Where is the righteous indignation?

[BrentAllen]

Yep, IBD made one mistake in one EDITORIAL. I'd be interested to hear what you think about the New York Times and CBS, after all the fiction they REPORTED as news.

[BadenP]

First of all I think there is a lot of behind the scenes info on terrorism that the public is not and will not be made aware of, and I suspect that is why Obama is keeping parts of the Patriot Act going. Even with all the new safeguards in place it is still fairly easy for some crackpot or group to sneak into the USA, and it is not about the news we hear about as much as the events we never hear about that concern me. No country can ever be completely safe from attack,so I think I will let those leaders on the frontlines make those decisions than critize them from a point of ignorance as some seem determined to do.

 

Brent, as far as the press is concerned both the left and right wing press share equally in the blame, both sides show a total disregard for ethical reporting and the facts and instead go for ratings or sales by resorting to cheap sensationalism, and it is getting worse all the time.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

So you're saying it's OK for IBD to print crap if other people do it too?

[sherminator505]

"I'd be interested to hear what you think about the New York Times and CBS, after all the fiction they REPORTED as news."

 

Such as, say, the link between Iraq and 9-11?

[BrentAllen]

ML,

Nope, don't put words in my mouth, never said that. I said I was interested in your opinion of the others, given your severe criticism of IBD over one mistake.

 

sherm,

I was thinking more along the lines of Jayson Blair, and Dan Rather and the forgery. When speaking of the NYT, there's a long list to choose from.

[scoutingagain]

"No country can ever be completely safe from attack,so I think I will let those leaders on the frontlines make those decisions than critize them from a point of ignorance as some seem determined to do."

 

Sorry, BP but this is the same rational used by many to support Bush's decision to go into Iraq. They told us they "knew" there were weapons of mass destruction.

 

Nothing wrong with being critical of Presidential policy based on what we know from the media and what the government tells us. It's what makes us a free society. It's the only information we have acceess to and ultimately come election time we as citizens need to make decisions based on that information. We need to judicious in our interpretation of what we learn from the media because we know the media makes mistakes and publishes or transmits stuff that isn't true. So we need to constantly reassess our postions based on the best information we have when it becomes available. But don't suggest we should trust the government or administration, Republican or Democrat, just because they have access to more information.

 

SA

 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Nope, don't put words in my mouth, never said that.

 

I never SAID you said that. I ASKED you "So you're saying it's OK for IBD to print crap if other people do it too?"

 

I said I was interested in your opinion of the others, given your severe criticism of IBD over one mistake.

 

Well, since you won't bother to answer my questions, why should I bother answering yours?

[BrentAllen]

Uh.....McFly....I did answer your question.

 

Here's a little suggestion for you - don't answer a question with a question. And phrasing that way does mean you are trying to put words in someone's mouth, as in "are you saying...?"

[sherminator505]

True enough about the NYT, although the reporter that was in the tank for the Bush administration also comes to mind...

[BadenP]

scouting again,

 

You do not know of what you speak my friend, I did DOD intelligence work for several years and let me tell you there have been many very close calls that are kept under wraps to prevent panic among the population. For every event that gets reported there are least ten or more that do not, so act high and mighty all you want, criticize all you want, but you are still reacting from a view of ignorance and partial information.

 

Your WOMD analogy is a lame duck argument as well. I don't agree with wire taps either but in this day of rapidly expanding communication technology today it is almost impossible to trace many remote phone calls, and computer messaging back to their source.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Uh.....McFly....I did answer your question.

 

Uh, McFly....you didn't even recognize my question as a question.

 

But why don't you point out exactly where you answered my question. Here's what I wrote:

So you're saying it's OK for IBD to print crap if other people do it too?

 

Here's what you wrote:

ML,

Nope, don't put words in my mouth, never said that. I said I was interested in your opinion of the others, given your severe criticism of IBD over one mistake.

 

Now, the first sentence says you never said that, but you don't indicate if that's what you meant or not. Your second sentence also doesn't indicate if that's what you meant or not.

 

Here's a little suggestion for you - don't answer a question with a question.

 

I didn't.

 

Here's what you wrote earlier:

Yep, IBD made one mistake in one EDITORIAL. I'd be interested to hear what you think about the New York Times and CBS, after all the fiction they REPORTED as news.

 

Neither one of those sentences are questions.

 

And phrasing that way does mean you are trying to put words in someone's mouth, as in "are you saying...?"

 

No, that's what's known as trying to clarify what someone meant by what they said.

[BrentAllen]

OK, McFly, I guess I will have to use kindergarten words, so you can understand.

 

You asked me a question - "So you're saying it's OK for IBD to print crap if other people do it too?"

 

I answered - nope. That also means "no." No. Nein. Nada. NO. Comprende?

 

I asked you a question - "I'd be interested to hear what you think about the New York Times and CBS, after all the fiction they REPORTED as news." You even acknowledged this was a question, when you said "Well, since you won't bother to answer my questions, why should I bother answering yours?"

 

Instead of answering my question, you asked yours - "So you're saying it's OK for IBD to print crap if other people do it too?"

Hence, you answered my question with a question.

 

I think I hear your mom calling you. Time to go home and take your bath.

 

 

[GernBlansten]

Brent,

Would you re-read your exchange with Merlyn, then re-read the Scout Law.

Do you see a disconnect?

[BrentAllen]

Gee, Gern, I just thought I was following your example. You know, counter punch, get dirty.

 

"All too often, the conservative leaners think they can denegrate liberals without response. I'm here to keep that from happening. If they take a swing, especially a cheap shot, they should expect a counter punch."

 

"And I for one am tired of following my mother's advice and be polite and never discuss politics. Not when the right wing has driven the debate into the mud. They want to get dirty? I'll get dirty. It will not go unchallenged."

 

Here's a quarter....

[GernBlansten]

Brent,

I'm not WB. I'm a lesser scouter. I expect much more from someone of your stature.