How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Peace Loving Progressives in Action   [ Page: 1  2  3  ]
 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Peace Loving Progressives in Action

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


25 posted 02-06-2011 07:14 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Blogs must be the new bibles, one must assume? That was typical, double-talking, non-factual slime peddling the New Yorker is becoming more known for. That's what people are using for references these days??
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


26 posted 02-06-2011 09:57 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

Ah,

Not willing to take on Packer's assertions and instead resort to the old 'liberal media' saw.

And then criticize the 'credibility' of Packer and the New Yorker ...

This coming from the man who's thread source material is a posting at Breitbart.  You remember him as the guy who rushed to be first to publish video falsely suggesting that Shirley Sherrod discriminated against a white farmer at the Dept. of Agriculture.  

The faked, doctored videos accusing Acorn of colluding with prostitution rings!

Let's even drag out the AM radio meme that 'nobody wants to hear liberal talk' and 'conservatives are on the air because they sell ads' while ignoring that the same market dynamics and OWNERSHIP dynamics either are or aren't in effect in other media such as newspapers and television.

But if you want to play that game Denise -- I'll bite.  Show me the money.  Where are all these 'liberal' media owners?  Who are they?  What are their organs?  Specifically.  No boogeymen.

Rich Bond admitted it back in 92 -- the Republicans are just working the refs.

Yawn.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


27 posted 02-06-2011 10:19 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Packer's asserertions are laughable at best...he's just blogging out his personal anti-conservative drivel. Yawn.

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


28 posted 02-06-2011 10:49 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

I have to wonder what Packer would have to say about the video that began this thread, the "Kill Clarence Thomas and his wife" rants, along with the others, with REVOLUTION being chanted in the background. He would probably say what you have said, reb.......nothing at all.
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


29 posted 02-06-2011 10:52 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

Ok... here's the assertions Mike.


1.Only one side has made the rhetoric of armed revolt against an oppressive tyranny the guiding spirit of its grassroots movement and its midterm campaign.

Who, do you think, is he talking about? You know.  YOU KNOW! You won't admit it... but you do.  And your denial is mere confirmation.  

2.Only one side routinely invokes the Second Amendment as a form of swagger and intimidation, not-so-coyly conflating rights with threats.

Where are all the lefty quotes Mike?

3.Only one sideís activists bring guns to democratic political gatherings.

Where are all the Liberal guns Mike?

4. Only one side has a popular national TV host who uses his platform to indoctrinate viewers in the conviction that the President is an alien, totalitarian menace to the country.

Ever seen or heard a lefty trying to suggest Mitch McConnel, John Boehner, or Rush Limbaugh are aliens?  I mean the kind that weren't born in America.  I'm pretty sure myself that Rush is a Klingon.

5. Only one side fills the AM waves with rage and incendiary falsehoods.

I've listened to Thom Harman and Ed Shultz.  Don't hear the ragemongering that I hear out of Savage, Limbaugh, and Beck.  

But lets take a look at the talk radio industry on the inside:

quote:

ďTalk radio (and some cable news channels) dropped the ball the week following the shootings. Many hosts and programmers forgot good radio/good broadcasting and forgot Rule #1 - 'Ratings and Revenue.' They went right for Rule #2 - 'Never let facts get in the way of a good talk show,"
http://www.radio-info.com/newsletters/news-talk-edge



6. Only one side has an iconic leader, with a devoted grassroots following, who canít stop using violent imagery and dividing her countrymen into us and them, real and fake.

I wonder who he's talking about?  Do you know?  If you do -- why do you?


Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


30 posted 02-06-2011 11:01 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

I've said nothing about it? Really?  We truly are a people separated by a common language.

I'll ask a question about the video... was it shot by James Okeefe?
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


31 posted 02-06-2011 11:24 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Why is it that you are working so hard NOT to address what was said in the video, Reb?
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


32 posted 02-06-2011 11:28 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

For the same reason I don't consult a broken watch to find out what time it is Mike.  How do I know when it's right.  I don't even know what I'm addressing.  Do you?  I mean, other than yet one more 'protests too much' attempt to try to say the other side does it to.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


33 posted 02-06-2011 11:41 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Only one side has made the rhetoric of armed revolt against an oppressive tyranny the guiding spirit of its grassroots movement and its midterm campaign.

Show me  that rhetoric of armed revolt, please.

Only one side routinely invokes the Second Amendment as a form of swagger and intimidation, not-so-coyly conflating rights with threats.

True enough, because there is only one side treating the second amendment as toilet paper.

Only one sideís activists bring guns to democratic political gatherings.

How many people brought guns, reb...or are you referring to one and making that the general definition of all?

