|
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
A news paper guy from Seattle, I forget the ragsheet, was being
interviewed last night on O'rielly Factor. The fellow had written an article trashing Bill and Fox news in general. I have to admit I was somewhat amazed to hear him admit that basically he had taken all of his comments out of context, and that if they had been in context and properly framed, it would have given a whole other quite opposite impression of the story. So why are left coast libs so hateful and out of touch, easy, cause they are being lied to by the same self serving folks who have been running the media for the last 50 years. Part of the lie of course is drumming on the right as hateful and dangerous, this keeps the lemmings from straying from the pack, the more honest the news, the more hateful the attacks from the left. It's funny how they keep telling us that the "right" does not want to let out the truth, when it is them who are constantly using the media to try to silence the right. Can you imagine if NPR, Rainbow push, etc, were "right" leaning operations, the left would shut em' down in a second. I watch the lies, admissions, and apologies of those on the left and they bounce off each other like water, I don't see how anyone can miss it. |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
|
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
Backyard Renegade wrote:
A news paper guy from Seattle, I forget the ragsheet, was being interviewed last night on O'rielly Factor. The fellow had written an article trashing Bill and Fox news in general. I have to admit I was somewhat amazed to hear him admit that basically he had taken all of his comments out of context, and that if they had been in context and properly framed, it would have given a whole other quite opposite impression of the story. So why are left coast libs so hateful and out of touch, easy, cause they are being lied to by the same self serving folks who have been running the media for the last 50 years. Part of the lie of course is drumming on the right as hateful and dangerous, this keeps the lemmings from straying from the pack, the more honest the news, the more hateful the attacks from the left. It's funny how they keep telling us that the "right" does not want to let out the truth, when it is them who are constantly using the media to try to silence the right. Can you imagine if NPR, Rainbow push, etc, were "right" leaning operations, the left would shut em' down in a second. I watch the lies, admissions, and apologies of those on the left and they bounce off each other like water, I don't see how anyone can miss it. The thing I find particularly amusing is when the left interview each other, then report it as fact!!! Clearly everyone has their own opinions but so what?? the "opinion" of some uneducated lefty draft dodger is just that, whereas if it's Powell's "opinion" it can be read knowing he's smart, he's made it to the top over some pretty good competition,, he's well experienced & respected by all sides in defense matters & has had the benefit of all the resources of the US & other allied govts in formulating his "opinion". Reporting the "opinions" of un-named people is outright deception nothing more. K |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
Backyard Renegade wrote:
A news paper guy from Seattle, I forget the ragsheet, was being interviewed last night on O'rielly Factor. The fellow had written an article trashing Bill and Fox news in general. I have to admit I was somewhat amazed to hear him admit that basically he had taken all of his comments out of context, and that if they had been in context and properly framed, it would have given a whole other quite opposite impression of the story. So why are left coast libs so hateful and out of touch, easy, cause they are being lied to by the same self serving folks who have been running the media for the last 50 years. Part of the lie of course is drumming on the right as hateful and dangerous, this keeps the lemmings from straying from the pack, the more honest the news, the more hateful the attacks from the left. It's funny how they keep telling us that the "right" does not want to let out the truth, when it is them who are constantly using the media to try to silence the right. Can you imagine if NPR, Rainbow push, etc, were "right" leaning operations, the left would shut em' down in a second. I watch the lies, admissions, and apologies of those on the left and they bounce off each other like water, I don't see how anyone can miss it. Tell us the truth, fella...did you complete even the 4th grade? -- Email sent to is never read. |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
A news paper guy from Seattle, I forget the ragsheet, was being
interviewed last night on O'rielly Factor. The fellow had written an article trashing Bill and Fox news in general. You apparently forgot more than you know. There are only two major newspapers in Seattle. The Seattle Times. The Seattle PI. Just now, running a "search" program in the archives of both newspapers, using the words "O'Reilly Factor", no article critical of O'Reilly showed up. (Suppose some devious liberal pulled it out of the arhives to avoid embarrassment?...Of course not.) Not calling Scotty a liar- it wouldn't surprise me to have a "ringer" interviewed by Fox and I'm sure Scotty saw what he reports. But...... If such a story ever appeared, I can't find it in the achives of our major daily newspapers. So, *if* that portion of the tale is BS, of what possible value could the remainder be? |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 22:04:40 GMT, Joe Parsons
wrote: On 9 Jan 2004 13:00:59 -0800, (Backyard Renegade) wrote: So why are left coast libs so hateful and out of touch, easy, cause they are being lied to by the same self serving folks who have been running the media for the last 50 years. What makes you believe that those who live in any particular area of the country receive information only from regional sources? Joe Parsons Without being pro or con re Backyard's statement, I am wondering why you asked the question you did. Saying, "...the same self serving folks who have been running the media for the last 50 years" doesn't imply information is received only from local sources. John H On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay! |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
|
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
OOOps... Sorry I was not taking notes, but now that I think of it I do
beleive they said Oregon. I will look for the interview again. You can question my education, but to suggest that Fox would put in a "ringer" is just more change the subject bs... I didn't question your education. It wouldn't be the first time that somebody staged an interview. An interview in which the host just magically decimated his adversary. You said "Seattle." I don't know if the article ran or not, but as soon as I pointed out that I couldn't find it in the archives of our major daily papers- your memory improved and the reporter is now from "Oregon." I know you guys on the East Coast think everything west of the Mississippi river is compressed to a couple of hundred square miles, but it's still a fair jog from Seattle to "Believe They Said", Oregon. :-) I can accept that you saw an interview on Fox. The rest of the details are comparatively hazy. Guess we'll have to go ahead and allow "some left coasters" to be moderates, (since most probably are), until proven otherwise. |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
Joel Connelly was interviewed by O"Rielly.
