Possibly One Of The MOST VAPID, OBSEQUIOUS, GAG-INDUCING Articles EVER In The WP

[Beetwasher]

Be prepared for douche chills. We have identified a bonafide WH propoganda plant at the WP in this Paul Farhi character. I will post no samples of this tripe. Click at your own peril.

Bush the Embracer
Interpreting the Presidential Hug

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/26/AR2007102602321.html?hpid=topnews

[hlthe2b]

1. yeach... the title alone is enough for me...

I'll pass...

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. Blaghhh.

:puke:

[More Than A Feeling]

3. When I first saw your title, I thought it read "gas-inducing" articles

Upon further review, I've found that my misreading is also accurate!

[Beetwasher]

5. That Too!

:rofl:

[Flabbergasted]

14. lol

[crikkett]

4. cue the collection of Bush hugging Gannon

in that special way he has

[rusty charly]

6. ACK!

[Beetwasher]

9. How About This One:

[rusty charly]

18. closer...

[babylonsister]

7. The 'author' apparently writes for Little Green Footballs

which is what came up when I googled him...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Green_Footballs

Little Green Footballs
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
• Learn more about citing Wikipedia •
Jump to: navigation, search
Little Green Footballs
Little Green Footballs logo
Political affiliation Conservative
Website www.littlegreenfootballs.com

Little Green Footballs (LGF) is a political blog run by California web designer Charles Johnson. In the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks, Johnson - who describes himself as "pretty much center-left before 9/11"<1> - transformed his blog's discussion of bicycle racing, programming, web design, and the occasional humorous news item into a very active discussion of the War on Terror, Islam and the Arab-Israeli conflict. Media observers have described the site as "ultraconservative"<2> or "right wing";<3> observes Johnson:

I'm not pretending I'm giving equal time to both sides. But I do think what I'm advocating, and what I believe in, is the right side.<4>

For "promoting Israel, and Zionism" and "presenting Israel's side of the conflict," LGF won the "Best Israel Advocacy Blog" award from the Jerusalem Post in 2005 <5>. According to Gil Ronen, a reporter for Internet news outlet, Israel National News:<6>

If anyone ever compiles a list of Internet sites that contribute to Israel’s public relations effort, Johnson's site will probably come in first, far above the Israeli Foreign Ministry's site.

In the United States, LGF is perhaps best known for playing a key role in raising doubts about the authenticity of the Killian documents regarding President Bush<7><8>, which preceded the resignation of CBS' Dan Rather. The site won the Washington Post's reader poll for Best International Blog in November 2004<9> and played a large role in exposing the forged and altered photographs in the Adnan Hajj photographs controversy<10>.

[Beetwasher]

10. Great Find!

:thumbsup: That would make perfect sense.

[Maestro]

11. Wow. So he decided to run a puff-piece on Bushler.

What a hack!

[Maestro]

8. This is actually an article in a newspaper?

What editor at the WP would approve of something so trite? :shrug:

[Flabbergasted]

13. Bush is desperate to get his approval ratings up?

[Flabbergasted]

12. I'd find that article really offending if I were Bush. Or is this really all he has left? nt

[Bitwit1234]

15. I belong to the Washington Post internet online

because I used to live in that area and check the news often. I tried to post a comment to the article and even after using my ID etc it wouldn't post. But this is the comment they wouldn't let me post.

"This article is enough to gag a maggot. Doesn't this person ever get their head out of bushasscrack."

At least I got to post it somewhere.

[papau]

17. LOL :-) n/t

[annabanana]

16. yick. . Most of the commenters "get" that this is as meaningful as

his pawing of New Orleanders after Katrina.. i.e. creepy photo-opping

[muntrv]

19. But according to the bushie's logic, hugging is un-manly.

[Olney Blue]

20. Although the article in general made me vomit, there was this unflattering

zinger at the end:



"Bush, like other modern wartime presidents, is less frequently photographed hugging wounded troops or their bereaved.

Perhaps that's considered too intimate an image for public consumption. Or perhaps it's simply too far off-message for any White House, raising uncomfortable questions about cause and effect.

In other words, for even as compulsive a hugger as George Bush, there may be some things any president would rather not embrace."

[opihimoimoi]

21. Is this ALL THEY HAVE???? To refer Bush as a HUGGER? WTF? R they Mad?