On Wed, 26 Aug 2009 11:23:28 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
.. .
I really didn't think I was that oblique in my presentation. I
certainly don't have a "clew" as to what you're attempting to rebut.
The point here is that a consipcuously left-leaning news organization,
Russia Today, is matter-of-factly stating that the American news media
has a tangible left-wing bias for the most part. And RT doesn't have
a dog in the fight, so to speak. IOW, they're fairly detached
observers of the american political conversation in this respect.
Consequently, it robs the left-leaning pundits of one of their
favorite informal fallacies, the circumstantial ad hominem, in
defending the liberal media.


Let me get this straight... you're a right-wing nutcase citing a Russian
source that considers the possibility that Obama might not be perfect. Yet,
there I'm doubtful that there's a single person on this newsgroup who
believe Obama should not be criticized if he deserves it. Even MSNBC
criticizes him multiple times a week.

Do you consider Rush or O'Really liberal? How about Lew Dobbs? I won't even
mention the moron Glen Beck.

Rudimentarily speaking, since it appears that I will be unable to
render it sensibly otherwise, I have offered an observation that a
Left-leaning news organization, specifically RT, recognizes the
liberal bent of the American news media. This was the only nuance I
was offering, other than the fact that left-leaning politico's in this
country would have a difficult time applying the logical fallacy of
the circumstantial ad hominem to RT to refute RT's perspective of the
American media considering RT's own ostensible, poltical persuasion.
Make sense?

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access