Could the Press Grow a Spine?

WalterM140 wrote:
Well I watched "Hardball" last night with Campbell Brown.

She had Bartlett, one of the Bushies on. She asked him a question. He talked
for a while and she said something like, "you are very articulate, but that
avoids the question completely." I wish more of the Press would point out that
the vast majority of the questions asked are just totally avoided on both
sides.

She also showed two clips back to back of VP Cheney caught in a big lie about
Atta's supposed meeting with Iraqi intelligence in Prague. In the one clip,
Cheney said it was "confirmed" that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence. About a
year later he said he never said that.

Running the clips back to back showed that he just lied. Bartlett hemmed and
hawed about that and said the question was still open, but Cheney's words
definitively said it was NOT open -- it was CONFIRMED (in case anyone missed
it the first time) that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence.

These ******* Republicans have got to go.

Let's face it, Walt, lying is what they do best....and accusing their opponents
of lying is what they do second best. It seems to be the nature of the beastie.

George Z.

Walt

"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...
WalterM140 wrote:
Well I watched "Hardball" last night with Campbell Brown.

She had Bartlett, one of the Bushies on. She asked him a question. He
talked
for a while and she said something like, "you are very articulate, but
that
avoids the question completely." I wish more of the Press would point
out that
the vast majority of the questions asked are just totally avoided on
both
sides.

She also showed two clips back to back of VP Cheney caught in a big lie
about
Atta's supposed meeting with Iraqi intelligence in Prague. In the one
clip,
Cheney said it was "confirmed" that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence.
About a
year later he said he never said that.

Running the clips back to back showed that he just lied. Bartlett hemmed
and
hawed about that and said the question was still open, but Cheney's
words
definitively said it was NOT open -- it was CONFIRMED (in case anyone
missed
it the first time) that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence.

These ******* Republicans have got to go.

Let's face it, Walt, lying is what they do best....and accusing their
opponents
of lying is what they do second best. It seems to be the nature of the
beastie.


They can't count very well, either! :-)

The good news is most of you radical assholes, being anti-RKBA, will roll up
pretty quickly.

Steve Swartz


"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...
WalterM140 wrote:
Well I watched "Hardball" last night with Campbell Brown.

She had Bartlett, one of the Bushies on. She asked him a question. He
talked
for a while and she said something like, "you are very articulate, but
that
avoids the question completely." I wish more of the Press would point
out that
the vast majority of the questions asked are just totally avoided on
both
sides.

She also showed two clips back to back of VP Cheney caught in a big lie
about
Atta's supposed meeting with Iraqi intelligence in Prague. In the one
clip,
Cheney said it was "confirmed" that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence.
About a
year later he said he never said that.

Running the clips back to back showed that he just lied. Bartlett hemmed
and
hawed about that and said the question was still open, but Cheney's
words
definitively said it was NOT open -- it was CONFIRMED (in case anyone
missed
it the first time) that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence.

These ******* Republicans have got to go.

Let's face it, Walt, lying is what they do best....and accusing their
opponents
of lying is what they do second best. It seems to be the nature of the
beastie.

George Z.

Walt

Subject: Could the Press Grow a Spine?
From: "Leslie Swartz"
Date: 6/23/2004 12:00 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

The good news is most of you radical assholes, being anti-RKBA, will roll up
pretty quickly.

Steve Swartz


Do you have more than three Purple Hearts and a Silver Star?


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

On 24 Jun 2004 14:17:03 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: Could the Press Grow a Spine?
From: "Leslie Swartz"
Date: 6/23/2004 12:00 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

The good news is most of you radical assholes, being anti-RKBA, will roll up
pretty quickly.

Steve Swartz


Do you have more than three Purple Hearts and a Silver Star?


Arthur Kramer

Actually, Art, you shouldn't be using Purple Hearts as a measure of
valor. They demonstrate either bad luck, or if garnered in groups, a
level of combat incompetence.

I've got an SSM and five DFC's, but no PH. I'd rather win than lose.
I'd rather America prevail than the Islamic fundamentalists. I'd
rather retain national sovereignty than subject us to the whims of the
UN. I'd rather carry my own weapon and defend myself. I'd rather
individual responsibility than a welfare state. I'd rather keep my
earnings and make my own spending choices. I'd like higher standards
rather than affirmative action.

Any questions?


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

Subject: Could the Press Grow a Spine?
From: Ed Rasimus
Date: 6/24/2004 7:53 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

On 24 Jun 2004 14:17:03 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: Could the Press Grow a Spine?
From: "Leslie Swartz"
Date: 6/23/2004 12:00 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

The good news is most of you radical assholes, being anti-RKBA, will roll
up
pretty quickly.

Steve Swartz


Do you have more than three Purple Hearts and a Silver Star?


Arthur Kramer

Actually, Art, you shouldn't be using Purple Hearts as a measure of
valor. They demonstrate either bad luck, or if garnered in groups, a
level of combat incompetence.

