tahoma" size="-1"><hr>The Media needs to be more responsible for the influence it has. Who knew I would ever agree with a Bush? I guess there's a first time for everything. ;)</font>


Next thing you know you'll have a Bush Cheney sign posted in your yard!

:]

Chris

[dissention]

And...her point? She appeared on The O'Reilly Factor and has the gall to criticize unfair media coverage? Gimme a f*cking break. Pickles sure is desperate to help her hubby.

[Jason T.]

Next thing you know you'll have a Bush Cheney sign posted in your yard!

Let's not get carried away here! LOL! I still extremely dislike her husband. ;)

[strandinthewind]

And...her point? She appeared on The O'Reilly Factor and has the gall to criticize unfair media coverage? Gimme a f*cking break. Pickles sure is desperate to help her hubby.

FOUL and BS - Laura Bush handled herself with dignity and class in that and every other interview I have ever seen her in - and she has been on other shows al la Larry King, etc., which are hardly Fox News. I know you have blind hatred for W and will sink to any level to spew it - but his wife has never done anything to draw that except support her husband, which even you can hardly fault her for - but you will because you hate W so much. I say beat up on W all you want, but pot shots at his wife are classless, unwarranted, beneath you.

I just hate it when First Ladies are attacked because of their husbands.

[Johnny Stew]

"I think there are a lot of reasons to be critical of the media in America," she said in an interview Tuesday with Fox News Channel's "The O'Reilly Factor."

"I think that a lot of times the media sensationalize or magnify things that aren't -that really shouldn't be," she said.

Meanwhile, Rupert Murdoch was sitting at home, thinking, "Well, DUH."

[sparky]

FOUL and BS - Laura Bush handled herself with dignity and class in that and every other interview I have ever seen her in - and she has been on other shows al la Larry King, etc., which are hardly Fox News. I know you have blind hatred for W and will sink to any level to spew it - but his wife has never done anything to draw that except support her husband, which even you can hardly fault her for - but you will because you hate W so much. I say beat up on W all you want, but pot shots at his wife are classless, unwarranted, beneath you.

I just hate it when First Ladies are attacked because of their husbands.

I personally have never heard her say anything worthy of particular scorn or derision. She has always seemed vaguely vacant, Stepford like, and basically harmless. The simple fact that she married that scumbag and sleeps with him however, is plenty of reason for me to be suspicious of everything about her identity and personality. I'm sure Jesse Helms' wife is an absolutely charming dinner party guest as well.

[strandinthewind]

I personally have never heard her say anything worthy of particular scorn or derision. She has always seemed vaguely vacant, Stepford like, and basically harmless. The simple fact that she married that scumbag and sleeps with him however, is plenty of reason for me to be suspicious of everything about her identity and personality. I'm sure Jesse Helms' wife is an absolutely charming dinner party guest as well.

I guess, but it just rubs me the wrond way when people attack her personally when she tries as in that interview to empathize with all people in the media glare. But, the world never thinks like I want it to :laugh:

[Johnny Stew]

I say beat up on W all you want, but pot shots at his wife are classless, unwarranted, beneath you.

I just hate it when First Ladies are attacked because of their husbands.

Of course she was involved in a fatal hit & run, so that might be a reason to regard her with a certain amount of reservation. :)

(I'm placing bets now on how long it takes for someone to mention Teddy Kennedy... but I've never said I was wild about him either.)

[strandinthewind]

Of course she was involved in a fatal hit & run, so that might be a reason to regard her with a certain amount of reservation. :)

(I'm placing bets now on how long it takes for someone to mention Teddy Kennedy... but I've never said I was wild about him either.)

