Our tea party friends
in [Golf]
|
Prev: Let us endeavor....
Next: I am Kenneth Gladney
From: bknight on 30 Mar 2010 13:10 On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 09:53:41 -0700 (PDT), Dinosaur_Sr <frostback(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: >On Mar 30, 10:34�am, bkni...(a)conramp.net wrote: >> On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 06:35:26 -0700 (PDT), Dinosaur_Sr >> >> <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: >> >On Mar 29, 7:06�pm, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: >> >> On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:35:57 -0500, MNMikeW wrote: >> >> Your claim was that the NYT was as biased as the Washington Times, a >> >> cult rag and an embarrassment to journalism. >> >> >I would have never thought a person like you would recognize that the >> >NYT is a cult rag that is an embarassment to journalism. >> >> He didn't. �Although a semi-colon would've helped,does one have to >> point out that he was describing the Washington Times to you? >> Otherwise it was a poor reading by you, or a poor attempt at >> diversion. >> BK > >Both papers are cult rags, IMHO. One makes no claims to have all the >news that's fit to print though, which is pretty braggadocios for a >rag that would have to rise to come to the level of a supermarket >tabloid. What does your opinion have to do with your missing Carbon's point? It was HIS opinion to which you responded incorrectly. Now, about your opinion. Are you seriously making the statement that the NYT is on a plateau beneath a supermarket tabloid? If so you really are showing your myopic bias. Hyperbole is one thing, but stupidity is another. BK BK BK
From: John B. on 30 Mar 2010 13:43 On Mar 30, 12:53 pm, Dinosaur_Sr <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: > On Mar 30, 10:34 am, bkni...(a)conramp.net wrote: > > > > > > > On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 06:35:26 -0700 (PDT), Dinosaur_Sr > > > <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: > > >On Mar 29, 7:06 pm, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > > >> On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:35:57 -0500, MNMikeW wrote: > > >> Your claim was that the NYT was as biased as the Washington Times, a > > >> cult rag and an embarrassment to journalism. > > > >I would have never thought a person like you would recognize that the > > >NYT is a cult rag that is an embarassment to journalism. > > > He didn't. Although a semi-colon would've helped,does one have to > > point out that he was describing the Washington Times to you? > > Otherwise it was a poor reading by you, or a poor attempt at > > diversion. > > BK > > Both papers are cult rags, IMHO. One makes no claims to have all the > news that's fit to print though, which is pretty braggadocios for a > rag that would have to rise to come to the level of a supermarket > tabloid.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Hey, thanks for weighing in on this. I'm sure we're all grateful for your incisive analysis.
From: William Clark on 30 Mar 2010 13:45 In article <1qb4r5dpjig4i5tgm1fv83gp25obmcgsio(a)4ax.com>, bknight(a)conramp.net wrote: > On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 09:53:41 -0700 (PDT), Dinosaur_Sr > <frostback(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: > > >On Mar 30, 10:34�am, bkni...(a)conramp.net wrote: > >> On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 06:35:26 -0700 (PDT), Dinosaur_Sr > >> > >> <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: > >> >On Mar 29, 7:06�pm, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > >> >> On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:35:57 -0500, MNMikeW wrote: > >> >> Your claim was that the NYT was as biased as the Washington Times, a > >> >> cult rag and an embarrassment to journalism. > >> > >> >I would have never thought a person like you would recognize that the > >> >NYT is a cult rag that is an embarassment to journalism. > >> > >> He didn't. �Although a semi-colon would've helped,does one have to > >> point out that he was describing the Washington Times to you? > >> Otherwise it was a poor reading by you, or a poor attempt at > >> diversion. > >> BK > > > >Both papers are cult rags, IMHO. One makes no claims to have all the > >news that's fit to print though, which is pretty braggadocios for a > >rag that would have to rise to come to the level of a supermarket > >tabloid. > > What does your opinion have to do with your missing Carbon's point? It > was HIS opinion to which you responded incorrectly. > > Now, about your opinion. Are you seriously making the statement that > the NYT is on a plateau beneath a supermarket tabloid? If so you > really are showing your myopic bias. Hyperbole is one thing, but > stupidity is another. > > BK Indeed, he gives academia a bad name.
From: Dinosaur_Sr on 30 Mar 2010 14:02 On Mar 30, 12:10 pm, bkni...(a)conramp.net wrote: > On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 09:53:41 -0700 (PDT), Dinosaur_Sr > > > > <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: > >On Mar 30, 10:34 am, bkni...(a)conramp.net wrote: > >> On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 06:35:26 -0700 (PDT), Dinosaur_Sr > > >> <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: > >> >On Mar 29, 7:06 pm, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > >> >> On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:35:57 -0500, MNMikeW wrote: > >> >> Your claim was that the NYT was as biased as the Washington Times, a > >> >> cult rag and an embarrassment to journalism. > > >> >I would have never thought a person like you would recognize that the > >> >NYT is a cult rag that is an embarassment to journalism. > > >> He didn't. Although a semi-colon would've helped,does one have to > >> point out that he was describing the Washington Times to you? > >> Otherwise it was a poor reading by you, or a poor attempt at > >> diversion. > >> BK > > >Both papers are cult rags, IMHO. One makes no claims to have all the > >news that's fit to print though, which is pretty braggadocios for a > >rag that would have to rise to come to the level of a supermarket > >tabloid. > > What does your opinion have to do with your missing Carbon's point? It > was HIS opinion to which you responded incorrectly. > > Now, about your opinion. Are you seriously making the statement that > the NYT is on a plateau beneath a supermarket tabloid? If so you > really are showing your myopic bias. Hyperbole is one thing, but > stupidity is another. I responded to what was written. I know that the NYT is a dishonest rag that is below the level of a supermarket tabloid because the supermarket tabloids are honest about what they are.
From: bknight on 30 Mar 2010 16:15
On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 11:02:02 -0700 (PDT), Dinosaur_Sr <frostback(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: >On Mar 30, 12:10�pm, bkni...(a)conramp.net wrote: >> On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 09:53:41 -0700 (PDT), Dinosaur_Sr >> What does your opinion have to do with your missing Carbon's point? It >> was HIS opinion to which you responded incorrectly. >> No response indicates you admit this. >> Now, about your opinion. �Are you seriously making the statement that >> the NYT is on a plateau beneath a supermarket tabloid? �If so you >> really are showing your myopic bias. �Hyperbole is one thing, but >> stupidity is another. > >I responded to what was written. I know that the NYT is a dishonest >rag that is below the level of a supermarket tabloid because the >supermarket tabloids are honest about what they are. YOU know? You think you know, but as usual your opinion is just that...not fact. BK |