What ALL Liberal Democrats are Tacitly Admitting!
Thomas P. Jabine
<Bas...@snowhill.com> wrote:
>They are saying that they only have two kinds of voters:
>
>1. Those that are incredibly intellectually challenged and cannot even
>follow an arrow to a punch hole or have to be told how to vote in
>other ways, This group is made up of those that have to be told
>what/how to think and what to do. A few crumbs are thrown to them to
>keep them on the "farm".
>
>2. Those that are blinded by sanctimonious ideology and will close
>their eyes to any maleficence or misuse of the other group in order to
>achieve their goals.(after all "we give them crumbs in exchange")
>These are the dangerous ones!..They will be the "Ruling Class" when
>total Socialism takes over.
>
>(This paragraph for PC)
>I'm not trying to imply that either of these groups are made-up of any
>age, ethnicity, or economic segment specifically. There are some of
>all in both groups..in fact, some of these voters could be a part of
>either or both at different times.
>
>After the Clinton-Lewdinsky (sic..for vern) matter, slowly and
>belatedly backfired on the "spin-doctors" and more of the truth came
>out, Clinton slipped drastically in the polls (and wait 'til Ray gets
>through with him) The American people are beginning to "get it" and
>won't be fooled as easily anymore, Somebody has forgot to tell Al Gore
>and his minions..
>
>We now have alternative web sites for balance and we also have the Fox
>News Network..as The Who said "We won't be fooled again!"
>
>(the crux of this post)
>What the liberals are tacitly admitting is that a large number of
>their voters are gullible and not very sophisticated...sorry if the
>truth hurts..but no one can challenge this without being disingenuous.
And what you are tacitly asserting is that it doesn't matter if the
votes of the "unsophisticated" aren't counted. BTW, if you were as
sophisticated as you think you are, you would realize that the Who
were being ironic when they sang those lyrics.
"Hain't we got all the fools in town on our side? And
ain't that a big enough majority in any town?"
-- Mark Twain - Huckleberry Finn
Duane
Jeez Tom, that's not what is tacitly asserted at all...
> BTW, if you were as
> sophisticated as you think you are,
..what a tacitly biased statement that is..
> you would realize that the Who
> were being ironic when they sang those lyrics.
Who?
> "Hain't we got all the fools in town on our side? And
> ain't that a big enough majority in any town?"
>
> -- Mark Twain - Huckleberry Finn
C'mon Tom, bias is where we find it.
Duane
NKC
Did you know that theFox News Editor is W's cousin?
small, small world.
>
>(the crux of this post)
>What the liberals are tacitly admitting is that a large number of
>their voters are gullible and not very sophisticated...sorry if the
>truth hurts..but no one can challenge this without being disingenuous.
>
>
>Bassman....AKA Ritch
>
Bob Miller
Bas...@snowhill.com wrote:
> They are saying that they only have two kinds of voters:
[No, you are saying that.]
>
>
> 1. Those that are incredibly intellectually challenged and cannot even
> follow an arrow to a punch hole or have to be told how to vote in
> other ways, This group is made up of those that have to be told
> what/how to think and what to do. A few crumbs are thrown to them to
> keep them on the "farm".
>
[No, there are arguments that the ballot was cluttered and confusing,
at the least; that the punch holes didn't line up on the ballot, or as
it sat on the machine in the voting booth.]
>
> 2. Those that are blinded by sanctimonious ideology and will close
> their eyes to any maleficence or misuse of the other group in order to
> achieve their goals.(after all "we give them crumbs in exchange")
> These are the dangerous ones!..They will be the "Ruling Class" when
> total Socialism takes over.
>
[Don't bogart that joint, Adolf. You're becoming incoherent.]
>
> (This paragraph for PC)
> I'm not trying to imply that either of these groups are made-up of any
> age, ethnicity, or economic segment specifically. There are some of
> all in both groups..in fact, some of these voters could be a part of
> either or both at different times.
>
> After the Clinton-Lewdinsky (sic..for vern) matter, slowly and
> belatedly backfired on the "spin-doctors" and more of the truth came
> out, Clinton slipped drastically in the polls (and wait 'til Ray gets
> through with him) The American people are beginning to "get it" and
> won't be fooled as easily anymore, Somebody has forgot to tell Al Gore
> and his minions..