All accounts of that exonerate her and indicate it was an accident. Please provide one peice of evidence that does not. You far lefties will go to any lengths :laugh: :cool:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/e1698.htm

I know many conspiracies abound about this. But, the facts as we know them do not support that she willfully killed anyone. Having said that, I am sure this thread will turn into a Laura B. is a conniving murderer. I hope not, but history does not support me :cool:

[sparky]

All accounts of that exonerate her and indicate it was an accident. Please provide one peice of evidence that does not. You far lefties will go to any lengths :laugh: :cool:

Anyone on any far end knows no bounds, from my experience ! :wavey:

[strandinthewind]

Anyone on any far end knows no bounds, from my experience ! :wavey:

Preach On and Amen brother Sparky :laugh: :cool:

[dissention]

FOUL and BS - Laura Bush handled herself with dignity and class in that and every other interview I have ever seen her in - and she has been on other shows al la Larry King, etc., which are hardly Fox News. I know you have blind hatred for W and will sink to any level to spew it - but his wife has never done anything to draw that except support her husband, which even you can hardly fault her for - but you will because you hate W so much. I say beat up on W all you want, but pot shots at his wife are classless, unwarranted, beneath you.

I just hate it when First Ladies are attacked because of their husbands.

Sorry, but any type of message she was trying to get across was muffled by the venue and manner in which she chose to express it. You may disagree, but going onto The O'Reilly Factor on Fox News and making statements like she did not only makes her look out of touch, but ridiculous.

[dissention]

All accounts of that exonerate her and indicate it was an accident. Please provide one peice of evidence that does not. You far lefties will go to any lengths :laugh: :cool:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/e1698.htm

I know many conspiracies abound about this. But, the facts as we know them do not support that she willfully killed anyone. Having said that, I am sure this thread will turn into a Laura B. is a conniving murderer. I hope not, but history does not support me :cool:

No, I just find it suspicious that Laura killed her boyfriend right after they borke up. I also find her association with the Bush family to raise doubts about her. But, hey, maybe she was simply a product of eugenics and thought she was being welcomed into an American dynasty. ;)

[strandinthewind]

Sorry, but any type of message she was trying to get across was muffled by the venue and manner in which she chose to express it. You may disagree, but going onto The O'Reilly Factor on Fox News and making statements like she did not only makes her look out of touch, but ridiculous.

Correct me if I am wrong :wavey: - but The Factor is one of the top rated shows in the business. I know you hate BO (I Love the way that reads :laugh: ) - but his show is very popular despite your opinion :shrug: So, I think it was wise of her to go to that highly popular venue; it makes her look in the eyes of the vast majority of people (again the show has very high ratings) in touch and far from ridiculous.

[dissention]

I guess, but it just rubs me the wrond way when people attack her personally when she tries as in that interview to empathize with all people in the media glare. But, the world never thinks like I want it to :laugh:

Yeah, she was empathizing with people. People, of course, meaning her husband and that blasted "liberal media." :rolleyes:

[strandinthewind]

No, I just find it suspicious that Laura killed her boyfriend right after they borke up. I also find her association with the Bush family to raise doubts about her. But, hey, maybe she was simply a product of eugenics and thought she was being welcomed into an American dynasty. ;)

Again, show me the money :laugh: Where is the proof? There is none.

I mean having had the chance to observe her for four years, does she look like someone who would drive her car like a bat out of hell and purposefully into her ex-boyfriend's car in a willfull and calculated attempt to kill him -0 all the while putting her friend in her car's life in peril :shrug: She hardly portrays that image :shrug: But, the conspiracy theories will abound as they always do :cool:

[dissention]

Correct me if I am wrong :wavey: - but The Factor is one of the top rated shows in the business. I know you hate BO (I Love the way that reads :laugh: ) - but his show is very popular despite your opinion :shrug: So, I think it was wise of her to go to that highly popular venue; it makes her look in the eyes of the vast majority of people (again the show has very high ratings) in touch and far from ridiculous.

What's your point? :shrug:

70% of the viewers of O'Lielly are Republicans and the rest of the audience is populated mostly of liberals who tune in to laugh at him. And he averages 2.5 million on a good night. :shrug: She was preaching to the choir and not-so-eloquently tried to turn her pro-Bush propaganda into a blanket statement about the media so the Republican lap dogs would eat it up and log onto the Free Republic to blast the "liberal media."

