Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 81 to 94 of 94
  1. #81  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG View Post
    That is going to be parsed because that poll is for the House, not the Senate. Sorry.
    true, missed that
  2.    #82  
    Quote Originally Posted by meyerweb View Post
    I'm amused. The discussions as to why the Republicans lost so many elections, and what it means, will go on for months. What's amusing, though, is the immediate reaction of conservatives to blame the "liberal media."

    And just what media is this? Last I saw, Fox is the most watched broadcast news show, and no one can claim that to be even a tiny bit liberal (nor 'fair and balanced,' for that matter). It's conservative, republican bias is more blatant than any other TV news show's liberal bias. And I doubt that very many people in the heartland get their news from the Washington Post or New York Times. Even if they did, it's been a long time since the Post has really been a "liberal" newspaper. They even endorsed a republican for governor of Maryland this year.

    Even Fox News, the Washington Times and other more conservative outlets have been forced to acknowledge that fact that this administration's foreign policy has been a disaster, rockin' and rollin' from one blunder to another. Bush's foreign policy group is really The Gang That Couldn't Shoot Straight. When all 4 military newspapers call the administrations military policy a failure, you know this has gone way beyond the 'liberal media.'

    But it's much easier to blame someone else than accept responsibility for your own failure, I guess.
    Your statement that "Fox is the most watched broadcast news show" indicates a startling level of ignorance. Fox News is a cable outlet...not broadcast. They are the most popular cable news network, but their audience pales in comparison to the ABC/CBS/NBC viewership. And what you perceive as bias at Fox is probably just exposure to an alternative viewpoint.

    As far as a dominant liberal media, well, I'm a gun owner. I see which way that issue is presented, and that is just one example. When I see a Time magazine cover entitled, "The Pelosi that Stole Christmas", or "Is Al Franken Good for America", then I'll back off my claim that the media is biased. (The original covers were Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh.)

    Your reference to "all four" military newspapers belies additional ignorance. The Military Times syndicate is owned by Ganett News. I believe that the exact same editorial ran in all four papers. Media bias made you think that four independent papers published similiar editorials.

    The media is free to publish what they wish, of course. They have that right. I would hope that they would at least acknowledge the responsibility and recognize the power of the consequences of the memes they create.
  3.    #83  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Are you honestly naive or are you just repeating the talking point? I mean honestly. You do realize that most people recognize the fact that the statement was intended as a slam on Bush and the Repubs tried to frame it otherwise.
    Yes. Another demonstration of how liberal nuance is just too sophisticated for the unwashed masses.

    Cite, please, the polling data that illustrates your claim.
  4.    #84  
    Quote Originally Posted by perditac View Post
    fellow progressives...it is not too early to start keeping an eye on this new bunch of rat bastards. They will have all the power that the outgoing bunch of rat bastards had and are therefore destined to become just as corrupt. Keep 'em honest ...keep them under the microscope!
    Excellent point. I'm waiting to see if Pelosi appoints impeached judge Alcee Hastings as head of the House Select Committee on Intelligence. That will really be an indicator.
  5. #85  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever View Post
    When I see a Time magazine cover entitled, "The Pelosi that Stole Christmas", or "Is Al Franken Good for America", then I'll back off my claim that the media is biased. (The original covers were Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh.)
  6. #86  
    Quote Originally Posted by g-funkster View Post
    hooray for facts!
    The problem with that isn't that it's for the House. It's that it's misleading. The chart shows how many people claimed each factor was "extremely important." Well, how many said they were "very important" or just "important"? And then what factors drove people to switch their votes? The experts point to Bush's handling of Iraq.

    You got that image from ThinkProgress. Here's their commentary which you omitted:
    Additionally, 57 percent of the voters polled disapprove of the way the Iraq war is being run.

    UPDATE: “”The reporting on the importance of national issues is off - again. It’s not correct to say that Iraq is less important than corruption or terrorism to people’s vote — it’s solely a function of question wording. The items listed on television are rated individually as “How important is this issue to you” and not against one another or as a motivator for voting.” — John Halpin
    And CNN says: "Exit polls: Bush, Iraq key to outcome"

    So neither ThinkProgress nor CNN believe the message from that chart.
  7. #87  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever View Post
    The media is free to publish what they wish, of course. They have that right. I would hope that they would at least acknowledge the responsibility and recognize the power of the consequences of the memes they create.
    Thanks, your post prompted me to read more about memes. They certainly do seem to have a major influence in our society. You are right that the media creates them, but is seems that goes both for the left as well as the right wing media. Unfortunately it seems that most memes are directed at getting us to buy stuff we don't need.
  8. #88  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG View Post
    You are saying that with the replacement of Rumsfeld, Iraq would be going just dandy?
    Nope. I said that if he announced his resignation earlier, the Republicans would have kept the Senate.