[Except that Clinton's rating didn't slip drastically in the polls. More
people
would prefer him to either Bushie or Gore. For all the Clinton-Lewinsky
and Whitewater and Travelgate, what do we have? Nothing. However,
along the way we found out that a number of sanctimonious Republicans
in Congress were sticking their dipstick into something other than the
family car. For ex, Henry Hyde, who had a "youthful indescretion" in
his forties. Or, Newt Gingrich, leader of the family values charge, who
was plugging an aide on his desk while decrying Clinton. Hypocritical,
no? And others.]
>
>
> We now have alternative web sites for balance and we also have the Fox
> News Network..as The Who said "We won't be fooled again!"
[Meet the new Bush. Same as the old Bush.]
>
>
> (the crux of this post)
> What the liberals are tacitly admitting is that a large number of
> their voters are gullible and not very sophisticated...sorry if the
> truth hurts..but no one can challenge this without being disingenuous.
>
>
> Bassman....AKA Ritch
[Batman, I'll agree that a large number of all voters are gullible, ill-
informed, etc. Any blue collar man or woman who votes Republican
in the year 2000 is gullible, for ex.]
Duane
Walk us through how you have established your credibility.
Duane
Diane
news:3A19D2F6...@prodigy.net...
>
>
> Bas...@snowhill.com wrote:
>
> > They are saying that they only have two kinds of voters:
>
> [No, you are saying that.]
>
> >
> >
> > 1. Those that are incredibly intellectually challenged and cannot even
> > follow an arrow to a punch hole or have to be told how to vote in
> > other ways, This group is made up of those that have to be told
> > what/how to think and what to do. A few crumbs are thrown to them to
> > keep them on the "farm".
> >
>
> [No, there are arguments that the ballot was cluttered and confusing,
> at the least; that the punch holes didn't line up on the ballot, or as
> it sat on the machine in the voting booth.]
This was not the first time that ballot was used.
If they had such a problem with it, why didn't they challenge it before and
get it changed? Both sides ok'd the ballot.
If people think there was a problem with it, then they should go after their
party reps for ok'ing it and go after the state/county for their lousy
voting system.
If they couldn't get their ballot to line up then why didn't they ask for
help from the poll workers?
Unfortunately people mess up and ballots get disqualified. It happens in all
elections in every state.
This just sounds like a bunch of excuses and whining.
> >
> > 2. Those that are blinded by sanctimonious ideology and will close
> > their eyes to any maleficence or misuse of the other group in order to
> > achieve their goals.(after all "we give them crumbs in exchange")
> > These are the dangerous ones!..They will be the "Ruling Class" when
> > total Socialism takes over.
> >
>
> [Don't bogart that joint, Adolf. You're becoming incoherent.]
>
> >
> > (This paragraph for PC)
> > I'm not trying to imply that either of these groups are made-up of any
> > age, ethnicity, or economic segment specifically. There are some of
> > all in both groups..in fact, some of these voters could be a part of
> > either or both at different times.
> >
> > After the Clinton-Lewdinsky (sic..for vern) matter, slowly and
> > belatedly backfired on the "spin-doctors" and more of the truth came
> > out, Clinton slipped drastically in the polls (and wait 'til Ray gets
> > through with him) The American people are beginning to "get it" and
> > won't be fooled as easily anymore, Somebody has forgot to tell Al Gore
> > and his minions..
>
> [Except that Clinton's rating didn't slip drastically in the polls. More
> people
> would prefer him to either Bushie or Gore. For all the Clinton-Lewinsky
> and Whitewater and Travelgate, what do we have? Nothing.
We have a vice president who apparently can't get into office on the
coattails of an economic boom or as a result of impeachment backlash.
If Clinton's escapades hadn't resulted in a rift between them and Gore had
used Clinton's influence, he should have been able to pretty much skate into
the white house...even if he isn't too swift himself.
> However,
> along the way we found out that a number of sanctimonious Republicans
> in Congress were sticking their dipstick into something other than the
> family car. For ex, Henry Hyde, who had a "youthful indescretion" in
> his forties. Or, Newt Gingrich, leader of the family values charge, who
> was plugging an aide on his desk while decrying Clinton. Hypocritical,
> no? And others.]
