fuckin cheney

[]
posted by catherine / June 25, 2004 /

okay. this kind of surprised me. in the washington post article about cheney using profanity against senatoar leahy on the senate floor...they say it. in the article. the f-word.

On Tuesday, Cheney, serving in his role as president of the Senate, appeared in the chamber for a photo session. A chance meeting with Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (Vt.), the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, became an argument about Cheney's ties to Halliburton Co., an international energy services corporation, and President Bush's judicial nominees. The exchange ended when Cheney offered some crass advice.

"Fuck yourself," said the man who is a heartbeat from the presidency.

is this like, acceptable? in the washington post? (it's on the online version of the article as well as the print.) i'm not offended, just surprised they'd actually print the f-word. i mean, my god, THINK OF THE CHILDREN.

Comments

Yeah, I know. And later on the get all [expletive] about asshole. The fuck's going on?

Posted by: kriston on June 25, 2004 09:37 AM

yeah. is asshole now officially worse than fuck?

Posted by: catherine on June 25, 2004 09:49 AM

Maybe it was ok because it was a direct quote; they're just reporting the news. Later in the article they refer to it as the F-word...

"Then there was that famous Talk magazine interview of Bush by Tucker Carlson in 1999, in which the future president repeatedly used the F-word."

Posted by: Teresa on June 25, 2004 10:43 AM

that's a good point. but later on in the article they write this: "...Bush pointed out a New York Times reporter to Cheney and said, without knowing the microphone was picking it up, 'major-league [expletive].'" the expletive was asshole, and that was a direct quote. so i'm still confused.

Posted by: catherine on June 25, 2004 10:46 AM

Yeah, the post's [expletive deleted] is sort of a Washington running gag. I'm not usually one to claim media bias, but I really do think the Post probably did this just to make Cheney look bad. They could've conveyed all of the information using euphemisms.

I think this'll blow up in the face of whatever editor allowed it. Lots of angry letters are forthcoming, I'd predict...

Posted by: tom on June 25, 2004 10:48 AM

yeah if they get lots of letters, though, i think it will serve to just keep the cheney-fuck story alive. which is fine by me.

Posted by: catherine on June 25, 2004 11:06 AM

Ah, yes, Tommy—Dana Milbank wrote the piece. Enough said.

Posted by: Kriston on June 25, 2004 11:25 AM

I like what Kriston said at Gp:

"But more to the point, people really think kids read the Post? Where did they print it, in Garfield?"

--s

Posted by: j.scott barnard on June 25, 2004 01:58 PM

what's worse, today's junior jumble was TSHIEADH

Posted by: tom on June 25, 2004 03:11 PM

Post A Comment

Name


Email Address


URL


Comments


Remember info?



Google Analytics