[strandinthewind]

Yeah, she was empathizing with people. People, of course, meaning her husband and that blasted "liberal media." :rolleyes:

No, she referred specifically to Ms. H-K. She was saying how hard it was to listen to bad things being said about your husband. I tend to agree with her - it would be hard :shrug:

[Johnny Stew]

All accounts of that exonerate her and indicate it was an accident.

I didn't say she intentionally murdered someone... I said she was involved in a fatal car accident.

And she was.

I always thought that was considered "vehicular manslaughter." :shrug:

[strandinthewind]

What's your point? :shrug:

70% of the viewers of O'Lielly are Republicans and the rest of the audience is populated mostly of liberals who tune in to laugh at him. And he averages 2.5 million on a good night. :shrug: She was preaching to the choir and not-so-eloquently tried to turn her pro-Bush propaganda into a blanket statement about the media so the Republican lap dogs would eat it up and log onto the Free Republic to blast the "liberal media."

My point is she wanted to reach a wide audience and that show let her acheive that goal. I am uncertain how you can argue it did not even if it was preaching to the choir as you assert.

[dissention]

Again, show me the money :laugh: Where is the proof? There is none.

I mean having had the chance to observe her for four years, does she look like someone who would drive her car like a bat out of hell and purposefully into her ex-boyfriend's car in a willfull and calculated attempt to kill him -0 all the while putting her friend in her car's life in peril :shrug: She hardly portrays that image :shrug: But, the conspiracy theories will abound as they always do :cool:

Proof for what? I never said she purposely killed him, don't assume or put words in my mouth, darling. I said I simply found it suspicious.

As for whether she looks like she could do it, I hear no one ever suspected that that good ole boy Ted Bundy was a serial killer. ;)

[strandinthewind]

I didn't say she intentionally murdered someone... I said she was involved in a fatal car accident.

And she was.

I always thought that was considered "vehicular manslaughter." :shrug:

Not if it was an accident - which this by all accounts was. Again, if anyone has proof that it was not, let's see it.

Manslaughter usually involves some sort of "hot blood" - it it not premeditated, it is a crime commited in the heat of the moment. But, I am unsure what the Texas statute said at that time, But, the officials did not seem to think the accident fit any crime becuase it was just that - an accident. Also, was LB a prominent person at that time? Was she involved with the Bushes then? I do not know the answer to that.

[dissention]

My point is she wanted to reach a wide audience and that show let her acheive that goal. I am uncertain how you can argue it did not even if it was preaching to the choir as you assert.

And what I'm saying is that by going on O'Lielly and Faux News, any message she was trying to get across about the "unfair" media was muffled by the venue she speaking at. She chose to speak at a right-wing propaganda machine and her comments will only serve to feed the right-wingers hate of what they believe to be a liberal media.

[Johnny Stew]

As for whether she looks like she could do it, I hear no one ever suspected that that good ole boy Ted Bundy was a serial killer. ;)

Ted Bundy was pretty darn cute. *lol*

[strandinthewind]

Proof for what? I never said she purposely killed him, don't assume or put words in my mouth, darling. I said I simply found it suspicious.

As for whether she looks like she could do it, I hear no one ever suspected that that good ole boy Ted Bundy was a serial killer. ;)


Did you just spin this to compare LB to Le Bundy :laugh: :wavey:

Seriously, I was using hyperbole to support my point that by all accounts this was a horrible accident, which I do not hear you saying :wavey: :xoxo:

[GypsySorcerer]

Ted Bundy was pretty darn cute. *lol*

:laugh: He was cute. :eek: I feel like a sicko for admitting that, but... :shrug:

[dissention]

Ted Bundy was pretty darn cute. *lol*

:lol: Not as cute as Brandon, I take it? :lol:

Let's just look at the list of Laura's lies about the incident:

-When questioned about it during her husbands campaign for governor and president, she said she wasn't the one driving.

-She claimed it was raining that night and the roads were slick. It wasn't.

-She said she didn't know who she had killed until she got to the hospital. However, she wasn't taken tot he hospital until after her boyfriends father arrived at the scene to see his dying son.

