On Feb 3, 4:49*pm, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 11:25:28 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould





wrote:
On Feb 3, 10:42?am, wrote:
On Feb 3, 1:39?pm, John H. wrote:

On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 09:13:31 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould

wrote:
On Feb 3, 6:18?am, John H. wrote:
Bye!

McCain did pretty good, but illegal immigration didn't come up. That's
where he takes a lot of heat in my book.
--
John H

You mean FOX threw McCain a softball?

No.....

Imagine that. ?:-)

They just didn't throw the ball. It was neither soft nor hard. From the
liberals perspective, McCain is pretty hard on illegal immigrants, i.e., he
calls them illegal instead of 'undocumented', as though they lost their ID
card.

If you watched, you'll have noted that Wallace was just as rough with
McCain as he was with Hillary.
--
John H

That is what the left calls bias They have ruled the media for half
a century, they are not happy...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I don't see any great shift on the horizon for media "rule".
The only media the right controls is whatever stations it can buy.
Buying up all the TV, radio, and newspaper outlets in dusty little
towns
around the country may make a particular editorial viewpoint the only
"voice" locally available, but that still doesn't make that viewpoint
any big deal on a national basis.

Is Washington DC one of your 'dusty little towns'?

Chuck, you are too much.
--
John H- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

He makes so many of my points for me I really don't think Chuck
realizes that he is what most of the country might consider an "elite
liberal". I have never really wanted to think badly of folks like
that, just wonder how they missed so much. Sometimes they are so
detached, they don't even realize how insulting and patronizing their
comments are.. Like they say, some folks don't know what they don't
know. That being said, I still remain that Chuck is pretty honest and
means no disrespect to anyone when he is being serious...