No, no, no. I keep telling you that rational ignorance is the number one threat to the republic.
Actually, you are:
Hopefully, you won’t mind that I question the fox’s report on the status of the henhouse. From your site:
One presumes, of course, that it is they who decide what is accurate, reliable, and credible. As well, one wonders at the irony of one agenda monitoring another. I mean, doesn’t one?
Sure, question away. I’ll go ahead and assume you’ll be posting later with some contrary evidence that shows their facts to not be in order? :dubious:
Yeah, they’re absolutely an anti-Fox organization, but if their methodology is correct, they are presenting objective evidence in this case. As far as I can tell, the time they are reporting is the amount of time speakers are covered. But, as you say, I’d look for a confirming source before taking their numbers at face value.
But you’ve already given them the status of “facts”. A scientist who conducts an experiment after having already made up his mind as to the veracity of his hypothesis is wasting time. If the experiment contradicts him, he will declare it flawed and unreliable. After all, how can anything contradict what is already true?
I remember well those rebuttals. especially Ralph Reed and the 16 NATO countries figure. Lets see if there will be the equivalent this time around for the RNC.
Xtisme I’m watching Giuliani’s speech right now… and though I agree most here will criticize according to our “intelectualized” perceptions. Those are our personal opinions. As for how these speeches will resonate with the common man… well they all sound pretty familiar. The same slogans and key words. 9/11 is being milked to the limit too ! We know how they have sucessfully been used before. The speeches are longish and boring… but then so were most of the DNC.
Giulani was the low point… attacking Germans releasing a “terrorist” was pretty low. Appeasment rhetoric again was low. My opinion of him is dropping a lot… His “thank god Bush is president” was corny. “With us or with the terrorists” is cheap. Basically he repeated all the “slogans” about Bush and the war on terror. Comparing Bush to Churchill was the final straw though.
McCain was more balanced and, though I agree that we shouldn't consider him a closet democrat, it still pains me to see him supporting Bush. His delivery was so so... I would think he would be a bit more "emotional". The public obviously likes him.He’s not making it up. They changed the wording.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_08_29.php#003381
I just get nervous when someone with such an obvious agenda takes it upon themselves to monitor someone else’s agenda. It’s hard enough to qualify without taking into account the fact that much of Fox’s primetime programming is devoted to issue-oriented talking head shows. Even during 9/11 coverage, at 8:00 we heard from Piss Face and at 9:00 we heard from Horny and Combover. That’s just what they do.
Well, of course they took it down and modified it. You can find the story over at Kevin Drum’s Washington Monthly site
My seconds will call on you in the morning, sir or madam, expecting to receive your abject apology. Written in blood would be a nice touch. A videotape of you committing seppuku will also be acceptable…
:rolleyes:
This isn’t science, Lib. It’s grade school addition. If you have evidence that their ideology got in the way of their calculator, show it. Otherwise, your skepticism is unfounded.
Absolutely. I glossed over the fact that you were reporting a report, so I shoud have said, “He made it up.” But in that moment I hadn’t considered that MSNBC would have fixed it. Looking at the format of that screenshot, it almost looks like there should be something after “Move you to support”, doesn’t it? Maybe they actually were trying to make it a legit poll…
Lib: This Wash. Post article seems to back up my assertion as well, sans numbers. Of course, if you really were entirely unbelieving of the MMFA numbers, you could verify them yourself during tonight’s Fox News RNC coverage. Otherwise, you could continue to be unfoundly cynical.
I believe he was just talking to people (in the hall and watching on TV) who don’t pay attention to the news. Unfortunately that’s a lot of people and they lap that stuff up.
I can’t respect anyone who sticks up for the Bush camp after what the Bush camp did to him and his wife.
Moore is writing a daily column for USA Today. He’s allowed to be there just like anyone else with the proper press credentials. Sean Hannity was allowed to roam the floor of the Dem convention, and I didn’t see any Democratic speakers calling him out from the stage and the entire hall erupting in boos. Republicans and Moore himself might laugh the incident off, but I thought it was beyond rude. For the entire convention to loudly boo Moore to his face because he made a movie they don’t like? That’s the real face of the Republican party. Slap a bandaid with a purple heart on it and you have an insight into their black souls too.
At the very least, though, we need to see the delta in coverage by the other networks, too. It wouldn’t surprise me one bit if more Americans were interested in hearing McCain, Giulliani, and Schwartzenegger than want to hear Jackson, Sharpton, Gore, and Carter. 
Kerry was the target of a pretty hard PR offensive in regards to Bush’s famous question. Bush’s generals earned their pay with that one, that’s for sure. Kerry couldn’t respond with a “no” to the question because his image had already suffered from the “flip-flop campaign”; to answer no would have resulted in Bush & co. trumpeting about the vote Kerry cast for authorizing war and gleefully shouting out the inconsistency.
In fact, Bush et al convinced everyone that a grave threat existed, and then reaped the political capital. It would be bad (and inefficient) for Kerry to be forced in a position where he had to explain his decision on the vote and “doing it again”, he was essentially forced to the wall with this one. There must be some damn fine communications agencies working for the Republicans, because from a PR view that was a masterful (if dirty) stroke.
I take that as a very very valid opinion. I just researched your posts in august and I didn’t find on e political comment !
Oh, absolutely. Unfortunately, it looks like the MMFA site was designed by a chimp. There’s a page that breaks down the amount of coverage CNN and MSNBC gave to various speakers (except each day’s keynote, which is odd - maybe all networks gave 100% to keynoters) for the DNC.
I have had enormous respect for Mr. McCain. I could almost stomach his loyalty to men he knows have no dignity, no respect, and are in every way unworthy of his support. But that putrid little bit of shit-ass political theater…the bandaids with a Purple Heart…he watches, he sees, he is silent.
He is a whore.
I missed the speech-- what did he say?
I’ve always been surprised that McCain is somehow viewed as being above politics. He certainly breaks with the party line from time to time, but I’ve never seen that he didn’t act like any other politician in pushing his agenda.
Grade school addition? I appreciate the, um, concern about my erudition, but I actually was talking about you, not them. See, when I said, “But you’ve already given them the status of ‘facts’,” it was a second person, and not a third person subject of the sentence. You know, grade school grammar.