I've got an SSM and five DFC's, but no PH. I'd rather win than lose.
I'd rather America prevail than the Islamic fundamentalists. I'd
rather retain national sovereignty than subject us to the whims of the
UN. I'd rather carry my own weapon and defend myself. I'd rather
individual responsibility than a welfare state. I'd rather keep my
earnings and make my own spending choices. I'd like higher standards
rather than affirmative action.

Any questions?


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8



There are those who will do nothing for anyone under any circumstances
regardless of need. Then there are those who are more concerned and helpful to
those in need. Your mileage may vary. There is nothing heroic about greed.


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

And there is nothing Benevolent about Stupidity, Comrade.

Steve Swartz




"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...
Subject: Could the Press Grow a Spine?
From: Ed Rasimus
Date: 6/24/2004 7:53 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

On 24 Jun 2004 14:17:03 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: Could the Press Grow a Spine?
From: "Leslie Swartz"
Date: 6/23/2004 12:00 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

The good news is most of you radical assholes, being anti-RKBA, will
roll
up
pretty quickly.

Steve Swartz


Do you have more than three Purple Hearts and a Silver Star?


Arthur Kramer

Actually, Art, you shouldn't be using Purple Hearts as a measure of
valor. They demonstrate either bad luck, or if garnered in groups, a
level of combat incompetence.

I've got an SSM and five DFC's, but no PH. I'd rather win than lose.
I'd rather America prevail than the Islamic fundamentalists. I'd
rather retain national sovereignty than subject us to the whims of the
UN. I'd rather carry my own weapon and defend myself. I'd rather
individual responsibility than a welfare state. I'd rather keep my
earnings and make my own spending choices. I'd like higher standards
rather than affirmative action.

Any questions?


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8



There are those who will do nothing for anyone under any circumstances
regardless of need. Then there are those who are more concerned and
helpful to
those in need. Your mileage may vary. There is nothing heroic about greed.


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

In message , Ed Rasimus
writes
On 24 Jun 2004 14:17:03 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:
Do you have more than three Purple Hearts and a Silver Star?

Actually, Art, you shouldn't be using Purple Hearts as a measure of
valor. They demonstrate either bad luck, or if garnered in groups, a
level of combat incompetence.

I'd call them good luck myself, but then my (limited) experience was
infantry where *we* were the targets. (This isn't meant to denigrate
groups like armour and aviation: just because the enemy is targeting
your platform rather than you personally; doesn't make you safer,
because the overmatch in weapons involved and for aircraft the problem
of a long fall to follow, tends to produce much more an "escaped unhurt
/ killed with no chute" dichotomy)

I've got an SSM and five DFC's, but no PH. I'd rather win than lose.
I'd rather America prevail than the Islamic fundamentalists. I'd
rather retain national sovereignty than subject us to the whims of the
UN. I'd rather carry my own weapon and defend myself. I'd rather
individual responsibility than a welfare state. I'd rather keep my
earnings and make my own spending choices. I'd like higher standards
rather than affirmative action.

Any questions?

Yes, but they're quibbles rather than arguments. I'd argue details of
many of those statements while agreeing with them overall.

--
He thinks too much: such men are dangerous.
Julius Caesar I:2

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 22:46:22 +0100, "Paul J. Adam"
wrote:

In message , Ed Rasimus
writes

Any questions?

Yes, but they're quibbles rather than arguments. I'd argue details of
many of those statements while agreeing with them overall.

But, then you've proven yourself to be a rational individual who
offers greater depth to the discussion than simple name calling or
sloganeering.

As I regularly tell students, political questions are complex and
nuanced. They usually exhibit two opposing positions with deeply held
convictions. The hard part is to rise above the pig-wrestling and
listen to the other side's argument, demand that both sides offer fact
and reason, then make objective rather than subjective choices.

Ain't easy.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

Ed Rasimus wrote:

As I regularly tell students, political questions are complex and
nuanced. They usually exhibit two opposing positions with deeply held
convictions. The hard part is to rise above the pig-wrestling and
listen to the other side's argument, demand that both sides offer fact
and reason, then make objective rather than subjective choices.

Ain't easy.

Has it *ever* actually been that way though?

I'm reading a bio of Ben Franklin (for months now) and am at
the point where he loses his seat in the PA Assembly due to
efforts of "The Proprietors" to oust him.

The Proprietors were basically the Penn family that owned
PA, ran estates there exempt from taxes, etc, etc, etc.

A pamphlet war against Franklin made outrageous claims
(some based on seeds of truth) that put modern political
debate and especially ads to shame.

This sort of character assassination in the guise of
political debate was common political currency from the
founding of the US right up to the late 1800s when electioneering
seemed to become more civil (though still filled with the
smoke filled, back room wheeling and dealing). Washington,
Adams, Jefferson and Jackson seemed especially victimized
by this sort of politically driven, savage personal attack.

Sitting back and coolly considering the evidence for a
decision seems more the realm of scientific method and
even that gets nasty at times.


SMH