Wait a minute, first you are criticizing Kerry for pandering to them,

NOYB wrote:
He did pander to them.

And that's a bad thing? What about Bush & Cheney's pandering? Or is it
only "bad" because it looks like a Democrat might get some of that
voting bloc?



now you want to use their judgement to condemn him?


I'm not using their judgement.

Really?

... I'm using facts...which of course is
confusing to you. He lied to them.

No, you're the one lying. You are contradicting yourself. If Kerry voted
one way on the earlier bill, and the other way at a later time, then
to say that he voted either way is not a lie. However, to say that he
lied about his vote is not the truth... and guess what that means.

And yet you jump up and say that I must be confused... hey, I'm not the
one contradicting myself, nor passing value judgments based on
condemning others for something my own team does regularly.





Can we have just a teensy bit of logic & consistency, please?


Like you would understand logic...or consistency...

Try it, let's see.

So far all you've done is chase your tail and toss some insults. Is that
all your side has to offer?

DSK

"NOYB" wrote in message ink.net...
NEWS FOR SALE: CBS PUSHED BOOK IT OWNS; '60 MINUTES' DID NOT REVEAL PARENT
COMPANY'S FINANCIAL STAKE IN CLARKE PROJECT

CBSNEWS did not inform its viewers last night that its parent company owns
and has a direct financial stake in the success of the book by former White
House terror staffer turned Bush critic, Dick Clarke, the DRUDGE REPORT can
reveal.

60 MINUTES aired a double-segment investigative report on the new book
"Against All Enemies" -- but did not disclose how CBSNEWS parent VIACOM is
publishing the book and will profit from any and all sales!

ETHICAL BREACH

CBS even used heavy promotion for the 60 MINUTES/book launch during its
Sunday sports shows.

It is not clear who made the final decision at CBSNEWS not to inform the
viewer during 60 MINUTES how they were watching a news story about a VIACOM
product.

60 MINUTES pro Lesley Stahl is said to have been aware of the conflict
before the program aired.

Yeah, and the Kerry camp was calling news orgs on monday offering to
pay for sattellite time if they would air Clark in prime time
interviews...

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Wait a minute, first you are criticizing Kerry for pandering to them,

NOYB wrote:
He did pander to them.

And that's a bad thing? What about Bush & Cheney's pandering? Or is it
only "bad" because it looks like a Democrat might get some of that
voting bloc?


I never said it was a bad thing. You did. I said he lied.

I *did* say lying is a bad thing. You don't seem to think so.




now you want to use their judgement to condemn him?


I'm not using their judgement.

Really?

Yes, really.


... I'm using facts...which of course is
confusing to you. He lied to them.

No, you're the one lying. You are contradicting yourself.

No I'm not.

If Kerry voted
one way on the earlier bill

What earlier bill? There is no "Helms-Burton Bill--Version I". There is
only the "Helms-Burton legislation"...aka the Libertad Act...aka the "Cuban
Liberty and Democratic Solidarity".


, and the other way at a later time, then
to say that he voted either way is not a lie. However, to say that he
lied about his vote is not the truth... and guess what that means.

And yet you jump up and say that I must be confused... hey, I'm not the
one contradicting myself, nor passing value judgments based on
condemning others for something my own team does regularly.





Can we have just a teensy bit of logic & consistency, please?


Like you would understand logic...or consistency...

Try it, let's see.

So far all you've done is chase your tail and toss some insults. Is that
all your side has to offer?

Kerry lied about voting for the Helms-Burton legislation.

thunder wrote in message ...
On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 05:50:08 -0800, Backyard Renegade wrote:


First off, I don't frequent any of the above channels. Second, the fact is
that they were hawking a book and purposly neglected to make full
discolsure, or even hint that they may have a financial reason to support
Clark, that is typical and dishonest, but I would not expect you to
address that with any more vigor than kisser did...

LOL, and just where did I not agree with your assessment of 60 Minutes?
60 Minutes has always been a cheap shot show. I will note, however, you
seem to be content to shoot the messenger, rather that deal with the
message.

Why discuss the message, it has been debunked as more Harry/Kerry...
You know, run with it if it works, run from it later after the damage
has been done...