"Gould 0738" wrote in message ... OOOps... Sorry I was not taking notes, but now that I think of it I do beleive they said Oregon. I will look for the interview again. You can question my education, but to suggest that Fox would put in a "ringer" is just more change the subject bs... I didn't question your education. It wouldn't be the first time that somebody staged an interview. An interview in which the host just magically decimated his adversary. You said "Seattle." I don't know if the article ran or not, but as soon as I pointed out that I couldn't find it in the archives of our major daily papers- your memory improved and the reporter is now from "Oregon." I know you guys on the East Coast think everything west of the Mississippi river is compressed to a couple of hundred square miles, but it's still a fair jog from Seattle to "Believe They Said", Oregon. :-) I can accept that you saw an interview on Fox. The rest of the details are comparatively hazy. Guess we'll have to go ahead and allow "some left coasters" to be moderates, (since most probably are), until proven otherwise. |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
GAZ wrote:
Joel Connelly was interviewed by O"Rielly. O'Reilly? The right-wing asshole's asshole. The FDA ought to run a warning crawl under his TV show... "Watching this will rot whatever little remains of your brain..." -- Email sent to is never read. |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... GAZ wrote: Joel Connelly was interviewed by O"Rielly. O'Reilly? The right-wing asshole's asshole. The FDA ought to run a warning crawl under his TV show... "Watching this will rot whatever little remains of your brain..." What is it like living in that strange world of yours where *everyone* who disagrees with you politically is an asshole? I have yet to find another person as closed minded and bigoted as you Harry. Your world must be awfully lonely. |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 19:30:50 -0500, John H wrote:
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 22:04:40 GMT, Joe Parsons wrote: On 9 Jan 2004 13:00:59 -0800, (Backyard Renegade) wrote: So why are left coast libs so hateful and out of touch, easy, cause they are being lied to by the same self serving folks who have been running the media for the last 50 years. What makes you believe that those who live in any particular area of the country receive information only from regional sources? Joe Parsons Without being pro or con re Backyard's statement, I am wondering why you asked the question you did. Saying, "...the same self serving folks who have been running the media for the last 50 years" doesn't imply information is received only from local sources. I think it does. From the subject of his post, he is talking about "left (west) libs," not the "libs" he so scorns from other areas of the country. Joe Parsons |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
Harry Krause wrote in message ...
GAZ wrote: Joel Connelly was interviewed by O"Rielly. O'Reilly? The right-wing asshole's asshole. The FDA ought to run a warning crawl under his TV show... "Watching this will rot whatever little remains of your brain..." The fact is, the guy as good as admitted to dishonest reporting but of course none of you has anything to say about that. I guess to you, lies are kinda' like air to the rest of us.. |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
Harry Krause wrote in message ...
GAZ wrote: Joel Connelly was interviewed by O"Rielly. O'Reilly? The right-wing asshole's asshole. The FDA ought to run a warning crawl under his TV show... "Watching this will rot whatever little remains of your brain..." You know harry, for someone who thinks they are so smart, you are awfully narrow minded. How can you even pretend to have a fair opinion when you refuse to even consider the opposition on any subject. Seems to me you must have led one of those sheltered kind of limosine lives where there was never any oppostion or accountability for ones actions and words to think the way you do. Sometimes in conversation folks say they hope folks like you actually have to work for a living one day or stand up for themselves, I usually hope they don't. I hate to see anyone suffer, no matter how wreched they are. |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
"GAZ" wrote in message ...
