Rolling Stone reports that Bush did indeed steal the election in 2004

[Four More Beers 0]

There was a reason the exit polling was so wrong:

 

 

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/104...election_stolen

[fastfish 0]

Rolling Stone should follow Hunter S. Thompson's example....they are such an established mouthpiece now

[TerrySilver 0]

rolling stone does the news now? what a joke.

 

they should just stick to what they do best; promoting/pushing crappy musicians like britney spears and 50 cent to stardom, just so everytime i turn on the radio i get tortured by listening to their sh*tty music 7 times a day

[supermike80 1,922]

Seriously..Who the fock cares at this point. Man let it go.

I hate Bush but foe the love of God LET IT GO

[Soonerman 0]

Rolling Stone said it? It must be true.

[Uh-huh 0]

Rolling Stone said it? It must be true.

You should be the very last person to comment on other parties' credibility.

[Soonerman 0]

You should be the very last person to comment on other parties' credibility.

 

Yeah, let's talk about credibility.

 

Like when this board was down and you were on the FBG board.

 

This tool, in February of 2006 mind you, was commenting in the latest Bush thread. I forget what the topic was, but he stated that until then, he had been "on the fence" regarding the Bush administration, but that he was now completely against the admin.

 

Now, I'm sure everyone remembers tool boy here has been one of the prime Bush-haters going back years now. For him to pretend that he was "on the fence" regarding Bush in Feruary of 2006 was classic.

 

Yeah, let's talk about credibility.

[gratefulted 14]

Rolling Stone may have published it but Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wrote it, he also has references to his sources.

[pimptastic69 0]

Seriously..Who the fock cares at this point. Man let it go.

I hate Bush but foe the love of God LET IT GO

 

 

S.S.D.D.

[BMoney 0]

rolling stone does the news now? what a joke.

 

they should just stick to what they do best; promoting/pushing crappy musicians like britney spears and 50 cent to stardom, just so everytime i turn on the radio i get tortured by listening to their sh*tty music 7 times a day

 

 

they also reported that Hootie and the Blowfish stole a Grammy 10 years ago also...

 

who cares...its over...done with...

[Strike 5,564]

they also reported that Hootie and the Blowfish stole a Grammy 10 years ago also...

 

who cares...its over...done with...

 

And yet somehow those fockers couldn't figure out that Milli Vanilli was lip syncing!!!!

[Rye & Leaf 0]

Rolling Stone should follow Hunter S. Thompson's example....they are such an established mouthpiece now

 

 

Really, stop bashing Hunter. He may have been for McGovern in 72, but that is because he was for the underdog, not because he had a political basis...

[Voltaire 5,317]

This is a really long article. I've been reading alot and am only 2/3 done with the first of 4 pages. It's quite disturbing too. There was a heck of a lot of vote tampering going on, I['m just astonded the Dem party isn't making a bigger stink of this.

[Chronic Husker 85]

Rolling Stone said it? It must be true.

Good job on attempting to discredit the content of the article, rather than the source.

[fatsean 0]

which Kennedy is this? the alleged rapist? the drunk? the drug addict? the adulterer?

Why isn't anybody else reporting this?

[Snoopy1 0]

which Kennedy is this? the alleged rapist? the drunk? the drug addict? the adulterer?

Why isn't anybody else reporting this?

 

 

Well some of it's been reported before. The shredding of registration cards is one example, that was a story before the election.

[kpbuckeye 3]

Good job on attempting to discredit the content of the article, rather than the source.

 

 

ok, source=kennedy

no history of any kennedys being biased.

 

good job using common sense

[Snoopy1 0]

One thing from reading the article and thinking about the 2000 election, having extremely partison people in charge of setting up, running and certifying elections seems completely assinine.

[Soonerman 0]

Good job on attempting to discredit the content of the article, rather than the source.

 

When a legitimate news organization publishes this, I will address the content.

 

I mean when people post other tinfoil hat articles, like how we didn't really land on the moon, I don't feel a big need to address their content either.

[Snoopy1 0]

ok, source=kennedy

no history of any kennedys being biased.

 

good job using common sense

 

Um there were 208 documented sources.

 

Source = 208 documented sources.

Kpbuckeyes ability to evalutate something he hasn't read...

[GettnHuge 2]

There was a reason the exit polling was so wrong:

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/104...election_stolen

 

 

hilarity at its best.

 

5 geek points for you

[kpbuckeye 3]

Um there were 208 documented sources.

 

Source = 208 documented sources.

Kpbuckeyes ability to evalutate something he hasn't read...

 

 

gathered and 'interperted' by a kennedy.

Snoopy1 ability to read who wrote the article, ie the source

 

have the balls to post under your real name. puzzay alias.

[Snoopy1 0]

gathered and 'interperted' by a kennedy.

