Well for the first time in some time the main stream media has decided that maybe, just maybe there is something a bit foul in the White House Press Corp, or it was a very slow news day. A story about the whole Gannon/Guckert scandal, compounded with the revelations that the Bush Administration has been paying for good press has made the front page of a major market newspaper.

On the front page of the Philadelphia Inquirer, political analyst, Dick Polman wrote a story "White House stirs debate on media tactics.”

Some excerpts,

And his employer, a conservative Web site operated by Texas Republican activists, having already erased all traces of “Gannon,” announced Thursday that it was unplugging its Web site to “reevaluate operations.”

But the Jeff Gannon/James Guckert saga is far from over. It remains unclear how a graduate of a conservative training program, someone with no previous journalism experience, someone whose writings were often lifted directly from White House press releases, still managed to gain access to the White House press room, where he spent two years lobbing gentle questions at the press secretary and the President.

And some political analysts who monitor President Bush’s relations with the media insist that Gannon (who, referring to Democrats, recently asked Bush, “How are you going to work with people who seem to have divorced themselves from reality?”) should not be viewed as an isolated case. Rather, they contend that Gannon is symptomatic of a broader White House strategy to undermine the traditional media by disseminating the Bush message in creative new ways.

They go on to say

Larry Gross, who runs the Annenberg School of Communication at the University of Southern California, says: “Richard Nixon hated the press, Bill Clinton hated the press - but they accepted the basic rules of the game. Bush has a strategy of discrediting, end-running, and even faking the news. Those prepackaged videos sent to local TV stations ‘looked’ like news, much the way Gannon ‘looked’ like a reporter. We’re seeing something new: Potemkin-village journalism.”

The reported here did a great job of posting the facts in the case, and the fact that it is on the front page, makes it a real story (Almost 5 weeks after it broke). If you took this whole saga, and replace the name Bush with Clinton, it would have taken less than 5 mines to make the front page.

The Gannon thing is debunking one of the greatest myths the republicans love to hang on to, that the media is a liberal haven, if so, you would think they would have jumped on this from day one, like the countless other scandals of the Bush Administration.

At least some part of the main stream media gets the story.

From the The Plain Dealer
Technorati Tags: Humor, Media

Well as for as I can tell, Jeff/James is not what we call a reader. With the reopening of his site, he has shown that he is “divorced from reality” and thinks people are coming to his site to read his brilliant cuting and pasting job, but in fact we are there to point and laugh. A comment that comes to mind when I go there is, “What an egotistical ass, he thinks we care what he has to say”

So Anyway, I wanted to point you all to a story on OpEdNews.com here by Anthony Wade, he titles the story From the Ashes Rises The Liar, The Whore

Enjoy

Here is another one here

From: Eric Johnston, PlanetOut Network (link)

As a person who was active duty for over 3 years, before I was injured while on active duty, entering me into the ranks of disabled veteran, I find this news very encouraging. I was active before the "Don't ask, Don't tell", and it was born while I was in. (3 months after I enlisted).

All it really did was nothing. Right now, the US military is full of homosexuals, I would venture to say, that the percentages are a little higher than that of the general population. This is due to many reasons I am sure, mainly, men are conditioned to be "macho" and the military is a means to that end quickly.

So here is a good story…

A government report due out Friday shows “don’t ask, don’t tell,” the military’s ban on lesbian, gay and bisexual personnel, has cost the Pentagon hundreds of millions of dollars to implement, prompting members of Congress to announce new plans to repeal the measure.

“Don’t ask, don’t tell” (DADT) was adopted by Congress in 1993 and signed into law by President Bill Clinton. Under the law, lesbian, gay and bisexual military personnel cannot reveal their sexual orientations without risking expulsion from the armed forces.

Approximately 10,000 service members have been discharged under the policy, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), a non-partisan congressional accounting agency.

Analysis by the GAO found the Pentagon has spent nearly $200 million to recruit and train replacements of enlisted personnel discharged under the policy.