You missed the point.
Clinton's lying under oath, which has been reinforced by Gore's repeated
lapses of honesty, resulted in folks casting their votes elsewhere last
week.
Unfortunately hypocriscy is too prevalent in politics.
But when someone takes an oath, it should mean something, and they should be
held to it.
> >
> >
> > We now have alternative web sites for balance and we also have the Fox
> > News Network..as The Who said "We won't be fooled again!"
>
> [Meet the new Bush. Same as the old Bush.]
>
> >
> >
> > (the crux of this post)
> > What the liberals are tacitly admitting is that a large number of
> > their voters are gullible and not very sophisticated...sorry if the
> > truth hurts..but no one can challenge this without being disingenuous.
> >
> >
> > Bassman....AKA Ritch
>
> [Batman, I'll agree that a large number of all voters are gullible, ill-
> informed, etc. Any blue collar man or woman who votes Republican
> in the year 2000 is gullible, for ex.]
Why?
..diane
bass...@my-deja.com
Bob Miller <bobmil...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>
> Bas...@snowhill.com wrote:
>
> > They are saying that they only have two kinds of voters:
>
> [No, you are saying that.]
>
> >
> >
> > 1. Those that are incredibly intellectually challenged and cannot even
> > follow an arrow to a punch hole or have to be told how to vote in
> > other ways, This group is made up of those that have to be told
> > what/how to think and what to do. A few crumbs are thrown to them to
> > keep them on the "farm".
> >
>
> [No, there are arguments that the ballot was cluttered and confusing,
> at the least; that the punch holes didn't line up on the ballot, or as
> it sat on the machine in the voting booth.]
>
> >
> > their eyes to any maleficence or misuse of the other group in order to
> > achieve their goals.(after all "we give them crumbs in exchange")
> > These are the dangerous ones!..They will be the "Ruling Class" when
> > total Socialism takes over.
> >
>
> [Don't bogart that joint, Adolf. You're becoming incoherent.]
>
> >
> > (This paragraph for PC)
> > I'm not trying to imply that either of these groups are made-up of any
> > age, ethnicity, or economic segment specifically. There are some of
> > all in both groups..in fact, some of these voters could be a part of
> > either or both at different times.
> >
> > After the Clinton-Lewdinsky (sic..for vern) matter, slowly and
> > belatedly backfired on the "spin-doctors" and more of the truth came
> > out, Clinton slipped drastically in the polls (and wait 'til Ray gets
> > through with him) The American people are beginning to "get it" and
> > won't be fooled as easily anymore, Somebody has forgot to tell Al Gore
> > and his minions..
>
> [Except that Clinton's rating didn't slip drastically in the polls. More
> people
> would prefer him to either Bushie or Gore. For all the Clinton-Lewinsky
> along the way we found out that a number of sanctimonious Republicans
> in Congress were sticking their dipstick into something other than the
> family car. For ex, Henry Hyde, who had a "youthful indescretion" in
> his forties. Or, Newt Gingrich, leader of the family values charge, who
> was plugging an aide on his desk while decrying Clinton. Hypocritical,
> no? And others.]
>
> >
> >
> > News Network..as The Who said "We won't be fooled again!"
>
> [Meet the new Bush. Same as the old Bush.]
>
> >
> >
> > (the crux of this post)
> > What the liberals are tacitly admitting is that a large number of
> > their voters are gullible and not very sophisticated...sorry if the
> > truth hurts..but no one can challenge this without being disingenuous.
> >
> >
> > Bassman....AKA Ritch
>
> [Batman, I'll agree that a large number of all voters are gullible, ill-
> informed, etc. Any blue collar man or woman who votes Republican
> in the year 2000 is gullible, for ex.]
>
>
And exactly how gullible is a person that buys into any sort of conspiracy
bull shit that comes out from under any rock?
Bassman...AKA Ritch
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Bob Miller
Duane wrote:
> Walk us through how you have established your credibility.
> Duane
[Duane, bite me.]