-She claimed Michael Douglas, the man she killed, was not her boyfriend.

-She claimed he wasn't driving a car, he was driving a jeep.

Shall I post the police report?

[dissention]

Seriously, I was using hyperbole to support my point that by all accounts this was a horrible accident, which I do not hear you saying :wavey: :xoxo:

You also did not hear me say she purposely killed him. :xoxo:

[sparky]

No, she referred specifically to Ms. H-K. She was saying how hard it was to listen to bad things being said about your husband. I tend to agree with her - it would be hard :shrug:

Well, yeah. It would be hard. But that would be the bill of goods they both bought, wouldn't it ? They married politicians. Don't get mad and weepy if you buy an alligator and it won't let you pet it like a dog, play fetch, and sleep at the foot of your bed. These people. What do they expect ?
"It's so awful being in the spotlight and scrutinized ! HOW WAS I SUPPOSED TO KNOW THIS HAPPENS TO PUBLIC FIGURES ? IT'S A BRUTAL SHOCK ! HOW COULD THIS HAPPEN TO ME ????"
Anyone in such a position who carps about it must have been raised in a box like a veal. That reaction alone is evidence of a desperately lacking I.Q. and consciousness of the world at large.
Ridiculous.

[dissention]

No, she referred specifically to Ms. H-K. She was saying how hard it was to listen to bad things being said about your husband. I tend to agree with her - it would be hard :shrug:

Yeah, so let's stop reporting the evils her husband is committing. :rolleyes:

[Johnny Stew]

Not if it was an accident - which this by all accounts was. Again, if anyone has proof that it was not, let's see it.

I'm not a lawyer, but it has always been my understanding that, whether it was "just an accident" or not, if you're the driver in a car accident which kills either one of your passengers or someone in another car, it's considered vehicular homicide.

By all accounts, she ran a stop sign on a clear, sunny day, and plowed into Michael Dutton Douglas' vehicle.
Running a stop sign is considered negligence, and therefore qualifies as "vehicular homicide," I would think.

[dissention]

I'm not a lawyer, but it has always been my understanding that, whether it was "just an accident" or not, if you're the driver in a car accident which kills either one of your passengers or someone in another car, it's considered vehicular homicide.

By all accounts, she ran a stop sign on a clear, sunny day, and plowed into Michael Dutton Douglas' vehicle.
Running a stop sign is considered negligence, and therefore qualifies as "vehicular homicide," I would think.

It was vehicular homicide. According to Black's Law Dictionary, vehicular homicide is "the killing of a human being by the operation of a motor vehicle in a manner which creates an unreasonable risk of injury to the person or property of another and which constitutes a material deviation from the standard of care which a reasonable person would observe under the same circumstances."

:wavey:

[strandinthewind]

You also did not hear me say she purposely killed him. :xoxo:

No, but you have alluded to such in prior posts, which I am most certainly not looking up :wavey: But, you can clear all of this up right here and now by saying it was an accident and if it was not an accident, then what was it?

[strandinthewind]

Yeah, so let's stop reporting the evils her husband is committing. :rolleyes:


No whose putting words in other peoples' mouths. I never said that. If I did - please show me where :xoxo:

[dissention]

No, but you have alluded to such in prior posts, which I am most certainly not looking up :wavey: But, you can clear all of this up right here and now by saying it was an accident and if it was not an accident, then what was it?

An incident of suspicion. ;)

[dissention]

No whose putting words in other peoples' mouths. I never said that. If I did - please show me where :xoxo:

I never said you did. I was simply pointing out that if she doesn't want to hear bad things about her husband, news organizations would have to stop covering his presidency. :wavey:

[strandinthewind]

It was vehicular homicide. According to Black's Law Dictionary, vehicular homicide is "the killing of a human being by the operation of a motor vehicle in a manner which creates an unreasonable risk of injury to the person or property of another and which constitutes a material deviation from the standard of care which a reasonable person would observe under the same circumstances."