The cost is likely much higher because the Defense Department does not track specific costs of investigating or discharging gay service members or for handling legal challenges and reviews of dismissals, according to the GAO report.

“DADT is both a waste of human and material resources which any nation can ill afford during a time of war,” said Ken Sholes, vice president of American Veterans for Equal Rights.

The report also did not include costs associated with discharging officers or trained specialists. Among the nearly 800 specialists with critical skills who were discharged, 322 were linguists, including 54 who specialized in Arabic.

Sholes told the PlanetOut Network that training a linguist can take up to a year or more.

Rep. Marty Meehan, D- Mass, the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Terrorism, Conventional Threats and Capabilities, has drafted the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, a proposal that would end the ban on gay and lesbian military personnel.

Meehan plans to introduce the measure next week, with support from a coalition of congressional representatives, including Reps. John Conyers, D-Mich. and Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y.

Meehan called DADT “counterproductive.” “Now we have the numbers to prove that the policy itself is undermining our military readiness,” he told the Boston Globe.

Many U.S. allies have abandoned policies that discriminate against gays in the military, including Britain, which is now actively courting gays as recruits for the Royal Navy

If this is moved forward, I believe that this would be a great benefit to our arms services. Homosexuals are not a treat to the military. Regardless of what some may say, those nations that have removed the ban, have suffered no negative effects. Facts are more telling than opinions.

Well from the "To Good to be True" file, the man whore James Guckert aka Jeff Gannon has thrown common sense into the wind and reopened his jeffgannon.com. With the new catch phrase "So feared by the left they had to take me down" James dives into the world of faux-blogging.

As an aside, I say faux because one of the arts of blogging to open up your stories to comment, something James has not done. I suspect that Mr. Guckert is a little to dense to setup blogging software (His blog is a static site built in FrontPage), or is deafly afraid that opening his site up for comment will dent his reality.

He opens his site with the following diatribe,

I’Im baaaaaaack! If you thought I was going to slink away - then you don’t know much about me. Someone still has to battle the Left and now that I’ve emerged from the crucible, I’m stronger than before.

Despite all the pleas from the Left to go over to the ‘dark side’ and expose the ‘corrupt Bush administration’ simply isn’t going to happen. My faith and my ideology are rock solid.

Still, the last few weeks have been difficult for my family and my associates. To them I offer my apology and gratitude for their support.

In regard to the allegations about my personal life, I have been advised by my attorneys not to comment on any of the details pending the outcome of any possible legal action I might pursue. Therefore, I won’t be discussing any of that stuff here.

Mr Guckert, we here on the left do not fear you, far from it. I personally laugh at you, I sometimes feel bad for you, because I suspect that are far too dumb to know you are being used, and far to egotistical to see the truth.

We also never had any expectation that you were "to go over to the ‘dark side’ and expose the ‘corrupt Bush administration’", we do not need you over here, your writing skills are poor at best (Mine are not much better, but them, I never claimed to be a journalist), and there is plenty of decent for Bush in cyberspace, your "services" are not needed.

I want to thank you for bring your page back online, it will make for a good laugh, and given how clueless you are, it is only a matter of time before you say something (else) you are going to regret.

From the

Here
February 24, 2005
By DANIELA ALTIMARI, Courant Staff Writer

A key legislative committee made history Wednesday by endorsing a measure that would make Connecticut the second state in the nation to adopt civil unions for same-sex couples.

After a lively two-hour debate, the judiciary committee approved the civil unions bill by a 2-1 ratio in a largely bipartisan vote.

The proposal needs the approval of the full House and Senate and Gov. M. Jodi Rell to become law. But if that happens - and several lawmakers predicted it would - Connecticut would join Vermont as the only other state to extend nearly all of the rights and responsibilities of marriage to gay and lesbian couples.