Bob Miller
Diane wrote:
> Bob Miller <bobmil...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
> news:3A19D2F6...@prodigy.net...
> >
> >
> > Bas...@snowhill.com wrote:
> >
> > > They are saying that they only have two kinds of voters:
> >
> > [No, you are saying that.]
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > 1. Those that are incredibly intellectually challenged and cannot even
> > > follow an arrow to a punch hole or have to be told how to vote in
> > > other ways, This group is made up of those that have to be told
> > > what/how to think and what to do. A few crumbs are thrown to them to
> > > keep them on the "farm".
> > >
> >
> > [No, there are arguments that the ballot was cluttered and confusing,
> > at the least; that the punch holes didn't line up on the ballot, or as
> > it sat on the machine in the voting booth.]
>
> This was not the first time that ballot was used.
>
[Actually, it was. That TYPE of ballot has been used before, but
not that particular ballot, you know, with the candidates for president
in the year 2000. I have heard some of the irregularities were blamed
on the ballot itself misfitting the unit inside the voting booth. If the
printed names weren't lined up properly with the holes, you could
expect a lot of problems.]
>
> If they had such a problem with it, why didn't they challenge it before and
> get it changed? Both sides ok'd the ballot.
[Interesting question. I would like to know. Apparently, they banned
the use of these kinds of ballots in Massachusetts because of
problems in the past.]
>
>
> If people think there was a problem with it, then they should go after their
> party reps for ok'ing it and go after the state/county for their lousy
> voting system.
>
[Agreed. And if on election day voters are being disenfranchised because
the ballot if fucked up, they should demand their right to vote and be
counted.]
>
> If they couldn't get their ballot to line up then why didn't they ask for
> help from the poll workers?
>
[There were many reports of poll workers not providing help, telling
voters that they'd already voted and too bad, you can't get a new
ballot, etc. Surely, you've seen those news reports.]
>
> Unfortunately people mess up and ballots get disqualified. It happens in all
> elections in every state.
[Yes.]
>
>
> This just sounds like a bunch of excuses and whining.
[And what does it sound like whine the Bush campaign goes to the
US Supreme Court and tries to block the vote-counting? What
would the official Republican position be? Count the votes only
if they go my way?]
>
>
> > >
> > > 2. Those that are blinded by sanctimonious ideology and will close
> > > their eyes to any maleficence or misuse of the other group in order to
> > > achieve their goals.(after all "we give them crumbs in exchange")
> > > These are the dangerous ones!..They will be the "Ruling Class" when
> > > total Socialism takes over.
> > >
> >
> > [Don't bogart that joint, Adolf. You're becoming incoherent.]
> >
> > >
> > > (This paragraph for PC)
> > > I'm not trying to imply that either of these groups are made-up of any
> > > age, ethnicity, or economic segment specifically. There are some of
> > > all in both groups..in fact, some of these voters could be a part of
> > > either or both at different times.
> > >
> > > After the Clinton-Lewdinsky (sic..for vern) matter, slowly and
> > > belatedly backfired on the "spin-doctors" and more of the truth came
> > > out, Clinton slipped drastically in the polls (and wait 'til Ray gets
> > > through with him) The American people are beginning to "get it" and
> > > won't be fooled as easily anymore, Somebody has forgot to tell Al Gore
> > > and his minions..
> >
> > [Except that Clinton's rating didn't slip drastically in the polls. More
> > people
> > would prefer him to either Bushie or Gore. For all the Clinton-Lewinsky
> > and Whitewater and Travelgate, what do we have? Nothing.
>
> We have a vice president who apparently can't get into office on the
> coattails of an economic boom or as a result of impeachment backlash.
>
> If Clinton's escapades hadn't resulted in a rift between them and Gore had
> used Clinton's influence, he should have been able to pretty much skate into
> the white house...even if he isn't too swift himself.
[Agreed. I am mystified that any rational human being with the least bit of
knowledge of the Bush family could have voted for Dubya, but again I
overestimated.]
>
>
> > However,
> > along the way we found out that a number of sanctimonious Republicans
> > in Congress were sticking their dipstick into something other than the
> > family car. For ex, Henry Hyde, who had a "youthful indescretion" in
> > his forties. Or, Newt Gingrich, leader of the family values charge, who
> > was plugging an aide on his desk while decrying Clinton. Hypocritical,
> > no? And others.]