:wavey:

Sorry - you originally said "vehicular manslaughter" - which is a different thing. I do not know the Texas Statue in 1963 - I will try to find it. Interstingly, MADD has caused the dramatic change in these statutes in the last 20 years. But, we are talking 1963 here. If you find it -please post it. I will look as well. But, I strongly suspect it did not apply to this accident because the police did not apply it.

[dissention]

Sorry - you originally said "vehicular manslaughter" - which is a different thing. I do not know the Texas Statue in 1963 - I will try to find it. Interstingly, MADD has caused the dramatic change in these statutes in the last 20 years. But, we are talking 1963 here. If you find it -please post it. I will look as well. But, I strongly suspect it did not apply to this accident because the police did not apply it.

I didn't, Johnny did. ;) I'm not a lawyer, so I can't tell you much about it, but what she did qualifies as vehicular homicide according to Black's Law Dictionary.

[strandinthewind]

An incident of suspicion. ;)

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Touche'

[strandinthewind]

I didn't, Johnny did. ;) I'm not a lawyer, so I can't tell you much about it, but what she did qualifies as vehicular homicide according to Black's Law Dictionary.

Oops - I thought I was esponding to Le Stew!!!!

Possibly it would - but what was the law in Texas in 1963 :shrug: That is what is dispositive here - not a generic def. from Black's dic.

[dissention]

Oops - I thought I was esponding to Le Stew!!!!

Possibly it would - but what was the law in Texas in 1963 :shrug: That is what is dispositive here - not a generic def. from Black's dic.

I think it's very telling that her record was expunged. ;)

[strandinthewind]

I think it's very telling that her record was expunged. ;)

It was expunged? Do you have a site? I am not saying it was not. I am just wondering why it was. It could be because they were minors, which was the original reason why the police were reluctant to release the report.

[Johnny Stew]

Yes, the first time I said "vehicular manslaughter," but I corrected myself the second time, and typed "homicide."

Sorry about that. :)

[dissention]

It was expunged? Do you have a site?

Not off-hand, but it was expunged when she turned 21 because it happened just before she turned 18. Typical Republican, so begins the cover-up. :laugh:

[strandinthewind]

Not off-hand, but it was expunged when she turned 21 because it happened just before she turned 18. Typical Republican, so begins the cover-up. :laugh:

I am a little confused. If it was "expunged" there would be no record of it. There is a record of it because the police report was released by the state (I think). Plus, if the state expunges every minor's records, how is that a cover up :shrug:

[dissention]

I am a little confused. If it was "expunged" there would be no record of it. There is a record of it because the police report was released by the state (I think). Plus, if the state expunges every minor's records, how is that a cover up :shrug:

I'm not a law enforcement official, don't ask me. But the police report wasn't released until a few years ago during Shrub's 2000 campaign. I'm just glad that the Bush records have been released and we've been able to catch that family in the lies they spin, most notably Shrub saying he was never arrested and never had his license suspended. Both were lies. And when he ran for governor, he had his people change his drivers license # so people couldn't find those things out.

[strandinthewind]

I'm not a law enforcement official, don't ask me. But the police report wasn't released until a few years ago during Shrub's 2000 campaign. I'm just glad that the Bush records have been released and we've been able to catch that family in the lies they spin, most notably Shrub saying he was never arrested and never had his license suspended. Both were lies. And when he ran for governor, he had his people change his drivers license # so people couldn't find those things out.

I agree on W - he has put some hum dingers out there and/or played with words and time limitations to obviate the truth. I just do not see a conspiracy regarding Laura Bush's 1963 tragic accident.

[dissention]

I agree on W - he has put some hum dingers out there and/or played with words and time limitations to obviate the truth. I just do not see a conspiracy regarding Laura Bush's 1963 tragic accident.