Joel Connelly was interviewed by O"Rielly. Yes, that's the guy. Another Harry clone, not an honest bone in his fat little body. I find folks like him that would lie to the public about it's leader, lies that would intentionally turn a public against that leader, just to suit a personal agenda, to be among the most discusting vermin on earth. Just call Harry, Leonard... "Gould 0738" wrote in message ... OOOps... Sorry I was not taking notes, but now that I think of it I do beleive they said Oregon. I will look for the interview again. You can question my education, but to suggest that Fox would put in a "ringer" is just more change the subject bs... I didn't question your education. It wouldn't be the first time that somebody staged an interview. An interview in which the host just magically decimated his adversary. You said "Seattle." I don't know if the article ran or not, but as soon as I pointed out that I couldn't find it in the archives of our major daily papers- your memory improved and the reporter is now from "Oregon." I know you guys on the East Coast think everything west of the Mississippi river is compressed to a couple of hundred square miles, but it's still a fair jog from Seattle to "Believe They Said", Oregon. :-) I can accept that you saw an interview on Fox. The rest of the details are comparatively hazy. Guess we'll have to go ahead and allow "some left coasters" to be moderates, (since most probably are), until proven otherwise. |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
The fact is, the guy as good as admitted to dishonest reporting but of
course none of you has anything to say about that. I guess to you, lies are kinda' like air to the rest of us.. Tracking this thing down- It appears that the O'Reilly's debate victory was more apparent to Scotty than to O' Reilly. O'Reilly's website says, "Kudos to Joel Connelly for coming on the show to defend his column, which he claimed was "satircal" in nature." Wouldn't O'Reilly have been shouting from the rooftops if he got some evil, scheming, mind poisoning, liberal to admit "dishonest reporting"? http://www.billoreilly.com/pg/jsp/community/tvshow.jsp Plenty of room for a variety of opinions in the world. If Scotty thinks JC was trounced by O'Reilly, he's free to keep score anyway he chooses. |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
"Satircal in nature", yeah right. The dishonest part was that he
neglected to tell the folks he was reporting to that it was "satircal" and any of them would get a very negative opinion, based on half truths and dishonest framing of the article. Can't comment on the article, as I haven't been able to find a copy on line. (If you know where I can find a copy it would be interesting to see). A satirist doesn't start with a disclaimer: "The following work is a satire." The article may or may not be good satire. If it *is* good satire, there are people who might not read it carefully or who strive to represent the article in a certain light who will not recognize it. Good satire sneaks up on you......you begin reading it and then you finally realize that the author is just putting you on. Once you're clued in, the remainder of the article becomes particularly funny. . Are you guys all reading out of the same play book? No. The world is not comprised of a series of absolute stereotypes. (I know that isn't what you're sold by much of the right wing media, "libs this, all libs that, etc"), Everybody who disagrees with you, including the huge percentage of the country who have serious doubts about your beloved Bush, isn't guilty of treason and sedition. |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
|
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
"Gould 0738" wrote in message ... "Satircal in nature", yeah right. The dishonest part was that he neglected to tell the folks he was reporting to that it was "satircal" and any of them would get a very negative opinion, based on half truths and dishonest framing of the article. Can't comment on the article, as I haven't been able to find a copy on line. (If you know where I can find a copy it would be interesting to see). A satirist doesn't start with a disclaimer: "The following work is a satire." The article may or may not be good satire. If it *is* good satire, there are people who might not read it carefully or who strive to represent the article in a certain light who will not recognize it. Good satire sneaks up on you......you begin reading it and then you finally realize that the author is just putting you on. Once you're clued in, the remainder of the article becomes particularly funny. . Are you guys all reading out of the same play book? No. The world is not comprised of a series of absolute stereotypes. (I know that isn't what you're sold by much of the right wing media, "libs this, all libs that, etc"), Everybody who disagrees with you, including the huge percentage of the country who have serious doubts about your beloved Bush, isn't guilty of treason and sedition. A huge percentage have serious doubt about Bush? How about far less than a majority. According to the latest polls, anywhere from 54% to 64% of Americans approve of the way GWB is doing his job. http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm Sorry Chuck...the "huge percentage" is actually in favor of GWB. ;-) |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
Oh boy! A quote war! :-)
