From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Sun Jan 23 2005 - 13:54:19 GMT
Arlo,
Are you snowed in? No snow here in South Carolina.
> The point was about "ad hominem" being a "leftist argument". Change the
> topic all you want, the truth stands: both conservatives and liberals and
> any other labelled-person you want to throw in use "ad hominem" arguments
> equally.
You ignore the power structure when it's convenient to do so. Case in
point: ABC News soliciting information about military burials taking place
on inauguration day in order to launch an irrelevant smear attack on Bush.
> > The Condi Rice confirmation case illustrates leftist media bias because
> > the former KKK member senator Robert Byrd (known to his friends as
> > "Sheets") was one of three Democratic senators who used a parliamentary
> > maneuver to delay a full vote on the nomination of Rice. Not a peep out
> > of the press. Can you imagine what the same press would do if a black
> > female Democrat were blocked from taking a high cabinet post by say,
> > Trent Lott? Rather, Jennings, Blitzer, Woodruff and company would go
> > berserk.
> Oddly, when Bush lied about WMDs, and his staff have said from the
> beginning that Bush wanted to "pin the blame on Iraq", the press was
> silent. Oh, it was reported, but when Clinton lied about getting oral sex,
> or bad business dealings twenty years previously, he had an independant
> counsel making headlines for years. We had stained dresses drug into the
> national forum. But lying about the reasons for war, "s'alright".
>
> Imagine if rather than lie about a blowjob, Clinton had been the one who
> lied about WMDs and rushed to war with Iraq? Dear lord the conservative
> media would have him hanged by now. Bush, on the other hand, gets a free
> pass.
A beautiful example of the left's use of the Big Lie propaganda technique.
To lie, you must know the truth. Clinton did. Bush, along with the rest of
the world, didn't.
> Bush has a $40 million dollar inauguration while soldiers are dying and
> victims of the tsunamis are suffering. Imagine if Clinton did this. And yet
> the only media reference I heard pointing out the idiocy of this was The
> Daily Show (which, by the way, had a presidential historian on, who pointed
> out that Lydon Johnson sent all of the money for his inauguration to
> families of Vietnam soldiers who had been killed.).
You and MSH are all bent out of shape because Kerry lost the election. If
Kerry had won, would you still be complaining? Hardly. Clinton spent more
more on his inaugural after he sent U.S. troops in Bosnia in a pre-emptive
incursion, based on his lie that the troops would only be there for a
year. Not a peep out of the leftists.
> > That word "patriotic" really bugs you doesn't it? I wonder why you find
> > it so powerful. Could it be your subconscious is telling you that
> > supporting America's laws protecting intellectual value rights is a good
> > thing?
>
> Not at all, I consider myself very patriotic. When I use it in quotes, it
> is because I am angered at how the conservative media manipulated its use
> to mean "blind obedience to government". To me, my patriotism is vigilence
> against deception regardless of "party affiliation" and dissent against any
> policy, by any administration, I find immoral. **That** is patriotism,
> "blind obedience" is "patriotism" only to lapdogs.
I don't find liberating people from tyranny immoral.
> > Speaking of Fox News, it's primetime coverage in numbers of viewers is up
> > 57% over 2001 while CNN dropped 14% and MSNBC went down 47%. I think you
> > should ask yourself, "Why?" (How large do you suppose is the audience for
> > the Guerrilla News?)
>
> Because the right-wing is winning the propaganda war.
In other words, people are too stupid to recognize when they are being
manipulated? The election showed that most people weren't fooled by
leftist propaganda that Bush lied about WMD.
> > > Certainly, BECAUSE they were stopping the "jew bias". Goebbels speeches
> > > and writings against the german media are well documented on the web.
> > Where?
> http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/goebmain.htm
Which speech?
> > > Well, you see, I have this organization called "Objective Media
> > > Analysis", and they've determined it to be true. If you dispute their
> > > objective findings, it is only because you are conservatively biased.
> > > Since I'm a "liberal", I accept everything they tell me as fact,
> > > because liberals don't lie, or would ever stretch the truth to serve
> > > political ends, only conservatives do these things.
> >
> > Just as I thought. You have no source.
>
> Why is my source less credible than the MRC? You conservatives always want
> to dismiss anything that isn't "rightist".
Just as I thought. You have no source.
Platt
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 - horse@darkstar.uk.net
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 : Sun Jan 23 2005 - 13:58:34 GMT