I outlined all of Laura Bush's lies about "the accident" earlier in the thread. If those particular lies aren't attempts to cover up the truth, I don't know what are. :) :xoxo:

[strandinthewind]

I outlined all of Laura Bush's lies about "the accident" earlier in the thread. If those particular lies aren't attempts to cover up the truth, I don't know what are. :) :xoxo:

I know you did. But, every source i have read does not site those. They all conclude it was an accident. But, as I said earlier and in other threads - you far lefties cannot ever see the truth when the truth in any way and not matter how slight gives ant credibility to the Bushes. Correct me if I am wrong, but Laura Bush did not know W in 1963. So, are you saying the Bush's fixed her accident before knowing her :shrug:

[strandinthewind]

You said:


-When questioned about it during her husbands campaign for governor and president, she said she wasn't the one driving.

I have never read that. And if she did, she has said she was driving many other times. So, I tend to doubt the veracity of that reporter.

You said:

-She claimed it was raining that night and the roads were slick. It wasn't.

I have read reports that said it rained earlier that evening.

You said:

She said she didn't know who she had killed until she got to the hospital. However, she wasn't taken to the hospital until after her boyfriend's father arrived at the scene to see his dying son.

She was treated for injuries and probably was in shock. But, even if this is true, how does that make her culpable in the accident?

You said:

She claimed Michael Douglas, the man she killed, was not her boyfriend.

I never read this. She and MD went out a few times, that is what I read. Moreover, she has consistently said in what I read that he was her friend. AND - how does denying that he was her BF make her guilty of anything in the accident.

In any event, all of these so called lies do not indicate in any way that Laura Bush purposefully killed anyone, which you are not technically asserting I know - but you refuse for who knows why to conceded this was an accident when ALL parties involved say it was :rolleyes: All of these things also do not indicate any kind of cover up because the police report is available and she and they have all concluded it was an accident.

Yet, blind hatred of W once again makes people see things where they are not :cool:

Seriously, I cannot believe even you would go to this length. But, the blind hatred on both sides never ceases to amaze me.

You said

-She claimed he wasn't driving a car, he was driving a jeep.

When did she say this?

You said

Shall I post the police report?

I have seen it and it supports that it was an accident :cool:

But - here is a far left site that goes into the craziness you assert:

http://www.childbutcher.com/laura_bush.htm

[dissention]

I know you did. But, every source i have read does not site those. They all conclude it was an accident. But, as I said earlier and in other threads - you far lefties cannot ever see the truth when the truth in any way and not matter how slight gives ant credibility to the Bushes. Correct me if I am wrong, but Laura Bush did not know W in 1963. So, are you saying the Bush's fixed her accident before knowing her :shrug:

I never said that or implied it, but there you go again. :xoxo:

It has nothing to do with being a far-lefty, it has to do with the incident in question being suspicious, which it is.

[skcin]

Not off-hand, but it was expunged when she turned 21 because it happened just before she turned 18. Typical Republican, so begins the cover-up. :laugh:


:nod:

Paula

[strandinthewind]

I never said that or implied it, but there you go again. :xoxo:

It has nothing to do with being a far-lefty, it has to do with the incident in question being suspicious, which it is.


So, you are saying the Bushes had nothing to do with this alleged cover up but the R's or that she is a R somehow did :shrug: after all, you said N"ot off-hand, but it was expunged when she turned 21 because it happened just before she turned 18. Typical Republican, so begins the cover-up."

Well, if it was not an accident, then that implies intent. So, if you are not willing to call it an accident, the only logical conclusion is you see some sort of intent on her part. If not, then it must have been an accident, which you are unwilling to admit.

[dissention]

You said:

-When questioned about it during her husbands campaign for governor and president, she said she wasn't the one driving.

I have never read that. And if she did, she has said she was driving many other times. So, I tend to doubt the veracity of that reporter.

Yeah, she fessed up to driving after she was caught in a lie.

You said:

-She claimed it was raining that night and the roads were slick. It wasn't.

I have read reports that said it rained earlier that evening.

Read the police report. ;)

You said:

-She said she didn't know who she had killed until she got to the hospital. However, she wasn't taken to the hospital until after her boyfriend's father arrived at the scene to see his dying son.

She was treated for injuries and probably was in shock. But, even if this is true, how does that make her culpable in the accident?