>
> You missed the point.
>
>
> Clinton's lying under oath, which has been reinforced by Gore's repeated
> lapses of honesty, resulted in folks casting their votes elsewhere last
> week.
[Dubya is part of a criminal family enterprise that operates above the law.
His greatgrandfather and grandfather were the worst kind of Nazi collaborators,
the kind who did it for money. They helped the Nazi residua survive WWII.
GHWBush was embroiled in CIA shennanigans since he got out of Yale in
the forties. He helped pave the way for huge frauds, many of which were the
means for his evil spawn to carve out their own personal fortunes, his
fingerprints are
all over Dealey Plaza. He and Bill Casey committed treason in order to
steal the 1980 election. No doubt when the dust settles we shall see again
the proof of an electoral theft by the Bushes and their ilk. At least they
haven't assassinated anyone this time around.]
>
>
> Unfortunately hypocriscy is too prevalent in politics.
>
[Yes.]
>
> But when someone takes an oath, it should mean something, and they should be
> held to it.
>
[Like when Bush said he'd uphold the Constitution back in 1980?]
>
> > >
> > >
> > > We now have alternative web sites for balance and we also have the Fox
> > > News Network..as The Who said "We won't be fooled again!"
> >
> > [Meet the new Bush. Same as the old Bush.]
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > (the crux of this post)
> > > What the liberals are tacitly admitting is that a large number of
> > > their voters are gullible and not very sophisticated...sorry if the
> > > truth hurts..but no one can challenge this without being disingenuous.
> > >
> > >
> > > Bassman....AKA Ritch
> >
> > [Batman, I'll agree that a large number of all voters are gullible, ill-
> > informed, etc. Any blue collar man or woman who votes Republican
> > in the year 2000 is gullible, for ex.]
>
> Why?
>
> ..diane
[I'm going to be eating turkey today and watch football from my mother-
in-law's recliner. I'll give you some history tomorrow and then on.]
Duane
> Duane wrote:
>
> > Bob Miller wrote:
> >
> > > Bas...@snowhill.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > They are saying that they only have two kinds of voters:
> > >
> > > [No, you are saying that.]
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 1. Those that are incredibly intellectually challenged and cannot even
> > > > follow an arrow to a punch hole or have to be told how to vote in
> > > > other ways, This group is made up of those that have to be told
> > > > what/how to think and what to do. A few crumbs are thrown to them to
> > > > keep them on the "farm".
> > > >
> > >
> > > [No, there are arguments that the ballot was cluttered and confusing,
> > > at the least; that the punch holes didn't line up on the ballot, or as
> > > it sat on the machine in the voting booth.]
> > >
> > > >
> > > > 2. Those that are blinded by sanctimonious ideology and will close
> > > > their eyes to any maleficence or misuse of the other group in order to
> > > > achieve their goals.(after all "we give them crumbs in exchange")
> > > > These are the dangerous ones!..They will be the "Ruling Class" when
> > > > total Socialism takes over.
> > > >
> > >
> > > [Don't bogart that joint, Adolf. You're becoming incoherent.]
> > >
> > > >
> > > > (This paragraph for PC)
> > > > I'm not trying to imply that either of these groups are made-up of any
> > > > age, ethnicity, or economic segment specifically. There are some of
> > > > all in both groups..in fact, some of these voters could be a part of
> > > > either or both at different times.
> > > >
> > > > After the Clinton-Lewdinsky (sic..for vern) matter, slowly and
> > > > belatedly backfired on the "spin-doctors" and more of the truth came
> > > > out, Clinton slipped drastically in the polls (and wait 'til Ray gets
> > > > through with him) The American people are beginning to "get it" and
> > > > won't be fooled as easily anymore, Somebody has forgot to tell Al Gore
> > > > and his minions..
