Talk:Roger Stone

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Roger Stone article.

Article policies
This is a controversial topic that may be under dispute. Please read this page and discuss substantial changes here before making them.
Make sure to supply full citations when adding information and consider tagging or removing uncited/unciteable information.
This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.




I would just like to add, that I am a conservative republican and yet everything about Roger Stone that has been discussed here - including the Specter/Kerry signs, the mob during the Florida recount, and more were known to me through Republican party circles prior to reading this article or looking at other websites. From what I've heard, this guy is bad news all around.

This page is terribly biased and frankly, unless some of these allegations can be backed up with evidence, they should be removed.

Jgardner 21:14, 2005 Apr 22 (UTC)

There is plenty of documentation out there on Roger. See Evans & Novak April 27, 1977 (a story that I "planted") detailing his escapades See Watergate Hearings 1973 documenting his exploits as "Michael McMinoway" Roger's code name at CREEP: Sedan Chair II. He flunked out of George Washington Uinversity and never received a degree. A known racist, at GWU he used to refer to Blacks as "jungle bunnies" and "spear chuckers". Interestingly, in the College Republicans he was a sworn enemy of Karl Rove who was CR head at that time. He along with Terry Dolan (died of AIDS in 1980, a closest gay who attacked other gays) attempted to takeover the CRs but were outsmarted and outmanuervered by Karl. (Karl was a "liberal", "communist" or worse in their eyes) Stone was placed in the National YR Chairman slot by Charlie Black, Richard Viguerie and Peter McPherson. JulianG3

Contents

[edit] Tried to clean it up

I tried to clean it up. There are no facts on this guy except from the wacko-left hate-america-first Bush-is-hitler crowd. I mean, none of these allegations are substiantiated, and the the so-called sources are political rags and websites. But apparently he is some kind of villain to these guys. One website went as far as to make it sound like he was fresh from Nazi training camp with his blonde hair and blue eyes. Jgardner 21:31, 2005 Apr 22 (UTC)

I'm tempted to put something like the following in this article:
The far-left crazy wackos who see Karl Rove behind every liberal failing consider Roger Stone a central figure in all his dealings. Unable to produce any evidence, we are left to believe that Roger Stone, at least in their eyes, is more fiction that reality.
Jgardner 08:57, 2005 Apr 28 (UTC)
Thank you for resisting the temptation. Ellsworth 20:57, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
in light of this display of wanton ignorance, all of Jgardner's contributions should be systematically deleted as suspect.

Actually, there are plenty of facts. Fact: Roger Stone was kicked off the Dole team during his presidential bid for placing an advert in a DC swinger's magazine. Fact: Stone and Trump were forced to withdraw adverts that portrayed Indians in New York State in a highly racist light. --Poorpaddy 17:14, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Anonymous revisions, NPOV tags

I'm not sure 63.202.172.90's suggestion to ignore Jgardner's edits is warranted. This article is not neutral. The criticism of Stone should note the source of the criticism, shouldn't it? Is citing Lyndon LaRouche publications a mainstream and neutral source of fact? The same article cited that is critical of Stone also alleges that he was "coordinating Cuban mobs" during the 2000 Florida Recount. Is there evidence for that? Kaisershatner 14:33, 2 May 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Dirty Tricks started in first grade

Article should cite recent interview in Weekly Standard where Stone describes his first political dirty tricks operation in first grade: [1]

'Stone was bitten by the political bug early. In first grade, he supported John F. Kennedy, because he was Catholic, like Stone, and "he had better hair than Nixon." During a mock election at school, Stone told classmates that if Nixon won, he'd make kids go to school on Saturdays. "Kennedy swept the election," he says proudly, "because of disinformation I spread about Nixon. It was kind of a first experience." ' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.202.248.81 (talk) 13:44, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] C.U.N.T., a Roger Stone 527 group

Why isn't this in here?

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/01/legendary_gop_strategist_launc.php

http://www.citizensunitednottimid.org/

"The more people go to the site, the more people buy the T-shirts," Stone explains.... "The more people buy the T-shirts, the more people wear the T-shirts. The more people wear the T-shirts, the more people are educated. Consequently, our mission has been achieved." Though neither the word itself nor even the acronym is ever mentioned, "it's one-word education. That's our mission. No issues. No policy groups. No position papers. This is a simple committee with an unfortunate acronym...."

Funny how the "family values" party attracts the most venomously hateful people.
--63.25.248.176 (talk) 20:36, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, really! The Repiglican Party, just as classy as ever! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.128.226.167 (talk) 04:15, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
I've been meaning to add it. I'll get to it. Worth noting. Thanks for the links. Hey, anyone feel free to add it in before I get to it. Noroton (talk) 23:58, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ref cleanup and whatnot

I've cleaned up some refs and removed some unreferenced or poorly referenced content. I've also written to Mr Stone to ask for a free image that can be used in this article. I had removed the external links as unnecessary (particularly the Village Voice article) but as Gamaliel reverted that I just elaborated on the description of his website. Avruch T 19:31, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Relevance of the "personal style" section

I'm not sure what the relevance is of the personal style section. It seems like he is known for his professional activities, not his personal spending and dressing habits. Are there other BLPs that include this type of trivia? I think that although its been noted in passing in some articles, it is nonetheless a not-really-important aspect of his life that probably does not need to be included in this article. Avruch T 21:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I added back the "personal style" section because this aspect of his character has been pretty widely noted. I've just added citations from Newsday, The New York Observer and The New York Times which have noted his flamboyance (in addition to what we have from The Weekly Standard), and both the Times and The Weekly Standard give some details. I strongly suspect that there isn't a profile of him in the media that doesn't mention this and go into details. It extends both into his clothing, his public persona and other aspects of his personal life, as noted in that section. It seems to me the article would be really lacking an important aspect of this subject if we didn't include it. Noroton (talk) 21:21, 28 April 2008 (UTC)