Scotty launched the first salvo with: There is nothing patriotic about hating your country, or pretending that you can love your country but despise your government." Bill Clinton Speaking at Michigan State University Gould courageously fired back with: "Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official, save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him insofar as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country." Theodore Roosevelt ****** Now, Scotty, if you are willing to state "I think Bill Clinton is a wiser man than Teddy Roosevelt"- I guess your quote wins. :-) Here's the article where I found the quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ Party loyalty is un-American -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ © 2000 WorldNetDaily.com Our first president, George Washington, warned us about the dangers of putting any political party above the general interests of the country. It would do well for Americans today to relearn this basic lesson. Our loyalty must first and foremost be to the fundamental principles upon which our nation was built, not to the finite interests of political partisanship. It is a fatal mistake to assume that any political party is the harbinger of patriotism. Theodore Roosevelt said, "Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official, save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him insofar as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country." My loyalty to a party or politician must be measured by his loyalty to the fundamental principles on which America was founded. When I remain loyal to a politician or party after they demonstrate an unwillingness to be faithful to those immutable principles I am guilty of disloyalty to my country. Sadly, too many people today are willing to turn their backs on truth for the sake of remaining loyal to the party. Democrats who railed for justice when Richard Nixon was president looked the other way or even defended crimes committed by Bill Clinton. Republicans who railed against Bill Clinton refuse to examine the character, conduct and positions of G. W. Bush............. (remainder snipped) (Article written by Dr. Chuck Baldwin) |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
A huge percentage have serious doubt about Bush? How about far less than a
majority. According to the latest polls, anywhere from 54% to 64% of Americans approve of the way GWB is doing his job. Never said it was a majority. Merely a huge, (rather than insignificant) percentage. Read for content, please. |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
"Gould 0738" wrote in message ... A huge percentage have serious doubt about Bush? How about far less than a majority. According to the latest polls, anywhere from 54% to 64% of Americans approve of the way GWB is doing his job. Never said it was a majority. Merely a huge, (rather than insignificant) percentage. Read for content, please. Please learn definition of the word huge. I posted it for you to save time: huge (click to hear the word) (hyj) adj. hug·er, hug·est 1. Of exceedingly great size, extent, or quantity. See Synonyms at enormous. 2. Of exceedingly great scope or natu the huge influence of the Hellenic world. Sorry Chuckie, but a *huge* percentage of Americans *support*, not doubt, GWB. Brush up on your grammar skills, please. |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
"Jim--" wrote in message ...
"Gould 0738" wrote in message ... A huge percentage have serious doubt about Bush? How about far less than a majority. According to the latest polls, anywhere from 54% to 64% of Americans approve of the way GWB is doing his job. Never said it was a majority. Merely a huge, (rather than insignificant) percentage. Read for content, please. Please learn definition of the word huge. I posted it for you to save time: huge (click to hear the word) (hyj) adj. hug·er, hug·est 1. Of exceedingly great size, extent, or quantity. See Synonyms at enormous. 2. Of exceedingly great scope or natu the huge influence of the Hellenic world. Sorry Chuckie, but a *huge* percentage of Americans *support*, not doubt, GWB. Brush up on your grammar skills, please. He is just fine with the grammar skills, he is just intellectually dishonest and good at goosestepping... |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
Backyard Renegade wrote:
"Jim--" wrote in message ... "Gould 0738" wrote in message ... A huge percentage have serious doubt about Bush? How about far less than a majority. According to the latest polls, anywhere from 54% to 64% of Americans approve of the way GWB is doing his job. Never said it was a majority. Merely a huge, (rather than insignificant) percentage. Read for content, please. Please learn definition of the word huge. I posted it for you to save time: huge (click to hear the word) (hyj) adj. hug·er, hug·est 1. Of exceedingly great size, extent, or quantity. See Synonyms at enormous. 