Only one side has a popular national TV host who uses his platform to indoctrinate viewers in the conviction that the President is an alien, totalitarian menace to the country.

Of course. SInce the side the president belongs to would hardly be standing up against their fearless leader, that seems only natural. Ask yourself why he is so popular. Could it be that people can relate to what he says?

Only one side fills the AM waves with rage and incendiary falsehoods.

I suggest you broaden your horizons. There is plenty of rage and outright lies coming from the left....but maybe they don't count?

Only one side has an iconic leader, with a devoted grassroots following, who canít stop using violent imagery and dividing her countrymen into us and them, real and fake.

Can't stop using violent imagery? Then you must have many examples of that. Produce them, please. Or are you talking about "targeting", ignoring the fact that the left used those same bullseyes years before? Maybe you mean violent imagery like saying, "if they bring a knife, you bring a gun!". No, you don't mean that, I'm sure, since those are Obama's words.

I'll admit you have hutzpah, reb. In a thread showing libs talking about kill supreme court justices and their families, cutting off toes of radio personalities and sending a black back to the fields where he belongs, you decide to discuss how violent the right is....nice try.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


34 posted 02-06-2011 11:44 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

How do I know when it's right?

Uh, maybe when it's a video staring you in the face, English spoken?

They talk of killing a supreme court justice and you don't know if that's right or not?

yawn.

The video says it all. Ignore it all you want...your perrogative but please don't talk about the evil, threatening right while doing so. It really weakens your position.
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


35 posted 02-07-2011 12:06 AM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

But the video is not staring me in the face Mike.  The person asking the question is not on camera -- therefore -- we don't know what he's actually asking the person that's shown on the video.  Just like O.keefe's video.  We don't know the editing.  We don't even know who the responders are.  Got names?  Addresses?  But what we do have is Brietbart's track record.  Don't bet on the ponies.
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


36 posted 02-07-2011 12:13 AM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

Show me  that rhetoric of armed revolt, please.



Already have Mike.
http://piptalk.com/pip/Forum6/HTML/002060-2.html#38

My Packers punched em out din' they?  

Sorry I gotta run Mike.  I'll try to pick this up later in the week buddy.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


37 posted 02-07-2011 12:27 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

The person asking questions is not on video? We don't know what he's asking? But we do. His audio is clear. WHo did the editing? Please.....

Have you presented such arguments with regards to tea party videos?

Let's face it...you watch a video where the libs clearly say that they should kill a supreme court justice and his wife and you can't even bring yourself to say that that type of speech is wrong. We have no common ground to seek.

Go Packers....(not Packer)  
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


38 posted 02-07-2011 12:39 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

From your link...

Several GOP officials from the same area in Arizona have resigned following last week's shooting rampage in Tucson, including a district chairman who said threats from local tea party members caused him to be worried for the safety of himself and his family.

Miller, who is black, said a number of the attacks were racially based. At an event in Lake Havasu City, Ariz., Miller told The Huffington Post that someone called out, "There's Anthony, get a rope."


I see. It is noteworthy for you to report that a district chairman felt threatened and that a black man told a reporter that he heard "Get a rope". Did you ask who the interviewer was? Did you ask who edited it? Did you ask if these points were verifiable? No, but you felt them newsworthy enough to mention. Do you feel that someone saying hang the black Clarence Thomas and his wife newsworthy? Nope, you want to know who interviewed them and did the editing. Nice try.....

Interesting that the Huffington Post would print that a black man reported having heard racial slurs but have nothing to say about whites calling for a black man and his wife to be strung up and murdered. That says about as much about the Huffington Post as one needs to know.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


39 posted 02-07-2011 06:08 AM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

I'm trying to figure who the national TV host is who supposedly is using his platform to indoctrincate his viewers that the President is an alien. All that I know of won't even touch the eligibility subject (an inquiry primarily as to type of citizenship, not lack of citizenship) other than to say they aren't touching that subject.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


40 posted 02-07-2011 02:06 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     The New Yorker is pretty much meticulous about their fact checking, Mike.  It is right up there with The Economist.  The New Yorker even fact checks poems.

     You may not like or agree with the slant of a particular article.  You may believe that an article is not balanced the way you'd like it to be and that other publications balance their articles in a fashion that's more to your liking.  The article may not be balanced to your liking in fact.  

     Should you suspect otherwise, you might consider writing the publication a letter to the editor and asking about their fact-checking policy.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


41 posted 02-07-2011 05:27 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K

     I'd suggest that now would be a good time to moderate the tone of the conversation for everybody.  Having been through one such bubbling over period, I'd rather not go through another.