Snoopy1 ability to read who wrote the article, ie the source

 

have the balls to post under your real name. puzzay alias.

 

 

Who says this isn't my real name, like your previously well throught out arguement, you managed to avoid offering any proof to the contrary.

 

Please by all means then discredit the article and documentation, instead of the author, out of hand. I guess it's just easier offering up cliches and the same tired fallacies you use in every arguement.

[MDC 7,466]

The Bush administration is so crooked that it really wouldn't surprise me, but unless this article dedicates some time to what we're supposed to do about it - and by that I mean moving forward, in upcoming elections - I'm not that interested. Congress can't even get the Bush administration to answer for its lies leading up to the Iraq war - it's not going to revoke his presidency.

[surferskin 30]

this article HAS TO BE TRUE...how else could bush have won?? i'm sure it has nothing to do with the dems nominating an unlikable doosh.

[MDC 7,466]

this article HAS TO BE TRUE...how else could bush have won?? i'm sure it has nothing to do with the dems nominating an unlikable doosh.

 

Both sides had an unlikeable doosh.

[surferskin 30]

Both sides had an unlikeable doosh.

 

not according to the voters.

[MDC 7,466]

not according to the voters.

 

They also both received a lot of votes. I'm not sticking up for Kerry - I didn't like the guy and still think they should've nominated Howard Dean. But Bush is every bit the doosh the J. Kerry is.

[D_House 0]

LIBERAL MEDIA

 

OK, but seriously, how many of you dooshbags actually read the article?

[GettnHuge 2]

still think they should've nominated Howard Dean

 

 

I think I can speak for most conservaties when I say we supported the Dean nomination as well.

[Rusty Syringes 478]

Bush could solve every problem on the planet and crap rainbows into the sky, and Rolling Stone would still find something to rag on him about.

 

That unbalanced piece of crap has zero credibility. With every issue, it goes looking for some horrific thing they can pin on him and then pound that square peg into a round hole at all costs.

 

Considering they put Clay Aiken on the cover and have been sucking American Idol's schlong just to cash in on the popularity, that magazine doesn't even have any credibility in its niche market - music - much less in politics.

 

[brinett9 0]

Bush could solve every problem on the planet and crap rainbows into the sky...

Yeah, that could happen.

 

I'll keep an eye out for such developments.

[Korben Dallas 0]

this article HAS TO BE TRUE...how else could bush have won?? i'm sure it has nothing to do with the dems nominating an unlikable doosh.

 

Not denying Kerry was an unlikeable douche...I don't personally know him, he very well might be.

 

But 1. I think Bush defines this description. 2. I think that is the point of the article, that Bush was more unlikeable and they cheated (again) to win. 3. After all the character slandering of Kerry, I don't think we ever got the chance to find out what kind of person Kerry actually was. 4. It could have been Jesus running on the Dem ticket and you would have still hated him and voted for Bush.

[D_House 0]

yeah i always kill the messenger when i'm brought bad news too.

[Korben Dallas 0]

I think I can speak for most conservaties when I say we supported the Dean nomination as well.

 

 

 

I like Dean as the DNC chairman, he's doing a great job of doing the right thing for the party, but I totally agree with both the conservatives happiness and the fact that I'm glad he didn't get the nomination either.

[MDC 7,466]

Bush could solve every problem on the planet and crap rainbows into the sky

 

At this point I'd settle for a balanced budget and some bare minimum level of competence in the war on terror.

[surferskin 30]

Not denying Kerry was an unlikeable douche...I don't personally know him, he very well might be.

 

But 1. I think Bush defines this description. 2. I think that is the point of the article, that Bush was more unlikeable and they cheated (again) to win. 3. After all the character slandering of Kerry, I don't think we ever got the chance to find out what kind of person Kerry actually was. 4. It could have been Jesus running on the Dem ticket and you would have still hated him and voted for Bush.

 

like most Dems, we hardly get a chance to find out who any of them are because they constantly try to be all things to all people. flip floppin dooshbags...have the dems finally decided their platform yet?

[MDC 7,466]

like most Dems, we hardly get a chance to find out who any of them are because they constantly try to be all things to all people. flip floppin dooshbags...have the dems finally decided their platform yet?

 

Remember how Bush ran on a platform of limited government, no nation-building, and restoring honor and dignity to the White House? How's that working out?

[surferskin 30]

no nation-building

 

 

[MDC 7,466]

 

Remember back in 2000 when he said our troops shouldn't be nation-building? And now Iraq is the 51st state, we have servicemen acting as police, and he's about to deploy the national guard to the border.

 

I've been very critical of Kerry here, in particular his ever-changing stance on Iraq. But to act like Bush is some rock of stability is laughable - he's contradicted everything he ran on.