for the 5 or 6 people without a brain maybe, but it's too small a percentage to make a difference. I wouldn't worry about it.
For you and me, maybe, but you gotta remember, Joe Six-pack don't know better, he's got to many other things to worry about and besides, why would FAUX news lie?or the 5 or 6 people without a brain maybe, but it's too small a percentage to make a difference. I wouldn't worry about it.
Wow, i thought the People's Temple offed themselves twenty years ago in South america..
That was the Nike branch....Obama obviously belongs to the Stephen Marbury branch....
Because Joe Sixpack, the typical FOX News viewer, is on the fence between Fred Thompson and Barack Obama, of course.
Can we sticky a boutons post to the top of the political forum and be done with it? It's the same goddamn post every single time:
Repug/dumb /FAUX News/ head/Dubya/wingnuts/M$M/dip s
"Repug/dumb /FAUX News/ head/Dubya/wingnuts/M$M/dip s"
M$M is outta place. That's one of Dan's faves.
Repeating truths, some might stick. And I love it if they annoy the pricks here.
Same tactic as head repeating lies for years "Saddam-WTC" suckered millions of people, most Repugs are still suckered.
Youre not repeating truths, youre repeating opinions.
Repug = opinion
dumb = name subs ution
FAUX News = ok, some truth...ok, a lot
head = name subs ution
Dubya = nickname
wingnuts = opinion
dip s = guess?
You express your opinion in the most elementary of ways. Thus, the reason you consistently speak to deaf ears. I dont listen to my 7 year old niece because she thinks, talks and acts like a 7 year old. I dont care how many books shes read, or what news sites she gets her info from. Shes 7.
The truths about the Repugs are easily condensed to a few, the overwhelming truth being their murderous crime of the Iraq war, closely followed by their willful incompetence in all areas of governance, except in protecting and enriching the super-rich and corps to the detriment of the other 99%. The Iraq war is clearly nothing but an economic policy to enrich the MIC and oilcos.
Talking about this Exec and the Repug/neo- s who put them there does not merit respectful terms because these criminals merit no respect, only impeachment and ignominy. I don't care whether my position is minority or majority, but even the criminal Nixon at resignation was more popular than dubya.
I am not trying to be condescending, seriously, but was that so hard?The truths about the Repugs are easily condensed to a few, the overwhelming truth being their murderous crime of the Iraq war, closely followed by their willful incompetence in all areas of governance, except in protecting and enriching the super-rich and corps to the detriment of the other 99%. The Iraq war is clearly nothing but an economic policy to enrich the MIC and oilcos.
Talking about this Exec and the Repug/neo- s who put them there does not merit respectful terms because these criminals merit no respect, only impeachment and ignominy. I don't care whether my position is minority or majority, but even the criminal Nixon at resignation was more popular than dubya.
Look at the previous quote compared with:
Which one has a better chance of conveying a convincing argument and influencing the sphere of others?slapping dumb /red state/NRA/sheeple/rabble/Bible-thumper right wingers is TOO EASY, always has been, always will be.
Cheap entertainment!
Are you really trying convince anybody here?
No, but Yes in the sense that I used the word. I try to make a convincing argument in that it isnt fatally flawed or so horribly subjective that its dismissed out of hand before I even hit the "Submit Reply" button.
Mind you, Ive been shreded before on glaring mistakes, but I try to at least stay level-headed and approach the argument/debate from at worst an objective point of view, or at best a humorous vantage point.
Don't forget it was senator Kennedy that started it:
Ted Kennedy Barak Obama Bin Laden
The Washington Post gets taken to the carpet by it's own editorial cartoonists for publishing false Obama rumors....
'Wash Post' Cartoonist Mocks Own Paper Over Obama Story
Tom Toles
By Greg Mitc , with Dave Astor
Published: November 30, 2007 11:05 AM ET
Editor and PublisherNEW YORK Tom Toles, the Pulitzer-winning editorial cartoonist for The Washington Post, has never been afraid to take on his own paper's coverage in the past (as E&P has do ented) and he does it again today, joining a blogosphere chorus of critics of a story about Barack Obama.
Toles told E&P today he had received no negative reaction from Post editors so far. He said this is the latest example of the creative freedom given him by the Post, which often publishes editorial content (on topics such as the Iraq War) more conservative than the cartoonist's views.