“We have an opportunity to provide a huge step forward for equal rights,” said state Sen. Andrew McDonald, a Democrat from Stamford and co-chairman of the committee. McDonald, one of several gay legislators in Connecticut, noted that unlike Vermont, Connecticut lawmakers are acting without a court order.

The bill, approved on a 25-13 vote, faced opposition on two fronts: those who said it went too far and those who argued it did not go far enough.

In a controversial move, the influential gay rights coalition that has been leading the call for same-sex marriage has been lobbying against the civil union proposal.

Anne Stanback, president of Love Makes a Family, said she was gratified by the tenor of Wednesday’s debate and by the overwhelming defeat of two other proposals to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. But in her view, she said, civil unions are an unacceptable compromise she intends to vigorously oppose.

Several lawmakers contrasted Love Makes a Family’s all-or-nothing approach with the incremental pace of social change.

“That’s how we do things up here, we take things one step at a time,” said Rep. Themis Klarides, a Republican from Derby who supports civil unions. “Is [this measure] 100 percent equality? Maybe not. But it’s certainly something we should all be very excited about.”

One member of the judiciary committee is standing by Love Makes a Family. State Sen. Mary Ann Handley, a Democrat from Manchester who voted against the proposal, said she could not in good conscience support civil unions, which she branded as “marriage lite.”

“I’m not voting against [civil unions] because I don’t support gay marriage,” Handley said, “but because I support it so strongly. … I truly believe what we are doing here is not adequate.”

Civil unions offer same-sex couples most of the rights and responsibilities of marriage, but are not recognized by most other states or the federal government. Such legal partnerships would permit couples to file joint state tax returns, qualify for a partner’s health insurance and inherit a partner’s property without paying taxes.

The rights of same-sex couples could also be influenced by Connecticut’s courts. Last August, seven gay and lesbian couples from around the state sued in Superior Court in New Haven after being denied marriage licenses.

Last May, Massachusetts became the first state in the nation to legalize gay marriage following a successful legal challenge.

Marie T. Hilliard, a lobbyist for the Connecticut Catholic Conference, said she intends to oppose the civil union proposal, which she referred to as “marriage by another name.”

Sen. David Cappiello, a Danbury Republican, said he was still struggling with the civil union concept.

“I’m not ready to support civil unions, particularly if we’re going to be criticized by both sides,” he said. Cappiello ultimately voted against the bill, but said it was possible he could change his mind.

Many of the other legislators who voted against the measure said they fear it would lead to gay marriage. “I’m going to be very honest,” said Republican Sen. John Kissel of Enfield, “I think this is one more step toward marriage.”

Supporters didn’t disagree.

“If [civil unions] are what we can do … I say OK,” said Rep. Toni Walker, a Democrat from New Haven. “But I really wish and hope that this is not the end of this subject.”

Additional Information after the post - I still find it odd that the site was not changed unto right at a point when things start heating up with USANext, but, it looks as if OMC has just been caught in the crossfire. Josh Marshall has a post over on Talking Points Memo that has some more detail….

And though they apparently leased space from USANext until as recently as late last year, the financial ties between the OMC and USANext ended in 2002. In fact, from what I understand, it was Jarvis’s arrival at USANext, and the new direction in which he took the organization, that prompted the folks at OMC to sever those ties.

We will see how this thing shakes out, but for now, O’Neill Marketing Company is just a right wing marketing firm

The fine people at USANext that brought you the now discredited "Swift Boat Vet's for Truth", are also the people behind United Seniors Association, and Americans Lobbying Against Rationing of Medical Care, USA. USANext is a Republican front operation with Karl Rove as the puppet master.

Let us look at some facts;

United Seniors Association = USANext
Americans Lobbying Against Rationing of Medical Care, USA = USANext

According to Give.com
United Seniors Association (link) *
Affiliates: O’Neill Marketing Company (OMC) (link)
Is located at
3900 Jermantown Road, Suite 450, Fairfax, Virginia 22030 (link)

O’Neill Marketing Company (OMC) (link)
It is located at
3900 Jermantown Road, Suite 450A, Fairfax, Virginia 22030 (link)

But Marq, when I click the link, it says they are a suite 300, you are right, that is what they say today, but what did it say on say Fed 8th 2005? Take a look. The great scrubing has begun.