A doctor now? Let's not diagnose her with possibly being in shock, darling, neither of us know. It's just one of her attempts to cover-up the accident by giving false and misleading information when questioned about it. She was still at the scene when her boyfriends father got there and found his son was dead. And with the exception of bruises, she had no injuries.

You said:

-She claimed Michael Douglas, the man she killed, was not her boyfriend.

I never read this. She and MD went out a few times, that is what I read. Moreover, she has consistently said in what I read that he was her friend. AND - how does denying that he was her BF make her guilty of anything in the accident.

Again, I've never said she purposely did it, I've said that the incident in question is suspicious and is made even moreso by her continued twisting of the truth. :wavey:

In any event, all of these so called lies do not indicate in any way that Laura Bush purposefully killed anyone, which you are not technically asserting I know - but you refuse for who knows why to conceded this was an accident when ALL parties involved say it was :rolleyes: All of these things also do not indicate any kind of cover up because the police report is available and she and they have all concluded it was an accident.

:rolleyes: AGAIN, I never said she purposely did it. Doesn't anything penetrate that skull of yours? :laugh: The incident is suspicious enough for me not to say that it was an accident, but I also won't say that she killed the kid on purpose.

Yet, blind hatred of W once again makes people see things where they are not :cool:

This has nothing to do with Dubya, it has to do with what I consider to be suspicious on the part of his wife. But, if you'd like to talk about Dubya and his cocaine busts, let's do it. :D

Seriously, I cannot believe even you would go to this length. But, the blind hatred on both sides never ceases to amaze me.

I can't believe that Laura Bush would lie about these things when we have the police report to contradict her.

-She claimed he wasn't driving a car, he was driving a jeep.

Shall I post the police report?

He was driving a sedan, not a jeep. ;)

[dissention]

So, you are saying the Bushes had nothing to do with this alleged cover up but the R's or that she is a R somehow did :shrug: after all, you said N"ot off-hand, but it was expunged when she turned 21 because it happened just before she turned 18. Typical Republican, so begins the cover-up."

Well, if it was not an accident, then that implies intent. So, if you are not willing to call it an accident, the only logical conclusion is you see some sort of intent on her part. If not, then it must have been an accident, which you are unwilling to admit.

That was a joke, Jason, not that anyone can tell from your post because you edited out the laughing icon. ;) It was such a ridiculous statement that I didn't think you would actually take it seriously. :rolleyes:

[dissention]

Why didn't the Midland police issue a ticket to Bush?

Why didn't they convene a grand jury to look into the accident?

[strandinthewind]

That was a joke, Jason, not that anyone can tell from your post because you edited out the laughing icon. ;) It was such a ridiculous statement that I didn't think you would actually take it seriously. :rolleyes:


The laughing emoticon did not cut and paste - sorry I had no intent to decieve.

[strandinthewind]

Why didn't the Midland police issue a ticket to Bush?

Why didn't they convene a grand jury to look into the accident?

Because they found no fault. It was an accident. Thus, this is a mountain out of a molehill. I mean don't you think the deceased's parents would have screamed from here to hell for one if it had not been an accident. They did not and the police saw no fault. They were there. We were not :shrug:

Again, there are so many things to dislike W for that I think this is making a mountain out of a tiny mole hill - but I know I know W and anyone related to him can never ever under any circumstances get any credit no matter what the facts say because to do so would betray the cause :laugh:

[dissention]

The laughing emoticon did not cut and paste - sorry I had no intent to decieve.

I know that, you goober. ;)

[strandinthewind]

I have search on google for the those lies you allege Laura Bush told. I cannot find them. Can you direct me to a site (a credible one mind you :laugh: ).

[dissention]

I have search on google for the those lies you allege Laura Bush told. I cannot find them. Can you direct me to a site (a credible one mind you :laugh: ).

