Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:
The major tuna company in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco
district, StarKist (Del Monte) is being exempted from the minimum-wage
increase that Democrats approved this week.

A spokeswoman for Mrs. Pelosi said Wednesday that the speaker has not
been lobbied in any way by StarKist or Del Monte.

Nope - nothing to see here - a decent wage for all Americans - except
for the largest employer in my District.

How long will she last? Bet she doesn't even make it out of this next
term.


Same old same old is right.

Same old posting of political bull**** to a boating newsgroup just to
stir up a fight.


Same old M.O.
1. Make outrageous statement.
2. Post a link to a carefully selected article.
3. Leap to a conclusion that the article doesn't actually support
4. Use the conclusion, not the facts, as the basis for the outrage.
5. Appeal to the emotions, rather than the intellect.
6. Alwasys include a personal attack on someone from the "wrong" side
of the political spectrum.


That may be the standard editorial format on certain types of radio
shows, but in my opinion it makes no useful contribution to a boating
discussion group. Aren't there some "high five" forums on the Limbaugh
and Hannity web sites?

On 14 Jan 2007 09:03:09 -0800, "Chuck Gould"
wrote:


Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:
The major tuna company in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco
district, StarKist (Del Monte) is being exempted from the minimum-wage
increase that Democrats approved this week.

A spokeswoman for Mrs. Pelosi said Wednesday that the speaker has not
been lobbied in any way by StarKist or Del Monte.

Nope - nothing to see here - a decent wage for all Americans - except
for the largest employer in my District.

How long will she last? Bet she doesn't even make it out of this next
term.


Same old same old is right.

Same old posting of political bull**** to a boating newsgroup just to
stir up a fight.


Same old M.O.
1. Make outrageous statement.
2. Post a link to a carefully selected article.
3. Leap to a conclusion that the article doesn't actually support
4. Use the conclusion, not the facts, as the basis for the outrage.
5. Appeal to the emotions, rather than the intellect.
6. Alwasys include a personal attack on someone from the "wrong" side
of the political spectrum.


That may be the standard editorial format on certain types of radio
shows, but in my opinion it makes no useful contribution to a boating
discussion group. Aren't there some "high five" forums on the Limbaugh
and Hannity web sites?

Chuck, it *is* funny how your anti-political-post posts usually manage to
have an anti-conservative comment included therein. You *could* be unbiased
and get the same message across, no?
--
******************************************
***** Have a super day! *****
******************************************

John H

JohnH wrote:

Chuck, it *is* funny how your anti-political-post posts usually manage to
have an anti-conservative comment included therein. You *could* be unbiased
and get the same message across, no?
--
******************************************
***** Have a super day! *****
******************************************

John H

Sorry John. I'll try to be less transparent in the future. But to be
fair, this bit of hysterical propaganda was posted by a conservative
and my comments regarding the poster's M.O. were rather precise.

I have also criticized liberal political posts to the newsgroup, even
though I have less personal objection to liberal politics than to
conservative politics.

And I'm not anti-conservative, I'm anti disruptive behavior. I know,
like, and respect the opinions of many fine conservative people. Even
when I disagree with the same opinions, I can still respect them when
well considered and presented without propaganda techniques. None of
those fine conservative people would impose some anti-liberal
whine onto a boating discussion group, however. The left shoe fits
exactly the same way as the right one, as far as that goes.

There are enough liberals in this group that if we chose to fill it
with non-stop liberal nonsense we could do it. Fortunately, the
majority of people posting to a group like rec.boats have some regard
for the content and character of the group and enough maturity to take
their political outrage (liberal, conservative, or otherwise) to a
venue where people aren't trying to discuss a non-political
recreational pastime. Some self centered screw ups from both sides of
the political spectrum don't have the self control to refrain from
peeing their political pants where it's inappropriate- most of them
aren't even boaters so there's no darn reason except sheer
bullheadedness why they would choose rec.boats to post this stuff.

On 14 Jan 2007 19:51:27 -0800, "Chuck Gould"
wrote:


JohnH wrote:

Chuck, it *is* funny how your anti-political-post posts usually manage to
have an anti-conservative comment included therein. You *could* be unbiased
and get the same message across, no?
--
******************************************
***** Have a super day! *****
******************************************

John H

Sorry John. I'll try to be less transparent in the future. But to be
fair, this bit of hysterical propaganda was posted by a conservative
and my comments regarding the poster's M.O. were rather precise.

I have also criticized liberal political posts to the newsgroup, even
though I have less personal objection to liberal politics than to
conservative politics.

I'm not complaining about your criticism of either liberal or conservative
political posts in the newsgroup. Neither belong here.

However, it *is* possible to criticize *any* political post without the
negative comments toward one group or the other.
--
******************************************
***** Have a super day! *****
******************************************

John H