    People lost confidence that the Administration had a working strategy for Iraq. Their concern was that the next two years would look just like the last three years. People wanted some change. All the President had to do was say, "The war isn't going well. We're going to try a new approach." But "stay the course" came across as a stubborn refusal to change.

    With the Gates announcement, even some Democratic leaders are cautiously optimistic that we might see some change for the better. It wouldn't have taken much to swing a few thousand votes in Virginia or Montana.


    I think the Iraq mess is a result of Abu Ghraib, dissolving the Iraqi military, and total deBaathification. Few people remember that Bush and America were relatively popular in Iraq right after the invasion. Abu Ghraib dropped approval to the single digits. Abu Ghraib was a consequence of Rumsfeld's lean military strategy and his ambivalence towards torture. I think Bremer was responsible for the other big mistakes.

    Rumsfeld should have resigned right after Abu Ghraib; that would have sent a message that the US doesn't tolerate or approve of torture. His staying sent the exact opposite message and fueled anti-US hatred.

    After the early mistakes, I'm not sure that any other Sec'y of Defense would have handled the war much better or differently - though I'm certainly no expert on war strategy. The experts say that the solution to Iraq will be political, not military. That tells me that Rice needs to step up. No wonder that we're getting Iraq advice now from a commission that includes two former Secretaries of State.
  9. #89  
    its interesting how Newt Gingrich called the president on a lack of candor to the American public in his handling of the Rumsfeld firing. I do not often agree with Newt but I do in this instance. I think Newt is posturing for a presidential run in 2008.
  10. #90  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix View Post
    The evidence is that Bush said he was keeping Rumsfeld when he really wasn't. Do you know what the word candor means, Gingrich certainly does.
    *Sigh* Apparently you don't.

    You accused Bush of lying for political gain. Gingrich didn't. Yes, we know Bush lied. Gingrich argues that Bush lied and missed an opportunity for political gain. The word "candor" offers you no support.
  11. #91  
    I appreciate your conceding that Bush did lie and that it involved politics. What you suggest is possible - that he missed a political opportunity.

    I just want to clear something else up here that you raised and that is everything I post here in TC, I believe in it myself. You can accuse me of not having all of the facts, you can accuse me of not interpreting them correctly, you can even suggest I am delusional, but you are totally wrong to call someone who does not agree with you a liar or a hypocrite. When you say stuff like that it makes you look bad not me.
  12. #92  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix View Post
    I appreciate your conceding that Bush did lie and that it involved politics. What you suggest is possible - that he missed a political opportunity.

    I just want to clear something else up here that you raised and that is everything I post here in TC, I believe in it myself. You can accuse me of not having all of the facts, you can accuse me of not interpreting them correctly, you can even suggest I am delusional, but you are totally wrong to call someone who does not agree with you a liar or a hypocrite. When you say stuff like that it makes you look bad not me.
    There's nothing to appreciate. I never denied that he lied; I just repeatedly asked you what you would have done, and you never responded. As for conceding that Bush's action had to do with politics, that's another dishonest claim. Why do you keep doing that?

    I said you're dishonest because you have a history of lying, not because you disagree with me. Go back to the Global Warming thread. You repeatedly make false statements. You repeatedly make up baseless accusations. When you make stuff up, that's dishonesty.

    I said you're a hypocrite because you portray a false piety and talk about how it's wrong to lie to your children, and because despite my repeatedly asking, you couldn't answer that you would have done anything different. (This is another opportunity to say that you would have told the truth in the same situation.)
  13. #93  
    Precisely in the global warming thread too, I said what I believe in, I am saying what I believe here too.

    Samkim, you are the one doing the accusing, the bullying, the leveling of personal attacks here. And I am sure the people here in off topics realize it too.

    I will continue to visit treocentral and interact with my conservative and liberal friends as much as I like without listening to your abuse because you are on my ignore list now.
  14. #94  

    I guess I get the last word.


    cell insulted me first when I just asked a simple question:
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix View Post
    If you want to rationalize Bush's lying please go ahead without me from here on.
    cell still has refused to say that she(?) would have answered differently from Bush.


    And cell attacked Bush first:
    Lying about Rumsfeld leaving had everything to do with politics...
    I respond to people with the respect they deserve. And I stand behind everything I said about cell. She's got a history. When you make things up, you know you're making it up.
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

Posting Permissions