Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
If you are going to pretend that all of the major media are house organs of the Democratic Party, there's really no point in conversing at all.
|
No. We've got Fox.
I think we've now moved to the English system of partisan media. I think the media need to explicitly recognize and state this. There are too many undecided morons who might still think that "I read it in the paper, so it must be true . . . ."
Quote:
|
Kerry picked up on news headlines that fit his campaign message. Big surprise. I cannot believe that you think Kerry should be giving a "let's take a reasoned approach to this," whatever the hell that means, one week before an election.
|
You're right on this point. I shouldn't include Kerry in that list. He's the candidate. I can't hold him to a standard that I'm attempting to apply to "neutral" deliverers of news.
Quote:
|
Since Bush's campaign is increasingly based on lying about Kerry's position (see, e.g., Kerry's plan for a government takeover of health care . . .
|
Um, have you read Kerry's "plan"? That's what it is. Private insurance pays for low-limit stuff. Gov picks up everything above that limit.
Quote:
|
. . . . and his willingness to let the UN veto our foreign policy . . .
|
We're quibbling over definitions. "Veto"? No. Do I think he will look for foreign approval to the detriment of our country? Yep.
Quote:
|
The real question is what to make of the various stories about the missing explosives. I asked you, several posts ago, what was wrong or missing from Marshall's account. You have yet to respond. I do not understand why you think the NYT story is an old one, since you are also complaining that they just scooped CBS, and since it appears the White House did not know about all this until recently. I also do not understand why you think the NBC trumps what (e.g.) the NYT and AP have reported.
|
Old story, with a new spin from the IAEA report.
I think what the White House didn't "know" earlier was that the Times would fall for it, and report that they disappeared on Bush's watch. They already knew that there was a big stash there at some point pre-invasion.
Like I said earlier, my complaint isn't with the objective details of the stories. It's that the Times trumpets what hasn't been developed yet, and then, when more info is brought to the public's attention, the people who were reading the Times yesterday and crowing are now saying, well, no, let's wait and see. You've already done the damage, and now you want the fix to be careful and methodical? Call me a cynic, but . . .
(BTW, I must have missed the Josh link. On the now-dead board?)