> > >
> > > [Except that Clinton's rating didn't slip drastically in the polls. More
> > > people
> > > would prefer him to either Bushie or Gore. For all the Clinton-Lewinsky
> > > and Whitewater and Travelgate, what do we have? Nothing. However,
> > > along the way we found out that a number of sanctimonious Republicans
> > > in Congress were sticking their dipstick into something other than the
> > > family car. For ex, Henry Hyde, who had a "youthful indescretion" in
> > > his forties. Or, Newt Gingrich, leader of the family values charge, who
> > > was plugging an aide on his desk while decrying Clinton. Hypocritical,
> > > no? And others.]
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > We now have alternative web sites for balance and we also have the Fox
> > > > News Network..as The Who said "We won't be fooled again!"
> > >
> > > [Meet the new Bush. Same as the old Bush.]
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > (the crux of this post)
> > > > What the liberals are tacitly admitting is that a large number of
> > > > their voters are gullible and not very sophisticated...sorry if the
> > > > truth hurts..but no one can challenge this without being disingenuous.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Bassman....AKA Ritch
> > >
> > > [Batman, I'll agree that a large number of all voters are gullible, ill-
> > > informed, etc. Any blue collar man or woman who votes Republican
> > > in the year 2000 is gullible, for ex.]
> >
Duane
You have no credibility.
Duane
Bob Miller
bass...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <3A19D2F6...@prodigy.net>,
> Bob Miller <bobmil...@prodigy.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Bas...@snowhill.com wrote:
> >
> > > They are saying that they only have two kinds of voters:
> >
> > [No, you are saying that.]
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > 1. Those that are incredibly intellectually challenged and cannot even
> > > follow an arrow to a punch hole or have to be told how to vote in
> > > other ways, This group is made up of those that have to be told
> > > what/how to think and what to do. A few crumbs are thrown to them to
> > > keep them on the "farm".
> > >
> >
> > [No, there are arguments that the ballot was cluttered and confusing,
> > at the least; that the punch holes didn't line up on the ballot, or as
> > it sat on the machine in the voting booth.]
> >
> > >
> > > 2. Those that are blinded by sanctimonious ideology and will close
> > > their eyes to any maleficence or misuse of the other group in order to
> > > achieve their goals.(after all "we give them crumbs in exchange")
> > > These are the dangerous ones!..They will be the "Ruling Class" when
> > > total Socialism takes over.
> > >
> >
> > [Don't bogart that joint, Adolf. You're becoming incoherent.]
> >
> > >
> > > (This paragraph for PC)
> > > I'm not trying to imply that either of these groups are made-up of any
> > > age, ethnicity, or economic segment specifically. There are some of
> > > all in both groups..in fact, some of these voters could be a part of
> > > either or both at different times.
> > >
> > > After the Clinton-Lewdinsky (sic..for vern) matter, slowly and
> > > belatedly backfired on the "spin-doctors" and more of the truth came
> > > out, Clinton slipped drastically in the polls (and wait 'til Ray gets
> > > through with him) The American people are beginning to "get it" and
> > > won't be fooled as easily anymore, Somebody has forgot to tell Al Gore
> > > and his minions..
> >
> > [Except that Clinton's rating didn't slip drastically in the polls. More
> > people
> > would prefer him to either Bushie or Gore. For all the Clinton-Lewinsky
> > and Whitewater and Travelgate, what do we have? Nothing. However,
> > along the way we found out that a number of sanctimonious Republicans
> > in Congress were sticking their dipstick into something other than the
> > family car. For ex, Henry Hyde, who had a "youthful indescretion" in
> > his forties. Or, Newt Gingrich, leader of the family values charge, who
> > was plugging an aide on his desk while decrying Clinton. Hypocritical,
> > no? And others.]
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > We now have alternative web sites for balance and we also have the Fox
> > > News Network..as The Who said "We won't be fooled again!"
> >
> > [Meet the new Bush. Same as the old Bush.]
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > (the crux of this post)
> > > What the liberals are tacitly admitting is that a large number of
> > > their voters are gullible and not very sophisticated...sorry if the
> > > truth hurts..but no one can challenge this without being disingenuous.
> > >
> > >
> > > Bassman....AKA Ritch
> >
> > [Batman, I'll agree that a large number of all voters are gullible, ill-
> > informed, etc. Any blue collar man or woman who votes Republican
> > in the year 2000 is gullible, for ex.]