     I'll try to address some of the comments made above on the assumption that they were made to everybody as part of the discussion of an issue, rather than as an attempt to get into something more personal, and because I think they deserve answering.  I won't try to answer everything because I don't want to get too hooked on the tone.  Is this me?  Possibly.  I simply want to try to keep this about the facts and the issues.

1)
Only one side has made the rhetoric of armed revolt against an oppressive tyranny the guiding spirit of its grassroots movement and its midterm campaign.

Show me  that rhetoric of armed revolt, please.

     During the Nevada Senatorial campaign, the Republican candidate made reference to "second ammendment solutions" to the way the government was being run.  She refused to reply to reporters who tried to get her to explain herself.

     Former Governor Palin published a hit list of people whom she thought should be voted out of office.  Her rhetoric on the subject was very inflammatory.  She characterized these folks as targets.  I do think she was somewhat taken aback when a psycho with no discernable party affiliation started to open fire on the congresswoman in Arizona, but I also believe her rhetoric was not helpful.  I am purposefully softpedaling the incident out of politeness here.  The use of crosshairs in Ms Palin's literature was not helpful.  Nor was her refusal to backpedal from the initial confrontation when this was pointed out to her when the literature was first presented.

     Did she have the right to publish that literature?  She certainly did.

     Does it suggest encouraging extra-legal activity?  Yes, I think it does.  I also think that this is something that I have just pointed out two examples of and which more might be available if one cared to look.  

     In fact, the notion that the president is not a citizen is in itself a notion that is designed to de-legitimize the government, isn't it?, though it's presented in terms that are difficult to disallow in any open-minded discussion.  
One side-effect of these suggestions is that any action that one takes is legitimate in response.

     Any of these factors seem to qualify for me.  The entire notion of the tea party harks back to the basic metaphor of the Boston Tea Party, doesn't it?  Lest it escape notice, this was one of the initial violent acts that led to the Revolution.  That is the metaphor that the right wing of the Republican Party has been using for at least the past two years.

     It is a legitimate metaphor, of course.  

     But to suggest that it is not the metaphor that it in fact is may perhaps be going just a touch too far.  It denies the depth of rage felt by the right wing, and its determination to overthow any changes made by the new deal and, really, by any reform movement in the united staes since the country turned against the Robber Barons of the late 19th century.  

     That would be, of course, in my opinion.



2)
Only one side routinely invokes the Second Amendment as a form of swagger and intimidation, not-so-coyly conflating rights with threats.

True enough, because there is only one side treating the second amendment as toilet paper.

     I am not interested in treating the second ammendment as toilet paper.  I don't own guns now, and haven't since I was a kid, but I really enjoy the things.  I like target shooting, and the time or two I went skeet shooting I had a blast.  

     The clay pigeons thumbed their noses at me.

     I do disagree with the reading that the more conservative folk give to the second amendment, though.  I think my reading is legitimate.  It was designed to encourage the growth of state militias in a country that really couldn't afford to have its state governments fund them.  Hence the phrase "to bear arms" in the amendment, which meant a body of armed troops, not heavily armed yahoos on the street.

     Even the NRA today doesn't want all the guns out there that we have.  They want legal access to guns, but aren't particularly happy with the vast underground slosh of illegal firearms in the hands of criminals.  They're fairly clear that most registered gun owners aren't out there knocking folks off with legally acquired weapons.  I think the NRA would be happy to get a lot of those illegal guns out of the system, if they could figure out how to do it.

     They're simply stuck because they don't see any way of drying up the illegal market without drying up the legal market as well.  I don't see Switzerland, where there are loads of automatic rifles floating around, having the sort of firearms problems we do, and I'd be interested in knowing why.

     This doesn't come from treating the second amendment like toilet paper.  It comes from failure to come to grips with a legitimate problem we have with gun violence in this country, and with not having any real understanding of how to stop it.  I think the solutions that left and right have advocated may not be particularly helpful here, and that as a society, we're so busy butting heads and repeating what we are already convinced to be the answers, that we haven't had a fresh look at the problem in decades.

     This isn't a problem with toilet tissue, it's a problem with generalized blindness.



3)

Only one sideís activists bring guns to democratic political gatherings.

How many people brought guns, reb...or are you referring to one and making that the general definition of all?

     Mike, I simply have no idea what you're saying.

     The demonstration last year, I believe, in Washington by ome of the tea party folks has to be rescheduled mto Virginia because of the Washington firearms laws.  That suggests that there were several people with guns.  That's one example.

     Guns and political events are probably not a great combination.  Guns and booze are not a great combination.  Guns and adreneline should probably be avoided as well, even with experienced shooters.