So both of these companies are in the same office, so they are in fact the same. The "change" shows that there is something there, what are they hiding?

What does all this mean? Well, if you look at the client list for OMC you will see some names we have all grown to love, like…

Nat’l Rep. Congressional Committee fundraising advocacy
Parents Television Council fundraising advocacy
Rep. Governors Association fundraising advocacy
Rep. National Committee fundraising advocacy

Hmmm, you are a “grassroots” org, pushing the ill fainted Social Security Reform, yet your client list is a who's who of the neo-cons infrastructure. I smell a rat.

* Please note this site goes to the USANext Site.

More to come…

Thanks to at Josh Marshall @ Talking Points Memo, He stated this, I want to help bring it forward to more prople

From
(LINK)

It looks as if Bush fears the unscripted. As we know, he is not the brightest bulb in the tree (Some say it has burnt out all-together). Thinking he could manipulate the Germans much like he did during the US 2004 elections, he wanted to "stage" a town hall meeting. When the Germans did not play along, out beloved leader took his toys and went home. Read the article below…

During his trip to Germany on Wednesday, the main highlight of George W. Bush’s trip was meant to be a “town hall”-style meeting with average Germans. But with the German government unwilling to permit a scripted event with questions approved in advance, the White House has quietly put the event on ice. Was Bush afraid the event might focus on prickly questions about Iraq and Iran rather than the rosy future he’s been touting in Europe this week?

The much-touted American-style “town hall” meeting the White House has been planning with “normal Germans” of everyday walks of life will be missing during his visit to the Rhine River hamlet of Mainz this afternoon. A few weeks ago, the Bush administration had declared that the chat — which could have brought together tradesmen, butchers, bank employees, students and all other types to discuss trans-Atlantic relations — would be the cornerstone of President George W. Bush’s brief trip to Germany.

State Department diplomats said the meeting would help the president get in touch with the people who he most needs to convince of his policies. Bush’s invasion of Iraq and his diplomatic handling of the nuclear dispute with Iran has drawn widespread concern and criticism among the German public. And during a press conference two weeks ago, Bush said Washington is still terribly misunderstood in Europe. All the more reason, it would seem, for him to be pleased about talking to people here.

But on Wednesday, that town hall meeting will be nowhere on the agenda — it’s been cancelled. Neither the White House nor the German Foreign Ministry has offered any official explanation, but Foreign Ministry sources say the town hall meeting has been nixed for scheduling reasons — a typical development for a visit like this with many ideas but very little time. That, at least, is the diplomats’ line. Behind the scenes, there appears to be another explanation: the White House got cold feet. Bush’s strategists felt an uncontrolled encounter with the German public would be too unpredictable.

To avoid that messy scenario, the White House requested that rules similar to those applied during Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s visit two weeks ago also be used in Mainz. Before meeting with students at Paris’s Institute of Political Sciences, which preens the country’s elite youth for future roles in government, Rice’s staff insisted on screening and approving any questions to be asked by students. One question rejected was that of Benjamin Barnier, the 24-year-old son of France’s foreign minister, who wanted to ask: “George Bush is not particularly well perceived in the world, particularly in the Middle East. Can you do something to change that?” Instead, the only question of Barnier’s that got approval was the question of whether Iraq’s Shiite Muslim majority might create a theocratic government based on the Iranian model?

The Germans, though, insisted that a free forum should be exactly that. Wolfgang Ischinger, Germany’s Ambassador to the United States, explained to the New York Times last week: “We told them, don’t get upset with us if they ask angry questions.”

In the end, the town hall meeting was never officially dropped from the agenda of the trip — instead it was dealt with in polished diplomatic style — both sides just stopped talking about it.