2. Of exceedingly great scope or natu the huge influence of the Hellenic world. Sorry Chuckie, but a *huge* percentage of Americans *support*, not doubt, GWB. Brush up on your grammar skills, please. He is just fine with the grammar skills, he is just intellectually dishonest and good at goosestepping... The meaning of "huge" fits perfectly well into the way Chuckster used it. The word is not finitely defined. It isn't one of those BORG binary words, eh? By the way, it is a huge mistake to consider the art of "defining" words as part of grammar. Grammar deals with inflexional forms of a language or other means of indicating the relations of words in the sentence, and with the rules for employing these in accordance with established usage. It also usually includes the phonetic system of the language and the principles of its representation in writing. -- Email sent to is never read. |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Backyard Renegade wrote: "Jim--" wrote in message ... "Gould 0738" wrote in message ... A huge percentage have serious doubt about Bush? How about far less than a majority. According to the latest polls, anywhere from 54% to 64% of Americans approve of the way GWB is doing his job. Never said it was a majority. Merely a huge, (rather than insignificant) percentage. Read for content, please. Please learn definition of the word huge. I posted it for you to save time: huge (click to hear the word) (hyj) adj. hug·er, hug·est 1. Of exceedingly great size, extent, or quantity. See Synonyms at enormous. 2. Of exceedingly great scope or natu the huge influence of the Hellenic world. Sorry Chuckie, but a *huge* percentage of Americans *support*, not doubt, GWB. Brush up on your grammar skills, please. He is just fine with the grammar skills, he is just intellectually dishonest and good at goosestepping... The meaning of "huge" fits perfectly well into the way Chuckster used it. The word is not finitely defined. It isn't one of those BORG binary words, eh? Who made you dictionary king? That is your opinion....I stated mine. By the way, it is a huge mistake to consider the art of "defining" words as part of grammar. Grammar has everything to do with the proper use of words when conveying an idea or opinion. You think not? |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
Jim-- wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Backyard Renegade wrote: "Jim--" wrote in message ... "Gould 0738" wrote in message ... A huge percentage have serious doubt about Bush? How about far less than a majority. According to the latest polls, anywhere from 54% to 64% of Americans approve of the way GWB is doing his job. Never said it was a majority. Merely a huge, (rather than insignificant) percentage. Read for content, please. Please learn definition of the word huge. I posted it for you to save time: huge (click to hear the word) (hyj) adj. hug·er, hug·est 1. Of exceedingly great size, extent, or quantity. See Synonyms at enormous. 2. Of exceedingly great scope or natu the huge influence of the Hellenic world. Sorry Chuckie, but a *huge* percentage of Americans *support*, not doubt, GWB. Brush up on your grammar skills, please. He is just fine with the grammar skills, he is just intellectually dishonest and good at goosestepping... The meaning of "huge" fits perfectly well into the way Chuckster used it. The word is not finitely defined. It isn't one of those BORG binary words, eh? Who made you dictionary king? That is your opinion....I stated mine. My two degrees in English, perhaps, my long career as a professional writer, and my collection and use of many dictionaries, none of which are the on-line type you like? There is no finite definition for "huge" in the dictionary. A standard definition is as follows: Very great, large, or big; immense, enormous, vast. Not finite. Do you understand the term finite? By the way, it is a huge mistake to consider the art of "defining" words as part of grammar. Grammar has everything to do with the proper use of words when conveying an idea or opinion. You think not? Hehehe. You're wrong, as usual. I gave you the definition of grammar. The art of defining words is not a part of grammar. You obviously don't know what the definition of grammar is, either. What is it that you do know? -- Email sent to is never read. |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Jim-- wrote: Grammar has everything to do with the proper use of words when conveying an idea or opinion. You think not? Hehehe. You're wrong, as usual. I gave you the definition of grammar. The art of defining words is not a part of grammar. Where did I say it was. I said "grammar has everything to do with the proper use of words when conveying an idea or opinion." Do you dispute that Harry? |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
Jim-- wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Jim-- wrote: Grammar has everything to do with the proper use of words when conveying an idea or opinion. You think not? Hehehe. You're wrong, as usual. I gave you the definition of grammar. The art of defining words is not a part of grammar. Where did I say it was. I said "grammar has everything to do with the proper use of words when conveying an idea or opinion." Do you dispute that Harry? Absolutely, and the definition I provided refuted it. -- Email sent to is never read. |
Why some left coasters think they are moderates...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Jim-- wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Jim-- wrote: Grammar has everything to do with the proper use of words when conveying an idea or opinion. You think not? Hehehe. You're wrong, as usual. I gave you the definition of grammar. The art of defining words is not a part of grammar. Where did I say it was. I said "grammar has everything to do with the proper use of words when conveying an idea or opinion." Do you dispute that Harry? Absolutely, and the definition I provided refuted it. Sorry bud but what you just said makes no sense. And you have two degrees in English, a long career as a professional writer, and a collection and use of many dictionaries? Funny. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:22 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com