Our tea party friends
in [Golf]
|
Prev: Let us endeavor....
Next: I am Kenneth Gladney
From: John B. on 7 Apr 2010 21:08 On Apr 7, 6:19 pm, BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > In article <clark-78112E.14084207042...(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- > state.edu>, cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu says... > > > > > > > In article > > <576e9a46-6587-4a6a-8e29-d9f5a33f4...(a)r27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, > > Dinosaur_Sr <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: > > > > On Apr 6, 10:46 pm, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 07:51:39 +0000, assimilate wrote: > > > > > On 4-Apr-2010, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote: > > > > > >>> Are you trying to claim the NYT isn't biased? > > > > > >> Compared to the Washington Times? Get real. > > > > > > the only difference is the NYT is biased in the same way that you are > > > > > Everybody is biased. It's the degree of bias that matters. You would > > > > have to be incapable of rational thought to seriously equate a cult rag > > > > like the Wash Times to the NYT. > > > > The NYT, like the Wash Times, is deliberately biased. The bias is a > > > matter of policy, and both are extreme to my minds eye. I don't see a > > > difference. > > > Where would you say the political bias of David Brooks lies? Thank you. > > David Brooks is a wannabe, wannabe invited on the TV shows, wannabe > invited to the parties, wannabe employed. > > Brooks is not a respected conservative intellectual by those on the > right. Why? Because he's not hateful and belligerent?
From: R&B on 7 Apr 2010 21:49 On 2010-03-22 19:17:34 -0400, Dene said: > On Mar 21, 9:36�pm, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: >> In article <80odtqFki...(a)mid.individual.net>, >> >> �"dene" <d...(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: >>> "Alan Baker" <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote in message >>> news:alangbaker-2489FD.20174421032010(a)news.shawcable.com... >> >>>> LOL >> >>>> Says the man who claimed sniping from behind a killfile was cowardly... >> >>>> ...right up until he started doing it himself. >> >>> You can accuse me of various things. �A few might be true. �But nobody has >>> ever called me a troll. �That distinction, which is lower than ant pee, >>> belongs to you. >> >> I can accuse of things that are true. >> >> And I don't need to repeat what you've been called. We both know what it >> was. >> >> :-) > > I know what I've been called. It's much better than being a troll, of > whom you are foremost. > > -Greg If, indeed, he's a troll, judging from this thread, you're the only one he's hooked. Randy
From: R&B on 7 Apr 2010 21:54 On 2010-03-22 09:02:30 -0400, bknight(a)conramp.net said: > On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:05:30 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: >> You don't keep up with modern protest tactics Bobby. >> >> If your opposition won't shoot themselves in the foot then you go into >> the crowd and shoot them in the foot. >> > I guess there are those, like you, that think this way. There IS a > high road Bert. > > BK Oh, he took the first exit off that road long ago. Randy
From: R&B on 7 Apr 2010 21:57 On 2010-03-22 15:21:09 -0400, BAR said: > In article <teqeq5hj905930d6r6nu7kugrf0ip52iso(a)4ax.com>, > bknight(a)conramp.net says... >> >> On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:05:30 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: >>> You don't keep up with modern protest tactics Bobby. >>> >>> If your opposition won't shoot themselves in the foot then you go into >>> the crowd and shoot them in the foot. >>> >> I guess there are those, like you, that think this way. There IS a >> high road Bert. > > If you think the Democrats ever take the high road you are a fool. > > We are well past sitting back and accepting what a Congress with an > approval rating nearing the single digits pushes upon us. > > We are well past sitting back and accepting what a President with an > approval rating that is decreasing by a percentage point a day tells us > what is best for us. Then you're also well past sitting back and accepting what 53 percent of the voters said at the polls in November 2008. You are no patriot. You are an anarchist, and an anti-government type. You oppose the very government that a majority of Americans elected to represent them. That is not merely my opinion. It's a fact. You are just another lunatic member of the Timothy McVeigh wing of the radical Republican right. Randy
From: Don Kirkman on 8 Apr 2010 01:45
On Wed, 7 Apr 2010 16:33:27 -0500, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> wrote: >"John B." <johnb505(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >news:92b8e5d7-5d66-4100-9cdb-3e1887d49e55(a)y14g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... >On Apr 7, 2:08 pm, William Clark <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio- >state.edu> wrote: >> In article >> <576e9a46-6587-4a6a-8e29-d9f5a33f4...(a)r27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, >> Dinosaur_Sr <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: >> > On Apr 6, 10:46 pm, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: >> > > On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 07:51:39 +0000, assimilate wrote: >> > > > On 4-Apr-2010, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote: >> > > >>> Are you trying to claim the NYT isn't biased? >> > > >> Compared to the Washington Times? Get real. >> > > > the only difference is the NYT is biased in the same way that you >> > > > are >> > > Everybody is biased. It's the degree of bias that matters. You would >> > > have to be incapable of rational thought to seriously equate a cult >> > > rag >> > > like the Wash Times to the NYT. >> > The NYT, like the Wash Times, is deliberately biased. The bias is a >> > matter of policy, and both are extreme to my minds eye. I don't see a >> > difference. >> Where would you say the political bias of David Brooks lies? Thank you.- >> Hide quoted text - >Right. You will find liberal and conservative commentary on the op-ed >page of the NYT. You will find only conservative voices on the op-ed >page of the Wash Times. >Only the NYT would consider David Brooks conservative. ISTM that more than once I've heard David Brooks describe himself as conservative, but obviously he's not a fanatic conservative. On the Lehrer News Hour he consistently takes the conservative side of the discussions. -- Don Kirkman donsno2(a)charter.net |