     I think that's what you may be talking about, but I'm not certain.
  

4)

Only one side has a popular national TV host who uses his platform to indoctrinate viewers in the conviction that the President is an alien, totalitarian menace to the country.

Of course. SInce the side the president belongs to would hardly be standing up against their fearless leader, that seems only natural. Ask yourself why he is so popular. Could it be that people can relate to what he says?


     The question of popularity has always been a difficult one.  If I'd have asked you about popularity in the late years of Bush the younger's administration, I don't know that you would have offered popularity as the touchstone you offer it as here.  You certainly didn't when Obama was at his most popular.  

     Popularity is important.  

     I'm simply not certain that you want to make popularity the most important thing, if only because of the number of people who've had it that you simply disaprove of so much.  Stalin, Mao, Hitler.  And also Roosevelt, Clinton and Obama at various points in their Presidencies.  Popularity is related as much to charisma as core values.  

     I believe that each of us feels that some of the folks that the other most values may be serious buffoons; so you'd have to ask, popular among which folks and for what reasons.  We should probably do more than make an appeal to popularity.  We don't need to leave it out ó it's always great to feel like you're backing a winner! ó but maybe not so high on the scale would be better for everybody.



5)
Only one side fills the AM waves with rage and incendiary falsehoods.

I suggest you broaden your horizons. There is plenty of rage and outright lies coming from the left....but maybe they don't count?

     Sure, they count.  It all counts.  That's a decent metaphor, after all.

     They all weigh, as well.  That's another decent metaphor.


6)

Only one side has an iconic leader, with a devoted grassroots following, who canít stop using violent imagery and dividing her countrymen into us and them, real and fake.

Can't stop using violent imagery? Then you must have many examples of that. Produce them, please. Or are you talking about "targeting", ignoring the fact that the left used those same bullseyes years before? Maybe you mean violent imagery like saying, "if they bring a knife, you bring a gun!". No, you don't mean that, I'm sure, since those are Obama's words.


     Do Obama words count.  Yes, they do.  Do bullseyes count?  Yes they do.  Have you heard me condemn Obama for things I believe he's done wrong?  If you haven't, you haven't been paying attention.  Is the right wing wrong when it does the same thing?  Well, in fairness, yes it is.  Does the left wing encourage people to show up to demonstrations carrying firearms?  If they do, it"s not been in any of the literature I've seen.  You'd have to look pretty far back to see much left wing interest in firearms, though it has been there.

     Frankly, though, I doubt you find as many guns in any American left wing organization as you'd find in Michegan's or Idaho's right wing groups alone.  Let alone taking the rest of the country into account.  Though I'm always willing to be shocked by the truth, if it's got a decent source behind it.  Centerist or non-fringe right wing would be fine with me.  Better would be as close to objective and a-politcal as possible.

     My guess, my opinion, ready to be disconfirmed or confirmed by whomever wishes to chip in.

     I do agree that Ms. Palin is a divisive leader.  I'd be surprised if you could, or anyone could find a mother-load of bipartisan comment by that lady, while on the other hand, the President has made a great deal of it.


7)
I'll admit you have hutzpah, reb. In a thread showing libs talking about kill supreme court justices and their families, cutting off toes of radio personalities and sending a black back to the fields where he belongs, you decide to discuss how violent the right is....nice try.


     I'll have to check back to see this evidence.  Unfortunately, the right has some history of counterfeiting and forging tapes and other evidence, such as the Pimp and Prostitute tapes used to smear and destroy ACORN.  Given that track record, allegations from right wing sources are often difficult for me to credit.  Folks who are often most vocal about preading such smears are often notably absent when it comes time for taking responsibility for having done so, I've notice.  After the Republicans in congress voted to thank those who (it turned out) faked the tape, the same politicians managed to let the matter coast when time came for an appropriate apology.  I'd call that unkind.  I wouldn't call that even a nice try.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


42 posted 02-07-2011 05:29 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

It's a blog, Bob, not an editorial. Why should I bother writing to the New Yorker. I didn't bring them into the conversation. WHat they say is of no interest to me, whichever side they champion. When someone starts using their blogs as reference points to bring here and those blogs are little more than rants, I say something.

I don't know what they have to do with the video in question, anyway...you know, the one people of the left persuasion have no comment on.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


43 posted 02-07-2011 05:43 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

( I deleted here a comment just made about ACORN. That dog has been whipped here in the past and ACORN has gotten it's just rewards)


On this tape you would say what? That perhaps a fine fellow said, "I would kill for a hamburger" and "I love Clarence Thomas and his wife" and then the right-wing wackos took  the recordings, spliced together the "kill" in the first one and "Clarence Thomas and his wife" and came up with "Kill Clarence Thomas!" LOL!