It all started yesterday with a front-page story by Perry Bacon that, to many readers, seemed to needlessly -- not to say, unfairly -- play up completely unfounded rightwing rumors about Sen. Obama. The piece opened: "In his speeches and often on the Internet, the part of Sen. Barack Obama's biography that gets the most attention is not his race but his connections to the Muslim world.
"Since declaring his candidacy for president in February, Obama, a member of a congregation of the United Church of Christ in Chicago, has had to address assertions that he is a Muslim or that he had received training in Islam in Indonesia, where he lived from ages 6 to 10. While his father was an atheist and his mother did not practice religion, Obama's stepfather did occasionally attend services at a mosque there.
"Despite his denials, rumors and e-mails circulating on the Internet continue to allege that Obama (D-Ill.) is a Muslim, a 'Muslim plant' in a conspiracy against America...."
The Toles cartoon shows a reader looking at an article in an unnamed paper with the headline: "Obama's eating of vegetables fuels rumors about him."
The text of the story reads: "Barack Obama doesn't hide his enjoyment of peas and beans, fueling Internet rumors that he's a jihadist vegetarian who will take the oath of office with his hand on a slab of damp tofu.
"He denies the rumors, but sure does eat a lof of vegetables, including tofu at times, and the real significance of the rumors is how they will hurt him if they get repeated enough.
"INSIDE: Are the rumors true? More discussion of them first."
The usual tiny character in the right corner of the panel comments: "So much discussion they ran out of space for the word LIES."
What did the real-life Toles think of the Post story? "I would prefer my cartoon to speak for me on that," Toles told E&P. "It included pretty much everything I wanted
to say."
Bacon explained to those who wrote to complain yesterday that he felt the article was fair, since Obama has cited his years living abroad as giving him valuable perspective on world affairs.
Post political reporter Lois Romano, in an online chat yesterday, defended the story: "This discussion has reached a high pitch on the Internet and our editors decided it was in the readers interest to address it. I have heard people say that they won't support Sen. Obama because they read he doesn't put is hand over his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance. He has denied this-- so airing some of this and giving him a chance to deny its accuracy could be viewed as setting the record straight."
Among the early readers' comments at the Toles page today at the Post:
--"Thought I was at the Washington Post site the other day but after reading Perry Bacon's article I was sure it must be The Onion. Now I'm still confused."
--"Excellent cartoon! The Post should be ashamed of the Bacon article -- but proud of Toles."
--"That piece by Perry Bacon Jr. should have embarrassed every real journalist associated with the Post. Since when do rumors get published in what was once a reputable newspaper. Heck, this barely passed for rumor, more like just flat out lies. Disgusting."
Why are some of the Washington Post editors conspiring against Obama?
Politico==The Washington Post is accustomed to criticism of its coverage from the right and left blogospheres, but a Nov. 29 front page story about Barack Obama’s rumored Muslim ties came with a twist: Many voices within its own newsroom joined in the firestorm.
Post editorial cartoonist Tom Toles lampooned it on the editorial page last Friday, and media critic Howard Kurtz wrote Monday that he didn’t “believe the piece was well executed.” This Sunday, Deborah Howell will weigh in with her ombudsman column.
Assistant Managing Editor Bill Hamilton, who oversees political coverage and edited the article, said that he was “a little puzzled” that readers didn’t see that the paper’s intention was to call into question rumors that Obama is secretly a Muslim (rather than a Christian), and was educated in an Indonesian madrassa. “I’m sorry it was misunderstood,” Hamilton said. “It obviously makes me think about how I edited it.”
...Since Thursday, there have been angry e-mails, Hamilton said, and allegations that the Post is swift-boating the Illinois senator by discussing rumors at length, without mentioning whether they’ve been thoroughly discredited by other media. In a web piece led “Is Perry Bacon Serious?”, Columbia Journalism Review’s Paul McLeary wrote that the Post’s A1 story “may be the single worst campaign ‘08 piece to appear in any American newspaper so far this election cycle.”
McLeary contended that the Post played up rumors about Muslim ties, including one from Insight magazine about how the young Obama was educated at an Indonesian madrassa, without mentioning that a CNN reporter jetted off to Jakarta nearly 11 months ago and debunked it...==
Ummm... because their handlers have already predetermined that Hillary should be the Dem nominee? Couldn't be.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote