Greetings from your friendly, neighborhood, TERRORIST!

"Jay Honeck" wrote

Which is why I listen to NPR. It may be liberal in many ways, but they
report the WHOLE truth.

How do you know?

That's actually a serious question, I wasn't being flippant. I can
cite 2 specific examples where NPR left out critical information from
stories (which I'll spare you unless you want to hear them). And
that's a lot, considering how rarely I can stomach listening to their
biased reporting.

Jim Rosinski

Which is why I listen to NPR. It may be liberal in many ways, but they
report the WHOLE truth.

How do you know?

Well, I read extensively. I subscribe to two newspapers, Newsweek, and (of
course) I read Yahoo news all day long.

Can we EVER know that we're getting the "whole truth"? Of course not. But
NPR, due to its non-commercial format, does very well.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:



Can we EVER know that we're getting the "whole truth"? Of course not. But
NPR, due to its non-commercial format, does very well.

Public radio and TV are as commercial as regular broadcast and cable
radio and TV.

Bob Noel writes:
In article , Brian
Westley wrote:

ACLU attempted to prevent the Boy Scouts from discriminating against
people. Hardly an attack.

Except the Boy Scouts is a private organization.

That wasn't decided UNTIL the courts ruled when the ACLU brought the
lawsuit;

It was already known that the BSA is a private organization.

Nope; the Dale case hinged on whether the BSA was a "public
accommodation" or not.

Perhaps it wasn't legally determined until the case, but the BSA
being a private organization falls into the duh category.

Not when government agencies sponsor BSA units; the government
can't run youth groups that exclude atheists.

---
Merlyn LeRoy

"Dave Stadt" writes:
"Brian Westley" wrote in message
...
"Tom S." writes:
"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
In a previous article, "C J Campbell"
said:
...
ACLU's attack on the Boy Scouts is legendary. Apparently ACLU does not
believe in freedom of association, either, if it involves groups that
it
does not like.

ACLU attempted to prevent the Boy Scouts from discriminating against
people. Hardly an attack.

Except the Boy Scouts is a private organization.

That wasn't decided UNTIL the courts ruled when the ACLU brought the
lawsuit; you can hardly fault the ACLU for arguing its side of a case
(much of which was based on the fact that many government agencies
sponsor BSA units. Note that I'm not talking about schools allowing BSA
units to meet; there were, and still are, lots of public schools and
other government agencies that own & operate BSA units.

How does an organization "own" a BSA unit?

The BSA itself says the sponsor "owns and operates" the unit,
because it's just a youth group started by that organization
that is using the BSA program. If a public school decides to
start a soccer team, they "own" it. The problem is when a
school decides to start a Scout unit, because the school can't
exclude people on the basis of religious belief the way the
BSA requires.

---
Merlyn LeRoy

Stefan wrote

More to the point, there even is no such thing as an absolute truth.

Right. There are absolutely no absolutes. If you see the
self-inconsistency in those words, you should be able to see it in
yours as well.

Jim Rosinski

Jim Rosinski wrote:

Right. There are absolutely no absolutes. If you see the
self-inconsistency in those words, you should be able to see it in
yours as well.

Surprize, this was one of the main philosophical problems the humanists
encountered. Descarte's solution was cogito, ergo sum. This solution is
broadly accepted since the 17th century. Maybe I'm slightly less stupid
than you might think.

Stefan

Jim Rosinski wrote:

Right. There are absolutely no absolutes. If you see the
self-inconsistency in those words, you should be able to see it in
yours as well.

Surprize, this was one of the main philosophical problems the humanists
encountered. Descartes offered the solution cogito, ergo sum. This
solution has been broadly accepted since the 17th century. Maybe I'm
slightly less stupid than you might think.

Stefan

In July I went to a dinner party where there was a guest from England.
When the subject of NPR came up, he said: What's that? Without
thinking, I said: "National Partisan Radio."

Omigod! The Good People at table were so upset their teeth were
chattering.

Sally bawled me out afterward.

Sometimes I feel like a character in a New Yorker cartoon, where the
clueless husband is leaving the party and having his sins pointed out
by his wife.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! www.vivabush.org

On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 23:13:49 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

Can we EVER know that we're getting the "whole truth"? Of course not. But
NPR, due to its non-commercial format, does very well.
--

Jay, you should get the Wall Street Journal. Hey! Business expense!

The editorial page and the Leisure & Arts page (book reviews etc) are
refreshingly and intelligently right-wing. The news pages are neutral.
Some of the opinion columns are liberal (especially the weekly op-ed
from Albert Hunt, the WSJ bureau chief in Washington, who is as
left-wing as the editorial page is right-wing).

I get up at 5 o'clock and do my online chores over cereal and coffee.
(God, I love the aftertaste of coffee at 5:27 a.m., which it is at the
moment.) Then I wash up. Then I go out to the road and get the WSJ,
which I read over the second cup of coffee.

By 7 a.m. I am alert, informed, opinionated, and ready to earn a
living.


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! www.vivabush.org