As I said to LR, it appears we have no  common ground at all, when you fellows can look at tapes clearly advocating violence and murder against citizens and have nothing more to say than, "I don't know what I'm looking at" (in LR's case) and "Allegations from right wing sources are difficult for me to credit", from you, I just find myself shaking my head.

So be it.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


44 posted 02-07-2011 09:54 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

I'd like to know how people present falsehoods and other people repeat falsehoods as though they are truth without batting any eye.

WHO IS THE POPULAR NATIONAL TV HOST WHO INDOCTRINATES HIS AUDIENCE WITH CLAIMS THAT OBAMA IS AN ALIEN?

That false claim alone tells me all I need to know about Packer.

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


45 posted 02-07-2011 11:03 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

It took you that long, Denise?? I reached that point at (Most of the Obama quotes that appear in the comments were lame attempts to reassure his base that he can  get mad and fight back, i.e., signs that heís practically incapable of personal aggression in politics.)

(Maybe it will make more sense if you take out the vowels and read it backwards)
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


46 posted 02-07-2011 11:18 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

There's a thought!
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


47 posted 02-08-2011 12:00 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Actually, O'Reilly was on tonight receiving mail about his interview with Obama. One e-mail said, "Thanks. A friend bet me 100 bucks that you would ask Obama about his birth certificate and I said you wouldn't."

O'reilly replied with, "Why would I want to question Obama about that junk?"

Apparently the New Yorker was not referring to O'Reilly. SInce Rush and Hannity have said the same, they're out, too.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


48 posted 02-08-2011 05:12 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



      "That was typical, double-talking, non-factual slime peddling the New Yorker is becoming more known for."

     The above was your statement, Mike.

     I'd imagined that you'd want to address the people directly, if you felt that way, and get a direct response to your criticism.  I thought that you'd like to know that The New Yorker actually has an excellent industry wide reputation for fact checking.  

     Should the question have been been without merit, as you suggest, then why sidetrack the discussion with such wild accusations?  They'd appear to be a colossal waste of everybody else's time if you didn't think they were part of the discussion, wouldn't they?  Why would you want to do something like that?  I'm sorry, I simply don't follow.

     You asked a number of rhetorical questions that I attempted to answer one at a time, to the best of my ability, including your request for people to give you examples of some of the far right wing behaviors that you'd asked for above.  I tried my best to offer the sort of examples that you'd specifically asked for, and I notice that you haven't responded to my attempt to carry on that thread of the conversation.  Your really did quite literally ask for the response, so I'm puzzled why you haven't responded to the response that was offered.  Did you find the responses offensive in some fashion ó I made every attempt to keep them factual and well modulated.

     I understand that you might have found my comments unsatisfactory in some way, but suggesting that I had some sort of personal flaw did not, to me, seem like a response that actually addressed the nature of the discussion.  Actually, it seemed to address what you dislike about liberal politics and perhaps about me.

     Probably, if both of us kept the discussion more strictly confined to the facts we were discussing, it would work out better, don't you think?

     I said above that I thought that the New Yorker might present points of view that everybody might not agree with, and I could understand why anybody might disagree with those.  Examples of mistakes in the fact checking you allege on their part would be helpful in understanding your charges.  

     In response to Denise, I believe that the sort of alien in question is actually the sort of alien that is a foreign national rather than the sort of visitor from another planet that the discussion of the text may have made the word sound like.  A significant portion of the far right has in fact attempted to paint The President as a foreign national type alien, and the occasional denial that has come from party officials on the right has often been half hearted, and has given folks on the far right considerable encouragement in their attempts to further this particular meme.  You've mentioned and defended this particular point of view on occasion yourself, haven't you?

     I may be incorrect in remembering you speaking about Michele Bachmann as being a commentator (as well as an officeholder) who has supported this point of view from time to time.  I may well be mistaken on this;  You'd be the person I'd ask for names of any supporters of this notion among commentators or officeholders, and I'd suspect you'd be able to supply at least one or two.  If I'm in error about this, please forgive me.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


49 posted 02-08-2011 07:19 AM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

Yes, of course I know what type of 'alien' he was talking about. No, I never claimed Obama was an alien. I question the type of citizenship he has, as do most of the so-called 'birthers'. Is it the natural born type required to hold the office of President, or another type?

I don't recall Michelle Bachmann ever talking about it, and I know of no 'popular national TV host' who 'indoctrinates' his audience with that assertion.

But then I suppose facts don't stand in the way of Packer.

 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Peace Loving Progressives in Action   [ Page: 1  2  3  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors