I.e., the only response you can come up with.
Keep it up all you like, though. Even an electronic village needs an idiot.
Giraffe, you’ll find some of the most old-man-type cranky and choleric discussions of conservative politics in the editorial and letter pages of Machine Design magazine. That entertainment alone is worth the price - free.
I see I failed to parse tightly enough, despite knowing the hair-splitting response I was sure to get. Oh, well…at least you don’t fail to disappoint.
To the degree that they share the same political ideology, yes.
But then you already knew that. Why do we have to spend so much time around here getting bogged down in specious comparisons that are really apples and oranges? Are you unable to argue your position on its own merits, free from verbal red herrings?
Actually, no. You made statements. I asked questions, based on those statements, including extensions of those statements to similar but different situations. That’s how debating an assertion works.
For example, if I say “criminals should be punched in the head, to discourage crime” and someone asks “what about jaywalkers?”, that’s neither a specious comparison nor a verbal red herring. It’s easy to argue a position if you dismiss any examples that make it look silly as irrelevant.
You stated that magazines should not select their staff based on political affiliation. I disagree, and gave examples of magazines whose only purpose is to give commentary on current events from a specific political viewpoint, which you ignored. You stated that all magazines are part of the mainstream media, so that when people discuss bias in the mainstream media, specific examples of individual magazines holding a bias are illustrative of the bias in the overall mainstream media. I disagree, pointing out that the vast number and diversity of magazines means that the individual views of a single random magazine are irrelevant, especially when said magazine’s purpose has nothing to do with politics or current events.
You still haven’t gotten around to telling us how you infer the political ideology of a mag devoted to naked guys with limp dicks.
[QUOTE=Starving Artist]
To the degree that they share the same political ideology, yes.QUOTE]
Haven’t we already determined that this ideology can best be defined as “Not in agreement with Starving Artist”, or did you have another definition?
Yes, I’ve always maintained that right-wing nuts like Sam and yourself are the undisputed experts in hypocrisy and double standards.
I did no such thing, and you know it. At most, I implied staff should not be fired based on previously unknown political affiliation.
If you keep up with these efforts to restate my comments so as to make them appear what they aren’t in order to bolster your own position, I’m simply gonna have to stop responding to you.
This is silly. If I waged some complaint against “Hollywood,” would you be pointing out that Hollywood also makes advertising films for NAPA Auto Parts and then suggest I’m wrong in my contention because NAPA Auto Parts films don’t fit my complaint?
Everyone knows what is meant by “Hollywood,” and everyone knows what is meant by “mainstream media.”
Therefore, I’m content to leave it to the perception of those who read this thread to evaluate the merit of what I said. I’m not going to get into a pissing contest with you over whether or not Pocket Rocket Magazine should be included when I talk about mainstream media, and whether or not the answer will somehow determine whether I’m right or wrong about mainstream media bias.
I thought we did, up until the point where you said the following:
Then you attempted to weasel out of it, and continue to do so. Wanna just make a clarifying statement on what you consider to be “mainstream media” and we can get on with it?
I know what I mean by mainstream media, and it sure as hell doesn’t include “Playgirl.”
Nope. I just said what I had to say on the subject. Capishe?
Nope, I sure don’t. I don’t think anyone else does, either. In fact, I have a sneaking feeling that you don’t as well - that’s why you continue to try to weasel out of it. How can we discuss all things mainstream media if you’re not willing to actually define it beyond “it’s all things media unless I say it’s not”?
See? Here you go again. Who said anything about “discussing all things mainstream media”? Not I, certainly. And since you and your two compatriots here are obviously more interested in trying to define the meaning of what the word is, is, I think I’ll just hang back and wait for someone else to come in and try to add some life to this thread.
Cheers. 
Coward. You have yet to offer a solid post that clearly identifies what the fuck you’re talking about (or even want to talk about), then get all huffy when someone asks for clarification. No wonder no one on the right around here backs you up.
Selecting staff of a given political disposition includes firing staff who no longer fit the requirements. You said it was wrong for Playgirl to fire an editor based on her political affiliation. I asked if you felt the same held true for all magazines, including politically-oriented publications. You still haven’t responded.
You have that backwards. You have, in my opinion, suggested that the politics of the NAPA Auto Parts crew is in some way reflective of the politics of “Hollywood”. I disagree.
I thought so too, until I opened this thread and saw you including Playgirl in the mainstream media.
I propose an experiment: go find ten random people and ask them only the following question “would you say the magazine Playgirl is part of the mainstream media?” No elaboration beyond that. I guarantee the answer will be no 10 out of 10 times.
Care to elaborate? The message that right wing media delivers is very simple and straight forward. It also simplifies VERY complex issues. Care to refute that with anything?
SA, I’d really like to hear an anwer to this question before I even attempt to take this whole mess seriously.
Did Starving Artist ever concede that they were wrong, or did they just run away?
Run away, of course. It’s a favorite tactic of today’s Republicans.
Weak, dude. If you’ve got to post Republican-bashing drivebys, at least give us something original or funny. Even then, save it for a thread where another Republican has been willing to even partially endorse Starving Artist nonsensical ramblings.
No gold star for you.