You have to make me work, eh? :laugh: Start with the police report (yes, even I will admit the site is VERY distasteful):

Page #1: http://www.childbutcher.com/police_report.jpg
Page #2: http://www.childbutcher.com/police_report_2.jpg

The police report dispels the claim that he was driving a jeep and that it was rainy or had been raining (it says the roads were dry and the night was clear). There are two factors as to why the accident occurred on the report,
but one of them is illegible, unfortunately. The speed she was driving at is also illegible. :(

Here's an article from Readers Digest that backs up the assertion that she knew who it was that was in the other car:

http://www.childbutcher.com/Douglas_Readers_Digest_article_January_2004.jpg

EDIT: Even though the site itself is questionable, what I linked to are actual scans, there is no editorializing to be found in what I linked to. :wavey:

[strandinthewind]

Interesting article - it seems another accident occurred at that same intersection a little while before LB's. Apparently, it was a dangerous intersection :shrug:

BTW - experience (personal and professional) suggests that unless it was acutally raining, the police report will not say raining. I think I read where it has rained earlier that day. So, that is not inconsistent with the police report. Plus, even if it did not rain, LB was not asserting rain as a cause of the accident. So, it is of little relevance :shrug:

Again, the facts make me conclude there was no malfeasance here. It was just a horrible accident on a road where another accident had recently occurred.

[gldstwmn]

He was driving a sedan, not a jeep. ;)

It was a Corvair, I think. :eek:

[dissention]

It was a Corvair, I think. :eek:

:nod: It sure was.

[dissention]

BTW - experience (personal and professional) suggests that unless it was acutally raining, the police report will not say raining. I think I read where it has rained earlier that day. So, that is not inconsistent with the police report. Plus, even if it did not rain, LB was not asserting rain as a cause of the accident. So, it is of little relevance :shrug:

Then why say the roads were slick from the rain. :shrug: Surely if it had rained earlier in the day, the roads would have dried. It is Texas, after all.

Like I've said a million times, there's enough there to make me question the incident. I won't say she's guilty and I won't say she's innocent, it's simply suspicious.

[strandinthewind]

It was a Corvair, I think. :eek:

To quote Nader "unsafe at any speed" :cool:

[strandinthewind]

Then why say the roads were slick from the rain. :shrug: Surely if it had rained earlier in the day, the roads would have dried. It is Texas, after all.

Like I've said a million times, there's enough there to make me question the incident. I won't say she's guilty and I won't say she's innocent, it's simply suspicious.

Where are getting that she said it was raining from?
Where are you getting that she said she was not driving from?
Where did she say she did not know who she hit - was she talking about during the actual accident or afterwards?

I am not saying she did not say these things, I just cannot find them. I would like to read them, etc. So, HHEELLLPPP!!!! :laugh:

[dissention]

Where are getting that she said it was raining from?
Where are you getting that she said she was not driving from?
Where did she say she did not know who she hit - was she talking about during the actual accident or afterwards?

I am not saying she did not say these things, I just cannot find them. I would like to read them, etc. So, HHEELLLPPP!!!! :laugh:

I've been looking, but I can't find the particular article. It was in USA Today, but all I found were two old USA Today articles about how she was stunned to be asked such questions at a campaign stop. :laugh:

Maybe we should just discuss Lynne Cheney's lesbian erotica. ;) :lol:

[strandinthewind]

I've been looking, but I can't find the particular article. It was in USA Today, but all I found were two old USA Today articles about how she was stunned to be asked such questions at a campaign stop. :laugh:

Maybe we should just discuss Lynne Cheney's lesbian erotica. ;) :lol:

My personal fav. was when Cokie Roberts, beloved by most mind you, asked Lynn "fire spitting hellcat" Cheney about her lesbian daughter and how that fit into the R party's platform. LC went apoplectic and screamed:

"Mary has never declared such a thing. I have two wonderful daughters. I love them very much. They are bright. They are hard working. They are decent. And I simply am not going to talk about their personal lives. And I'm surprised, Cokie, that even you would want to bring it up."

Gee - the R party and certainly W consider gay people to be sinners. How does that fit into LC's warped world's definition of decent? What a witch. I think the D's should use this side stepping diatribe to say "Look even that [brand of ketchup] LC agrees gay people are loved, hard working, bright, and decent!" :cool: