Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1.    #1  
    see
    http://www.buzzflash.com/farrell/04/10/far04036.html

    follow the links in each point to see the documentation.
  2. #2  
    I was hoping for an objective look at things. Objectivity is what really helps the undecided.
  3. #3  
    When they start off quoting Aspen's very own Hunter S. Thompson, all I can say is HO-HUM
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  4.    #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by KRamsauer
    I was hoping for an objective look at things. Objectivity is what really helps the undecided.
    Certainly you look at mainstream news for information, which is less than objective (ie FOX news).

    Did you follow the links to the source of the points, which are gleened from major papers, transcripts, etc? Just because the points to consider are compiled in a manner that makes a particular case does not mean that they are not valid for your consideration.

    If I presented 101 incidences where voter registration/ballot "mistakes" benefited the republican party, but could only find one that benefitted a democratic candidate would you consider it biased speculation that voter suppression efforts were being carried out by a particular party?

    You seem to be saying that objectivity only exists where two different sides are equally at fault. I submit that this is clearly not the case.
  5. #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    When they start off quoting Aspen's very own Hunter S. Thompson, all I can say is HO-HUM
    As a journalist in training, his writing, wit and pithy attitude is something I thought would appeal to you.

    Even though he's liberal, his style is still quite unique and offers great insight into establish your own journalistic style.

    Just my .02.
    << My command as we escape Palm HQ with a new Pre 3>>.

    Treo 300 >> Treo 600 >> Treo 650 >> Treo 755 >> Instinct >> Pre- >> TouchPad
  6.    #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    When they start off quoting Aspen's very own Hunter S. Thompson, all I can say is HO-HUM
    It is clear you don't dispute the information cited. Unless you feel that a quote by a journalist you don't care for invalidates everything that follows.


    "If we played fair, we'd never win." -Newt Gingrich
  7. #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by tjd414
    As a journalist in training, his writing, wit and pithy attitude is something I thought would appeal to you.

    Even though he's liberal, his style is still quite unique and offers great insight into establish your own journalistic style.

    Just my .02.
    I saw him in person doing a reading at the Boulder Theater. He was drunk and basically screwed that paying audience. I have no problem with his writing. He's just a jerk
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  8. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    I saw him in person doing a reading at the Boulder Theater. He was drunk and basically screwed that paying audience. I have no problem with his writing. He's just a jerk
    Could very well be, I've only read his work, never observed him in action.
    << My command as we escape Palm HQ with a new Pre 3>>.

    Treo 300 >> Treo 600 >> Treo 650 >> Treo 755 >> Instinct >> Pre- >> TouchPad
  9.    #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by Chick-Dance
    So do George W. Bush?s indiscretions, such as his D.U.I, make him a jerk?
    My personal opinion is that his refusal to reconsider a position in the light of new evidence ("staying the course") is the principle trait, among many, that qualifies him as a jerk of the first order.

    Interesting how the 101 points to consider got diverted by clairegrrl onto a discussion of Hunter S Thompson's personality. When you can't dispute the facts, change the subject. The republican strategy.

    BTW, the thing that angers me the most right now about republicans is the UNAMERICAN effort to prevent voters from casting their vote in every possible way, in every possible place.

    This is undermining democracy in its essence. They are terrified of a fair election!
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by nudist
    If I presented 101 incidences where voter registration/ballot "mistakes" benefited the republican party, but could only find one that benefitted a democratic candidate would you consider it biased speculation that voter suppression efforts were being carried out by a particular party?

    You seem to be saying that objectivity only exists where two different sides are equally at fault. I submit that this is clearly not the case.
    Yes. I would say that is biased speculation. I mean look at your avatar. And to go back to something you said earlier: "Just because the points to consider are compiled in a manner that makes a particular case does not mean that they are not valid for your consideration." Yes, it completely does. Because they are compiled with a certain point of view in mind. If I just showed you pictures of a coin that fell heads up but didn't show you all the ones where tails was up, does that mean the presentation is valid just because each picture is accurate? Of course not.

Posting Permissions