> >
> >
>
> And exactly how gullible is a person that buys into any sort of conspiracy
> bull shit that comes out from under any rock?
>
> Bassman...AKA Ritch
>
>
[Well, you seem to be ready to believe in any conspiracy
directed against angry white males. You are a pitifully
dumb shit. You really should do some reading, and maybe
get out of the bunker and diversify your human contact.]
Duane
Bob Miller wrote:
> [Well, you seem to be ready to believe in any conspiracy
> directed against angry white males. You are a pitifully
> dumb shit. You really should do some reading, and maybe
> get out of the bunker and diversify your human contact.]
Walk us through how you have established your credibility.
Duane
je
could get radio monopolies, consequently the great right wing radio
waste land.
Now he wants Bush in office because he wants to do the same with TV.
It is the Murdock propaganda station not Fox news. Murdock is notrious
for firing those who don't toe his line. And toe they do, listen if you
wish, believe if you wish, but do become aware of why they say what they
say.
John Griffin
>je <lib...@webtv.net> wrote in message
>news:16132-3A...@storefull-156.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
>Interesting that the republicans/conservatives think the news media is
>liberal/democratic and the liberals/democrats think it is
>republican/conservative.
>Just goes to show, apparently neither side is happy with the media.
>..diane
I think Dan Rather's attack on the Florida elections broad
yesterday defined CBS's "objectivity." That blatant example
was astounding. If he had simply said "In a few minutes
the Florida elections board will present a bunch of fucking
lies," he could have said the same thing and people in Denver
and Seattle could have seen another minute of football.
I don't see a hell of a lot of difference between Bush and
Gore, but it's obvious that Rather is a fucking idiot.
Duane
> Got fox news alright. Rupert Murdock got Regan to change the laws so he
> could get radio monopolies, consequently the great right wing radio
> waste land.
>
> Now he wants Bush in office because he wants to do the same with TV.
> It is the Murdock propaganda station not Fox news. Murdock is notrious
> for firing those who don't toe his line. And toe they do, listen if you
> wish, believe if you wish, but do become aware of why they say what they
> say.
Why do you say what you say, illiterate?
Duane
Diane
> could get radio monopolies, consequently the great right wing radio
> waste land.
>
> Now he wants Bush in office because he wants to do the same with TV.
> It is the Murdock propaganda station not Fox news. Murdock is notrious
> for firing those who don't toe his line. And toe they do, listen if you
> wish, believe if you wish, but do become aware of why they say what they
> say.
Interesting that the republicans/conservatives think the news media is
Duane
Actually, the repubs say that the media has a liberal bias and the dems say
tough shit.
Oh well.
Duane
~Paige
From your observation diane, it "Just goes to show" you've never watched the
Fox News Channel. If, per chance, you have, then it's apparent you didn't
listen.
~Paige
And the Rupert Murdock minions parrot "Fair and Balanced Coverage" a minimum
of 8 times, every hour on the hour. <lol!!> Murdock's own special form of
brain washing obviously is successful....with some.
John Griffin
>In article <3A235C90...@nationwide.net>,
> d...@nationwide.net wrote:
>And the Rupert Murdock minions parrot "Fair and Balanced Coverage" a minimum
>of 8 times, every hour on the hour. <lol!!> Murdock's own special form of
>brain washing obviously is successful....with some.
Don't ever worry about brainwashing. It can't happen to you.
Ron
Griffin <hilb...@bigger.aa.net> wrote:
>~Paige <PaigeM...@webtv.net> wrote:
>>In article <3A235C90...@nationwide.net>,
>> d...@nationwide.net wrote:
>>And the Rupert Murdock minions parrot "Fair and Balanced Coverage" a minimum
>>of 8 times, every hour on the hour. <lol!!> Murdock's own special form of
>>brain washing obviously is successful....with some.
>
>Don't ever worry about brainwashing. It can't happen to you.
>
Odd. I once knew another idiot that was not only prone to brainlessly
yammer about Evil Rupert Murdoch, but also habitually misspelled it
"Murdock".
Karen Anderson.
