Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rock_nj who wrote (298214)	9/19/2002 9:48:47 AM
From: PROLIFE	Respond to of 769669

Ann Coulter is hardly an unBIASed source. Quite unlike Friedman, Rich, and the like, huh?? LOL

To: Rock_nj who wrote (298214)	9/19/2002 12:17:28 PM
From: Neeka	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769669

Did you hear about what she had to say to the New York Observor about the Oklahoma City bombing? No, I didn't. Why don't you give us a link? If you would like to talk about it, I'll give you lots of examples of "bias"...... but for now lets examine hate and being mean. Here is what the acclaimed leader of the left and his minions said about the OK city bombing: These are exerts taken out of the book Slander by Ann Coulter, one of the most hated conservative thinkers alive today. [She is my hero because she has the guts to tell the truth. Something that many liberals don't recognize and some despise.] [My comments in parenthesis] "When impeached former president Bill Clinton [Slick to some] identified Rush Limbaugh as the cause of the OK City bombing, he unleashed all the typical liberal curse words for conservatives. He blamed "loud and angry voices" heard "over the airwaves in America" that were making people "paranoid" [fits quite a few of the lead me by my nose not my brain left here] and spreading "hate." Clinton couldn't have been more specific if he had fingered "that guy Al Franken called a big fat idiot." [liberals seem to cherish that word, idiot?] It is perfectly clear, for example, to Dan Rather, [attack dog mouth piece of liberalism] who said, "President Clinton named no names, but made it clear who's talking the talk.": It was also clear to Bryant Gumbel, who made the very same point the next day on the Today show. Lacking Clinton's nuance, Gumbel said: " The bombing in OK City has focused renewed attention on the rhetoric that's been coming from the right....[does that sound like an attack on free speech to you?] Snip Katie Couric has blamed conservative speech for the vicious murders of James Byrd Jr. in Texas [and let's not forget that famous ad sponsored by the 'compassionate, caring.... I feel your pain" left before national elections in 2000.] and Matthew Shepard in Wyoming. Painting conservative speech as a source of imminent danger helps lay the groundwork for the left's larger point that conservative speech is not "speech." But despite the fact that liberals strongly disapprove of conservative speech [as witnessed here on this very thread] and I mean strongly, wherever there is consumer choice, the public keeps choosing conservatives. LIberals try to extend their monopoly over the elite media to the competitive media with nauseating cross-promotions of any and all liberals. There is absolutely no dreary leftist to come down the pike [except rich4clueless] who will not instantly be acclaimed as a poet. Even the vicious smearing of conservatives is not insufferable as the suck-up profiles and interviews of liberals: How can you be so honest? There are fabulous sycophantic write-ups in the New York Times, gushing interviews on the Today show, celebrity-status profiles in Time, Newsweek, and Vanity Fair. If the antitrust laws were applied to the endless cross-promotions of leftists in the media, Vanity Fair-to say nothing of the New York Times Book Review, would be shut down. Finally, the self appointed champions of free speech come to the realization that hectoring alone will not shut down the Samizdat press. It must be regulated. The First Amendment protects taxpayer-funded photos of bullwhips up men's anuses. It says nothing about Matt Drudge. University of Chicago law professor Cass Sundstein argues in his book Republic.com that by allowing people to choose "what they want to read, see, and hear," the Internet is a threat to " a well-functioning system of democratic deliberation." It's never Debbie Does Dallas or the publication of classified Pentagon documents that provoke such urgent re-examinations of the First Amendment. When liberals warn that free speech imperils "the capacity of citizens to govern themselves," you know conservatives must be opening their yaps again. [Scary notions.] More later.............. ;) M