NO WMD's? Guess again,,,,

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by LuvRPgrl, Feb 9, 2006.

  1. musicman
    Offline

    musicman Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2004
    Messages:
    5,171
    Thanks Received:
    533
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +535
    The doddering old clown, Cronkite, broke this story during the 2004 election campaign - stupidly thinking he was doing his dutiful bit to derail President Bush. The MSM/DNC killed the story immediately - no doubt explaining to Walter - no doubt VERY SLOWLY - that this revelation would pretty much have obliterated what existed of the DNC platform for the next several election cycles. None of this surprises me, of course; the only objective, immutable truth in all of liberalism is political expediency.

    What DOES surprise me is that the story has been allowed - by the White House and most of the conservative blogosphere - to remain buried. This is the information that will blow the "Bush lied" and "no WMD" arguments out of the water. It's been KNOWN - FOR A WHILE!

    I'm scratching my head here. What gives?
     
  2. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,755
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,786
    I'm not a parrot for EITHER party. I don't care WHO said it. Bush will look foolish only to the fools who ALWAYS see him as foolish.

    I just have to keep wondering since when did the entire invasion hinge solely or even as a MAIN reason, on WMDs. I recall a laundry list of reasons. The left focuses on the ones that cannot be proven, and act like the rest never existed.

    So no, I don't miss your point. You see an opportunity to post somethign negative about Bush and you post it. You're MO is pretty clear. :laugh:
     
  3. LuvRPgrl
    Offline

    LuvRPgrl Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,163
    Thanks Received:
    206
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +206
    Its kinda funny, many many liberals will argue vehemently that the NY Times ISNT liberal, and the MSM isnt liberal, yet here is mariner, as do many other libs, admit it is. You do see that happen on the other side of the coin, when a publication is conservative, we freely admit it. They have so much to hide, so much to be ashamed of.
     
  4. Mariner
    Offline

    Mariner Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2004
    Messages:
    772
    Thanks Received:
    52
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Boston, Mass.
    Ratings:
    +52
    is biased liberally. It drives me bananas to have to go read the Wall Street Journal at $1 a pop to get an alternative viewpoint.

    But good newspapers like these tend to contain all the news. It's just that what's on page 1 of one is buried on page 17 of the other.

    Also, good papers do terrific in-depth investigative work, e.g. the Times' articles about innocent noncombatants tortured and killed in U.S. custody. A story like that isn't a liberal or conservative one--both sides need to take it very seriously.

    You're right, LuvRP, my mistake about your quote about religion was a serious one. I believe I apologized for it already. I also noted that you don't seem to apply that standard to Islam, which you freely judge on the basis of its prophet's and followers' actions, as you do to Christianity, which you say we should judge only according to its beliefs, not its followers' actions. Maybe I'm misunderstanding you. If so, feel free to clarify.

    Mariner.
     
  5. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,555
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,420
    You need to learn to distinguish propaganda from news.
     
  6. Mariner
    Offline

    Mariner Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2004
    Messages:
    772
    Thanks Received:
    52
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Boston, Mass.
    Ratings:
    +52
    I didn't know moderators could step in and out of role. Interesting.

    As for deafness, I have a 100dB loss bilaterally--pretty darned deaf. I work with only deaf and hard of hearing patients, and at deaf institutions, and use a sign language interpreter when I need to talk to a hearing person, except my wife and closest friends, whom I can lip-read.

    GunnyL, the Wall Street Journal didn't seem to think Bush was a loser until the past three of four months. There's been a real shift in their tone since then, and they now remind me of the New York Times under Howell Raines, which was scathingly critical of Clinton, to the dismay of many liberals. Still, they identify themselves as conservatives, and explicitly took the lose/lose position on WMDs. If someone here is a subscriber, perhaps s/he could look up the editorial and post it for us?

    Mariner.
     
  7. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,755
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,786
    I'm not missing anything because I disagree with your opinion. Stop trying to play the lefty, pseudo-intellectual and claim anyone who doesn't agree with you "just doesn't get it." I get it all just fine. Perhaps YOU don't?

    And it is bad form to identify Kathianne as a mod when she clearly was not acting in that capacity in her response to you.
     
  8. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,555
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,420
    Get your head out of the paper to find out WTF is really going on--the MSM has one goal and that is to defeat the conservative party.
     
  9. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,755
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,786
    Think about it. If she was solely a moderator and not a poster, she could not post except in an official capacity. I'm quite sure if a mod acts in that capacity where you are involved, there'll be no doubt in your mind. :laugh:
     
  10. Mariner
    Offline

    Mariner Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2004
    Messages:
    772
    Thanks Received:
    52
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Boston, Mass.
    Ratings:
    +52
    assumption that a moderator would try to set a moderate tone for discussion, even when posting a personal opinion.

    Dillo, the media are far more balanced now than in the past. Consider right-wing talk radio, or all the conservative humorists on TV, or Fox. At times, they've seemed to bend over backwards not to offend conservatives, e.g. in the way we get fudgy reports about Abramoff and Democrats, as if he was playing both sides equally, when in fact he was a Republican to the core (head of his college Republicans), explicitly sought to make K street a Republican-only franchise, and directed the vast majority of his lobbying towards Republicans. You sometimes wouldn't know that reading the news, as it attempts to be 'balanced.'

    On the other hand, there's a strong tendency among current conservatives to cry "bias" every time news that opposes their views is reported. If you only listened to Bush and his echo chamber at Fox News, you'd think you could take your kids shopping in downtown Baghdad this weekend

    Mariner.
     

Share This Page