As an ersatz for the town hall meeting on Wednesday, Bush will now meet with a well-heeled group of so-called “young leaders.” Close to 20 participants will participate in the exclusive round to be held in the opulent Mozart Hall of a former royal palace in Mainz, giving them the opportunity for a close encounter with the president. The chat is being held under the slogan: “A new chapter for trans-Atlantic relations.” The aim of the meeting is to give these “young leaders” a totally different impression of George W. Bush. In order to guarantee an open exchange, the round has been closed to journalists — ensuring that any embarrassments will be confined to a small group.

The guest list for the Wednesday afternoon gathering has been handpicked by several US organizations with offices in Germany. In recent days, the Aspen Institute and the German Marshall Fund have sent lists of possible guests to the German Foreign Ministry. The requirement was that all of the nominees had to be in their twenties or thirties and they must already have been in a leadership position at a young age. In other words: there won’t be any butchers or handymen on the elite guest list, but rather young co-workers from blue chip companies like automaker DaimlerChrysler, Deutsche Bank or the consultancy McKinsey. The fact that two American organizations are the ones managing the guest list suggests that the chat won’t be overly critical of Bush.

One participant in the Bush round is 31-year-old Katrin Heuel of Berlin, an employee of the conservative Aspen Institute. Just a few days ago, she received an invitation from the Protocol Office of the German Foreign Ministry. She’s a bit nervous about the encounter — after all, Bush isn’t someone she’s likely to encounter in her daily life in Berlin. She says she hasn’t heard anything about questions being scrutinized in advance or of any kind of script for the event. “I will ask very open questions about Iran, North Korea and Russia,” she said, adding that she’s excited to see how the president will react to the young people’s questions.

Foreign Ministry sources said Berlin wasn’t planning any briefing on the course of the chat prior to the event. And it’s unknown whether the American staff will make any suggestions to the young leaders. Then again, the day’s issue — a new chapter for trans-Atlantic relations, seems to ensure that things won’t get out of hand — after all, this event is supposed to focus on the future and not dwell on prickly questions about the past.

As further proof (As if we needed any more) that the followers of Bush are working hard for the new dawn of the dark ages, our pals and closes allies the United Kingdom has started a campaign to recruit gays.

From the NY Times, By SARAH LYALL .

New Course by Royal Navy: A Campaign to Recruit Gays

Five years after Britain lifted its ban on gays in the military, the Royal Navy has begun actively encouraging them to enlist and has pledged to make life easier when they do.

The navy announced Monday that it had asked Stonewall, a group that lobbies for gay rights, to help it develop better strategies for recruiting and retaining gay men and lesbians. It said, too, that one strategy may be to advertise for recruits in gay magazines and newspapers.

Commodore Paul Docherty, director of naval life management, said the service wanted to change the atmosphere so that gays would feel comfortable working there.

“While some gays were confident to come out, others didn’t feel that the environment was necessarily accepting of them,” Commodore Docherty said in an interview.

The partnership with Stonewall, Commodore Docherty said, will help “make more steps toward improving the culture and attitude within the service as a whole, so gays who are still in the closet feel that much more comfortable about coming out.”

Gays in Britain have benefited from a number of new laws, including one that makes it illegal for employers to discriminate on the basis of workers’ sexuality.

Wow, some day I hope the this nation can wake up, and see that nothing bad comes from gays. The UK has not sunk into the ocean, or burned to the ground. See, the Crazy Evangelicals lied to us.

The Senate Democratic leadership is privately circulating a letter calling for other senators to join a call for an investigation into discredited White House reporter Jeff Gannon, RAW STORY has learned.

The letter, issued from Minority Whip Richard Durbin (D-IL), calls on President Bush to "order a full inquiry" into how a "fake" journalist working for a "sham" news organization got access to the president.

Write your Senator Now, and ask that they sign this letter

Here is Senator Durbin’s Letter

Dear Mr. President,

At a press conference in the White House on January 26, you stated that "there needs to be a nice, independent relationship between the White House and the press." In that same press conference, you called on a reporter then known as Jeff Gannon, who worked for an organization called Talon News.

