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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (41860)	5/2/2004 7:28:31 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793626

In this case, you can mourn the loss of the idea that the American media are, you know, pro-American even under a Republican administration, while blaming the reporters who seem to be working for an American defeat. I'll accept that. I thought of it, too, actually, but I didn't want to complicate things with too much nuance. You know how the thread feels about that. <g> Still, singling out the media for blame for the defeat, if that's what it turns out to be, is not objective. ...95% of world media, including our own, who are all rooting for an American defeat. Nadine, asserting that there are more than a handful of people in this country who are rooting for an American defeat is way, way over the top, far enough over the top to be called scapegoating. If it comes down to defeat, there will be a few key causes and a number of contributing causes. The play of the media might reasonably end up as one of many contributing causes. It will not be THE cause. And the media sure won't be on the list because they're loaded with anti-Americans. At worst there are some who are anti-war or anti-Bush but that's not the same thing. I have no doubt that the identification of scapegoats will be step in the developing process that I started this colloguy by asserting.