>
Duane
> In article <3A235C90...@nationwide.net>,
> d...@nationwide.net wrote:
> And the Rupert Murdock minions parrot "Fair and Balanced Coverage" a minimum
> of 8 times, every hour on the hour. <lol!!> Murdock's own special form of
> brain washing obviously is successful....with some.
Yours is apparently complete.
Duane
~Paige
r_e...@ireland.com wrote:
> On 28 Nov 2000 04:25:44 -0800, in article <3a23a448$1...@huge.aa.net>, John
> Griffin <hilb...@bigger.aa.net> wrote:
>
> >>In article <3A235C90...@nationwide.net>,
> >> d...@nationwide.net wrote:
> >>of 8 times, every hour on the hour. <lol!!> Murdock's own special form of
> >>brain washing obviously is successful....with some.
> >
> >
<rofl!> Grizz...once a loooooong while you do give me a moment of mirth.
Thanks Grizz....hafta admit, that 'cracked me up'. <g>
> Odd. I once knew another idiot that was not only prone to brainlessly
> yammer about Evil Rupert Murdoch, but also habitually misspelled it
> "Murdock".
>
> Karen Anderson.
> >
>
Odd. I currently 'know' an idiot who is prone to brainless yammer about who
I'm not.
Thanks PP for the continuing holiday entertainment. Yer just precious!
<lol!!>
Paige Montoya
je
repeat over and over liberal media, the non thinking public believes it
is a liberal media.
Those who do not dig a bit deeper and realize just exactly how it
works.
The owners who themselves are big business like GE and Microsoft have an
investment just in who they are to lean to the right. But add on that
those people buying the advertisement are left leaning business that get
corporate welfare from the left and you get a left leaning media.
Now no matter how liberal a reportor happens to be, if he wants to keep
his job, he better spew the conservative propaganda.
They just cover all this up by brain washing the masses by repeating ad
nausiem that the media is liberal, when just a bit of logic tells you
just the opposit.
Thomas P. Jabine
~Paige
Yes, it's kind of sad Je, that the calibre of the current crop of
"investigative reporters" is ala Geraldo opening Al Capone's 'tomb' in
Chicago. And just think, the network broadcast that news event "live".
But I do have to admit. That was more inspiring and informative than a W
Bush speech.
John Griffin
>In article <3A235C90...@nationwide.net>,
>Duane <d...@nationwide.net> wrote:
>Actually, I think what the dems say to that is "bullshit."
They wouldn't say that while listening to Dan Rather, would they?
Why doesn't he wear his Gore campaign button on camera?
He wears one on his face and in his voice, figuratively.
Thomas P. Jabine
John Griffin <hilb...@bigger.aa.net> wrote:
>Thomas P. Jabine <tja...@polaris.umuc.edu> wrote:
>>In article <3A235C90...@nationwide.net>,
>>Duane <d...@nationwide.net> wrote:
>
>They wouldn't say that while listening to Dan Rather, would they?
>
>Why doesn't he wear his Gore campaign button on camera?
>He wears one on his face and in his voice, figuratively.
I have to admit you have me at a disadvantage there. I haven't watched
Dan Rather in years. (I do have a vague recollection of him fawning over
Ollie North, though.)
Duane
> In article <3A235C90...@nationwide.net>,
> Duane <d...@nationwide.net> wrote:
> Actually, I think what the dems say to that is "bullshit."
I am beginning to doubt your power of observation.
Duane
John Griffin
>In article <3a245...@huge.aa.net>,
>John Griffin <hilb...@bigger.aa.net> wrote:
>>>In article <3A235C90...@nationwide.net>,
>>>Duane <d...@nationwide.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>Why doesn't he wear his Gore campaign button on camera?
>>He wears one on his face and in his voice, figuratively.
>I have to admit you have me at a disadvantage there. I haven't watched
>Dan Rather in years. (I do have a vague recollection of him fawning over
>Ollie North, though.)
Not much of an advantage...I was watching a football game, and suddenly
Rather was staring at me and telling me that the Florida elections
department broad is an an evil, venal, herpes-having political whore and
that she was going to blatantly swindle Al Gore out of some votes that
might have been cast for him and which he insists he deserves whether they
were or not. Other than that, I've alway assumed he was just reading
what it said on the teleprompter and didn't pay much attention to him.