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 : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (50866)	6/23/2005 8:59:05 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

I'm not going to defend Milbanks, his article was factually incorrect, snide, rude and stupid...which is pretty much my point. I suspect he and his editor received a ton of nasty email saying the same. Today he's making fun of the Abramoff hearings. This is from an interview he did with the dailykos: "...I don't think we feel pressured. But it does drive the agenda in a sense that stories pop up in the blog ether and, because people start talking about them, they need to be addressed or debunked. The Kerry mistress story comes to mind. The web is both the salvation and the demise of print journalism. Proliferating blogs make it more unlikely that an important story will be missed or slip through the cracks. Even a large news organization like the Post has only 40 or 50 national reporters; there are zillions of bloggers. The downside is the web is contributing to the decentralization of information so that people can choose their own news, and facts, based on their ideology. I can see us reaching a point where conservatives get their news exclusively from Free Republic and liberals get it from World-o-Crap, and we're living in parallel universes..." dailykos.com ========== OIC, it's Les Kinsolving who's back to asking the Guckert/Inane questions in the White House Press Conference LOL. I wondered who 'Les' was. =======Howard Kurtz of the WashPos, May 12th "...The eight-page memo, written in advance of a July 23, 2002, Downing Street meeting on Iraq, provides new insights into how senior British officials saw a Bush administration decision to go to war as inevitable, and realized more clearly than their American counterparts the potential for the post-invasion instability that continues to plague Iraq.... Neither Bush nor Blair has publicly challenged the authenticity of the July 23 memo, nor has Dearlove spoken publicly about it. One British diplomat said there are different interpretations..." ============ At any rate, your friend the reporter can't be too worried if he's ok about being at the paper. After all, the paper is ok about him being there as well. The problem with the progressive side of the media is that there isn't a big bucks echo machine. Reasonable comments about, 'should we go to war?' get said and then disappear. The rightwing OTOH gets a talking point and repeats it endlessly and so obnoxiously that everyone remembers it. It's a propaganda thing that progressives do very badly. Heck, even Big Eddie says that every single day in his effort to earn Rush's paycheck. :) So far he's staying within the lines and, I believe, still taking unscreened calls.