From: Arlo Bensinger (ajb102@psu.edu)
Date: Fri Jan 21 2005 - 17:21:21 GMT
Platt,
>Arlo:
> > I don't archive O'Reily's broadcasts, but here is something you can do. Go
> > to Google, type in "liberal" and "asshole" (or your choice of "ad hominem"
> > attack). Search either "web" or "groups". If you can't find any evidence
> > doing this that "conservatives" engage in "ad hominem" attacks just as
> > vociferously as "liberals", then let me know.
>
>Your suggestion is irrelevant to the charge that the main stream media has
>a liberal bias.
>
My suggestion was that "conservatives" engage in "ad hominem" attacks just
as vociferously as "liberals". As Horse has demonstrated, perhaps even more
so. This refutes your use of the term "leftist argument" when referring to
"ad hominem" attacks.
>I have no problem calling those who give aid and comfort to terrorists who
>are dedicated to killing Americans, Britons, Dutchmen and other upholders
>of intellectual level rights "traitors."
If you define "patriotism" as "blind obedience to your government" that is
your problem. To me, part of the great thing about "freedom" is the
"freedom to dissent".
> > "Intelligent Design" is also a
> > masterful stroke of rhetorical propaganda, as is the deceptive use of
> > "faith-based" to replace "religious" in government edicts.
>
>Guess you didn't noticed that leftist Hillary Clinton came out in favor of
>"fath-based" government initiatives, saying "There is no contradiction
>between support for faith-based initiatives and upholding our
>constitutional principles."
When did I say I blindly support Hillary Clinton (or any other politician
or political party)???
See, unlike blind lapdogs, I freely and openly disagree based on principles
I hold, not party-affiliation.
> >Your recently
> > cited MRC, nothing more than a conservative propaganda machine, was
> > designed to provide a seemingly "objective" face to media research, while
> > delibertately skewing or falsifying (as Ant, Mark and others has already
> > demonstrated) reports to promote conservative rhetoric.
>
>It's a sign of propaganda on your part to make broad accusations without
>any objective evidence.
The evidence is there, your continual posts pretending it is not shows the
power of propaganda.
> > Rupert Murdoch's
> > blatantly false "fair and balanced" is another masterful use of
> > manipulative language.
>
>You see what I mean?
Yes, I see you actually believe it, and as such prove the power of the
propaganda.
> > Indeed, the entire myth of liberal media bias
> > follows a Goebbelian trajectory, which condemned "mass media" for its
> > "Jewish" bias, and promoted the Ministry as the only "fair" outlet for
> > news. The Ministry, then of course, only promoted the party, and anything
> > reported in the "mainstream media" was dismissed as "jew bias". Doesn't
> > this sound eerily, and possibly coincidentally, familiar?
>
>No. In Hitler's Germany there was no mainstream media, only Nazi media.
Learn some history, Platt. There WAS a mainstream media, it was gradually
taken over by the ministry BECAUSE they used the fear that everything in it
was "jew biased".
>Both sides use propaganda techniques that were well known long before the
>Nazis. The latest talking points from the leftists is to paint the current
>administration as suffering from "hubris" Before that it was that Bush
>lacked "gravitas." And, of course, we repeatedly hear "stupid" applied to
>him and those who voted for him.
As I've said, the conservatives are not unique in using talking points, but
the sheer volume of it pushed out by the conservative media over the past
several years has been very telling.
Arlo
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries -
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 21 2005 - 18:44:28 GMT