Since that time, the public has learned that the real name of that reporter is James Dale Guckert, not Jeff Gannon, and that he had regular access to the White House press facilities for more than a year. We have also learned that the questions he posed at White House press briefings and the stories he filed for Talon News frequently mirrored Republican Party talking points, that Talon News is a news organization in name only and that it has apparently close connections to the Republican party.

Given the unprecedented level of security in Washington since 9/11, it is troubling that that a non-journalist using a false name and working for a sham news organization could have gained regular access to the White House for such an extended period of time.

Another reason the Gannon/Guckert affair is disturbing is because of what we have recently learned about apparent efforts by some in your Administration to try to "buy" favorable news coverage. These other efforts include paying news personalities Armstrong Williams and Maggie Gallagher large sums of money to promote your Administration's education and marriage initiatives, and using tax payer dollars to produce video news releases promoting the new prescription drug benefit for Medicare beneficiaries and other policies the Administration regards as accomplishments. A recent report by the General Accountability Office called such video news releases illegal uses of public funds. More recently, we have heard troubling reports that Social Security Administration officials may be using public funds and pressuring public employees to promote your goal of privatizing Social Security.

As you know, concerns that government officials may be trying to deceive the public by manipulating the media can be extremely corrosive to public

trust. For that reason, we respectfully request that you order an immediate and thorough investigation into the Gannon/Guckert matter. How is it possible that a man using a fake name, with dubious journalism credentials, was able to clear the White House's extensive security screening process and gain such close access to you and your staff for such an extended period of time? Have there been other, similar breaches of security and journalism standards?

We appreciate your prompt attention to this important matter. We urge you to order a full inquiry so that the American people know the facts.

Well once again, the whack-job evangelicals that claim to have Jesus on there side have set there aim on a cartoon character.

From Canadian Press by JOHN MCKAY

On its website the Traditional Values Coalition is warning parents about the cross-dressing and transgender themes contained in the hit DreamWorks feature, now on DVD. Oh No!

“Shrek 2 is billed as harmless entertainment but contains subtle sexual messages,” says the coalition, which describes itself as a grassroots inter-denominational lobby with more than 43,000 member churches.

“Parents who are thinking about taking their children to see Shrek 2 may wish to consider the following.”

The article then proceeds to describe one of the characters, an “evil” bartender (voiced by Larry King) who is a male-to-female transgender in transition and who expresses a sexual desire for Prince Charming.

In another identified scene, Shrek and Donkey need rescuing from a dungeon by Pinocchio and his nose, which is made to extend as an escape bridge by getting the wooden boy to lie about not wearing women’s underwear.

So far, the Coalition’s gaydar doesn’t seem to have picked up on DreamWorks’ Shark Tale, in which a shark mafioso, voiced by Robert DeNiro, must come to terms with the fact he has a vegetarian son who likes to dress up as a dolphin.

But the Shrek accusation follows hot on the heels of other cases of animated characters being accused of infiltrating the minds of America’s children with pro-gay messages, much to the detriment of traditional family values.

Recently, PBS was upbraided by the group Focus on the Family - and supported by the U.S. secretary of education no less - for an episode of the cartoon series Postcards From Buster, in which Buster the rabbit encounters a couple of kids with lesbian parents.

I want to thank the whack-job evangelicals, you are only making my job easier, I do not need to work so had to discredit you when you are doing such a great job by yourseld. Here are some other “secret gays” in the cartoon world, you should go after them.

• Bert and Earny may be…
• The elf that wants to be a dentist, on TV during X-mas.
• There is some rumor Porky-pig is a gay

You should start getting these outlawed post haste!

Wait, If I recall, wasn’t Shrek hitched to the Princess Theona? I thought as long as you are hitched anything goes. I was raised Mormon, and that is what we were told.