wrote in message
...
On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 17:56:33 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 17:42:42 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

wrote in message
m...
On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 13:33:27 -0400, BAR wrote:

HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:14:10 -0400, BAR
wrote:

wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 06:09:43 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Mar 13, 8:53 am, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message

. ..





JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
wrote in message
...

On Mar 13, 8:31 am, HK wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 13, 8:17 am, wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 05:05:37 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:
Our local paper which basically trumpets the New York
Lies,
did not
make one mention of Spitzers party, not only that, the
article left
out all the possible felonies and only noted the
prostitution in one
paragraph. Completely ignoring the
Wire fraud
Mail fraud
Money structuring
Mann act
and all of the other felonies included in the possible
charges..
Here we go again, "it's all about the sex". Here come
the
excuses.
Americans deserve better than that kind of double
standard.
I still say he will be back, stronger than ever.. you
watch.
Just keeping count, you have the Chicago paper, ABC
news,
Journal
Inquirer (our local DNC ragsheet).
Anyone else have any expamples of local news outlest
protecting the
DNC on this one to add to this list? Check your papers
folks, bet
they
are doing the same. Some are even worse, trying in a
clever
way to
associate the GOP with Spitzer for those around the
country
that do
not know what party Spitzer was, it is quite a scam...
The idea that there is any collusion among newspapers is
just plain
laughable. Not much different than suggesting that all
the
drivers in
the Indy 500 get together ahead of time and decide who is
going to
win.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
You don't think the DNC has enough folks to make the phone
calls.. Did
your local paper mention he was a dem? If so, please link
me.
Bet you
cant
Here's a bit from *my* local paper:
Spitzer to Step Down as N.Y. Governor
Embattled *Democrat* Apologizes for His 'Private Failings'
By Keith B. Richburg and Carrie Johnson
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, March 13, 2008; A01
NEW YORK, March 12 -- New York Gov. Eliot L. Spitzer, a
rising
*Democratic* Party star who won election 16 months ago as a
crusading
reformer against corruption, announced his resignation
Wednesday after
being ensnared in a federal investigation that exposed his
double life
as a longtime regular client of high-priced prostitutes.
With his wife, Silda Wall Spitzer, at his side, Spitzer
apologized for
what he said were "my private failings" and said he is
stepping down so
as not to "disrupt the people's work." He said the
resignation
will take
effect Monday, to give his successor, Lt. Gov. David A.
Paterson, time
to make a smooth transition.
- - -
Time for you to check Rush for your next idiotic
accusation.-
Hide
quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Good, I will add it to the list, so far we are 3-1...
Thanks,
and BTW,
like I said before, Rush bores me, I don't listen to talk
radio..
=================
But....doesn't the mother ship claim that the Washington
Post
is not fair
and balanced? Are you allowed to read it? You might want to
pull down the
shades while doing so.
The Washington Post is not fair and balanced by anyone's
standards except
Harry's.
It's fair when the person reading it sees what he wants to
see.
In this
case, it made JWFM happy because it associated Spitzer with
the
word
"Democratic". Tomorrow, it may not please him as much.- Hide
quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
My paper is the Journal Inquirer... Hartford CT area.. And you
are
lieing again, I never said I was happy, I just noted it..
period..
stop putting words in my mouth. You and Harrry seem to be
pretty
good
at that.

If you live in New England, you would have to be pretty ignorant
of
your surroundings not to know who Elliot Spitzer is. Add to that
the
fact that the stories you are looking at are filed from NEW
YORK,
where it would be pretty silly to mention that Spitzer is a
democrat
every time his name is printed. How often do they put the word
Republican after the name of Jodie Rell, Governor of
Connecticut?
I
think you'll find that they occasionally mention it when it is
actually pertinent to the story, and pretty much never as part
of
a
headline or lead paragraph unless it's a story about the
republican
party position on something.


Isn't the standard style that the identification goes with the
first
use and there after it is not needed? The problem with
"journalism"
today is that the political agenda of the journalist determines
which style is used?

Nope. You've got it about as wrong as possible. The first use of a
name in an article should be first and last name, and after that,
the
last name only is used unless it would cause confusion.
AP publishes a style book that most newspapers follow at least
loosely. Some follow it more closely than others. Political
afilliation is not used unless it impacts the story in some
meaningful
way. Spitzer didn't do any of the things he allegedly did because
he
is a member of any particular political party, organization, race,
or
religion. All are incidental to the story, so none are prominent
in
the stories. They mention that he is married, and has children
because
that DOES help tell the story.

How does getting arrested for tapping your toes while taking a crap
in
an airport bathroom warrant having your political party affiliation
mentioned two or three times in each paragraph when the story is
reported?



Because it is the *Republican Party* that has positioned itself as
the
party of *family values* (whatever the hell that is), and that party
that is against gay right, and because Senator Craig was in the
forefront of the GOP battle against gays.

Spitzer got elected based upon his desire to root out corruption and
run
and ethical administration. Let's be fair.


Yes, and MUCH has been made of that in the media. In the news biz,
that's called a HOOK or an angle. It's a huge element of the story.
Many people are more incensed about the hypocrisy involved than simply
what he did. I am one of those people.



Right. Like this chart, which doesn't just point out gay behavior, since
that's becoming an accepted thing. It points out the hypocrisy of the
people
involved.
http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...g?t=1205430117


You are pretty weird sometimes, Kanter.




Have you seen a better one page summary of (as the magazine called it)
"Hot
Republican Gay Sex"? :-)


Certainly not something I would scan and save, and the sample size is
minuscule, so it doesn't mean much anyway. If the title was as you
state, then it's yellow journalism and pandering to a particular
demographic. You apparently match that target group. As I said,
sometimes you are a little weird. This is one of those times.



It serves a purpose: Dealing with the faithful who pretend they've never
heard of these bathroom queens before, and insist on "a cite". That usually
shuts them up. It's fun.